[fruityloops] Re: Interesting way to use patterns

  • From: Andrew Ebling <andyebling@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: fruityloops@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: 06 Sep 2002 14:08:32 +0000

LOL!  I hadn't considered putting automation in the same pattern as the
notes!  I'm not saying "thanks Gwydion thats obvious", rather it is
interesting that different people adopt different approaches by default
when they come to use a program like fruityloops.

Thanks for the clear description anyway :-)


On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 12:15, Gwydion Elderwyn wrote:
> It occured to me tonight that patterns do not have to contain any notes at
> all - they can contain just automation data.  I gave it a try and sure
> enough, Fruity is quite happy with it.
> Why is this useful?  I'll explain with an example.  You might also want to
> download http://www.elderwyn.com/public/fxdemo.flp (19k) which shows it in
> action.
> Say you've got a particular riff that gets repeated through your song, but
> you'd like to do different things with it along the way.  For example,
> gradually reduce a filter cutoff through the riff, or gradually increase the
> resonance, or somesuch.
> One way to approach it would be to record your automation for every instance
> of the riff.  So you'd need one pattern for each variation, and the pattern
> would contain both the notes and the automation.
> What I'm suggesting instead is to record the notes on one pattern, but then
> start a new pattern and record (or draw) the automation into that.  Be sure
> to name your patterns so you know what is what.
> This way, you only use one pattern for the main riff, rather than having to
> use a seperate pattern for each variation of the riff, and you can then drop
> in bars of the automation where you need them.
> Still doesn't sound that useful?  Consider this.  Say you've recorded the
> riff (and controllers) six times, for six different variations of filter
> levels or whatever the automations happen to be.  Now you decide that you
> want to change the notes in the riff.  Well, you have to do it six times,
> whereas using my method you only have to do it once.
> Or, consider this: You have three or four riffs, but would like to use the
> same automation effect (eg, filter sweep) on all of them at various times.
> All you need to do is drop in the automation pattern(s) at the appropriate
> place(s).
> Final example: You change the tone the riff plays and now the filter sweeps
> you recorded are too severe.  If you have use a seperate 'filter sweep'
> automation pattern, you only have to edit it once!
> Have fun FL'ers!
> G.

The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may
be legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail and you are not
a named addressee, please inform us as soon as possible on
+44 118 901 2999 and then delete the e-mail from your system. If you are
not a named addressee you must not copy, use, disclose, distribute,
print or rely on this e-mail. Any views expressed in this e-mail or any
attachments may not necessarily reflect those of Tao's management.
Although we routinely screen for viruses, addressees should scan this
e-mail and any attachments for viruses. Tao makes no representation or
warranty as to the absence of viruses in this e-mail or any attachments.
Please note that for the protection of our business, we may monitor and
read e-mails sent to and from our server(s).

Visit our website at http://tao-group.com/

Other related posts: