Tarekith wrote:22tape wrote:
just thinking aloud here-- there's gonna have to be A LOT of p-locking going on to pan each machine (for the workaround) and fx--for example, if you want to add different amounts of reverb to different machines/samples on the same track you're gonna have to p-lock every new instance of the sample on the track. for every sample. for the length of the song. could become quite tedious...
That's no different from how the MD and MnM work though.i never owned a mnm. and it's been a few years since i owned the md. but aren't the fx at the machine level on the md? i mean the md doesn't have a hierarchal track concept? if i remember correctly on the md, i could, say, set the amount of reverb for a single machine and not bother with it again if i didn't need to. yes, if i wanted to automate the reverb at a specific point in the pattern, i'd p-lock it.
but on the OT aren't all of the sample's fx and pan settings controlled at the track level not the sample level? so all samples within a single track will share the same pan and fx settings? i'm not sure if i'm being clear. so say on the OT, if i want to compose full songs only having 8 tracks, i'll have to combine "instruments" on the same track. and if i end up having the kick and bass on the same track they'll be sharing the pan and fx settings. i often like to have a mono bass directly in the center of the stereo field. so on the OT i would set the track pan to the center. but i like to have my kicks panned slightly left or right so to separate it from the bass. so when the kick sounds on the same track as the bass, i'd have to p-lock the whole track pan slightly left. then immediately p-lock it again back to the center for the bass. then again for the kick. and again for the bass. then again for the kick. repeat for every pattern throughout the whole track.
same with fx setting. if i have the snare and hats sharing a track, they'll have the same fx and pan settings. not only would i have to do the same thing with the pan as mentioned above, i'd also have to repeat the same process for reverb if i want one to be more wet than the other. throughout the whole track. and the same with any effect. whereas on the md, i think, the sample settings are at the machine level. you could just set it and let it go if you wanted.
does that makes sense?
someone suggested that you could just bounce down so you could reuse the pattern and not worry about doing all the p-locking again. true. but then you're talking about dealing with larger chunks of audio which eats into the ram and, more importantly, you lose control of start/end points of those individual samples that you bounced down. now you only have control over the start/end of the bounced pattern.
