Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /storage/content/49/145849/famitracker.com/public_html/forum/classes/dbHandler.php on line 29
FamiTracker
Okay, so we have the 0xy effect, but it's fairly limited in that it only does exactly three notes (and always across a period of three engine cycles, e.g. 20Hz).
Would it be possible for FT to have some kind of improved arpeggio effect where, instead of specifying the extra notes (a la 0xy), you specify an arpeggio sequence ID (like you do when defining an arpeggiated instrument) ? Then we could apply custom arpeggios on an ad-hoc basis without having to define them as separate instruments.
This could possibly be done as an alternate behavior for effect 0xy (effect '0xx' if you will), controlled by a switch in your Module Settings.
_______________________
Where to find me:
YouTube: [url=http://youtube.com/user/stratelier]http://youtube.com/user/stratelier
DeviantArt: [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/]http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/
[quote=Alexander283][url=http://www.famitracker.com/forum/posts.php?page=3&id=5903]Take a look at this.[/quote]
Very promising indeed, if maybe overcomplicating it.... I imagine that, if something like this is implemented then FT will need a new Module Settings option to control the behavior of effect 0, e.g:
_______________________
Where to find me:
YouTube: [url=http://youtube.com/user/stratelier]http://youtube.com/user/stratelier
DeviantArt: [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/]http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/
Well, the HerzDevil-Implementation manages it through another arpeggio mode next to Absolute, Relative and Fixed called "Scheme". I think that works way better because it's more flexible.
_______________________
The purpose of a programming language is to protect the computer against the programmer.
[quote=Alexander283]Well, the HerzDevil-Implementation manages it through another arpeggio mode next to Absolute, Relative and Fixed called "Scheme". I think that works way better because it's more flexible.[/quote]
I'm not convinced of that. For one, it means you have to define an instrument specifically to handle the arps (though, admittedly, you only have to define one instrument, not five or ten). I would rather have the ability to specify an arpeggio sequence regardless of current instrument (easier that way).
_______________________
Where to find me:
YouTube: [url=http://youtube.com/user/stratelier]http://youtube.com/user/stratelier
DeviantArt: [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/]http://stratadrake.deviantart.com/
[quote=Stratelier]I would rather have the ability to specify an arpeggio sequence regardless of current instrument (easier that way).[/quote]
Considering the current flexibility of the arpeggio schemes, that would break pretty much any instrument with an arpeggio macro.
.png)