Atom | Piano Roll 2 is now available

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

JohnnyGoodyear

@winconway said:

@blueveek said:

@JohnnyGoodyear said:
@blueveek As the original proud owner of 'I'm A Well-Fed Mama's Boy & These Are My Sausage Fingers' I am very grateful that the Apple Pencil thingie now works spectacularly. Many thanks and ++ etc.

I'm very happy to hear that. @winconway bomb tested it and painstakingly went through every single little button or touchable bit in the interface, double tapped and triple checked, to make sure it works perfectly. Direct your applause to him.

Actually he is being overly generous here, the new input behaviour (pencil, mouse and touch) which are all vastly improved, and pencil is the best in any app i personally have used, are one of the extremely rare occasions that he moved away from standards as suggested by Apple.
And in doing so, created something very special with the pencil, and mouse, it has to be said, which to this point in most apps was a slightly cumbersome nicety, but touch was always better.
Pencil is very very nice in PR2, if anybody gets chance to borrow one to try, trust me, have a go

Well, plenty of thanks to go around, but I can confirm that a very fine app just got greasy slick (and, trust me, that's a good thing ) with the pencil now...

gregsmith

@wim said:

@skiphunt said:

@skiphunt said:
If I already have full LK... already know how to use it and love it... what does Atom 2 get me that I don’t already have?

Ok, well how about just 3 good reasons/features to choose to use Atom 2 versus LK?

That is a tough, tough one. Both are excellent and there is so much overlap between the two that it's honestly hard to come up with any huge differentiation. I love them both, gravitating to one or the other largely depending on mood.

1. Modularity: LK is more monolithic, a central place to set up and launch clips. This is great if I'm in the mood for building a piece, but is a bit more of a thought disruptor if I'm just sitting down to jam. Atom instances are focused and single purpose. Each one is only what you need to do a single job and can be dropped in anywhere it makes sense in a jam. Somehow that helps me relax and focus on just making some noise for a bit.
2. Time Signatures: LK is stuck into 4/4 for now.
3. UI Elegance: Don't get me wrong, LK is great. I don't have a single complaint about it any more. Its UI is getting better all the time. But it has a lot more going on and isn't always as intuitive as Atom IMO.

That first one is the one that I float back and forth on the most. Having one centralized place to do sequencing and to launch clips can be just what I need for organization. To be honest, the idea of 16 Atom instances staring me in the face to achieve a 4-track / 4-clips per track clip launching grid makes my eyes cross. Then if I decide I want to add another track ... add four more instances of Atom. Eh no. I'm gonna be using LK if I'm planning to work like that.

But more often than that I'm not working like that. Usually I just want to hook up an app and start jamming with the knowledge that I can capture and loop anything good that comes out. Atom is just a super-streamlined way to get up and running like that. It has the macro capability to be more organized than that if that jam starts to turn into something worth organizing, but can start off with almost no barrier to creativity.

I probably didn't express that well. As I say, I don't give the edge to either app. They're both just beautiful tools to fit different moods to me.

Completely agree with this. I always start with atom 2 now. There’s just slightly less fuss to get something going.

But likewise I then I find atom 2 less neat for arranging those clips into a song. That’s where LK comes in and it takes absolutely no time at all to get it sequencing atom2 clips.

There’s some definite modular advantages to having a bank of atom2 clips decoupled from LK pads, such as multiple LK pads being able to launch the same atom2 clip. LK can also do ‘song level’ cc and clip level cc automations. This is also nice to have decoupled from the atom clips in my mind.

Now that LK has scene follow actions, it’s an even better tool for arranging a song.

The pain point for me is still audio clips. Segments is doing a pretty good job at the moment but the timestretching is just not good. The way I use samples, I often pitch down but need the original temo. Someone will fill that hole eventually though I’m sure and there’s workarounds for now.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

skiphunt

@wim said:

@skiphunt said:

@skiphunt said:
If I already have full LK... already know how to use it and love it... what does Atom 2 get me that I don’t already have?

Ok, well how about just 3 good reasons/features to choose to use Atom 2 versus LK?

That is a tough, tough one. Both are excellent and there is so much overlap between the two that it's honestly hard to come up with any huge differentiation. I love them both, gravitating to one or the other largely depending on mood.

1. Modularity: LK is more monolithic, a central place to set up and launch clips. This is great if I'm in the mood for building a piece, but is a bit more of a thought disruptor if I'm just sitting down to jam. Atom instances are focused and single purpose. Each one is only what you need to do a single job and can be dropped in anywhere it makes sense in a jam. Somehow that helps me relax and focus on just making some noise for a bit.
2. Time Signatures: LK is stuck into 4/4 for now.
3. UI Elegance: Don't get me wrong, LK is great. I don't have a single complaint about it any more. Its UI is getting better all the time. But it has a lot more going on and isn't always as intuitive as Atom IMO.

That first one is the one that I float back and forth on the most. Having one centralized place to do sequencing and to launch clips can be just what I need for organization. To be honest, the idea of 16 Atom instances staring me in the face to achieve a 4-track / 4-clips per track clip launching grid makes my eyes cross. Then if I decide I want to add another track ... add four more instances of Atom. Eh no. I'm gonna be using LK if I'm planning to work like that.

But more often than that I'm not working like that. Usually I just want to hook up an app and start jamming with the knowledge that I can capture and loop anything good that comes out. Atom is just a super-streamlined way to get up and running like that. It has the macro capability to be more organized than that if that jam starts to turn into something worth organizing, but can start off with almost no barrier to creativity.

I probably didn't express that well. As I say, I don't give the edge to either app. They're both just beautiful tools to fit different moods to me.

Very good explanation. Hmmm... don't get me wrong, I'm sure Atom 2 is amazing. Great dev, etc. It's just that I have waaay too many great apps that I rarely use. I've already got Atom 1 and so upgrade is only $5 (got the first one on sale). It's just that I'm trying to ONLY buy apps that I know I'll use regularly. Your reply lays the differences out nicely. thanks!

skiphunt

@gregsmith said:

@wim said:

@skiphunt said:

@skiphunt said:
If I already have full LK... already know how to use it and love it... what does Atom 2 get me that I don’t already have?

Ok, well how about just 3 good reasons/features to choose to use Atom 2 versus LK?

That is a tough, tough one. Both are excellent and there is so much overlap between the two that it's honestly hard to come up with any huge differentiation. I love them both, gravitating to one or the other largely depending on mood.

1. Modularity: LK is more monolithic, a central place to set up and launch clips. This is great if I'm in the mood for building a piece, but is a bit more of a thought disruptor if I'm just sitting down to jam. Atom instances are focused and single purpose. Each one is only what you need to do a single job and can be dropped in anywhere it makes sense in a jam. Somehow that helps me relax and focus on just making some noise for a bit.
2. Time Signatures: LK is stuck into 4/4 for now.
3. UI Elegance: Don't get me wrong, LK is great. I don't have a single complaint about it any more. Its UI is getting better all the time. But it has a lot more going on and isn't always as intuitive as Atom IMO.

That first one is the one that I float back and forth on the most. Having one centralized place to do sequencing and to launch clips can be just what I need for organization. To be honest, the idea of 16 Atom instances staring me in the face to achieve a 4-track / 4-clips per track clip launching grid makes my eyes cross. Then if I decide I want to add another track ... add four more instances of Atom. Eh no. I'm gonna be using LK if I'm planning to work like that.

But more often than that I'm not working like that. Usually I just want to hook up an app and start jamming with the knowledge that I can capture and loop anything good that comes out. Atom is just a super-streamlined way to get up and running like that. It has the macro capability to be more organized than that if that jam starts to turn into something worth organizing, but can start off with almost no barrier to creativity.

I probably didn't express that well. As I say, I don't give the edge to either app. They're both just beautiful tools to fit different moods to me.

Completely agree with this. I always start with atom 2 now. There’s just slightly less fuss to get something going.

But likewise I then I find atom 2 less neat for arranging those clips into a song. That’s where LK comes in and it takes absolutely no time at all to get it sequencing atom2 clips.

There’s some definite modular advantages to having a bank of atom2 clips decoupled from LK pads, such as multiple LK pads being able to launch the same atom2 clip. LK can also do ‘song level’ cc and clip level cc automations. This is also nice to have decoupled from the atom clips in my mind.

Now that LK has scene follow actions, it’s an even better tool for arranging a song.

The pain point for me is still audio clips. Segments is doing a pretty good job at the moment but the timestretching is just not good. The way I use samples, I often pitch down but need the original temo. Someone will fill that hole eventually though I’m sure and there’s workarounds for now.

Thanks! That helps too.

wim

I too am trying to avoid app clutter. My general rule of thumb these days is if there are similar apps and if there's nothing missing or that I especially don't like about one app that is solved by another, I try to skip the other. But in this case, it's more like they both fit different moods in ways that the other doesn't.

... that and that I really can't resist an app that is clearly as elegant as Atom 2. The scripting potential appeals to me too, but I didn't list that since I assume it's pretty rare that people would get into that aspect.

sloJordan

One of the main appeals of atom 2 to me personally (besides all the great bells and whistles, like scripting) is that so far, I have not yet had a single stuck note, or midi glitch even after overdubbing like 5 layers of keyboard parts in a single atom instance and then increasing the tempo to hyperspeed. On top of this, the fact that I can record tied notes across the loop bars (loop legato), which surprisingly few other midi recorders allow. These two things give the feeling that i can actually record things precisely and have confidence that they will play back rock solid. Basically it just works really freaking well.

tahiche

@wim said:

@skiphunt said:

@skiphunt said:
If I already have full LK... already know how to use it and love it... what does Atom 2 get me that I don’t already have?

Ok, well how about just 3 good reasons/features to choose to use Atom 2 versus LK?

That is a tough, tough one. Both are excellent and there is so much overlap between the two that it's honestly hard to come up with any huge differentiation. I love them both, gravitating to one or the other largely depending on mood.

1. Modularity: LK is more monolithic, a central place to set up and launch clips. This is great if I'm in the mood for building a piece, but is a bit more of a thought disruptor if I'm just sitting down to jam. Atom instances are focused and single purpose. Each one is only what you need to do a single job and can be dropped in anywhere it makes sense in a jam. Somehow that helps me relax and focus on just making some noise for a bit.
2. Time Signatures: LK is stuck into 4/4 for now.
3. UI Elegance: Don't get me wrong, LK is great. I don't have a single complaint about it any more. Its UI is getting better all the time. But it has a lot more going on and isn't always as intuitive as Atom IMO.

That first one is the one that I float back and forth on the most. Having one centralized place to do sequencing and to launch clips can be just what I need for organization. To be honest, the idea of 16 Atom instances staring me in the face to achieve a 4-track / 4-clips per track clip launching grid makes my eyes cross. Then if I decide I want to add another track ... add four more instances of Atom. Eh no. I'm gonna be using LK if I'm planning to work like that.

But more often than that I'm not working like that. Usually I just want to hook up an app and start jamming with the knowledge that I can capture and loop anything good that comes out. Atom is just a super-streamlined way to get up and running like that. It has the macro capability to be more organized than that if that jam starts to turn into something worth organizing, but can start off with almost no barrier to creativity.

I probably didn't express that well. As I say, I don't give the edge to either app. They're both just beautiful tools to fit different moods to me.

I agree with this. Atom2 for playing, LK for arranging.
I’m also daunted by too many nodes on aum, and if you want to automate them in any way to make a song or don’t have a launchpad thing you still need a “master” arranger.
This is why the feature of having multiple switchable patterns within an atom instance would make it a lot more useful and modular for different scenarios.
It’d be straightforward to trigger different patterns from LK but also and maybe more importantly from auv3 hosts. Without multiple patterns it’s very hard to use as a midi auv3 plugin in a host like a DAW or Drambo. You need to stack multiple instances (Atom2 nodes) and have some (complicated) logic to switch between them.

blueveek

Coming up in 2.0.4.

Notes colored by velocity value

It's:

• an example user style
• a file that can be modified/edited
• a demo of the kinds of things you can do with styling/scripting

Gdub

@blueveek
That looks nice
Can’t wait

blueveek

@zah said:
@blueveek
I've had a couple of situations where a clip has no undo operations available (greyed out), and adding something to a clip will not highlight the icon.
Any idea of what I did wrong?

Did this happen with new projects on 2.0.3? With older versions there was a bug reported about this, but should now be fixed. If you ever get stuck for whatever reason, you can "clear history" from the top right file menu.

Gdub

Anyone tried activating octachron drum machine via atom 2
It seems to start and stop when it feels like it
Having x2 octachron one channel with a single activate for each on a different note from atom 2 is giving me weird results
Fingers crossed I am doing it wrong
Any help tips please

reasOne

@blueveek said:
Coming up in 2.0.4.

Notes colored by velocity value

It's:

• an example user style
• a file that can be modified/edited
• a demo of the kinds of things you can do with styling/scripting

That’ssuperb editing

MrBlaschke

@Gdub said:
Anyone tried activating octachron drum machine via atom 2
It seems to start and stop when it feels like it
Having x2 octachron one channel with a single activate for each on a different note from atom 2 is giving me weird results
Fingers crossed I am doing it wrong
Any help tips please

Yep - there is definitely something wacky here - but i guess it is inside of Octachron somehow.
It’s kind of hit and miss.

I had more success placing Octachrons on separate MIDI lanes. But even that might be a lucky thing that it worked for me.

Gdub

@MrBlaschke
Thanks for confirming this
Normally I am at fault
But for once it might be the app
I might mail them later today to see if they can look into it
Thanks again

clowm

@blueveek hi! I got my hands a little dirty with CoreMIDI in attempts to create controller app but stumbled upon error while creating MIDI destination.

It seems that it's not possible to create midi destination inside auv3 instance Is it correct?
That means that I should run some app at the background of Drambo that will hold destination and will let atom2 and my app to communicate. Is this correct?

slicetwo

@blueveek said:

It's a very simple addition, should only take a minute. I'll prioritize it for the 2.0.3 update.

Got the update yesterday. Did this make it in? If not, no worries, just want to make sure I didn't miss anything. Thanks for all you're doing!

mbncp

atom.receiveNoteOn is really cool, no need to assign an input port in AUM
But clip.receive.. functions would be great too, could work independently of the view state.

In host like Cubasis where we select a track to arm it, an Atom script has no way to know which clip to talk to, maybe some onHostCC(cc, value, channel, clip[s]) .. could do the trick.

Just thinking a bit loud ..

blueveek

@clowm said:
@blueveek hi! I got my hands a little dirty with CoreMIDI in attempts to create controller app but stumbled upon error while creating MIDI destination.

It seems that it's not possible to create midi destination inside auv3 instance Is it correct?
That means that I should run some app at the background of Drambo that will hold destination and will let atom2 and my app to communicate. Is this correct?

Hmm, that's interesting, and new to me. It's certainly plausible that using Core MIDI inside an AU might not be allowed, though some folks have reported. I'll do a test for myself and get back to you. Otherwise, indeed, a standalone app should work just fine.

@slicetwo said:

@blueveek said:

It's a very simple addition, should only take a minute. I'll prioritize it for the 2.0.3 update.

Got the update yesterday. Did this make it in? If not, no worries, just want to make sure I didn't miss anything. Thanks for all you're doing!

Thanks for the ping on this. I've just implemented note audition with the keys on the left this afternoon during a break. It'll be part of the upcoming update.

@mbncp said:
atom.receiveNoteOn is really cool, no need to assign an input port in AUM
But clip.receive.. functions would be great too, could work independently of the view state.

In host like Cubasis where we select a track to arm it, an Atom script has no way to know which clip to talk to, maybe some onHostCC(cc, value, channel, clip[s]) .. could do the trick.

Just thinking a bit loud ..

Hmm, that's a good point. One thing to know is that while atom.receive* functions inject MIDI into all instances, only the ones that are armed or visible consume it. Otherwise, the MIDI will be intentionally ignored.

More control over this behavior would certainly be nice, perhaps an optional track and slot param to those functions to target individual instances? Or a new set of functions altogether.

slicetwo

@blueveek said:

@slicetwo said:

@blueveek said:

It's a very simple addition, should only take a minute. I'll prioritize it for the 2.0.3 update.

Got the update yesterday. Did this make it in? If not, no worries, just want to make sure I didn't miss anything. Thanks for all you're doing!

Thanks for the ping on this. I've just implemented note audition with the keys on the left this afternoon during a break. It'll be part of the upcoming update.

Glorious! Thank you!

mbncp

@blueveek said:
Hmm, that's a good point. One thing to know is that while atom.receive* functions inject MIDI into all instances, only the ones that are armed or visible consume it. Otherwise, the MIDI will be intentionally ignored.

with 'clip.receive*' it would only go to that clip, visible or not.

More control over this behavior would certainly be nice, perhaps an optional track and slot param to those functions to target individual instances? Or a new set of functions altogether.

Can be the same, what would be nice is also the portID, 0 could be the host, then as listed in inputs, 1,2,... My idea is to use a second iPad as controller, but with mixed functions with my main controller so it would be easier to assign any CC for it.
Same with output, could be nice to have a port option with the emit function.

Anyway just ideas, if it's to much work or it can become to confusing, just forget about it

blueveek

@mbncp said:

@blueveek said:
Hmm, that's a good point. One thing to know is that while atom.receive* functions inject MIDI into all instances, only the ones that are armed or visible consume it. Otherwise, the MIDI will be intentionally ignored.

with 'clip.receive*' it would only go to that clip, visible or not.

This could also work. My only reservation about that is that an atom.Clip is just a data structure with no behavior. But I don't think it's a big deal to add methods to it that do stuff.

More control over this behavior would certainly be nice, perhaps an optional track and slot param to those functions to target individual instances? Or a new set of functions altogether.

Can be the same, what would be nice is also the portID, 0 could be the host, then as listed in inputs, 1,2,... My idea is to use a second iPad as controller, but with mixed functions with my main controller so it would be easier to assign any CC for it.
Same with output, could be nice to have a port option with the emit function.

Anyway just ideas, if it's to much work or it can become to confusing, just forget about it

These are good ideas, and extremely simple for me to add. It's just a sandbox, I can expose as much or as little as possible

mbncp

@blueveek said:
It's just a sandbox, I can expose as much or as little as possible

I know

wim

I've been messing around with with style sheets today. I made a style that takes a bit of the edge off of the light mode theme and adds transparency to indicate note velocity.

I also tweaked the notes to have a raised appearance out of nostalgia for FL Studio's (desktop) piano roll. There are two versions in the attached zip file. number-37-tweaks-flat.css leaves out the raised note appearance in case that's not your thang.

To use:
1. Download and unzip the attached file.
2. Place the two .css files in styles folder of the latest version iCloud > Atom > Piano Roll \ > Styles.
3. Add Atom 2 to a host session then select the hamburger menu at the top-right and pick the style from the "Set Style" popup.

With raised notes

Flat notes

Raised notes - dark mode

[edit] Updated attachment with change suggestions from @blueveek.

blueveek

@wim said:
I've been messing around with with style sheets today. I made a style that takes a bit of the edge off of the light mode theme and adds transparency to indicate note velocity.

I also tweaked the notes to have a raised appearance out of nostalgia for FL Studio's (desktop) piano roll. There are two versions in the attached zip file. number-37-tweaks-flat.css leaves out the raised note appearance in case that's not your thang.

To use:
1. Download and unzip the attached file.
2. Place the two .css files in styles folder of the latest version iCloud > Atom > Piano Roll \ > Styles.
3. Add Atom 2 to a host session then select the hamburger menu at the top-right and pick the style from the "Set Style" popup.

Wow that was quick! And it looks great!

Important things to note:

• Importing scripts and styles works if you create or copy files inside the Atom folder using either a third party app (like Textastic), or Finder on your desktop. It's a little annoying that the Files app on iOS doesn't itself implement this functionality yet. In 2.0.4 I will implement drag-and-drop import, meaning that drag and dropping a script or style file onto an Atom instance (just like with MIDI files), will import and apply it.
• It would be good to have a patchstorage.com repository for scripts and styles. Once 2.0.4 lands and there's a super easy way of importing third-party code, we should set that up.

A few suggestions:

• Using custom fonts: I notice @wim that you've added a font-family: "Roboto Condensed" rule. Since Atom doesn't ship with this font, you'll need a rule to specify where to download it from. Google Fonts has a plethora of fonts to choose from, and you can include one with a line like @import url("https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Roboto+Condensed&display=swap"); at the top of the style file. See the example "User Font" style that comes with 2.0.4 beta.
• Calculating opacity based on velocity: What you've written there works (and based on the supplied examples in the beta), but I think this would be better: opacity: calc(0.25 + var(--velocity) / 127 * 0.75);. Notice the * 0.75, which avoids clipping over 1.0, and gets you a smooth transition between high transparency and full opacity.
• Velocity bar overflowing on the bottom left: Since you've added quite a substantial amount of curvature to notes, the thick velocity bar (which is a rectangle) overflows on the bottom right (where there's a curve). This is incredibly subtle and hard to see, but you can get rid of that by adding the following rule to #atom .note { overflow: hidden; }.

gregsmith

@wim said:
I've been messing around with with style sheets today. I made a style that takes a bit of the edge off of the light mode theme and adds transparency to indicate note velocity.

I also tweaked the notes to have a raised appearance out of nostalgia for FL Studio's (desktop) piano roll. There are two versions in the attached zip file. number-37-tweaks-flat.css leaves out the raised note appearance in case that's not your thang.

To use:
1. Download and unzip the attached file.
2. Place the two .css files in styles folder of the latest version iCloud > Atom > Piano Roll \ > Styles.
3. Add Atom 2 to a host session then select the hamburger menu at the top-right and pick the style from the "Set Style" popup.

With raised notes

Flat notes

Raised notes - dark mode

Thanks @wim 👌

wim

Thanks @blueveek - copy/paste error on the custom font. I didn't catch it because it still looked good.

I followed your example in the beta for the opacity calculation, so you might want to update that one.
Thanks for the velocity bar overflow modification. I never would have caught that one or have known how to deal with it.

I'll update my post above with the new files in a minute.

blueveek

@wim said:
Thanks @blueveek - copy/paste error on the custom font. I didn't catch it because it still looked good.

I followed your example in the beta for the opacity calculation, so you might want to update that one.

Yup! Need to.

Thanks for the velocity bar overflow modification. I never would have caught that one or have known how to deal with it.

I'll update my post above with the new files in a minute.

FloRi89

Here I made two themes so far, Solarized and Homebrew (yea I‘m a developer by profession ):

I‘m working on a video about theming, just an intro on how it works, what variables you have etc. But I catchend a cold last week, so will take a few more days.

We are going to need a way to share those, patchstorage maybe?