chance box - a random pad generator for JJOS

I've been making some simple devices to use with JJOS. Many requests have been made for JJ to create a function that allows samples to be triggered randomly or in a round-robin format. Who knows if this will be possible within JJ, so I decided to design something using Arduino. I'll refer to it as the Chance Box.

(I haven't had the time to make a proper video demonstrating how it works, but if anyone cares I will upload a better video in the next couple weeks. I understand that this video is not very satisfying.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6VUN4vyW6k

In brief, the video shows pads A01-A04 on track 17 randomly triggering samples on tracks 1-4.

Chance Box Synopsis:

It's a MIDI device that uses the multitimbral abilities included in recent JJOSXL releases. The user creates programs in the MPC containing sets of pads to be randomly triggered. For instance, several snares can be assigned to pads A01-A16 in a program named RANDOMSNARES. The programs are then assigned to tracks 1-16. The user can use tracks 17-64 for either "normal" use or to trigger the random pads on tracks 1-16.

MIDI in/out cables are attached to MIDI out/in of the Chance Box. When the device receives designated note-on/pad-hit messages from the MPC, it sends a randomly generated note-on/pad-hit message back to the MPC. The pad numbers on the triggering tracks correspond to the track numbers to which a random pad is triggered.

For example, let's say we want track 17 to be used with the Chance Box. We set up the MIDI out of track 17 to the Chance Box (ie, channel D01). When we hit pad A01, a random pad will be triggered on track 1. When we hit pad A02, a random pad will be triggered on track 2. And so on. Do we want snares to be randomly triggered from pad A06? Just assign a program full of snares to track 6.

(The video demonstrates a few pads being used as described. The audio is poor, but I think the hats/cymbal variations on pads A03/A04 are pretty audible.)

The system is quick. I cannot hear/feel latency. Once the device's microcontroller is initially programmed, it can be used independently from a computer. It's also customizable, in that a round-robin method can be used instead of random. We can select from 1 to 16 (or more) pads to be triggered in each program/track.

Designating tracks 1-16 to contain the random sets (programs) in theory seemed awkward, but using the device is actually intuitive for me. It'd be nice to select a range of tracks in JJOS to be multitimbral, but as of now we don't have that feature. MIDI in channel 1 can only control track 1 on the MPC, etc.

One more detail: we can also record on the "controlling" track which, when played back, will play back ever-changing loops. A one-bar loop can even be quite interesting and unpredictable.

It's a lot of info, so hopefully this description is coherent. Happy to answer questions if you have some.

yeah nice idea - random pad muting from external software is something I've played a bit with - since the cc# note-mapping (in the 'button' screen on 2XL) was introduced.

I need to actually try out 'sequence change by program change' to see how it works. That way you could do random switching at the sequence level as well.

SWEET. love arduino.
what midi library are you using?
i've never done anything with midi in with arduino, only out.
props for your cleverness.

Kinda new to Arduino. I researched a little bit and sketched from scratch.. no library for this one.

I also made a device that uses MIDI song position pointers and buttons to bounce around MP sequence timelines. So many possibilities.

oh yeah, that last idea is pretty awesome too. Great work!

consuming where are you from?

we should talk.
i'm in the middle of developing a midi controller with arduino as well. properly executed, it will be the first instrument of its kind and incredibly flexible.

this video shows a crude ancestor from which my current model descends. forgive the crappy synth preset i used with it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PcyuM1VGRk

Thanks, cat.

Nym: Riverside, So cal. If you'd like, you can contact consuming at gmail and bounce some ideas. The theremin controller looks intriguing.

theremin style midi conroller? man youre genius, i wonder why no majir brand had done that before! its a very simple idea tghats why it rocks. you should make it able to "quantize" notes so after C comes C# exactly, not every frequency in between..or you should make it to be able to "lock" the notes it play at certain scales, like the kaossilator, so even a noob can play. yea man genius idea because its simple it will be loved both by more serious persons and hipsters/pozers. promote yourself and get money you deserve it

tosfalma wrote:theremin style midi conroller? man youre genius, i wonder why no majir brand had done that before! its a very simple idea tghats why it rocks.

they have.
it was a pretty common feature on stuff that came out 3/4 years ago. I've seen it on dj fx units, guitar pedals, noise boxes, and many Roland products have it (they call it D BEAM).
it usually is a bit of a gimmick though, because it's no very precise, and light can interfere with it.

theremins work with mangnetic fields, this stuff usually works with infrared or something like that if I'm not mistaken.

the latest incarnation of this idea is based on the Kinect controller. I've seen some pretty interesting gesture controller projects that could be fun for live performances, but apart from that, nothing really useful.

all manner of gestural controllers implemented by equipment manufacturers have been sub-par afterthoughts intended to attract those with a weak prefrontal cortex

they have not committed to the design and code
and that is why i have built/am building the better controller.
with all the resources these guys have it's laughable that the d-beam is about the best they could do

Nym wrote:all manner of gestural controllers implemented by equipment manufacturers have been sub-par afterthoughts intended to attract those with a weak prefrontal cortex

they have not committed to the design and code
and that is why i have built/am building the better controller.
with all the resources these guys have it's laughable that the d-beam is about the best they could do

I know what you mean! and when the first stuff with theremin-like control came out I was really excited by it... too bad everything I tried till today works in such a sloppy manner! that's why I said it's nothing more than a gimmick most of the times.
the D-Beam is exactly that: it is good to show during demos and make the kids go "whoa!". I don't really think Roland wanted to revolutionize the market with it.

the only use I could see for that kind of controller is for some live performance when you need to show your crowd you are doing something on stage more than turning knobs.
I actually found it pretty useful on some guitar pedals built for noise-rock, but that should also show how it's a pretty restricted niche.

not to be polemical, but out of actual curiosity: I don't see how any kind of controller driven by gesture will ever be much practical or more comfortable than knobs, sliders and the such. I had a theremin and it was a pretty difficult instrument to work with.
I guess you can use some kind of quantization as tosfalma suggested, but that would impoverish the whole concept of having such kind of control.

ansiaaa wrote:the only use I could see for that kind of controller is for some live performance when you need to show your crowd you are doing something on stage more than turning knobs.

live - this was originally the driving force behind my concept, before i realized how powerful it will be as a compositional tool for playing extremely organic, evolving synth lines. but still - live performance is absolutely the motivation here.

not to be polemical, but out of actual curiosity: I don't see how any kind of controller driven by gesture will ever be much practical or more comfortable than knobs, sliders and the such. I had a theremin and it was a pretty difficult instrument to work with.

extremely difficult, which is why i'm not committed to the actual theremin "fretless" approach [extremely easy to do, and will be featured as a "mode" on my instrument]. i'm more interested in a virtual harp kind of thing, with more emphasis on glissando and portamento than straight up pitchbends.

you pick em up and you put em down, so to say.
minds will be blown, pants will be soiled
and copycats will line up around the block

well, that's surely the way to go!
I hope you'll succeed with your project, something like that would be really cool if working properly as you said