Additional Buildings for Transitions (e.g. Transition 1, Transition 2, Transition 3, etc.)

Feature requests
1

Good day.

I found a workflow that works for me, using ArrangerKing with Rando from Monkey C for my loop elements and Transit from Baby Audio as a Transition tool, since Unify by Pluginguru, my music making platform of choice, is not a DAW, so has no timeline, ability to draw in MIDI, create automation, or edit sound files.

It is working great for me but I’d like to have variations of my Transitions, sent to multiple Aux busses, so I can have a Transition effect for instance between the Build and Buildup buildings and a separate one for instance between the Buildup and Drop and one between the Drop and Break, etc.

I have been using the Air and Breakdown buildings as ‘placeholder’ transition buildings, since I was not using them in my preset but now have no additional ones to add to other parts, e.g. between the Break and Build, etc.

Please consider adding in some Transition buildings, e.g. Transition 1, Transition2, Transition 3 and Transition 4, etc. for instance.

I know that this is a different workflow to most but I need to make due with what I enjoy. I’m not a fan of complicated DAWS, do the music production thing purely as a hobby, and like the limitations of Unify, as it forces me to think out of the box.

Below is a screenshot of my current Template for reference:

Unify Template Screenshot
Unify Template Screenshot1917×1029 218 KB

1 Like
2

The “blue window” cannot be closed and is a considerable distraction when reading.

Screenshot 04-10-2024 08.40.59
Screenshot 04-10-2024 08.40.59800×509 327 KB

Screenshot 04-10-2024 08.42.22
Screenshot 04-10-2024 08.42.22882×746 16.1 KB

3

Jason, First allow me to congratiolate you on an awesome interesting setup!!

Second, you have no idea how close your screnshot is to what we are thinking should be ArrangerKing version 2 :smiley:

Really nice!

I have to admit I had to ask chatbot what the hell you are talking about , and this is what I got:

The person is describing how they’ve integrated different tools into their music-making process, since their primary platform, Unify by Pluginguru, lacks certain core DAW features. Here’s what they mean:

  1. Unify by Pluginguru: This is their main music-making platform, but it’s not a full DAW (Digital Audio Workstation). Because of that, it lacks features like a timeline (for arranging music over time), MIDI editing (for composing or manipulating note patterns), automation (for controlling parameters over time), and sound file editing.
  2. ArrangerKing: They use your ArrangerKing plugin as part of their workflow. It’s likely helping them with arranging their music or building the structure of their track, given ArrangerKing’s focus.
  3. Rando from Monkey C: This tool is used for their loop elements, meaning it helps them work with or generate repetitive musical sections (loops). It might add randomness or variety to the loop generation process.
  4. Transit from Baby Audio: They are using this as a transition tool. It likely helps them create smooth transitions between different sections of their music, such as building up to a chorus or moving between different song parts.

In summary, since their platform (Unify) lacks basic DAW functionalities like timelines and MIDI, they have found a workflow by combining ArrangerKing, Rando, and Transit to handle different parts of their music creation process, effectively filling in the gaps.

Is ChatGPT nailing it?

Ok, let’s say it is, now this shit is getting hairy! Complex. Let’s try.

If you look here:

and scroll down to the 2 images where one has a happy face and one has a sad red face. Then, in order to meet you; Can you tell me your understanding of why one is “good” and one is “bad”?

4

Hi Frits.

Each element of mine has a separate Arrangerking on it. I’m wanting a separate Arrangerking on each of my transitions as well, so all I’m asking for is additional buildings for Transition 1, Transition 2, Transition 3, Transition 4 and Transition 5, so I have variances of my transitions.
image

5

Hi Jason I get that.

I’ve invested some time into understanding your case, seen Andrew showcase his plugin, and as stated before: I totally dig what you are doing, almost “DAWless”, I think it sounds very inspiring and cool. And I want to fascilitate it.

But there’s a place here where we need to find a solution. If you look here:

You’ll see, I hope, why we cannot have more than 8 part types, as this is not dictated by ArrangerKing, the “8” is dictated by the very essence of what music arrangment is.

And on top of that it’s completely interwoven into everything such as sharecodes etc, we cannot just make more.

When you write this:

between the Buildup and Drop and one between the Drop and Break, etc

I’m starting to get confused. because with that you are not only in “number of parts”, but “in time” stepping out of the different part types, as I understand you.

So I think you may instead want to step back, and have the transition be PART of the … part. Not a part in itself?!

Now HOW to do that is another interesting question, but first, let me hear you, if you can agree that the solution to the challenge here is how to make a / any transition fire at the end of one part and or into the beginning of another? (I’d guess that it’s only at the end of one, as the other starts as the transition is done, right?)

You don’t want more parts, you want to fire a transition at the end of a part, right?

6

Hi Frits. I voted for ArrangerKing as the Innovative product of the year on KVR and want you to please consider my train of thought, i.e. screw conventional thinking of what a song structure should be but more on what can be possible if we look outside this way of thinking. Transit can refire every x bars, so if I have it firing every 2 bars or one bar, it is inconsequential; I don’t need an entire 8 bars to run my transition. I just don’t want to have to resort to using a coventional DAW to place trnasitions between my buitldings.

7

Hahaa, thank you for that vote!!

And screw conventions, yer!

But I cannot change the fact that ArrangerKing fundementally is build around 8 part types. We would more or less have to re-write the entire code, it’s not that I’m unwilling, it’s just not how the damn thing is coded, and I’m not trying to tell you that things shoudl stick to plan, just that there’s only so much that I can do… AND I’m not trying to piss you off, but lure you into my train of thought while understanding your need from a TECHNICAL point of view.

Because I think there is a technical solution. Maybe we should have a video meeting, would be easier than all this text - I live in Denmark, what’s your time zone?

I’m thinking Part mutes (or a modification of these) are where we should focus here :wink:

8

Cool, Frits, I did not realise that adding more building types would require a lot of re-coding, so all good. It would be great to somehow incorporate transitions into Arrangerking though. Part mutes (or a modification of these) is also my train of thought, so we can discuss it sometime next week. I live in Cape Town, South Africa.

9

This is in the pipeline; Ramps / curves of MIDI CC like Chords just as @Alleyfoo just helped me undersatnd here: My little request for midi export - #13 by Alleyfoo

And as I wrote to him: I need your guys support, each of you can quite easily raise a lot of money for development, like you voted on KVR, but Reddit posts as I keep telling people: These do magic for sales, and sales is 1:1 me calling the programmer to do your requests…

1 Like