Global Patterns

[Kriminal]

Probably I won't be keeping Orion as my main sequencer if this global madness happen and I can't use Orion as fastly and logically as now. I was a loyal user of Orion since V3, I bought it as expensive boxed product and paid upgrade fees for it. I wouldn't want to ditch it, I hope it'll have strong areas for which it'll be worthy to ReWire to or fire-up for special tasks, but nowadays I'm searching for my next main tool, as instead of addressing those areas on which Orion is limiting, I fear it will be getting worse on those areas where it was strong.

why would you ditch it? Just keep using the version that works for you, you dont have to upgrade

i could still go back to Orion Pro and make the same music i make now, Orion hasnt really added much that i need in the last 5 years, tho some of the new FX are much beteer than old stuff, from a workflow perspective its the same.

[Lance]

Probably I won't be keeping Orion as my main sequencer if this global madness happen and I can't use Orion as fastly and logically as now. I was a loyal user of Orion since V3, I bought it as expensive boxed product and paid upgrade fees for it. I wouldn't want to ditch it, I hope it'll have strong areas for which it'll be worthy to ReWire to or fire-up for special tasks, but nowadays I'm searching for my next main tool, as instead of addressing those areas on which Orion is limiting, I fear it will be getting worse on those areas where it was strong.

why would you ditch it? Just keep using the version that works for you, you dont have to upgrade

i could still go back to Orion Pro and make the same music i make now, Orion hasnt really added much that i need in the last 5 years, tho some of the new FX are much beteer than old stuff, from a workflow perspective its the same.

I didn't mean that I will ditch it as a whole.

Currently Orion is my main primary sequencer. Also I'd like to keep it for testing, so I will upgrade it even if it'll get global patterns, but if I won't like it and cannot find it as fast as now I will make it to a secondary tool for those tasks at which it will still have strengths hopefully.

Recently I was very productive with Orion. I'd like to release music this year. Despite making complex songs I had a rate of 1 good song per 2 days coming up with good ideas (IMO, of course), with projects I'm very happy with and having better production quality than I was capable before. The main key for this I can work very fastly with Orion. As I said sometimes I'm arranging my song structure faster than the play cursor is going real-time. That's the power of the current pattern system. This won't be improved with global patterns but the opposite, I couldn't arrange songs as fast, because loads of patterns will be there where I won't need them and they will cause problems too. I never needed a global tool, I won't use its benefits but it'll worsen my workflow and speed as it would be a core feature and way of handling patterns.

Rich's original pattern concept was a genius idea which is still getting the praise. I know developers who likes Orion for exactly this! It would be very sad to see if Rich would ditch this idea for a brainfart of Bones.

Imagine how the simple and fast way of changing patterns by mouse-scroll could work if you had loads of wrong patterns at a generator? Easy changing, selecting, identifying of patterns are essential to achive the current fast workflow.

[Mark]

Regarding pattern systems:

Orion's current and traditional pattern system which more logical and very suitable for fast working is superior to FL Studio's.

BUT, by the destroying of this system and replacing it with a global pool, Orion's system will be even more awkward and INFERIOR to FL Studio's!

WHY? Because at least FL Studio's single pattern can be a logically working full song-part and also you can work in FL clip-based too already in the traditional way of the sequencers.

Probably I won't be keeping Orion as my main sequencer if this global madness happen and I can't use Orion as fastly and logically as now. I was a loyal user of Orion since V3, I bought it as expensive boxed product and paid upgrade fees for it. I wouldn't want to ditch it, I hope it'll have strong areas for which it'll be worthy to ReWire to or fire-up for special tasks, but nowadays I'm searching for my next main tool, as instead of addressing those areas on which Orion is limiting, I fear it will be getting worse on those areas where it was strong.

So my wish for now: ReWire 64-bit support!

Where on earth does it say the current pattern-based approach will be ditched? I think part of the problem here (and the beta forum) is that each person has got a different interpretation of a simple concept. Again, I myself see the global patterns as a level to fit on to/alongside the current system. The way I see it, if you don't like it, you won't have to use it. If you do like it then it offers you another flexible way of working within the current system. Given Richard's past in implementing new ideas he has done exactly that without breaking backwards-compatibility.

FWIW, most of the people on the beta forum who have been discussing this have also been using Orion since year dot. You sound a bit like you're throwing your toys out of the pram if you ask me.

[Kriminal]

Where on earth does it say the current pattern-based approach will be ditched? I think part of the problem here (and the beta forum) is that each person has got a different interpretation of a simple concept.

i think it was Bones who said his ideal of global pools was to replace the current one (i may be wrong )

i cant see the point in having both, it really needs to be one or the other, to avoid even more confusion

[Lance]

Where on earth does it say the current pattern-based approach will be ditched?

Bones has described so: at every generator you will have the same battern bank, the global pool with a pattern selector of << < ... > >> (4 arrow buttons) for skipping through the loads of them you won't need there.



With this stupid idea, Orion also would be killed as a live performance tool too. Congratulations!

I liked your floating window pool alongside the current system idea, that wouldn't hurt the workflow and may have its use, but I cannot like Bones' idea as it would kill Orion's strongest feature and make the workflow slower.

[DivinEviL616]

I have read. I have thought. I have realized.

Now unfortunately I have to announce that if ANYONE CHANGES THAT PLAYLIST EDITOR I'll swell up like a spoiled child and pout about it! It was very high up on my 'logical reasons' to choice Orion over FL Studio. The only thing that I feel should ever happen to it is that Midi Patterns resize from both right and left; just like audio clips. Also I have the feeling that, once I figure out how to record a guitar without my system pitching a fit, I'll be asking for more 'tracking' flexibility.

When I first agreed to the concept it was because it seemed to offer a solution to the complications of, like Teksonic mentioned, layering a pad or bass line using the same patterns. Yeah that dance can get old real fast. It also seemed to solve the issue of whenever I get halfway through a track I always want to take a moment and try a few options. Am I seeking a sound that could be better handled by, or would sound better in harmony with, "BLAH" (insert your favorite plugin's name there) and then I'd have to open it copy/paste and so on. I also had no idea we would be encroaching upon such a noble creature as the playlist editor; and this is the basis my above post was formulated upon. My vision of the 'pattern pool' means to only affect the generators and the piano roll; and under those conditions it would be very useful to me. I very often like to take the drum midi and put it on a bass line synth and tweak it from there. It would have also eliminated my want for a Generator reset/replace option (see an older post of mine somewhere around here) because I could just delete the glitching plugin and reload it and simply reassign the patterns.

So I'm just going to chill for a little bit before I involve myself in another discussion I am not prepared to have. If you will kindly notice that I am now in Samurai Mode and will defend the honor of the pure and gentle playlist editor to the death or until I get bored...whichever. lol

[Richard]

i cant see the point in having both, it really needs to be one or the other, to avoid even more confusion

I think so too, with the exception of some sort of global pattern-browser (perhaps containing presets, similar to the v7 Styles, but global so they can be applied to any generator).

[Kriminal]

i cant see the point in having both, it really needs to be one or the other, to avoid even more confusion

I think so too, with the exception of some sort of global pattern-browser (perhaps containing presets, similar to the v7 Styles, but global so they can be applied to any generator).

you mean just midi note data i assume

[Lance]

i cant see the point in having both, it really needs to be one or the other, to avoid even more confusion

I think so too, with the exception of some sort of global pattern-browser (perhaps containing presets, similar to the v7 Styles, but global so they can be applied to any generator).

That's it.

It's a common feature in every popular DAW, you can import, drag-and-drop stuff from a media/project pool of audio, MIDI, presets, loops, automation patterns and so on.

But there the stuff must be organized and selectable to be useful (there are categories or folders, you may examine such pools in Cubase, Logic, Live or even in FL Studio, they all have one). Having every pattern at every generator would be a very stupid idea and destroying the current pattern and arrangement system. Let it be selectable what I want to have at a specific instrument, I don't want dozens of patterns get in the way of finding, selecting or arranging the right one I made specificly for an instrument.

Project browser/pool, that might be a good feature, not this global pool at every generator.

[Teksonik]

Where on earth does it say the current pattern-based approach will be ditched? I think part of the problem here (and the beta forum) is that each person has got a different interpretation of a simple concept. Again, I myself see the global patterns as a level to fit on to/alongside the current system

Both local and global patterns would get messy. Just imagine being able to drag *some* patterns to other tracks but not others... a nightmare for new users.

i cant see the point in having both, it really needs to be one or the other, to avoid even more confusion

I think so too, with the exception of some sort of global pattern-browser (perhaps containing presets, similar to the v7 Styles, but global so they can be applied to any generator).

I've made my case against Global Patterns...nothing much else to say other than think it over I mean really think it over before implementing any system that breaks Orion's Pattern Per Generator workflow which in my opinion is it's backbone and strongest point........

[bones]

No, you've made a case against something you don't understand, or that lives only in your head. What I've suggested is something quite different.

I'm afraid your point holds no merit.

EVERYTHING TEKSONIK HAS SAID IS WRONG, LIKE LANCE, HE HAS MADE NO EFFORT TO UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT AND, THEREFORE, HIS COMMENTS ARE FACTUALLY INCORRECT. PLEASE IGNORE HIS REMARKS. This is the "baggage" I was hoping to leave behind on the Beta Forum. Oh, well...

I still think Global Patterns are a bad idea since they break Orion's current Pattern per Generator workflow.

OK, I will address this one point, just to show how far off the mark you are. If you want to continue to work as you do now, you will be able to. The only thing that might change is the widget used to select patterns. If you want to continue to create patterns separately from each generator and never share them, you will be able to continue like that. Things will only change when you want to move beyond this basic workflow, and those changes will all be for the better.

Here is a way of organising things so that you would never even need to know that it was possible to share patterns. I don't think it is necessarily the best idea but it would mean you'd never even know they were there. When you insert a new generator, a virtual folder is created for it's patterns. e.g Wasp #1. Now, that instrument would, by default, see and use only patterns from that virtual folder. You could even keep the A1-H8 naming within that folder. However, there could also be a little arrow widget or something that, when pressed, would reveal all the virtual folders for all the other generators in the project, allowing you to also use those patterns without having to copy them across. As I said, this is a way of having your cake and eating it too, but I don't think it is anywhere near the best idea for organising patterns and probably wouldn't be worth doing if that was all we could do with it. i.e. Copy/paste would be just as easy.

Here's an example....Say I load up the fifth instrument in a song. Now I have to remember which patterns the first four instruments used and which patterns are still available to this new instrument.

Why do you? Maybe when you insert that instrument you want to use a pattern you've already made. I don't think I ever insert a second instrument and then create a pattern for it, it is always a case of having a pattern that I need a new instrument for. Anyway, who's to say that a new instrument doesn't automatically show the next empty pattern when you insert it, as happens when you combine patterns? Or that a new folder isn't created to store it's patterns? This is an issue that needs to be addressed, and a mechanism already exists within Orion, it not an insurmountable problem.

Then when I go to the Playlist I have to remember what patterns were written specifically for that instrument...

You already have to work out which patterns are fills, intros, middle-8s, verses, choruses, etc. If you can manage that OK, this won't make it any harder. If the pattern has the name of the instrument built into it, it won't be an issue at all. e.g. Dune-017 or Wasp #1-045. Again, issues to be addressed, not insurmountable problems.

And in the end how many times do you really use the same pattern for more than one instrument?

During the song writing process, I'd say between 20 and 50 times for each song, trying to find the best instrument for each part. OTOH, I only do the arrangement once and that is always when the locations of the patterns are fresh in my head. Once the basic arrangement is down, I can come back to it weeks or months later and the Playlist will tell me which patterns go with which instrument. Even with zero organisation of global patterns, it solves more issues than it creates. With just the tiniest bit of organisation, it eliminates the negative altogether.

Do you really need to have a Hi Hat pattern available for a Bass Synth or Lead Synth?

Why not? It might take you in an unexpected direction and lead to something wonderful. Serendipity is a great spark for creativity.

How many times are you going to use a Kick Drum pattern on a Piano part?

You might want to use it with a drumkit in the Sampler rather than a piano, or try it with Tomcat or Pro9. I've even done stuff where their is a voice sample triggered with every snare (an "ooomph" sound). It is quite a valid thing to want to do.

Or a Melody line in a Drum Synth?

Could be handy to layer it to give the synth part a percussive attack via Tomcat or with DrumRack in Multi Mode (like using the noise osc in Wasp). Again, something you might want to experiment with that is a bit out of left field. You wouldn't think to do it now but it might turn out to be a great effect if it was just a bit easier to broaden your experimental horizons.

Is pattern 87 a Bass drum pattern or a Bass Guitar pattern?

Is Pattern A1 the verse or the chorus? Is this the best instrument to use it with? Could it work better as a secondary rhythm? Your question assumes you already know the answers to these questions. It is in the pursuit of those answers (to the second and third questions) that global patterns work well. i.e. If it can answer these 2 questions whilst only raising one new one, then we are making progress.

Which patterns does instrument number 8 use?

The Playlist will answer that. A better question would be "which patterns can Instrument number 8 use?" Right now that answer is only about 1/8th of all the patterns in the song. How much better answer is "any pattern you like"?

Think of how patterns will translate in the Playlist. It will be a hodge podge of unrelated numbers or you'll be spending all day renaming patterns so they make sense.

It is like that now. e.g. when you are doing an arrangement, you realise you need a drum fill somewhere that is based on Pattern A1, but the next empty pattern is C7. Those two numbers bear no relationship to one-another, yet would need to sit side-by-side in the Playlist. Mostly I tend to use tricks like making all the verse patterns twice the length of the chorus patterns so I can easily identify what goes where. Those things will still be possible. None of it needs to be any harder or less transparent than it is now. Again, issues to be addressed, not insurmountable problems.

With Orion's current Pattern Per Generator I know that the patterns I have created for Albino that's set to a bass patch will be bass patterns..

Again, you are making assumptions - that amongst your vast arsenal of sonic weapons, Albino is the only instrument that is right for that part. i.e. You are locking yourself in and making it less likely to find the absolute best synth for the job. Either that or you have arrived at that decision by spending some time copying and pasting patterns from one instrument to the next until you are sure you've got the right one, in which case global patterns will make your life much easier.

the patterns I've created for Pro9 will be drum patterns etc etc....if I want to use those Pro9 patterns in another Drum Synth I simply Clone To and if I don't want to keep the Pro9 I simply delete it..everything that Global Patterns can do already without the horrid mess of a jumble of unrelated patterns......

Hardly everything, just one very specific thing. e.g. What if you decided that Pro9 works better in the verse but DrumRack is best for the chorus? You'd have two sets of patterns doing the same thing and if you decide to make a change in one place, you need to remember to go and change it yourself in the other. With global patterns, you'd change it once and it would be changed everywhere. There are many more areas where global patterns will be of great benefit. Even here, there won't be any downside, just two ways of achieving a similar result. Choose the one that suits the situation better. Think of it as the Pattern Mode equivalent of "Receive MIDI from Generator", only much more transparent.

[bones]

Make that global pool as an optional tool alongside the current pattern system for those who think countless reusing of MIDI patterns is a good thing or let's forget about it!

We don't often agree Lance but in this case I agree with you 100%..........

Would either of you care to explain how that would work and what the benefits would be? All this shows me is that you don't understand the idea at all, because doing that would be a complete waste of time.

[bones]

I think bones is actually thinking along similar lines especially when he states that making a new pattern in the piano roll automatically adds that pattern to the global pool.

No, I think that where Lance and Tek are struggling is with that terminology. i.e. When you call it a "global pool" it sounds like something separate that needs to be connected. It wouldn't be like that, which is why I've just been referring to it as "global patterns". Creating a pattern would be exactly as it is now - you find an empty one and you add data to it. Its just that as you create it, it is available to every instrument, not just the one you are using to make it. e.g. If you have 5 instruments all set to pattern 027, which is empty, and you select any one of them and press CTRL+R, all 5 instruments will immediately start playing that random pattern (assuming Play has been pressed).

The process of making patterns is still the same, you just have a central repository on top for easy access of existing patterns by other generators.

No, if you put something on top of something else, it becomes complex. Think of it as a street full of houses, where each instrument in your song is a house. Now the first house might have a swing set in the back yard, the second a swimming pool and the 3rd a trampoline. Right now, there are fences between each house so the kids from the first house have to climb over two fences if they want to play on the trampoline. They can do it, but its a lot of effort and so most of the time they are happy to play on their swings. That's the situation we have now - a bunch of fenced off instruments where it is possible to share, but not always easy. Now, imagine that the house owners all got together and decided to take down the fences between their houses - all of a sudden all the kids have one huge back yard with swings, a pool and a trampoline. That's what global patterns offer - a big yard to play in with all the toys at your disposal. It is simpler and more expansive.

BUT, by the destroying of this system and replacing it with a global pool, Orion's system will be even more awkward and INFERIOR to FL Studio's!

I agree. The only problem is that is not what is being proposed. What is being proposed is to take the system we have now and remove the barriers that prevent you from using a pattern belonging to one instrument in another. I really don't know how you can't see that.

Probably I won't be keeping Orion as my main sequencer if this global madness happen and I can't use Orion as fastly and logically as now.

We can only hope. Sadly, however, global patterns won't change anything, so we'll be stuck with you for some time yet.

With this stupid idea, Orion also would be killed as a live performance tool too. Congratulations!

Really? Strange, then, that I probably use Orion live more than anyone else in the world. You'd think I'd be a little more concerned, wouldn't you? Or maybe you just don't understand what the grown-ups are talking about?

Now unfortunately I have to announce that if ANYONE CHANGES THAT PLAYLIST EDITOR I'll swell up like a spoiled child and pout about it!

What? No-one has said anything about the Playlist changing. We are talking about patterns.

When I first agreed to the concept it was because it seemed to offer a solution to the complications of, like Teksonic mentioned, layering a pad or bass line using the same patterns. Yeah that dance can get old real fast. It also seemed to solve the issue of whenever I get halfway through a track I always want to take a moment and try a few options. Am I seeking a sound that could be better handled by, or would sound better in harmony with, "BLAH" (insert your favorite plugin's name there) and then I'd have to open it copy/paste and so on. I also had no idea we would be encroaching upon such a noble creature as the playlist editor; and this is the basis my above post was formulated upon.
My vision of the 'pattern pool' means to only affect the generators and the piano roll

Then you understand the concept, unlike Teksonik and Lance.

I think so too, with the exception of some sort of global pattern-browser (perhaps containing presets, similar to the v7 Styles, but global so they can be applied to any generator). It's a common feature in every popular DAW, you can import, drag-and-drop stuff from a media/project pool of audio, MIDI, presets, loops, automation patterns and so on.

That's a horrible idea. I don't want my GUI cluttered up with some stupid browser window full of things that aren't relevant. I want Orion to be simpler, not more complex. Being forced to use the Browser in Fruity was one of the things I hated most about it. It took up far too much valuable space on my screen and never showed me what I wanted to see, which meant endless scrolling to get what I needed. Krap like that needs to be hidden from the user, not stuffed in their face.

[DivinEviL616]

What? No-one has said anything about the Playlist changing.

Here...

my concern is keeping track of everything in the pools.

Yes.

Can we put patterns into the Playlist so easily as right know, with global pool? A1 - A1 - A1 - then a small scroll up on the wheel of the mouse - A2. No!

Because the majority of the patterns will get in the way where we won't need them! We have to avoid an awful lot of patterns and finding needles in a stack just for inserting a desired pattern to create an 'arrangement pattern of patterns'.

The whole idea is unnecessary - as we can share patterns between generators very easily and in many ways already - and breaks apart Orion's strongest area and make it slower to work with.

Make that global pool as an optional tool alongside the current pattern system for those who think countless reusing of MIDI patterns is a good thing or let's forget about it!

This is what insinuates a playlist editor change to me.

No, I think that where Lance and Tek are struggling is with that terminology.

You've identified it, step two is washing it off... This is where a lot of my misunderstandings will come from as well. When it comes to the jargon everyone tends to use their own slang. (see what I did there?)

Then you understand the concept

Yes, I do and it would carry benefits for me in the long run I will readily admit, but I would not want to see this implemented at the sacrifice of something else much more important to me. You assure me that we are illustrating the same concept with our words, but I want to be absolutely sure of that before vote yes on it.

@Teksonik Something I like to do is to take my drum midi's and apply them to a bass or lead synth just to 'see' and from what I've witnessed about 75% of the time you'll find something useful, or at least inspiring, to add to your work whether in this track or another with the same formula (ie time sig, tempo, blah blah). It's already going to be rhythmically compatible, you just then need to tweak it a bit changing note position to match the key of the song.

No, if you put something on top of something else, it becomes complex. Think of it as a street full of houses, where each instrument in your song is a house. Now the first house might have a swing set in the back yard, the second a swimming pool and the 3rd a trampoline. Right now, there are fences between each house so the kids from the first house have to climb over two fences if they want to play on the trampoline. They can do it, but its a lot of effort and so most of the time they are happy to play on their swings. That's the situation we have now - a bunch of fenced off instruments where it is possible to share, but not always easy. Now, imagine that the house owners all got together and decided to take down the fences between their houses - all of a sudden all the kids have one huge back yard with swings, a pool and a trampoline. That's what global patterns offer - a big yard to play in with all the toys at your disposal.

I see what you've done here... I like it! You get the award for the best multilayer analogy since I've shown up here.

Being forced to use the Browser in Fruity was one of the things I hated most about it. It took up far too much valuable space on my screen and never showed me what I wanted to see, which meant endless scrolling to get what I needed. Krap like that needs to be hidden from the user, not stuffed in their face.

Literally, when I decided to try FL Studio I had at my side, a friend who works within it just as the most proficient user does in Orion. The program had barely gotten rid of its splash screen and I was asking 'Ok, how do we collapse this shit?' I should have known then at approximately 5 seconds logged time with the program and I was already dissatisfied that the trend would continue. I didn't and continued to learn it, but I have to say it was ultimately beneficial, for it made Orion that much easier to navigate and operate within. That same friend drops by and watches me work sometimes and can't believe how simple it is...lol

Well since the fair maiden Playlist Editor is safe for now I will relax, but I think I'll stay in Samurai Mode a little longer... it's just so bad ass. @Lance's Avatar - Looking Good...nice to see a familiar face

[bones]

What? No-one has said anything about the Playlist changing.

Here...

That's just Lance and, as I said, he is talking out of his arse. I have no idea why he thinks that doing this would change anything in the Playlist.

Yes, I do and it would carry benefits for me in the long run I will readily admit, but I would not want to see this implemented at the sacrifice of something else much more important to me. You assure me that we are illustrating the same concept with our words, but I want to be absolutely sure of that before vote yes on it.

You are absolutely correct in your understanding. I would never want anything to affect the speed and ease of using the Playlist or that would make working with patterns harder than it is now. Its all about simpler and easier.