Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MIDI CC Curves
#1
I was messing around with automating some faders in Ableton via the NERDSEQ, using MIDI/CC values.  I couldn’t find any equivalent of glide, to create any fade ins, versus manually entering values.  Is there any way to do this?  Would it be through the Automator?  I tried sending an envelope with a slow attack to control preset 1, which I had mapped to CC1, which Ableton had mapped to a particular fader via MIDI learn, but it didn’t seem to work.  I was confused about how to route it though, on the envelope page (I think I tried source and destination none, and tried to use as FX to trigger the envelope, which in Automator was directed to control preset 1; maybe this is wrong?).  It would be create to be able to make some curves and such.
Reply
#2
That should do the job. If the envelope runs then it should also produce data through the automator (was it set to play?, Can you see it moving when the envelope runs?).
You might test at first with an LFO to see if it produces data. Also you might reduce the midi traffic generated through the automators (in the midi track setup).

In the latest release candidate you could also use the ADD command to let something glide up linear or exponentially. At least within the steps from midi for now. (a CV/Gate track can do this with tables which can run much faster and can create glides etc..)
PLEASE use the search function if something have been asked or discussed before.
Every (unnessesary) forum support means less time to develop! But of course, i am here to help!  Smile
Reply
#3
(03-21-2021, 06:32 PM)XORadmin Wrote: That should do the job. If the envelope runs then it should also produce data through the automator (was it set to play?, Can you see it moving when the envelope runs?).
You might test at first with an LFO to see if it produces data. Also you might reduce the midi traffic generated through the automators (in the midi track setup).

In the latest release candidate you could also use the ADD command to let something glide up linear or exponentially. At least within the steps from midi for now. (a CV/Gate track can do this with tables which can run much faster and can create glides etc..)

Hi Thomas, trying to have a go at this again, with a new composition.  Could you walk me through this a bit?  

I have a loop on my Microcosm pedal that I want to fade in over 32 steps.  The pedal volume responds to cc 13 (0-127).  I’ve set the cc at zero at the beginning of my NERDSEQ pattern that starts the pedal loop with another midi message.  

Thinking it might be more smooth and allow me a different curve (at least with a sine wave), I thought I could use an LFO (maybe sine or saw) and have it ramp it up to the maximum volume (cc value 127) and then stop the LFO once it peaks.  I’m not sure how to correlate the LFO amplitude and CC values.  And more so, I’m befuddled by all the clock choices (I thought perhaps I could use tick and adjust the speed such that the LFO peaks at say 32 steps, then turn it off).  Any suggestions?  

If I took the approach of the ADD command, would I just divide the 127 (I.e. going from 0 to 127) by 32 (I.e. around 4) and add this every step (to make it smoother, as opposed to a higher value every 2nd or 4th step)?  I want to make sure there isn’t some other command I’m missing to make it less tedious.

Would the LFO be any more smooth than the ADD command, or is it all limited by the steps.  I think the latter is the case, in which case, maybe the ADD command is the more clear approach, especially for a linear ramp up... 

I’m realizing that my grasp of the LFO’s (in terms of clock choices, etc.) is poor.  I’ve mucked around and figured out things in the past, but would like to understand it better.

Thanks much!

Edit:
I tried the ADD approach and it was actually pretty quick (though I still wonder if there’s some way to enter the start and stop values and have it interpolate automatically. It works well enough for my purposes - it’s pretty smooth actually and seems to do the trick. Seems like the LFO approach would involve more steps perhaps and be less straightforward, even if it’s a viable approach.
Reply
#4
You could use the first step to start the LFO and indeed stop it on step 32.
One possibility is to set the LFO clock then to TCK-MUL and the speed to 6F. It wil be a higher resolution than using the add command.
PLEASE use the search function if something have been asked or discussed before.
Every (unnessesary) forum support means less time to develop! But of course, i am here to help!  Smile
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)