CV/gate/trigger instead of midi bus?

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
WaveRider's picture
Joined: November 9, 2010

...I would really prefer a CV/gate/trigger system as the future "internal bus" in audiomulch, instead of directly using midi commands. You could always have a "midi to gate/CV" contraption in there too...

I am using audiomulch and NM1 and wish for some Nord modular type signal routing in mulch all the time!!! ...that type of control signal manipulation is better suited to mulch than midi, in my opinion... ...just my suggestion...

Ross B.
Ross B.'s picture
Joined: April 11, 2009

Thanks for the feedback. Where I think things are headed is really in the direction of enhancing the Parameter Control window to encompass internal and external control routing. My belief is that control signal processing is different from audio processing and needs a different user interface (ie not the audio patcher). It might not be clear from looking at AM now, but I am thinking that the Parameter Control window needs to morph into something more like DOT mapper (
One problem with this idea that I havn't resolved yet is how to cleanly support Audio -> Control mappings (pitch tracking and so on) but I think for control mappings (MIDI/OSC/HID) -> Parameters and LFO mappings it will work fine.

MIDI is there in AM to support VSTi plugins, and to allow people to integrate other 3rd party MIDI stuff. I don't want MIDI to be the only control routing mechanism in AudioMulch. But I have conceded to the mainstream by supporting MIDI and it will continue to be supported.

WaveRider's picture
Joined: November 9, 2010

thank you Ross for sharing info...

I see what you mean with the parameter control window and the DOT mapper. It certainly looks like a nice way to make AM more powerful and fun to use.

I personally would not care that much if audio signals and control signals would remain separate. I just prefer the trigger/gate/cv model over the midi note number/duration/velocity. You can scale the cv and get out of traditional tonality for example. Working with triggers has a different feel that rely on envelopes, rather than using midi note durations. Getting into logic when sequencing is great too. Seems to me it's a lot simpler to deal with cv/gate + triggers for many things, and somehow it works better for me... clocks and divisions rather than bars and beats... etc...

and of course you got to have midi too :) it will be a treat to see what you'll come up with!

just as a side note, the most important thing for me about AM is that it is musically friendly AND sonically powerful while not being something like MAX. I don't need -or want- to program to make music and AM delivers on that aspect nicely :)

whitelight's picture
Joined: June 3, 2010

To me something like programming is too difficult, when the most things are not visible.
I think you should be able to change between an audio- and a Midi- patcher. You beginn at first with the audiopatcher and you place your contraptions. Than you open the midi-patcher. Your contraptions of the audiopatcher appear as ghosts or dummies. Now you can drag and drop LFos and Midi-contraptions between them and connect them together. The Midi-Contraptions could be something like a Midi-modulator for example, that only change the pitch of an incoming Midi-Signal (I hope, that this is possible!!). Now you have to look to the contraption-propertywindow and rightclick on the wanted knob. Instead of automate this parameter you can connect it with the Midi
Advantages: You neither see the Midi contraptions in the audiopatcher nor their connections. You can mulch the MIDI- Data with changes, without getting complex. Its able to connect for example two arpeggiators with a pitched note, so that you can construct chords.
And a second way for beginners is possible: you can assign without other actions a knob with a Lfo. This is created automaticaly in the midi-patcher. If you assign another knob, this Lfo appears again as an alternative to a new one! This is a way without the option to mangle your Midi