Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
DRAMBO EXPRETS: Let's get to work...
Trying to challenge myself to dive into Drambo and model some popular synths. I saw Fricktion by Reason and while it looks cool, it's still a synth.
So, I'm going to do my best to mimic the synth. And according to the "totally not made up words" of Albert Einstein,
But I need some experts that can help vet this idea. Is it possible to model Friktion in Drambo? Calling on the people I can remember: @Gravitas @echoopera @McD @rs2000 @wim
Comments
https://patchstorage.com/faux-strings/
https://patchstorage.com/fluffy-cello/
A big part of this sound will come from emulating the resonances of the instrument body. You can do this to some extent with a filter bank (unorganized example in Fluffy Cello (autocorrected from Fluety Cello). Short Delay lines are another tool to get you to string sounds, as you’ll hear in Faux Strings.
The current set of modules in Drambo might not be able to do EVERYTHING that Friktion does, as it looks like there’s some physical modeling that isn’t present in Drambo, but you could absolutely make some similar sounds. Good luck!
Spelling “expert” Expret is kinda cute though
The synth friction looks to be a physical modeling one with custom maths. I’m not sure Drambo has modules needed. It is mostly subtractive/additive.
Friktion not included in reason 11 studios... I hate you Propellerhead. Just updated the daw and I saw that I have to pay 109 euros for Friktion.-( I will stay loyal to our Drambo;-)
Sounds like an exciting project @seonnthaproducer!
I'm working on other projects now but I can give you a few starter hints.
Most of the components are included in Drambo but there's neither a convolution reverb nor such a detailed string model.
TBH, if I had to clone this, I would do it on Desktop using AAS Chromaphone II.
Anyway, you can try your best using:
@audiblevideo Indeed, Drambo has a few really good PM modules too but I doubt that the models in Friktion are covered.
@seonnthaproducer
That’s quite a challenge to set oneself before diving into dRambo.
@rs2000’s suggestion is a good one but taking into account
that you have more experience with samplers
and not as much experience with synthesis
maybe try using both samples and synthesis.
It’s an old technique but it’s a good one.
Here’s the wiki for the ,’in depth’, explanation
in regards to sample synthesis or ROMplers
as they are known for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample-based_synthesis
At some point in the future I am going to be combining
strings and synthesis myself but in a slightly more convoluted way.
Using dRambo’s graphic modulator, cv sequencer and gate velocity module
I was going to do some Heavocity type sample banks.
Basically playable sequences.
Obviously I’m not there yet because I’ve just been totally
sidetracked by MiRack and a collab but it’s definitely on the horizon.
@rs2000 yup, MiRack is immense but dRambo blows
the competition out of the water in my opinion.
MiRack is a brilliant bridge between the past and the present.
dRambo is the future.
miRack and Drambo cover different ground and neither can replace the other...
Another idea: Use Drambo with the Spectrum Synthesizer Bundle and, if necessary, control the AUv3 parameters using CC Generator and MIDI Out modules.
Agreed.
Neither can replace the other.
I wonder what "it's still a synth" is supposed to mean. It sounds like he thinks that all things called synths are made up of the same basic components.
Perhaps OP thinks that all "synths" can be can be constructed from simple components ? Synths that do things like instrument-modeling are very different beats from synths constructed from oscillators , filters and vcas and the like.
While many synths are just variants of the same basic architecture, modeling synths aren't . And the modeling part often uses tricky math or combinations of components not found in Drambo's (or even Audulus' toolbox).
I'd think before trying to implement something in Drambo that it would be worth evaluating whether Drambo has the needed components.
To really master Drambo I think it's wise to work from left to right.
@bcrichards made a Drambo video that shows every possible sound source from basic oscillator to using fast LFO's as the signal. I'm going to watch that one and build sources
for each type and then move forward adding modifications to the right.
When I've learned to make instruments (which this thread calls for) I'll move down to
sequencing my instruments.
@McD that video is probably outdated by now
Gavinski brings up a good point. You could see how far you could get by utilizing various different short samples as String Oscillators maybe..hmmmmm.......
And who knows what some upcoming updates might bring.
Very true.
I think both of rs2000’s suggestions are good ones.
It would require routing the sound out of dRambo and
back in but it seems quite feasible using AUM and Thafknar
and/or using the Spectrum bundle from Burns Audio
as resonators.
They are fun anyway.
The only thing for Thafknar is getting the IR files for violins, violas, cellos etc.
I’ve already tried oscillators through the resonators in dRambo
without thinking about any specific real instrument in mind.
I may have another have a look again.
You can gate the Impulse module with a repeating signal (a saw wave through a vca) and get closer to a bowed sound.
I still intend to start there. I have this long list of intentions.
Great points, everyone. I appreciate taking the time to share your inputs.
I’ll definitely start with the premade string patches, and modify them to accomplish something similar.
@bcrichards and @rs2000 Thanks for the starting points. I’ll experiment with both, then combine both to get something similar to the actual physical modelling.
@Gravitas mentioned a great point. That said, Physical modelling seems pretty straight forward. Already have a few ideas on how to accomplish it in the digital realm, but I’m looking forward to racking (heh, see what I did there...modular racks...okay i’ll see myself out) my brain on some setbacks,a dn figuring it.
Honestly, I want to try and replicate some of the patches ideally, but I’ll most likely rely on crude methods to get the same outcome. Then I can look into manually reverse engineering it.
@Max23 - Does Drambo support actual equations? I was thinking I’ll do the math, then replicate it via actual oscillators and filters. That said, this is so funny to look back because Signals was one of the few courses I nearly failed in school.
@giku_beepstreet You created a monster...a beautiful monster. Looking forward to where you take this.
@McD - Do you happen to have the video from @bcrichards?
I was almost thinking of correcting the typo on Experts in Exprets. But, hey. Nothing is ever perfect (lol).
@seonnthaproducer Good luck doing the physical modeling!
Perseverance and a little bit of background knowledge in physical modeling is key to getting good results.
Drambo does have a few built-in equations, most of the time you'll have to use math modules in a certain combination though.
If you need any look-up tables or scale modifier or value re-mapping then the Graphic Shaper will become your best friend.
The feedback send/receive modules recently introduced will add 10ms delay because of the processing concept in Drambo but nonetheless, a few cool things can be done with them, also in physical modeling.
Yet another tip: PM does not necessarily mean using PM modules. Sometimes, a certain sound can be achieved more easily using simple oscillator combinations.
And my last tip: If your exciters lack realism (and natural transients are hard to synthesize!) then don't waste your time and use samples. If you manage to extract non-tonal transients, you won't have to use chromatically mapped samples, 1-3 attack samples per octave are usually enough.
@seonnthaproducer Regardless of the audio outcome, you'll still learn a great deal doing experiments in Drambo.
I enjoy using the "Oscilloscope & Spectrogram" App, by Mani Consulting. Using the O-Scope to study the waveforms of sampled instruments. The App has a freeze mode so you can take a snapshot of the waveform of a sample, at any point during its play back.
Watching Bowed instruments on an Oscilloscope reveals a great deal of progressive change in the waveform over time. Replicating that is a challenge, but it's a fun challenge.
I'm currently (among other things) thinking about methods for triggering play of a series of custom wave shapes drawn in graphic shapers in a looped sequence. But not with abrupt wavetable like transitions. I want to see if I came morph from one waveform to the next, by some sort of mixing methodology.
I want to take some Bowed instrument wave shapes and see what they sound like if I can get Drambo to morph them one after the next in that way.
Good luck with your experimenting!
Here's an attempt at a wavetable sort of design.
It uses a retrigger module to play a series of differently waveformed graphic shapers in a loop. The next step is to try to layer multiple loops of waveforms and attempt to make complex evolving sounds.
Video of the experiment...
@seonnthaproducer This is definitely an option for the sustained part of your dream sound.
Add an attack transient and there you have your string synth 😉