What about the super combinator?

[michal22]

Hi. I think today in the morning as to create a formula that describes the value of the parameter in real time, but I have not yet reached that.
I also have the idea to look at the value, as at the height of the upper face. This will be the value H. Please look at the attached picture. The value of X and Y could take values from 0 (left or down) to 1.0 (right or top) instead of percentages.



Still, I do not know how to describe the mathematical value. It really does not seem easy to solve. You are right.

[michal22]

Another solution for it to have more scenes with manual pathways between them using the slider.
1. More CV inputs in combinator.
2. Volt SL-1 with the slider and the possibility of changing the target scenes for the slider.
Example:

[Raveshaper]

Michal,

What I have decided to explore is generating a voxel height map. This would involve programming height values at arbitrary x- and y-values (points), and then using Catmull-Rom splines to build a mesh that describes control points that populate the surface with smooth interpolations. The surface is stored as an array, so value is solved by reading value "z" at surface coordinate (x, y). Changes in defined height data re-calculates the entire surface. This basically a variation on a NURBs surface.

[michal22]

Michal,

What I have decided to explore is generating a voxel height map. This would involve programming height values at arbitrary x- and y-values (points), and then using Catmull-Rom splines to build a mesh that describes control points that populate the surface with smooth interpolations. The surface is stored as an array, so value is solved by reading value "z" at surface coordinate (x, y). Changes in defined height data re-calculates the entire surface. This basically a variation on a NURBs surface.

I look amateurish and I think it's a great idea.
Thank you that you want to pursue it.
I eagerly followed up the development of the project.
I keep my fingers crossed for success.

[Raveshaper]

This will take me quite a while to create.

I believe I have already made most of what you want, I am preparing to make a video very soon to demonstrate it. It does not have a touch pad design like the one you describe, but it does some impressive things.

[michal22]

Great. I'm looking forward to it.
Thanks.

[RustyShakleforde]

How about a half-rack device?  Like a CMB-4.  Add as many as you want into a Combinator.  Have a few varieties, like one with stepped knobs, one with adjustable linearity, one with momentary buttons...

 

This seems to me like a great idea. I can picture a few different types. We could build up our own custom super combis. It gets rid of the resizing issue when adding full combis to combis, which i can see as a major issue.

Id love a little selection of half rack devices like this. I can picture how cool the inside of a combi would look with these. The main combi would need an upgrade to facilitate, but surely not as big an update as completely redesigning? I have never made a "mock" up for software before, but i can see this in my head and am tempted to try.

I might be missing something (im probably missing lots.. lol) but why has no one else liked this suggestion?

[RustyShakleforde]

How about a half-rack device?  Like a CMB-4.  Add as many as you want into a Combinator.  Have a few varieties, like one with stepped knobs, one with adjustable linearity, one with momentary buttons...

 

This seems to me like a great idea. I can picture a few different types. We could build up our own custom super combis. It gets rid of the resizing issue when adding full combis to combis, which i can see as a major issue.

Id love a little selection of half rack devices like this. I can picture how cool the inside of a combi would look with these. The main combi would need an upgrade to facilitate, but surely not as big an update as completely redesigning? I have never made a "mock" up for software before, but i can see this in my head and am tempted to try.

I might be missing something (im probably missing lots.. lol) but why has no one else liked this suggestion?

Oops, just re read the thread, I see this has been discussed. cool idea though.

[Oberlai]

Came across this old thread, and there are many great ideas in here for Combi 2.0! And even a couple of posts by the great Hamu. *Bows head and raises glass*.

I see in recent threads about most wanted features etc, that Combi2 is still up there, so when I came across this I have to say it's disappointing to think it's been many years and nothing's happened. Let's hope they see this and ofc really hoping we'll get a pleasant surprise in 11

[plaamook]

To me, I would just like to be able to put combinators inside of combinators. It is absolutely mind blowing to me that this hasn't been doable ever in Reason.  :m0358:

Word up

[plaamook]

To me, I would just like to be able to put combinators inside of combinators. It is absolutely mind blowing to me that this hasn't been doable ever in Reason.  :m0358:

I'd be happy if we could put Combinators inside of all Inserts, Mastering section (new idea) and in the Meta Channel itself (another new idea).

With multiple Combinators in an insert you could then switch from Combi to Combi to select/control them individually from the mixer/programmer. 

Combinators inside of Combinators also presents a basic graphic issue - as the size shrinks inside each Combi as you nest them, going two or more deep would require a different approach to prevent the sides from shrinking inwards and hiding more and more of the enclosed devices. Probably isn't going to happen any time soon that I can see…but never say never!

What if you have old combi and new combi. Old combi gets a knob slider facelift and can contain new combi but not itself (obvs). New combi cannot contain itself or old combi. Or some variation of this. Solves the russian doll effect (as I'm calling it) but stil allows for nesting of devices to clean up the inside of a combinator.

[Luxuria]

I agree with Selig on wanting to be able to put Combinators inside Mix Channel Inserts and the Mastering Insert Section, WITHOUT them splitting apart.

I always saw the Combinator as the ultimate organizer for effects chains. Instead of seeing a long column of effects, you tuck all the nitty gritty components inside a combinator and utilize the 4 buttons and knobs (I wish Combi2 adds more) to control any parameter through the matrix (which could also use an update to allow unlimited routings).

It breaks my heart adding certain effects into the Mix Channel Insert section only to get to a patch that's a Combinator and it breaks the workflow by adding itself OUTSIDE of the channel's insert section. Then if I want to add effects after the Combi, I have to decide whether I add in inside the insert section and break the top-down flow or add it outside the section under the Combi and take up additional rack space.

This feature is in my opinion the biggest improvement needed for Rack Workflow.

[OverneathTheSkyBridg]

Oh this old thread lol. I'd like to see the combinator concept rebuilt from the ground up. Keep it as a device in the rack but have it pop up in the sequencer like the Regroove Mixer as a macro type of device. All devices inside remain so in the old way, but do all of your "combinating" in a pop up interface so that you're not restricted by the Rack's limitations.

[Proboscis]

It is disappointing that such a powerful utility has been abandoned for future development. My feature requests doesn't ask for much, and I wouldn't want them to go too far, but for a Combinator Version 2 I would like to see

8 knobs and 8 Buttons
Double the number of Modulation Routing cells
Modulation Inputs for the Buttons
A Button Disable function where when button 1 is on, it turns of 2,3,4
Knob / Button Labels to show the user-defined name in the Sequencer (rather than Rotary 1, Rotary 2 etc)
Set knob position defaults, for example if I'm using a rotary to manipulate five variables, then it can be set to five positions.
Modulation Routing values to be selective, rather than only min/max

[EnochLight]

The Combinator still remains - to this day - one of Reason's most powerful features, IMHO.  That said, it's also its greatest thorn as it hasn't changed hardly since its release 10 years ago.  Its interface feels long in the tooth, to say the least.  Just 4 knobs and 4 buttons?  Really?

I'd say a Combinator 2.0 is long overdue.  But... I'd rather see the RE SDK add long overdue features before that's even thought of (sample import, panel changing with dynamic content, etc).  But I digress...

Well, here we are 4 years later, and I finally got that RE SDK update with sampling and panel changing! Now, time for Combinator 2.0!?

[Proboscis]

Well, here we are 4 years later, and I finally got that RE SDK update with sampling and panel changing! Now, time for Combinator 2.0!?

Which Rack Extensions have you built in the past that would have benefited from the latest development tools, and would you rework any of them? I own a few that have been updated quite significantly since purchase, but never saw the need to pay the upgrade price.

And does this mean you can now build a new Combinator for us ? I would buy your plugin instantly if you can do it ! Please, just don't go over the top. It still needs to be a fairly bland and straightforward utility. Not sure if Rack Extensions can have user-customized skins though. I would not like to lose that functionality.

I'm ready to buy instantly when you're ready to launch a Combinator 2.0

[Creativemind]

The Combinator still remains - to this day - one of Reason's most powerful features, IMHO.  That said, it's also its greatest thorn as it hasn't changed hardly since its release 10 years ago.  Its interface feels long in the tooth, to say the least.  Just 4 knobs and 4 buttons?  Really?

I'd say a Combinator 2.0 is long overdue.  But... I'd rather see the RE SDK add long overdue features before that's even thought of (sample import, panel changing with dynamic content, etc).  But I digress...

Well, here we are 4 years later, and I finally got that RE SDK update with sampling and panel changing! Now, time for Combinator 2.0!?

I'm sure I'm not alone here but (and I would've betted on it) I really thought a Combinator 2 would've been in Reason 11.

[RandyEspoda]

I remember back with Reason SIX, many were asking for things like copy/paste control in the combinator, more than four buttons, things like that.
Today those same things are still being asked. WAY overdue...Imo combis inside combis aren't even truly necessary, we need those functions first that would
make the combi experience more modernized and better...then they can think about scaling them within each other, which has also been asked since as long as I can remember. Just 8 or 16 knobs, a few more buttons, bit more cv plugs, copy/paste and say the 'merging' option, and the sky is already the limit (again) as it once had been before.