Old Motifator threads are available in the Archive.
VikasSharma
Total Posts: 1523
Joined 10-05-2010 status: Guru |
I have created a Drum Kit Voice for Tabla from some User Samples wherein each Key has been mapped to a different Tabla stroke. The kit works quite well and I have programmed several Drum Arps to work with it. I was trying to create a new Arp for the above kit in Pattern mode using two tracks. In track 1 of the Pattern, I sequenced the strokes for the right hand Tabla (called Dayan) and, in track 2 of the Pattern, I sequenced the strokes for the left hand Tabla (called Bayan). Both Parts of the Pattern have been assigned the same Tabla Drum Kit voice as referred above. I’m applying Pitch Bend to one of the strokes (i.e., one of the Drum Kit keys) on track 2 of the Pattern. For all the other strokes (Drum Kit keys), the Pitch Bend value of 0000 is assigned. The result of this Pattern sequence plays just fine. The problem starts when I convert this sequence to an Arp using the PUT TRACK TO ARPEGGIO job. I assign Track 1 of the Pattern to ARP Tr 1 with Convert Type ‘fixed’ and Track 2 of the Pattern to ARP Tr 2 again with Covert Type ‘fixed’. In the resulting Arp, it appears that the Pitch Bend is getting applied to the other keys also where it is not intended. Am I doing something incorrectly? Any help appreciated.
Regards,
|
Bad_Mister
Total Posts: 36620
Joined 07-30-2002 status: Moderator |
While creating the data you are most likely using two tracks, same kit assigned to both tracks. In trying to combine the data into one arpeggio Type, you are then forcing the data to a single MIDI channel (single Kit) that is why it is not working. While data is on separate tracks the Pitch Bend messages are automatically isolated to the MIDI channel they are created on… This is why they are not interfering. You cannot choose, on a Key by Key basis which keys of a drum kit respond to Pitch Bend (this is what you would need to have happen for your idea to work… When forcing the control data to a single MIDI channel.) And while the Key parameters of a KIT offer a great deal of independence within the Voice (compared to a normal Voice), it does not extend to individual real time tuning of each Key, unfortunately. Yamaha in the past has had products that solved this issue… Why it did not become apart of the overall MIDI spec is a topic for discussion… But the RY30 (from years ago) could tag individual tuning messages to the note-on event… So you could dynamically bend the pitch of one drum Key independent of the others on the same MIDI channel. It allowed for just the type of real time pitch control one would want/require to accurately perform various types of hand percussion instruments where pitch bending is an important part of the scene. Of course, the answer is always partially cost… The RY30 was a dedicated drum module so naturally you’d expect it to excel at editing and performing drums and percussion sounds. A single Arp occupies a single MIDI channel. Unfortunately, you cannot address individual Keys with tuning information on the XF. Oddly enough Yamaha XG spec allows individual drums to be tuned in real time via NRPNs, where you could activate and deactivate tuning messages… This is not implemented in the Motif/S/MOX series synths.
A Solution given the situation and limitations:
Say you have a pitch bend sample and you map it C5 of the KIT.. This means instead of manually performing the PB with a wheel, you simply going to hit a key that recalls the sound of that drum being bent… Placed appropriately in the Pattern. Your second track of arp data would be rhythmic performance of the C5 key where pitch bends would occur. When you hear an acoustic guitar Type arp, the scrapes and knocks are fixed note data generated separately from the data creating the musical tones… You would be doing a similar thing with your drum/percussion data where the tuning gesture is a kind of fixed ‘sound effect’. Hope that helps. |
VikasSharma
Total Posts: 1523
Joined 10-05-2010 status: Guru |
Thanks, Bad_Mister, for the detailed explanation.
Thanks for the suggestion. I thought of doing so too. Of course, it involves some extra work and, even then, you’re limited to voicing only the pre-sampled articulations, but yes, this is certainly a way forward. |