Calculator? |
Hell yeah! |
|
76% |
[ 10 ] |
Will it save time and effort? |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
Will it make realy phat basslines? |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
Real men don´t need no stinkin´calculator, I use Fortran. |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
I wouldn´t use it. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
I wouldn´t use it but would keep it open to look smart. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
Kassen has finally lost his mind. |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
|
Total Votes : 13 |
|
Author |
Message |
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:34 am Post subject:
The calculator! |
|
|
The recent discussion on building blocks reminded me of the old days with the classic. Up to version 2 the classic used to have building blocks, those were called "templates". They were below the "edit" tab and in hindsight must´ve been a good idea because the idea is now being revived. It was one of those touches that fell by the wayside because they weren´t too clear, and perhaps not everybody used them a lot. There was also a set of software settings to route the output busses to the physical outputs as you saw fit (nice for broken cables behind a rack with no time to spare) and......
...THE CALCULATOR!
The calculator was a marvelous little device. For those who forgot or those new to the scene; you would input (or import) the settings of a module and the amount of modulation it receves and out would roll a setting. This was very nice for a couple of reasons. For one thing you can get much finer controll over your parameters through the use of modulation but the interface does not display the end result; only the result of the settings of the module in question. It is also not at all easy to measure the output of every module, particularly where it concerns very fine osc tuning or dc offset due to the inacuracies of spectrumanalysis and the outputs being dc coupled. Admittedly trial, error and spare time can make up for a lot of what the calculator did but the calculator made it fast and easy, enabeling you to keep some semblance of workflow.
I keep a v2.0 next to my v3.03 of the clasic just for the calculator.
For this reason I want to petion for bringing back the calculator, updated for the year 2005 and the G2.
Vote Calculator, your children will thank you.
Do it now, don´t hesitate! No more testing in the dark!
Calculator for president! _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
cebec
Joined: Apr 19, 2004 Posts: 1098 Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:45 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Hi... is a pre 2.1 NM Editor available for download anywhere? i'd like to look at these 'templates' under the Edit tab...
The calculator does seem really cool. I'm looking at it in the NM 2.1 Editor, now. I voted to bring it back, updated, too. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:59 am Post subject:
|
|
|
the default templates (three of them) are realy simple and not realy worth the download, just a simple standard 2osc synth and stuff. The idea was that you´d put your own in a certain dir. It worked a bit like copy-paste, except that you´d copy from a external patch that wasn´t realy "open" as such. I never used it back then, to be honest.
I have a copy of 2.0 that I´d send if you realy want it. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
cebec
Joined: Apr 19, 2004 Posts: 1098 Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:03 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Actually, that sounds like something I could use. Currently, in order to add a building block/template to a patch i'm working on, I have to load the building block patch into an empty slot and copy/cut and paste to the active patch, which is annoying for several reasons.
I like this idea of an offline patchloader that's NOT one of the other slots.
Could you upload that 2.0 editor if it's not too much trouble?
Thanks! |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
mosc
Site Admin
Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18197 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:06 am Post subject:
|
|
|
This poll was a difficult one for me. I was torn between the first and last options. After carefull consideration, I voted for option #1. The word "finally" in the last one seems unnecessary.
Seriously, I've never seen this calculator, but it sounds like a good idea. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:29 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Well, you can have a seperate poll on the topic of my mind and how I lost it. Please include the option that I didn´t realy lose it but left it behind intentionally to have a excuse to go back.
One of the first times I met up with Rob and Wout I asked where the calculator had gone. That got me some realy strange looks and the explanation that nobody ever used it. Since then I´ve blurted out "and the ruturn of the calculator!" at many sugestions of other new features but if we are going to have templates again, even informally, then we might as well bring back the calculator too, I think. We´ll call it a renesance after the calculator-less dark ages. I´ll get my rightfull place in history, much like the librarians of monastries in the dark ages ;¬). _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
mosc
Site Admin
Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18197 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:20 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen, you don't seem like the Monk type of guy, but then again... _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
blue hell
Site Admin
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 24079 Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:24 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen wrote: | One of the first times I met up with Rob and Wout I asked where the calculator had gone. That got me some realy strange looks and the explanation that nobody ever used it.. |
The idea of having a calculator was a good one, but also there was a good reason for not using it - one could never be sure of the meaning of the answers it gave.
What I'd realy wan tto have is a way to be able to calculate the effects of applying a signal and an attenuation on the parameter controlled. This doesn't necessarily need to have the form of a calculator, specifications alone would do for me.
To get things exactly right takes a lot of experimentation currently.
Jan. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:11 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Blue Hell wrote: | a calculator was a good one, but also there was a good reason for not using it - one could never be sure of the meaning of the answers it gave. |
I´m not sure I understand what you mean. It works perfectly fine for me.
Quote: |
What I'd realy wan tto have is a way to be able to calculate the effects of applying a signal and an attenuation on the parameter controlled. |
Yes, agreed, that´s the main thing. I´d like to place the aditional remark that it would be very nice to be able to figure out exactly what value will come out of the waveshapers for a speciffic input given the settings, mode, mod.index and modulation input. The waveshapers are brilliant for c.v. manipulation but hard to use within larger structures due to a lack of documentation. Setting one right isn´t so bad but if there are several that somehow relate to the same structure then it becomes a pain. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
blue hell
Site Admin
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 24079 Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:44 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen wrote: | Blue Hell wrote: | a calculator was a good one, but also there was a good reason for not using it - one could never be sure of the meaning of the answers it gave. |
I´m not sure I understand what you mean. It works perfectly fine for me |
I've always found it to be a rather mystical instrument although I did try to use it.
Maybe it was a simple matter of garbage in / garbage out then :-)
Jan. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:41 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Oh, yes, back in 2.0 It was all chicken bones and incantations to me too! It´s just that as the Nord and my knowledge of it matured the need for one grew untill I finally sat down and figured out how to work it. Importing values from patches and so on is still voodoo for me but that´s perhaps because I don´t actually use 2.0 to run my modular and so it never actually runs a patch from which to import anything.
For simple things like making sure your osc. is tuned as exactly as it can be it´s a wonderfull tool though. You have to be carefull because for some parameters it can output values expressed both in time and Hz but that´s a good thing, not a problem.
If clavia still believes it´s too confusing and will turn new users off then I´d already be very happy with a stand alone program, a "assistant" if you wish. Perhaps some kind soul would give such a thing a go himself but it would be hard to get all of the exact values. From time to time only the *exact* value is good enough and Clavia isn´t realy generous with data on the exact algorithems used for everything (and understandabley so). _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|