Euclidian Rhythms: Can I make my own patterns?
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 01 May 2018
I am trialing it and I am indecisive whether I should buy it. Can I make my own pattern rhythms with it or the presets are as they are? If that is the case is it worth it? I can easily make those in the piano roll. Except from the fastness of the process is anything else I can gain from this Rack Extension?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, you can program steps manually by alt-clicking on the mute buttons, like in this video:dreamtuned wrote: ↑22 May 2018I am trialing it and I am indecisive whether I should buy it. Can I make my own pattern rhythms with it or the presets are as they are? If that is the case is it worth it? I can easily make those in the piano roll. Except from the fastness of the process is anything else I can gain from this Rack Extension?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you set density to 0% you have complete manual control over the pattern. When you increase the density, the algorithm will start filling in steps, but the steps you entered manually will always play.
IMO the gain with this RE is to 1) have the algorithm generate patterns you wouldn't think of yourself, or 2) to have the pattern change over time using automation or CV.
-
- Posts: 9
- Joined: 01 May 2018
Thank you a lot buddard!
After your reply and watching the video, I have purchased Euclidian Rhythms, awesome piece of software. Coming from Cubase and Logic Pro, I can say that Reason - especially with the Rack Extensions is such an unique DAW and very powerful. I am glad I have stepped into its path.
Thanks again.
After your reply and watching the video, I have purchased Euclidian Rhythms, awesome piece of software. Coming from Cubase and Logic Pro, I can say that Reason - especially with the Rack Extensions is such an unique DAW and very powerful. I am glad I have stepped into its path.
Thanks again.
Any chance this could ever have a set of 8 patterns for totally changing up the rhythm on the fly?
I'm looking for a simpler way to program drums with more patterns/variations than Reason's Drum Sequencer allows for. I love some aspects of Drum Sequencer, but there's a lot left to be desired, notably pattern memory. Stacking several DS's get complicated, but stacking a few ER's might be more manageable (one ER per drum, filtering the note range down solely to that single note per drum).
I'm looking for a simpler way to program drums with more patterns/variations than Reason's Drum Sequencer allows for. I love some aspects of Drum Sequencer, but there's a lot left to be desired, notably pattern memory. Stacking several DS's get complicated, but stacking a few ER's might be more manageable (one ER per drum, filtering the note range down solely to that single note per drum).
Perhaps RB's Sequences could assist?DJMaytag wrote: ↑20 Sep 2020Any chance this could ever have a set of 8 patterns for totally changing up the rhythm on the fly?
I'm looking for a simpler way to program drums with more patterns/variations than Reason's Drum Sequencer allows for. I love some aspects of Drum Sequencer, but there's a lot left to be desired, notably pattern memory. Stacking several DS's get complicated, but stacking a few ER's might be more manageable (one ER per drum, filtering the note range down solely to that single note per drum).
Get more Combinators at the deeplink website
And even if it doesn’t you should get it anyway. Believe me .deeplink wrote: ↑20 Sep 2020Perhaps RB's Sequences could assist?DJMaytag wrote: ↑20 Sep 2020Any chance this could ever have a set of 8 patterns for totally changing up the rhythm on the fly?
I'm looking for a simpler way to program drums with more patterns/variations than Reason's Drum Sequencer allows for. I love some aspects of Drum Sequencer, but there's a lot left to be desired, notably pattern memory. Stacking several DS's get complicated, but stacking a few ER's might be more manageable (one ER per drum, filtering the note range down solely to that single note per drum).
🗲 2ॐ ᛉ
-
- Posts: 3760
- Joined: 20 Oct 2017
- Location: Norway
- Contact:
I bought it right about the time it was released. It's WAY better than Reason't Poly Sequencer, hence thinking RB could outdo Reason's Drum Sequencer.
Euclidean is amazing! I can't recommend it highly enough. It's such an easy way to add variety/flair/character to your playing; it can really help make otherwise boring chord progressions much more interesting. It's one of the players I usually have in my player stack, along with Sequences. Another useful player to add to the stack is Latch. I think Euclidean and Latch play very nicely together.
For drums, you need to look at Sequences. It can play drum patterns, no problem. I prefer Sequences to Drum Sequencer for running drums with the latest 2 updates. This latest update gave us per-note conditions, so we can get way more variations per pattern than we had before (I like to think of it as unlimited because the number is really high). The ratchet update RBean gave us last time was a wonderful thing for drums, too. Now Sequences can play triplets and all sorts of other rhythms.
I agree, having different patterns on Euclidean would be excellent. You could always stack mulitple instances of Euclidean and turn off the ones you aren't using. The on/off buttons are automatable and can be set as Combi destinations.
For drums, you need to look at Sequences. It can play drum patterns, no problem. I prefer Sequences to Drum Sequencer for running drums with the latest 2 updates. This latest update gave us per-note conditions, so we can get way more variations per pattern than we had before (I like to think of it as unlimited because the number is really high). The ratchet update RBean gave us last time was a wonderful thing for drums, too. Now Sequences can play triplets and all sorts of other rhythms.
Adding pattern support to Euclidean would unfortunately not be feasible now. From the beginning, we opted to make every Mute/Hit button automatable and Remotable, which means that we have a pretty high number of automation objects already.
So if we added 7 more patterns, either the number of automatable and Remotable objects would multiply by 8 (which is not possible due to the number of automation objects being limited), or you would only be able to automate the per-set properties in pattern 1, which would be confusing and lead to more bug reports.
And if we instead make the Mute/Hit settings "global", i e that they affect all patterns, it would of course defeat the purpose of having patterns in the first place, since you would only load "snapshots" of the Density/Length/Offset settings...
So if we added 7 more patterns, either the number of automatable and Remotable objects would multiply by 8 (which is not possible due to the number of automation objects being limited), or you would only be able to automate the per-set properties in pattern 1, which would be confusing and lead to more bug reports.
And if we instead make the Mute/Hit settings "global", i e that they affect all patterns, it would of course defeat the purpose of having patterns in the first place, since you would only load "snapshots" of the Density/Length/Offset settings...
Given those choices, I think you guys went the right way with Euclidean. I'd rather stack a few of them and keep all the separate automation targets than have patterns.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests