Still Struggling with Quantizing HALP

[Karlo]

This issue I had with the pitch quantize is it quantizes per tick. If I have a quarter note and each quarter note is comprised of 6 ticks I hear the table quantize the quarter note to 6 different pitches instead of just holding one. It's infuriating when you have whole notes, some eight notes, sixteenths, etc. in one pattern. Infuriating as in inferior... like my NerdSEQ skills in getting this to work. LOL.

There is no issue with that. You can have a note over several patterns long and it would not change the quantized pitch.
It is the way you use the quantization which doesn't work for your application. If you follow my suggestions it will work just as you intended.
Your one step purpose might work, but I wouldn't do it like this in the first place, especially because you need to fill in a table with every note. That is not necessary here for the result.

The envelops - All my modular envelops are digital so I'm not sure your comparison to analog envelopes is relevant. For comparison, I have an Intellijel Quadrax and/or IME Kermit mkIII (both digital and buttery smooth) and neither of them contaminate my signal like the NerdSEQ envelopes. I think what MGD said - it might be oscillating and making a short ringmod type sound to my output signal on the VCA - but I don't know why it would oscillate. I don't have the envelope set to cycle, it is set to one shot or once. I would argue Digital envelopes are superior to analog... just not the NerdSEQ envelops. Something you may want to look into.

Of course beside comparing it to analogue modules it is the same thing comparing it to dedicated modules. They do only one thing, but the nerdSEQ does 1000 things at the same time. Unfair comparison. Again my question, how do you use them exactly (settings etc)? 

- clock dividing happens on the following pattern and is not instantaneous, I'm hopeful for the next release that clock divide is instantaneous and set from the pattern you want divided but how it's set up now, I just don't really understand the intent really. Example: Pattern 00 with the clock divide, then on 01, the pattern is now slower... great, but what if my sequence goes 00, 01, 00, 02... but I don't want 02 to be divided? I have to clone 00 to 03 jut to remove the clock divide FX. The clock divide should happen on the pattern you want clock divided...

When the current pattern executes the FX command to change the clock...then the pattern is running on it's clock already. That's why...that's the intent. If you are sitting in the bus and the door closes, then you got to wait for the next station until you can change to another one.
However, as you know of course, there is a force mode with the next firmware. If used well, it will do what you want it to do.

Ratcheting... again, I'm hopeful for the next release that this is addressed and can be set to musically division in the trigger column instead of all the button pressing trying to find the right combinations of repeats to trigger length as seen in the 1.23 firmware. As others have stated... if you later decide to change the BPM of your pattern, the repeats to trigger lengths will be "off" and you have to go back and go through the the massive amount of button presses to find the perfect combination of repeats to trigger length.

Retriggering is not ratcheting. No one ever said this and it is clear described in the manual and tutorials what it does..all but not (bpm) clock based ratcheting.
You can use table presets to create some ratchets as you know.
And also here as you surely saw already, there have been ratcheting added in multiple variations in the coming firmware.

Last but not least. The manual. As most of you know I am not a native english speaking guy and the developer of it all. And writing the manual is the worst thing to do as a developer. I try to put all the information in there. But all the use cases...sorry the manual would be 200+ pages big and the firmware would be only half evolved. Not in your interrest and I'm not even talking about my motivation. But the fact is, there is always a up-to-date manual with new versions (and you don't have to wait for months or if it's ever getting updated at all) and functions are described. All the tricks and use-cases is something to explain or show here on the Forum, to share on videos etc. And I am not even aware of many tricks people use. (In fact, the quantization of a main sequence with tables is also a trick and was never planned. But it works.)
With every new version I spend a few days, re-reading the manual, updating things, adding stuff. This is for me harder work than adding function X/Y to the sequencer. But I still do it...and I'm still happy to do it.

That all said, I get back to work, else there won't be any release.

Well dude, I still don't understand how you have YOUR quantization set up... so that goes back to the manual and the poor advice I've received here on the forum on how to quantize pitch without hearing the quantization on the ticks of the table. Spell it out for me in as detailed way possible so an idiot like me can implement it. I've yet to see that here on the forum or in the manual... we wouldn't be having this conversation if it was well documented.

Quadrax and Kermit are both multifunction modules... LFO, burst generators, S&H, oscillators, Envelopes. I've tried everything w/ NerdSEQ envelopes to eliminate the artifact in my VCA signal... nothing fixes it. Long attack, no decay, long decay, high sustain no sustain... long release,... nothing. It's a simple set up: Note Gates the envelope, the envelope goes out the mod output on the specified track, the envelope opens the VCA creating an artifact or contaminating the signal the VCA is passing. It's a little high pitch rattle sound, a tiny blip that my other envelops don't produce.

The manual... I really do applaud you for the manual. It is a beast, and to be fair, much better written than some manuals  written by native english speakers I have for other modules... it's just too big with all the expander info. Break it down. Maybe a separate guide with screen shots that show how to accomplish some simple tasks with the tables. Seriously, the manual isn't bad at all really, I've feel like I've managed quite well with the manual in setting up and using mostly everything... there is just so much this thing does and that is a huge compliment to you sir. Improvement to the manual is merely my selfish suggestion.

Now get back to that firmware release!

I love you guys.

[XORadmin]

This issue I had with the pitch quantize is it quantizes per tick. If I have a quarter note and each quarter note is comprised of 6 ticks I hear the table quantize the quarter note to 6 different pitches instead of just holding one. It's infuriating when you have whole notes, some eight notes, sixteenths, etc. in one pattern. Infuriating as in inferior... like my NerdSEQ skills in getting this to work. LOL.

There is no issue with that. You can have a note over several patterns long and it would not change the quantized pitch.
It is the way you use the quantization which doesn't work for your application. If you follow my suggestions it will work just as you intended.
Your one step purpose might work, but I wouldn't do it like this in the first place, especially because you need to fill in a table with every note. That is not necessary here for the result.

The envelops - All my modular envelops are digital so I'm not sure your comparison to analog envelopes is relevant. For comparison, I have an Intellijel Quadrax and/or IME Kermit mkIII (both digital and buttery smooth) and neither of them contaminate my signal like the NerdSEQ envelopes. I think what MGD said - it might be oscillating and making a short ringmod type sound to my output signal on the VCA - but I don't know why it would oscillate. I don't have the envelope set to cycle, it is set to one shot or once. I would argue Digital envelopes are superior to analog... just not the NerdSEQ envelops. Something you may want to look into.

Of course beside comparing it to analogue modules it is the same thing comparing it to dedicated modules. They do only one thing, but the nerdSEQ does 1000 things at the same time. Unfair comparison. Again my question, how do you use them exactly (settings etc)? 

- clock dividing happens on the following pattern and is not instantaneous, I'm hopeful for the next release that clock divide is instantaneous and set from the pattern you want divided but how it's set up now, I just don't really understand the intent really. Example: Pattern 00 with the clock divide, then on 01, the pattern is now slower... great, but what if my sequence goes 00, 01, 00, 02... but I don't want 02 to be divided? I have to clone 00 to 03 jut to remove the clock divide FX. The clock divide should happen on the pattern you want clock divided...

When the current pattern executes the FX command to change the clock...then the pattern is running on it's clock already. That's why...that's the intent. If you are sitting in the bus and the door closes, then you got to wait for the next station until you can change to another one.
However, as you know of course, there is a force mode with the next firmware. If used well, it will do what you want it to do.

Ratcheting... again, I'm hopeful for the next release that this is addressed and can be set to musically division in the trigger column instead of all the button pressing trying to find the right combinations of repeats to trigger length as seen in the 1.23 firmware. As others have stated... if you later decide to change the BPM of your pattern, the repeats to trigger lengths will be "off" and you have to go back and go through the the massive amount of button presses to find the perfect combination of repeats to trigger length.

Retriggering is not ratcheting. No one ever said this and it is clear described in the manual and tutorials what it does..all but not (bpm) clock based ratcheting.
You can use table presets to create some ratchets as you know.
And also here as you surely saw already, there have been ratcheting added in multiple variations in the coming firmware.

Last but not least. The manual. As most of you know I am not a native english speaking guy and the developer of it all. And writing the manual is the worst thing to do as a developer. I try to put all the information in there. But all the use cases...sorry the manual would be 200+ pages big and the firmware would be only half evolved. Not in your interrest and I'm not even talking about my motivation. But the fact is, there is always a up-to-date manual with new versions (and you don't have to wait for months or if it's ever getting updated at all) and functions are described. All the tricks and use-cases is something to explain or show here on the Forum, to share on videos etc. And I am not even aware of many tricks people use. (In fact, the quantization of a main sequence with tables is also a trick and was never planned. But it works.)
With every new version I spend a few days, re-reading the manual, updating things, adding stuff. This is for me harder work than adding function X/Y to the sequencer. But I still do it...and I'm still happy to do it.

That all said, I get back to work, else there won't be any release.

Well dude, I still don't understand how you have YOUR quantization set up... so that goes back to the manual and the poor advice I've received here on the forum on how to quantize pitch without hearing the quantization on the ticks of the table. Spell it out for me in as detailed way possible so an idiot like me can implement it. I've yet to see that here on the forum or in the manual... we wouldn't be having this conversation if it was well documented.

Quadrax and Kermit are both multifunction modules... LFO, burst generators, S&H, oscillators, Envelopes. I've tried everything w/ NerdSEQ envelopes to eliminate the artifact in my VCA signal... nothing fixes it. Long attack, no decay, long decay, high sustain no sustain... long release,... nothing. It's a simple set up: Note Gates the envelope, the envelope goes out the mod output on the specified track, the envelope opens the VCA creating an artifact or contaminating the signal the VCA is passing. It's a little high pitch rattle sound, a tiny blip that my other envelops don't produce.

The manual... I really do applaud you for the manual. It is a beast, and to be fair, much better written than some manuals  written by native english speakers I have for other modules... it's just too big with all the expander info. Break it down. Maybe a separate guide with screen shots that show how to accomplish some simple tasks with the tables. Seriously, the manual isn't bad at all really, I've feel like I've managed quite well with the manual in setting up and using mostly everything... there is just so much this thing does and that is a huge compliment to you sir. Improvement to the manual is merely my selfish suggestion.

Now get back to that firmware release!

I love you guys.

Quadrax and Kermit are both dedicated modules and they do nothing else than playing along their modulations. No advanced sequencing, no display handling, no sampling, no synthesis on audio rate ...etc etc.. and all at the same time.
I assume your are not running the envelope through an automator, are you? And I think I was missing the post about the 'shittiness' (sorry not my words) of the envelopes months ago, so I could get into that at an early stage. Don't use them if they are not good enough for you.
If you say that you are not using them through automators, I will check them again and do some deep measuring. But not at the moment.

The manual is what it is. It wouldn't make sense to remove the pattern screen explanation for the expanders and keep the one for midi or samples. I do agree that there is much room for improvement, but I am for sure not going to re-write the whole manual for free firmware updates. Collect your tricks and usage and share it. I take care of the endless list of feature requests and my own to do list to also provide free updates in the future.

As for the tables:
Empty table, loop, resync, whatever, that doesn't really matter.
Speed 1
Source internal tick or time(better)
Choose your notes
Quantization to either UP or DOWN
Actually, the most easy configuration you can think about. I tested that today again, it works.

Just to clarify. I am absolutely open for any critics and suggestions. But then in a more respectful manner. I am working hard and very often also evenings  after a full day work to get as many as possible happy (which makes me happy in return). They are very few real known issues and these I usually fix immediately or provide support for it. I can imagine that you can get frustrated if something doesn't work exactly as you want it. I can get too. And sometimes it's also hard for people to provide the correct solution to a specific problem. I try to keep track on anything around and interfere if I think that I need to help. But all in a polite way. 

Peace

[mvdirty]

You like the manual the way it is because you probably have the expanders. LOL

You weren’t even responding to me, but: Was LOLing at other people’s opinions really the best thing to do given that only shared theirs in response to you promoting yours? Can we start LOLing at of your opinions?

You’re going to find yourself without help if you keep talking to people the way you have been in this thread.

[mgd]

Also, please please please, put all the expanders info in a separate manual or an addendum at the end. It's painful scrolling through pages and pages of information for something that is an elective add-on to the NerdSEQ and not relevant to it's core functionality. Put it at the end of the manual. Please.

That's probably a matter of personal preference. I like it the way it is.

You like the manual the way it is because you probably have the expanders. LOL

Digital evelopes are better because they can be upgraded/improved through firmware... that's my data. Analog... get out the soldering iron.. no thanks. 

I'll see what I can do about the project file.

Well, meanwhile I do have some expanders. But I started reading the manual as part of my decision process whether I should buy the NerdSEQ or not and back then really liked that expanders were explained the way they are.

Can we agree that your opinion is not the only valid one?

Digital envelopes being better "by design":
I did not wish to get into a conversation on that level but since I'm already answering here I go anyway:
I find the idea that something is better because it "can be upgraded/improved through firmware" pure nonsense. Being able to improve something has nothing to do with being good or bad.
I couldn't care less about "potential to improve" when something is crap. Note this isn't meant to say digital envelopes are crap. I only object against the claim "better because they can be improved by firmware"

Maybe you understand what I mean by this example:
Some people use virtual analog synth (IMO e.g. the Nord sounds great) and some claim they don't sound as good as the real analog stuff. I'm not wishing to start a religious war about this. I just wish to point out that virtual analog can be improved by firmware but IMO that does not make it better.

Kind regards,
Michael

[Karlo]

You like the manual the way it is because you probably have the expanders. LOL

You weren’t even responding to me, but: Was LOLing at other people’s opinions really the best thing to do given that only shared theirs in response to you promoting yours? Can we start LOLing at of your opinions?

You’re going to find yourself without help if you keep talking to people the way you have been in this thread.

I can definitely do without your help. You've been unhelpful in every question I've posted. SEE YA

---

Also, please please please, put all the expanders info in a separate manual or an addendum at the end. It's painful scrolling through pages and pages of information for something that is an elective add-on to the NerdSEQ and not relevant to it's core functionality. Put it at the end of the manual. Please.

That's probably a matter of personal preference. I like it the way it is.

You like the manual the way it is because you probably have the expanders. LOL

Digital evelopes are better because they can be upgraded/improved through firmware... that's my data. Analog... get out the soldering iron.. no thanks. 

I'll see what I can do about the project file.

Well, meanwhile I do have some expanders. But I started reading the manual as part of my decision process whether I should buy the NerdSEQ or not and back then really liked that expanders were explained the way they are.

Can we agree that your opinion is not the only valid one?

Digital envelopes being better "by design":
I did not wish to get into a conversation on that level but since I'm already answering here I go anyway:
I find the idea that something is better because it "can be upgraded/improved through firmware" pure nonsense. Being able to improve something has nothing to do with being good or bad.
I couldn't care less about "potential to improve" when something is crap. Note this isn't meant to say digital envelopes are crap. I only object against the claim "better because they can be improved by firmware"

Maybe you understand what I mean by this example:
Some people use virtual analog synth (IMO e.g. the Nord sounds great) and some claim they don't sound as good as the real analog stuff. I'm not wishing to start a religious war about this. I just wish to point out that virtual analog can be improved by firmware but IMO that does not make it better.

Kind regards,
Michael

My thoughts on the manual are indeed, just my opinion. My opinion is not more or less valid than any other users opinions. 

Fair and accurate points regarding the envelopes. My intent was never to argue the merits of analog versus digital... someone else made that comparison here and started the analog versus digital religious war. I could car less as long as the envelope works without weird aliasing contaminating my VCA.

[XORadmin]

Let's relax and get back to the topic. I assume the quantization issue is solved now?
What about the envelope usage I asked for and my comments about ratcheting?

[Karlo]

Let's relax and get back to the topic. I assume the quantization issue is solved now?
What about the envelope usage I asked for and my comments about ratcheting?

My envelope usage is basic. Type: ADSR, Source: Gate 1, Destination: Mod 3

This goes into the CV input of Intellijel Quac VCA. You can hear the aliasing best if you use a signal without a lot of high frequency content, like a sinewave bass or sawtooth wave with low pass filter rolling off all the highs. Use headphones.

I tried many settings to eliminate the aliasing. Slow attack, slow decay, fast decay, long release, high sustain, low amplitude, inverted... etc. I could still here the little blip.

I only speculate it's aliasing based on how it sounds. I also read a thread (I think it was on novation bass station 2 thread) where the consensus was the digital envelope was creating artifacts or noises in the output signal due to aliasing. 

Something to look into.

I haven't had the opportunity to try your pitch quantization configuration and I just found out there are table presets for ratcheting in 1.23? I'm hoping to have a little free time this evening to explore.

Thanks

[mgd]

My envelope usage is basic. Type: ADSR, Source: Gate 1, Destination: Mod 3

This goes into the CV input of Intellijel Quac VCA. You can hear the aliasing best if you use a signal without a lot of high frequency content, like a sinewave bass or sawtooth wave with low pass filter rolling off all the highs. Use headphones.

Aliasing? From an envelope?
How shall that technically happen?

As I previously wrote, the only thing I could imagine is some sort of AM caused by early or late oscillation. I'd need a project file to check on a scope.

Have you tried with a different VCA?

I only speculate it's aliasing based on how it sounds. I also read a thread (I think it was on novation bass station 2 thread) where the consensus was the digital envelope was creating artifacts or noises in the output signal due to aliasing. 

Something to look into.

How could that possibly be aliasing?
Provide a project that shows this behaviour. That's better than this guess work and hearsay.

Kind regards,
Michael

[Karlo]

My envelope usage is basic. Type: ADSR, Source: Gate 1, Destination: Mod 3

This goes into the CV input of Intellijel Quac VCA. You can hear the aliasing best if you use a signal without a lot of high frequency content, like a sinewave bass or sawtooth wave with low pass filter rolling off all the highs. Use headphones.

Aliasing? From an envelope?
How shall that technically happen?

As I previously wrote, the only thing I could imagine is some sort of AM caused by early or late oscillation. I'd need a project file to check on a scope.

Have you tried with a different VCA?

I only speculate it's aliasing based on how it sounds. I also read a thread (I think it was on novation bass station 2 thread) where the consensus was the digital envelope was creating artifacts or noises in the output signal due to aliasing. 

Something to look into.

How could that possibly be aliasing?
Provide a project that shows this behaviour. That's better than this guess work and hearsay.

Kind regards,
Michael

You sound like a pretentious know it all. If you don't believe me or you don't have the blip in your envelopes than good for you. Please get out of my post and keep your unhelpful commentary to yourself.... 

***************

Edit: here is thread from muffwiggler where Danjel from intellijel is quoted about aliasing in the 12bit envelopes used in Quadrax and how the solution was a software fix... so it does happen...

https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/postin...&p=3175676


"Only a partial quantity of the first batch had 12bit DACs. The rest of the batch had 16bit and the next/subsequent batches will have 16bit as well.

The 12bit DACs actually worked great and you would be hard pressed to hear a difference between the 12bit and 16bit when used as envelopes/LFOs. They are clocked at 48Khz so it is very fast update rate.
The only issue was some aliasing due to quantization error noise that could be faintly heard in the 12bit version. This issue was mitigated with a software update that employed a special form of dithering."

[XORadmin]

Not here..please cool down.