problems with what~ and stash~ MIDI sequencer
Hello,
I followed a tutorial from Philip Meyer at YouTube where a sequencer was build with what~ & stash~
Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6LfVmCb2QI
I'm a beginner, so i rebuild the patch and i try to learn from it. I've got lost when he included the option to gate steps. I attached a picture where you can see my try of including the gate but i'm not sure if this is correct. I read in the comments of the video that some things doesn't work properly. So i'm confused. What i experience:
- The patch works fine without the gate and all steps with a different note value.
- It seems the patch can't play repeated notes, so for example, if i set all note sliders to the same value, nothing will play (this was also mentioned in the comments).
- I'm not sure if my try to get the gate working is correct, from the results i'm sure some things doesn't work as they should.
I'm thankful for any help to get this working.
what and stash and then edge triggering snapshot ... brrrr.
That video is a year old. There are better ways to do that with rtt.
Here is sequencer from 3 weeks ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfhQnNnh76k
Maybe this will not 100% solve your problem. but I am betting that all of his tutorials from the past year or so are packed into rtt, so best to start over and learn it.
Download rtt from package manager.
Check all off his new rtt video tutorials for secrets! For example one of the new videos solves the repeated note problem.
and change~ inserted - how should same note pass ?
I woud suggest to use official max tutorials
instead of housewife DIY videos, when starting to learn max.
Haha. Housewife. or the butler or the nanny.
hmmm… which one would know that it is almost impossible to figure out max just by using official tutorials and without a few helpful YouTube videos (Or by asking the kind folks on this forum)
a midi sequencer should be made using metro, counter and gate, like they did it in 1993, everything else seems overcomplicated and ineffective.
but how do you explain that to somebody without making a religion out of it? it felt like it would be only my personal opinion when making such statements, which would not be very helpful.
@ROMAN THILENIUS
well any religion in music would be Bad Religion (American Jesus 1993!)
I don't think explaining anything basic is a bad thing. in fact, I think we are losing that, and very fast it's happening. I'm in Korea, I teach an electronic music class that ends the last week with Max and Supercollider as a look at the future of music. Imagine trying to get students who, if you are not talking about k (f***ing) [pop}, are like "whaaat, is he crazy?"
And if they are not willing to learn about the telharmonium, theremin, ondes martenot, banu musa brothers, fairlight, synclavier, moog, conlon nancarrow, boulez, zappa , blondie - on and on and on - they will not pass my class.
//
its just about physics. nothing wrong at all about giving examples that explain the origin. opposite. those are most helpful. I was trying to think of one, but was still coming off the phasor.
example: the OP patch is a mess not because he is trying to use objects that he doesn't understand, but because he doesn't understand at all what is happening in the physics.
it a mess because he has not organized his machine sections. (yes they are machines!) The first machine is the Time Machine. Metro, phasor, buddha banging on a can, whatever - it's a time machine. He has time all over the place and not concisely organized. Pitch is included in the time machine - he has 2 of those machines and as y'all mentioned blocked any chance of pitch getting through!
The second machine is amplitude. That would be the gate. in this case 0-1. either you can hear it or not.
There is no third machine. Music only has 2 dimensions (frequency/time and amplitude/volume.) That's why my students better be able to explain the theramin.
Your metro, counter, gate are perfect for explaining to beginners.
Metro/counter = time/frequency machine
gate = amplitude/volume machine
It looks like the step sequencer took Leon’s job.
And makenote squashed the telharmonium down to a wee little computer object.
No religion. Just physics. ( unless you can make Max play like Clara Rockmore and crash the New York Stock Exchange- then I would have to kiss your ring and drink 10 bloody marys!)
Ps. Stash is absolutely one of my favorite Phish songs!
I don’t know much about what, except i say that a lot because everyone around me mumbles when they talk.
Homework for @TT
Oh, and assignment 7 (beginner intermediate) - stop using makenote. Makes no sense. Start building your own synths and found sounds. Much more rewarding.
step sequencer needs at least proper start, stop, pause, resume
and maybe few more things.
no matter what it is made of.
otherwise it is anti-example.
i agree with everything you said (including the stock market and the makenote external)
but what exactly would justify that we tell him "this is wrong! do it completely different! first describe a machine model of what you want to to operate the result like, and then use data rate objects only because i say so!"
if he wants to copy an existing example maybe it is simply his way of getting into this stuff.
and it is not guaranteed that you have success when you use metro. in the end it mainly depends on who uses the metro object.
boing bumm stash, boing bumm stash... brrrr!
@ROMAN THILENIUS
sorry if I am unclear about 2 points.
one is that everything I say to others, I am saying to myself. So when I mention things like organization and very very basic flow of ideas I am saying that to myself constantly.
two is that there is a sort of 50/50 concept at work. balance between knowing exactly what you want to happen before you even open a blank patcher, and trying an enormous amount tutoriala and experimentation that lead down new roads of discovery.
so the simple (pre 1983) step sequencer (I had the date wrong) is not incorrect, but it also may not be effective or helpful for a beginner.
it will be up to them to say this works but there must be a better or different way.
thank you both (source audio as well) for helping me think and study deeper. And I hope these conversations help the OP although now I’m thinking might have to build the Philip Meyer tutorial just to find what the expected outcome is.
oh please not. best practice*) is not to mix signal rate and data rate when it can be avoided.
*)
so they say in the forums. of course we could be wrong.
Wow.
I have been using Max since Opcode was responsible for its distribution, I think it was version 1.2 or 1.4. This discussion makes me realize I am still a neophyte.
I see thet
stash -> change -> edge -> snapshot
and same place
stash -> snapshot
that why I’m going to build it and find what is happening
we seem to have gotten way off answering the Op question
my original answer was simply that Philip has updated his tutorials and if @TT is going that rout it might be good to check newer lessons.