v4.92 out now

WTF? I petitioned hard to have the track mutes behave as the do now. Why is he changing this back out of the blue?? This is a step backward.

lol expect 4.93 this weekend...

King_Vitamin wrote:WTF? I petitioned hard to have the track mutes behave as the do now. Why is he changing this back out of the blue?? This is a step backward.

not quite out of the blue though, i dont know if u have been using track mutes lately but theres been immediate cut off of oneshot sample problems that lock up the mpc since v485, so theyre trying to fix it.

The track mute issues has bben discussed thoroughly in a long thread here. When people called for the feature now removed again i already knew it could be a real complex issue... read for yourselves (cant find it right now though...)

It seems to me the random pan thing (actually its a phase invertion on the stereo outs i think) happens more often with the 4.90 ive been working with the last days. Def. gotta do some test recording.

im tellin you guys, QLINK->LEVEL is such an easy track mute, or better yet just a deletion of the note you're trying to mute...i've never vibed with the track mutes. to each their own but you know.

Antonym wrote:im tellin you guys, QLINK->LEVEL is such an easy track mute, or better yet just a deletion of the note you're trying to mute...i've never vibed with the track mutes. to each their own but you know.

ant u r missing the point here,

no one in their right mind would want to mute a note they can get edit out of an event list.......this is about muting a sample that can then be un muted on the fly right? this in my experience often is required when doing stuf live (no i dont mean onstage away from a studio - 'live' to me is just as at home in the studio) off the cuff punch-in-outs of a long peice in a creative way.....something that would take ages to reprogram into chopped up bits and something that would never afford a nearly limitless permutation from such simple means....and probably any creative spark would have left the building and be long gone by the time it was figured out, placed into a schematic of note ons and offs after dividing a peice into 64 odd bits....making a program of it....blah blah.

as u said each to their own.....i love track mutes - but u dont vibe off them....so why does it appear that u are assuming u know why they're useful.

the traditional style of track mute using the pads of the mpc range is one of the dopest, funkiest features

nah i'm not missing the point. i know what the function is, what it does, and why it's appealing to people.

i'm saying there's a better way that's not nearly as messy as the current track mute specification. the MUTE/UNMUTE specification in general is kind of archaic and backwards - just look at what happens when you try to convert a song w/ muted tracks into a song.

instead, try using track/qreal/LEVEL. it does the exact same thing without these track mute issues. you can bring the sample in and out all you want. it's much less of a hassle.

something that would take ages to reprogram into chopped up bits and something that would never afford a nearly limitless permutation from such simple means....and probably any creative spark would have left the building and be long gone by the time it was figured out, placed into a schematic of note ons and offs after dividing a peice into 64 odd bits....making a program of it....blah blah.

sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and put some time in. building a program is a process that'll take hours, even days. i've spent entire sessions just laboring over a chopped sample program...and the spark doesn't go anywhere.

no one in their right mind would want to mute a note they can get edit out of an event list.......

you'd be surprised, this happens a lot more than you think.

i think this entire problem could be dealt with if MUTE was linked to LEVEL instead of its own specification. imagine - a track appears MUTED when LEVEL is 0. the second the LEVEL raises above 1, UNMUTED!

the same could happen from the MUTE page. hit MUTE, level drops to 0. it'd function the same way everyone loves, but instead of controlling this silly MUTE structure, it would be linked to LEVEL.

hell, i bet they could even squeeze some codespace out of doing it this way since it uses a preexisting function...

earwolf wrote:the traditional style of track mute using the pads of the mpc range is one of the dopest, funkiest features

Precisely why JJ should not be **** with it!

ant u r missing the point here,

no one in their right mind would want to mute a note they can get edit out of an event list.......this is about muting a sample that can then be un muted on the fly right? this in my experience often is required when doing stuf live (no i dont mean onstage away from a studio - 'live' to me is just as at home in the studio) off the cuff punch-in-outs of a long peice in a creative way.....something that would take ages to reprogram into chopped up bits and something that would never afford a nearly limitless permutation from such simple means....and probably any creative spark would have left the building and be long gone by the time it was figured out, placed into a schematic of note ons and offs after dividing a peice into 64 odd bits....making a program of it....blah blah.




as u said each to their own.....i love track mutes - but u dont vibe off them....so why does it appear that u are assuming u know why they're useful.



-Cosign, however I like the MUTE linked to Level Idea. You should shoot it to JJ.

ant, for all i said above in response to your comments, and i do feel strongly about what i said due to the hours ive put in here with mute de-bugging....

one this is for sure, that you're idea:>>>

"if MUTE was linked to LEVEL..."

this is an excellent solution, regardless of personal taste,habits,favoured techniques,whatever, IF jj did switch the mutes structure to be flat '0 to previous' volume flips, it would suit me fine, i just want to hit a pad, and have the sound cut out....

[and be able to a)record 'em, b)edit them easily......]

in a way i dont care "how" its done anymore. i just want it to work, be usable, and editable, and instant etc....

so what is the current work around for the converting mutes to song ' issue?

i may mention it, but i do feel bad about emailing jj every day about something little different thing/request especially because he's busy.

however, i don't know if it's possible, since i think even samples playing at 0 level take polyphony. i'm not a coder.

but what does my head in right now, is that it was perfected back in jj os 4.84......we had the lovely mute technique, and it didnt waste polyphony.

why cant that part of the os be just as it was?.......something fishy is afoot over in sushi land.

and now for something competly different!


i just reportet that:

load (mode + pad 2)
do it (F6) < !!
do it (F5) < !!

and

save (mode + pad 3)
delete (F6) < !!
do it (F5) < !!

have exactly the same combination of buttons (F6, then F5).

sometimes when i work i accidentialy go to save screen instead of load screen, select the sequence (superfast) then push F6 and F5 and delete the file i wanted to load. this is my fault, i know. but i asked jj if he could just switch F4 (cancel) and F5 (do it) in delete screen. so if anyone (me) pushes F6 > F5 to load, it just canceles and goeas back to save screen.

i don't know if other user have the same problem, but i'm sure it's safer. and it won't hurt anybody, right?

let's see if jj does it...