Doggiebox feedback

lee gummerman sheepguy at mac.com
Tue Feb 11 09:42:35 EST 2003


The sequencing idea is a great one.  There was an early Mac drum program
called Different Drummer which unfortunately only supported 8 bit sounds,
but had a nice graphical implementation of songs where you could nest loops
on individual sections or sequences of sections.  It was a very flexible and
concise way to represent song structure (IMHO).

-- Lee

On 2/10/03 3:48 PM, "Eric Bailey" <ebailey at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

> These are all very cool ideas that I would love to see implemented.
> 
> Additionally, I think there is a great opportunity for enhancing the
> sequencing abilities of Doggiebox.  The interface focus could change,
> making the process of creating drum parts much easier.
> 
> Basically, you'd base the entire editing interface on a song section
> (to use the terminology from the Doggiebox section marker list).  Edits
> are made one section at a time, and all sections still appear in the
> section list.
> 
> The interface twist is that, instead of piecing together a song in the
> editor window, you do it in a  "song-map" window that's basically a
> table of the drum sections in the order you want them to be played back
> and, for each section, how many bars should be played, what the
> starting bar is, etc.
> 
> A song could then be put together by dragging sections from the section
> list into the song-map.  A song could quickly change by reordering the
> song-map list, changing any song-map section's playback parameters, or
> adding/deleting sections from the song-map.
> 
> An example song might be comprised of the following sections, all 4
> bars each: Intro, Verse, Chorus, Chorus2, and Interlude.  Quickly
> arranging those sections into a song could result in something that
> looks like:
> Intro, Verse, Chorus, Verse, Chorus, Chorus2, Interlude, Chorus,
> Chorus2.
> 
> Maybe you want the last Chorus2 to repeat - just double the number of
> bars it plays for.
> 
> Maybe something's missing in the change from Chorus to Chorus2 - create
> a new section called ChorusTransition that's 1 bar long, put it in
> between the Chorus/Chorus2 sections, and have the related Chorus play
> only 3 instead of 4 bars.
> 
> Maybe the first bar of the Chorus after the Interlude needs more
> symbols - create a new section called InterludeTransition, 1 bar long,
> place it after the Interlude, have that post-Interlude Chorus start on
> bar 2 and now play only 2 bars (since we also use ChorusTransition).
> 
> At least for me, putting together and editing a song in this fashion
> would be a lot simpler than having a long editing window full of
> similar looking bars encompassing the entire song.  Of course, there's
> no reason why the two forms of editing can't coexist simultaneously,
> having a switch for the editor to go between section and full song mode.
> 
> Lets go back to that InterludeTransition.  Say we just directly edit
> that first bar of Chorus after the Interlude.  The software could
> automatically set up a new section called Fill1, insert Fill1 between
> the Interlude and Chorus in the song-map, and change that Chorus'
> starting bar to 2.  Later, you could rename Fill1 to
> InterludeTransition.
> 
> I'm interested in hearing other users' feedback on this.  I was going
> to write a program based around this concept in the middle of last year
> but got sidetracked (aka married) and saw the first release of
> Doggiebox and wanted to see how it would develop.
> 
> (Ben - I had this interface pretty fully spec'd out at one point.  If
> you're interested in specifics, I'd be happy to go over them with you.
> Additionally, I'd be happy to help in coding some of this functionality
> if you wanted to focus on some of the other great features requested in
> this thread.)
> 
> Thanks all,
> Eric
>
> 



More information about the Doggiebox mailing list