In Pyramid’s Scale effect, it should be possible to transpose by more than +/-12 semitones. I think this has been implemented on Hermod already. While this does not really make sense on MIDI synths, it is very convenient on modular synths where retuning oscillators is not fun at all.
Currently, the Chance effect plays or does not play a note based on a certain probability. Instead of playing / not playing, it would be interesting to have a skip / play feature in the sense that “with a certain probability, a note is skipped or played”. This would affect the length of the pattern, of course. Since polymetry/polyrhythm is a strength of Pyramid, a probability-based skip effect would be a very powerful addition.
A third point would be: 3) Stretching patterns by a certain factor, see for example https://obedia.com/how-to-stretch-a-midi-passage-in-studio-one-4/
The factors that should be available in the minimum are 2 (double) and 1/2 (half). This is called augmentation and diminution in music theory sometimes.
I can imagine that this is tricky to implement as a MIDI effect. But it can be implemented as a function applicable to patterns similar to the “consolidate” function which is applied to tracks.
Once it is possible to apply functions to patterns, many other things can be implemented: inversion in time (i.e. running the notes backwards), mirroring of notes relative to a root note above/below and so on.
EDIT: Studio One Release 4.5 introduces a lot of note-based effects (e.g. mirror).
I missed this post before posting a similar request regarding Chance, and a request for user defined scales. Regarding tbe transposition issue, I think there may be an octave up or down function that addresses your query.
The SCALE effect has a transpose function, correct. One can transpose +/-12 semitones. But this is one octave only. What I was talking about is being able to change for example +/-36 semitones (this is what they implemented on Hermod in the latest firmware update).
Chance per step is possible already now: just apply the CHANCE MIDI effect and switch it on/off per step by using automation. Automation of MIDI effect parameters is an incredibly useful feature.
Additionally, you can control the step probability for selected steps globally. See the manual for details.
Ahhh, I was under the mistaken impression that Chance only applied to pitch, velocity, and other automations. Things were not as clear about it being applied to note on commands when I first looked through the manual. Thank you for clarifying that!
Any further thoughts on user defined scales and modes?
RANDOM applies to pitch, velocity etc. CHANCE refers to the probability of a note being played or not. In a way, RANDOM is about probabilistic CVs, while CHANCE is about probabilistic gates.
Any effect parameters can be varied from step to step, also the “on/off” parameter. Additionally, a CHANCE probability of 100% means that a note is played for sure, while 0% means that it is not played for sure. If you want to vary CHANCE probability from step to step, look at the section “Effects Stepmode” in the online manual. Effect parameter variations per step was one of the more important reasons why I dumped Hermod and switched to Pyramid.
Suppose I created a 32-step sequence, how to reproduce the crash at the 29th step for every eighth repetition of the sequence?
It is not necessary to suggest programming a 256-step sequence.
There are many ways to implement this. This isn’t a good example, because it is really a variation which is pattern-based, not step-based.
I would create the 32 step pattern without crash, copy it, add the crash on the 29th step in the copy and then create two sequences, one that plays the first pattern 7 times and then the second pattern one time.
A 256 step pattern would work too: Set up the 32 steps and then increase the length of the sequence using the > pad. Each press of the button will double its length while copying its content. So pressing 3 times is enough to create a 256 step sequence (1 - 2 - 4 - 8). Then go and add the crash whereever you want
You can also use velocity to set per step chance. Enable chance effect, turn encoder 2 right the way up past 100% until it says velocity, then the per step velocity defines the per step chance making it much easier to edit in regular step view ( as opposed to modulation step view where you can’t see where your steps are unless you’ve programmed a specific modulation step).
Define “fast”. What I described takes seconds, not minutes. My implementation of what you have described would be: Set up the 32 step pattern and set a crash on step 29, then apply CHANCE on step 29 with a low probability. This can be implemented within seconds. For deterministic, long and evolving structures, I prefer using a DAW. Pyramid is for simpler patterns with stochastic elements. I would love to see Squarp move more in the direction of Numerology. The sequencer which competes Pyramid the most is not Octatrack, but Vector by Five12. Vector has more powerful stochastic effects and pattern-based functions. Plus a better user interface (Pyramid’s screen is much to small, and nobody really uses the oversized trackpad) and and and. If I have the opportunity, I will test Vector. Also, Pyramid is very much MIDI-based. I prefer the more CV/gate-based sequencers. But that’s me, I only use Eurorack components in my system, no MIDI synths.
You can find many things the Pyramid doesnt do well that other sequencers do. But the same is true vice versa. The Pyramid can do many things the Octatrack cannot. Maybe try not to make Pyramid fit into the “OT-thinking-box”, but rather play on the strengths of the Pyramid.
Having only used this thing for a few hours, I can see that it’s a useful and fun little powerhouse, however, the ability to create user scales, and chord voicings would be a MAJOR boon to the user base.
The ability to stretch and compact tracks and patterns arbitrarily would be otherworldly. “YES PLEASE!!?” to that. As I mentioned in another thread, Hermode tuning would be another incredibly useful and good sounding feature to implement. I know that one would be a lot of work, as it is an adaptive tuning system, and would require the system to be constantly analyzing chords and intervals, comparing them to look up tables, and adjusting the intonation of thirds, 5ths, and 7ths, in conjunction with the last notes played, so that it can decide whether a pair of notes are which inversion/extension around which key center at any given moment. Certainly not holding my breath on that one.
When people ask a developer for something that I don’t need - I just don’t pay attention to it, what others really want. You will get worse from the fact that in the Pyramid there will be new opportunities?
