Topic: Step Sequencer VS Piano Roll for Drum Patterns????/

[loosebills]

Which do you guys think is better for drum patterns..using the step sequencer and just adding steps to see what you come up with or using midi and the piano roll for drum patterns?

[LikeTwilight]

That's actually quite an interesting question. I seem to behave differently depending on which feature I am using.

The step sequencer is great for roughing out ideas or getting solid back-beats down. I find it great for grime.

However, when I want to edit with more detail, I use the piano roll - probably because this is also where I record live drum data. I do most all hi-hat loops in the piano roll.

But then I approach each genre differently too. I would do everything in the step sequencer for grime and use mostly static samples. For dnb I would use a collection of one hit samples, loops and multi-samples combining these elements with, piano roll (hi-hats and drum rolls), step sequencer (kicks and snares), audio and slicer (hi-hat loops, drum breaks (old loops) and cymbal loops).

They're both useful. I would say that the step sequencer is a quick solution if one doesn't have much time, is just working with static samples or doesn't have any way of recording midi data; whereas the piano roll makes shifted hits more obvious as to their placement.

[loosebills]

That's actually quite an interesting question. I seem to behave differently depending on which feature I am using.

The step sequencer is great for roughing out ideas or getting solid back-beats down. I find it great for grime.

However, when I want to edit with more detail, I use the piano roll - probably because this is also where I record live drum data. I do most all hi-hat loops in the piano roll.

But then I approach each genre differently too. I would do everything in the step sequencer for grime and use mostly static samples. For dnb I would use a collection of one hit samples, loops and multi-samples combining these elements with, piano roll (hi-hats and drum rolls), step sequencer (kicks and snares), audio and slicer (hi-hat loops, drum breaks (old loops) and cymbal loops).

They're both useful. I would say that the step sequencer is a quick solution if one doesn't have much time, is just working with static samples or doesn't have any way of recording midi data; whereas the piano roll makes shifted hits more obvious as to their placement.

when you say back beat what do you mean? Like the main drum beat that everything else is developed around?

[LikeTwilight]

Yes. I mean the kick and snare focus that drives the track. 

[DJEKCO]

the step sequencer is for percussion for me
i will lay down a 4x4 kick down and build off of that

[LikeTwilight]

It's great that these patterns can now be sliced in the playlist so that only one pattern need be created for a focussed 4x4. 

I can't remember when  that was introduced but it's been a huge time saver for me. Also makes the pretty step sequencer useful again - otherwise I probably would just use the piano roll for everything.

Of all the step sequencers I've seen, FL's is the best looking. Aesthetics do play a role in how I - or whether I do at all - work with equipment. The only exception I made was the Liquid Mix (which I preferred over the UAD), which I'm not keen on the appearance of on screen but at least it's got hardware control and feedback.

Just thinking about it now. With the old dashboard (still wondering where that's gone and if it has gone, why) it would be possible to skin images of the old classic processors that are being emulated and bring back a feel of using them. Of course, there wouldn't be the visual feed-back and each controller would have to be loaded along with each instance of LM.

Yeah. I talk to myself too...

[DJ Callosum]

I personally use the step sequencer for all my beats. Mainly cause I cant time things right when recording a drum beat.  Like I see people record there kick. then record there clap . etc.etc.etc.  I just lack that ability, so I find the sequencer my ideal choice. Plus I can hear what some thing is going to sound like w.o having to record it. Which IMO allows a better experimental work flow. 

For instance, when you record and you hate it, you either have to delete the entire thing or delete the part you hate and then record the new part in. Where with the sequencer  if you don't like something you can delete the node on the fly and put it some where else.

Of course if you need to make something faster then a  quarter note then you can just convert what u have on the sequencer to the piano roll and edit it from there.

[LikeTwilight]

Of course if you need to make something faster then a  quarter note then you can just convert what u have on the sequencer to the piano roll and edit it from there.

One can shift notes in the step sequencer. The restriction is that they only shift forwards by a maximum of one step - but you can still quickly set up quarter notes and such, it's just that they won't be graphically represented at first glance.

For instance, when you record and you hate it, you either have to delete the entire thing or delete the part you hate and then record the new part in.

I tend to set a six minute time in which to record - sometimes more. Then I review what I've got, cut out the bad bits and keep the stuff that worked. That way I have a number of variations and I often find that I end up going in new directions.

Then I record over the top of that to create harmonies - this would be the equivalent of the drum fills. Once everything is chopped and arranged, if it's a synth, I then record automation in a similar way to above.

Sometimes I'll use first takes - even if they're out a bit - because they inject a bit of life and motion into the track - though I most always quantize drum hits that are close to hits played by the back beat or cut them out entirely.

I figure that, "If I'm moving whilst I am playing/performing and that performance is recording, then some of the motion of the rhythms will be enhanced by my natural response to the music.

[WhiskeyPriest]

I nearly always go with the step sequencer first. The reason is because I have all my drum channels visible and editable in the one window. I find it makes for much quicker editing, than opening and closing individual piano rolls. I will send some samples to the piano roll if I need to. But if I don't need to, it's the steps. Before audio clips were implemented in FL (that was a while ago...) I even used to use the step sequencer for vocals !!... all sliced into small chunks 

[LikeTwilight]

Before audio clips were implemented in FL (that was a while ago...) I even used to use the step sequencer for vocals !!... all sliced into small chunks 

I used to do a similar thing with drum loops back in the days of Fruity Loops, only I wouldn't chop it by beat. I would cut the loop in half, then those two halves in half and then maybe once more with the quarters - so I would have 8 clips. I used the cut-by feature so that they were all related and then create insanity.

[Speaker Frequer]

I usually use the ss for my 4x4 beat and use the pr for hat lines, snare rolls, fills, ect. its much easier for me to adjust cutoff, res, velocity in the pr. I should prob start using the FPC more though so I can get it all in one window.

[Ricdude]

piano roll + fpc

[brstma]

I haven't used the step sequencer since '02 when I upgraded to get the piano roll   

[SDK]

I use both at the same time. I usually lay down my basic beat with the step sequencer, but I do most of my accents with the piano roll, so say I wanted to have a double clap, I could do that with the step sequencer, but I like to vary the velocity of one to add some more character. I also find that the piano roll is great for doing things like hi hats (again you can vary the velocity) and Snare rolls.

I used to like the FPC, but I also Like being able to put FX on each individual drum (don't know if its possible in FPC, cus I don't use it anymore)

[LikeTwilight]

I used to like the FPC, but I also Like being able to put FX on each individual drum (don't know if its possible in FPC, cus I don't use it anymore)

Easy. You can route each pad (top right output +/- values) to separate mixer tracks and apply FX there.