When sequencing melodies and introducing random note variation in them, the current Random Note FX seems to be choosing from the global scale settings.
For instance, if you set the global note scale into Blues Minor, and you set Random note FXs of a specific sequenced note, it picks notes available in that scale.
What is the problem?
Sometimes you might want one instrument to move around in a certain scale but another one in a different one (like restricting the bass to blues but then being able to sequence the melody using chromatic and add variation to it). Currently, you are stuck with whatever is set in the global settings.
What do you want to achieve?
Being able to assign different scales to different instruments for random note effects.
An alternative or complementary (but less effective) feature would be to be able to specify that scale per track as this request for Play.
Are there any workarounds?
Currently, there is no.
If notes are introduced manually you can change the scale for the sequencing of each instrument but that doesn’t serve the purpose of evolving melodies with random effects without having to arrange multiple patterns, and in any case, it would not be generative but just a random rendition using Fill.
Any links to related discussions?
I think this was mentioned in the Tracker+ discussion as a request already.
Program an instrument in the scale you want and render&load it. Then program the next instrument in the scale you want and render&load it… repeat as many times as you like.
Beatslice the instruments.
3.Program random slice/note fx for the slices if you like to have randomness.
It’s 3 Steps but it’s really fast to do. Don’t underestimate the power of render&load
Oh! Thanks for that! That’s a pretty cool suggestion! I’ll try it.
The only issue I see is that it defeats being able to explore scale matching between different instruments as you would need sequence and load. You could render one and play live the other one in the scale you want to test but that leaves the first one fixed.
Tried it yesterday night and it “works”. It is a bit laborious and less flexible but if not many people are exploring this, it might be overblown as a wish.
Happy to close/reject it as the alternative workflow produces a similar final result and seems that not many people need it.
I’ll keep it open for a bit, in case someone else wants to +1 this as well.
If it remains stale for a while i’ll close it, if that’s ok with everyone
Marking this wish for closure within the next 3 days. As no further feedback or objections have come up. For anyone stumbling on this topic please refer to @merlin’s workaround:
