September 5, 2016

Yo Dawg I Herd U Like Random, So I Randomed Ur Random: Tech Time 008

by Chris Randall
 



To do this video, I went through a bunch of the techniques I use in normal production to add indeterminism to tracks over the course of a couple days. I then sat down to edit it and realized I had over an hour of footage, and I didn't even cover most of the non-Live apps I use, nor hardware.

Randomization is a fucking broad topic.

Anyhow, I managed to knock it down to three techniques. Again, I'll raise this issue that has appeared a few times as I've done these: I'm not entirely sure what's worth filming. A lot of this shit is self-evident to me, so I'm not sure what people find interesting or not.

Anyhow, here you go: some thoughts on Randomization. Necessarily Live-centric.
 
 
 

8 comments:

 
 

 
Sep.05.2016 @ 8:19 AM
shamann
I enjoyed the beginning and the end of this one. There was a middle stretch (somewhere between the 6th an 8th minutes) of looking at menus I blanked on.

I think my favourite Tech Times thus far are those that are most specific (001, 003, 006, 007), so broad topics like this one might work best in specific cases (like 'how to use randomization on basslines,' etc).

Has the subscriber pick-up kept to a steady pace? Noticed recently that both Cuckoo and Tuesday Night Machines are +10,000, so I think the goal is doable.
 
 

 
Sep.05.2016 @ 1:30 PM
Chris Randall
Yeah, I tend to agree with you here; I don't really get to dwell on any one thing enough to my satisfaction in an overview video. I think I'll leave that to others and keep at my strong suit, which is deep coverage of a specific thing.

Regarding the subs, we're rocking a hundred a week or so, and this picks up when a video is more popular or I beg. I assume this will be a logarithmic curve; it's definitely steadier than it was at first. We're at 1249 right now, and were at 1230 yesterday before I put that video up. This is in line with what I've seen in the past. 20-30 a day on days where I put up a video, and 10-20 a day on days where I don't.

At this rate, assuming both a steady supply of videos from me, a mild exponent to the growth rate, and nothing going viral, I think we'll reach 10K by the New Year. On the one hand, it'd be nice if 10K people just up and hit "subscribe" when I asked. On the other, I don't really have access to 10K people on a normal basis. More like 5K-ish, assuming 2/3 of Instagram, 1/3 of Twitter, and 1/3 of the normal readership of this blog are all engaged. So I didn't expect it to happen immediately.

That having been said, 1250 subs in 8 weeks is unusual in the extreme for YouTube. On my CR channel, natural subs (never having once asked for subs on that channel) only got me 1,100 in ten years, with hundreds of thousands of views. Ditto for AD, which has 2500-some, with several videos that are well over 100K views.

-CR
 
 

 
Sep.06.2016 @ 6:31 AM
dj empirical
the problem with stuff you think is self-evident is that folks may not specifically ask for it, the whole "you don't know what you don't know" kinda thing.

that being said, I dug this one.
 
 

 
Sep.06.2016 @ 9:04 AM
Chris Randall
Yeah. At the last event I did at Control Voltage in Portland, I went on a riff about our upcoming Proton module, and just tossed off that it was Karplus-Strong and went on. Then I looked up and saw everyone's eyes glazed, and hit the rewind.

"How many people here know what Karplus-Strong synthesis is?" Three hands went up, out of the 50-odd there.

My problem (one of many) is that I've lived, ate, breathed, shat electronic music technology since the mid-80s, and so have all my friends, and I don't have a good handle on what people that haven't done that just know as a baseline.

-CR
 
 

 
Sep.11.2016 @ 7:49 AM
Dreamsforlove
Extremely informative video.

I actually really enjoy the 3rd party VST usage.

Most of the time, those plug-ins exist to streamline an existing workflow anyway, so explaining how they work and/or can be emulated in a stock plug in environment is tremendous, because ultimately, if they end up using any of the techniques with success, they will want a way to do the same thing, faster.

Do you have any other favorite targets for randomness besides a filter cutoff? also, do you do anything specific to ensure the randomness contributed to the groove,
And didn't ditract from it?

Thanks
- random penniless bedroom producer
 
 

 
Sep.11.2016 @ 9:39 AM
Chris Randall
Well, it kind of depends on what your ends are. I actually target the sends a lot, but the kind of music I make lends itself to that sort of foolishness. I hardly ever target the filter cutoff, but it's a good target for demo purposes because you can easily hear what's happening.

As far as the groove goes, to really get deep in to buffer madness but still maintain control, you have to have a reasonable working knowledge of music theory, or at least the timing part.

For instance, if you have swing on your track, doing buffer events shorter than 8th notes, hitting on the 8th, will be problematic. (Since every other 16th is swung.) Also, you'll note that there's an option to defeat triplet timings in Replicant. This is because doing a triplet buffer repeat on a straight time track is hardly ever cool. In setting up Replicant, I usually apply a lot of randomness to the number of repeats and the direction, but not the timing. I will also use the "selected beats" random feature to make sure that I'm only going to get repeat events on the beats I want them to happen on.

Basically, real virtuosity in this sort of thing (or, well, anything) comes from knowing your tools really well. So pick one plug that you think can do everything you want, and learn it inside and out. If you're only going to go with one, I'd actually recommend Illformed's Glitch 2, not one of ours. This is the granddaddy of this sort of thing, and in its current incarnation very capable.

-CR
 
 

 
Sep.11.2016 @ 11:15 AM
Dreamsforlove
Thanks for the quick response!

I actually just threw a volume shaper on my FX send, set it to midi retrigger, then randomized the mix knob. Then, On a different FX send, I did the same thing, but a formula controller is controlling the mix amount, set to an inverse of the first mix knob. (FL studio)

Since they are inverses, the gain staging is pretty much taking care of itself. I think the perceived loudness of both fx stems might be different at the same db level, but it's definitely a start.

I've tried the first glitch. It's nice, but I'm starting to think having individual effects might be better for my needs, since I can use FL's native control software more effectively that way.

Thank you so much!
 
 

 
Sep.15.2016 @ 4:55 AM
Modular Jk
I see the FLUID chorus in the beginning of the video , what is this version ? A new version will come ?
 
 

Comment:

 

Sorry, commenting is closed for this blog entry.