Automatic mute question - Help!

edited February 2013 in Techniques

I am looking for a way to record a loop and automatically mute it without it going through any iterations. I thought that using the mute track feature and using it to trigger the end of my loop would auto mute it but it appears that is not the case. Unless I'm using it wrong. There is the record toggle - Mute - select next track, but that requires you to have the track selected already.

@michael - the way I'm using loopy makes me really inclined to think that the track I am recording or last touched should be the "selected" track, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Is there any way to make that either the default or a selectable option? This would then allow me to use the record toggle - mute to go right from the chorus back into a verse or the bridge without waiting for the loop to go around.

Anyone have any thoughts or workarounds?

Nick

Comments

  • Oh, that's a great idea, making the 'mute' action punch out too! I'm gonna implement that.

    Selecting tracks via the app UI's an interesting idea, too - that'll have to be a setting, I'd say, as not everyone might want that, but I like it. It's not doable yet, though; I'll have to build it in.

    You mentioned moving from one section back into another pre-existing one - how would you imagine that working? The new 'toggle record, mute, select next' action simply moves onto the next track in the sequence, so it doesn't give you the option to move onto any particular track - to do that, you'd want to perhaps solo a particular track, or just tap it and the track you're moving from.

  • I was using the toggle record without count in and the 'mute' function actually works to end the recording, it just doesn't auto mute the track. Seems like a cool feature. However, since you turned me on to actually assigning the toggle record, mute, select next track to specific tracks, that feature essentially works the same, it just selects the next track which I don't use anyway because I've assigned channels 1-4 to the midi pedalboard to activate that way instead of using selected tracks.

    Yeah - I like the idea of the last track I touched or activated to be the "selected track" but I don't know how other people are using it in other ways so it probably would have to be an option.

    The way that I am currently moving between sections of a song is using the pedalboard assigned to specific channels, so when I want to move back to a different section I activate the count in mute function on the verse while I'm finishing the chorus. I activate the toggle record - mute - select next track that's assigned to the chorus track, which stops the recording, mutes it, and the verse track automatically starts because I triggered the unmute count in.

    I really like the idea about tapping it then the track you're moving to, but for me I need it to be hands free because I'll be going from a guitar based chorus back into a verse.

    I must say that it's phenomenal to have dialogue with the developer, and have you seriously consider and contemplate and actually implement the feature requests we all come up with. It's an amazing app and I'm really glad I went for it instead of the RC-50. Thanks for being awesome.

  • "Yeah - I like the idea of the last track I touched or activated to be the "selected track" but I don't know how other people are using it in other ways so it probably would have to be an option."

    Want!

  • Nice! Okay, I'll have a think about how I can do this.

    And it's my very great pleasure! I think it'd be stupid to have it any other way, to be honest - you guys're an invaluable resource for both sounding out ideas and getting new ones, so everyone who isn't doing this is missing out, I'd say =)

  • edited February 2013

    @Michael - Just to completely clarify: the function that would be a game changer for me right now is if the mute binding both muted the track and punched out the recording. That would be so awesome and would really make this so much more functional for me. I think that's what you said would be a great feature to add, but I wasn't sure.

    The other feature that would help me is if there were a binding that restarted EDIT: I found it

  • There is a restart binding.

  • If you mean a binding that is "unmute and start from the beginning" that would be awesome. I want that too

  • I meant to delete that last part, I just found the restart binding and it's pretty cool. Unmute and start from the beginning is interesting. It would be most useful to me if that could be assigned to a specific track. It would obviously have to restart everything as well. Hmmm.

    This is unrelated but in lieu of starting another thread... Another item That I actually mentioned previously I think is the timing of the loop. I'll do several two measure loops then ill use the punch in without count in feature to do an 8 bar loop. This works great, but if I don't time it right the beginning of my loop starts somewhere in the middle instead of at the top where I want it. The feature request here is every loop of increasing length (by multiples of two I think) would always start from the top. Thoughts on this?

  • The only thing I can say is to use the count in feature? Maybe that would solve the problem because it would start recording on beat 1

  • I thought about that but I like using the record start without count in because it allows me to avoid setting the loop length ahead if time.

  • I think other musicians that are not looping really don't appreciate how much thought and practice goes into this. This is why I love this board. So many valuable resources and we all have the same goal.

    Looping is really learning another instrument.

  • @nicolai185 - Yep, the mute function that punches out and mutes is what I was commenting on. Me likey.

    Hmm, good point about some longer loops starting in the middle/etc sometimes after recording. Am I right in saying that it sounds fine (as in, it doesn't suddenly jump to the middle after you punch out), but it's just that the playback position is offset?

    I could probably do some messing around with the global clock start position to remedy that. Lemme work on it.

  • Thanks for the reply @Michael!

    Yes - it sounds fine, it's just that the playback position is offset. So this works fine for the first iteration, but if I want to mute it and bring it back in at a later time then I have to manually unmute halfway around the loop instead of using a count in unmute. It would be so awesome if this could be changed. Not that I've done this, but if I were to do like a 32 bar loop it would be great to not have to wait until it comes all the way around. I would wait until the longest currently recorded loop comes around and then it would start there. It appears the way it's currently working is the global clock starts for all loop lengths at the same time. I think you got me with the first explanation, but I thought I'd just provide an example for clarity.

    On a side note - do you have a donations page or something? This app was $8 (which is a bargin) so if you manage to even implement a couple of my suggestions I'd be more than willing to donate some additional money to your development efforts. I'm a poor musician so it wouldn't be much, but every little bit helps right?

    Nick

  • edited February 2013

    Okay - cool, I think I know how to make this work in the way you expect.

    Loopy's clock works by remembering when the session was started, and determining the current loop position based on that (loop_position = (now - started_time) modulus loop_length). That means, though, that when you record a new loop that's a multiple of the base loop length (say, say, an 8 bar loop against a pre-existing 2 bar loop), the new loop's position will be based on the session's start time and not the time you recorded the loop, so that the loop position can be not where you expect. I'll change it so that the session start time is actually offset as required to make new loops (if they're the longest loop so far) start at the top.

    That's a lovely thought, thank you! But actually, I haven't really figured this out yet - I would like to find a way to fund new features (both in my apps and others' apps too!), but there's not really any nice way to do it yet. Maybe one day =)

  • @michael - I really think you have some devoted Loopy users who would make use of a simple IAP labeled "tip jar for the devs" tucked away somewhere in the settings. :-) would that not be a nice enough way to do it?

  • @Michael - THAT IS PHENOMENAL!! I'm really excited about that change and I can't believe that changing it is even an option. Thanks for making this happen.

    I guess I could just buy the app several times to give you more money ;-) From now on, whenever I see a friend with an apple device I'll download Loopy onto it...(just kidding).

  • *grin* Hmm, maybe! Sebastian had a brilliant idea about how to solve this once and for all, but it's a much longer-term project. He's very good at this kinda thing, I'll run it by him and see what he thinks. The IAP thing could definitely work (I've seen others do it, too, so there's a precedent), although I also quite like the idea of 'sponsoring' features, so you know you're actually getting something back, too. I'll have a think about it all =)

    No problem Nick! And... please do ;-)

  • Hey @Michael - way back when we talked about making the "Mute" button punch out AND mute. Right now, if I have the mute button set to a channel and hit it while it's recording - all it does is punch out - but it's still unmuted.

    What we talked about doing was having the mute button punch out (if it's recording) and mute. Otherwise it would just mute or unmute. Any plans to make that feature a reality? I know there's a feature that punches out and mutes, but the problem is that if I use it when a channel is muted (to unmute) it also activates the recording.

    I really do love loopy - I put it all my equipment away awhile back, but I'm really getting back into it.

  • Hey @nicolai185 - Oh, yes! I'm going to be doing a little update over the next month or two, and I'll make sure that's in there.

  • @Michael ...another vote for mute = punch out and mute.

    @nicolai185 "I thought about that but I like using the record start without count in because it allows me to avoid setting the loop length ahead if time."

    Would turning off the count-out help here? Count in gets things accurately started on beat 1, and you can press ahead of the bar. Without the count-out you can set the length wherever you want.

    I like running things this way (when I want to synch stuff anyway) but I could be missing something you want to do.

    As for the Loopy love...I concur! Fantastic app and developer, with a great bunch of helpful and knowledgable users here on the forum.

  • @Michael - you are awesome! I'm really looking forward to that feature. It will really make using this for songs with different verse/chorus/bridge vocals that run only once through each time awesome.

  • @stjambience - Thanks for the suggestion. The awesome thing about this app is that Michael listened to that feedback and actually made the change in the app! Here's Michael's response:

    "Loopy's clock works by remembering when the session was started, and determining the current loop position based on that (loop_position = (now - started_time) modulus loop_length). That means, though, that when you record a new loop that's a multiple of the base loop length (say, say, an 8 bar loop against a pre-existing 2 bar loop), the new loop's position will be based on the session's start time and not the time you recorded the loop, so that the loop position can be not where you expect. I'll change it so that the session start time is actually offset as required to make new loops (if they're the longest loop so far) start at the top."

    This change alone hooked me on loopy and any other updates (like the one I mentioned above) are just gravy.

Sign In or Register to comment.