To the Eventide folks- taking Harpeggiator further

[lordradish]

A question, prompted by the awesomeness of sequence view in Harpeggiator… how hard would it be, perhaps in an update, to simply enable the abilty to choose the notes, instead of preset patterns? There’s such a lack of this ability out there in the pedal world, I think this would increase the awesomeness/utiility factor by 100 if we were able to do this. Is it a software tweak? Are there hardware limitations to doing this?

[bohan]

lordradish wrote:

A question, prompted by the awesomeness of sequence view in Harpeggiator… how hard would it be, perhaps in an update, to simply enable the abilty to choose the notes, instead of preset patterns? There's such a lack of this ability out there in the pedal world, I think this would increase the awesomeness/utiility factor by 100 if we were able to do this. Is it a software tweak? Are there hardware limitations to doing this?

Yes, I agree it would be a game changer if those sequences of the Harpeggiator were editable. It is possible to implement it software-wise but there are two main problems:

1. It will take a lot of time to rewrite/create new modules in the code of Harpeggiator algorithm.

2. It would be impossible for users to create custom sequences on their H9 or PitchFactor without H9 Control.

[brock]

bohan wrote:

Yes, I agree it would be a game changer if those sequences of the Harpeggiator were editable. It is possible to implement it software-wise but there are two main problems:

1. It will take a lot of time to rewrite/create new modules in the code of Harpeggiator algorithm.

2. It would be impossible for users to create custom sequences on their H9 or PitchFactor without H9 Control.

Playing devil’s advocate here:

1.  Still non-trivial, but how about commandeering the last available ‘slot’ as a programmable sequence?  For pitch, say, #26, in Sequence A / B [as I assume the Random values are mathematically generated].

Of course, this is going to lead to a programmable Rhythm A / B pattern FR [in, for example, Slot #20].  The default pattern(s) would load as the original fixed pattern, as to not break backward compatibility.

2.  MIDI Note input (unused in the rest of the PF / H9 implementation).  For pitch, maybe a two-measure MIDI Note sequence, center on middle C for Unison input, with a one-octave spread on either side.  It could be ‘loaded’ by an external sequencer / DAW, MIDI controller / keyboard, or even MIDI pedalboard switches.

A similar setup for programmable Rhythm patterns; perhaps using the extreme low end (or high side) MIDI Notes to determine relative ‘groove’ levels for the 16 sequence steps.  Just a thought.

[benkosznik]

Bump – besides figuring out some sort of MIDI CC situation to modulate the preset rhythm patterns, did customizable sequencing ever show up in H9 Control or anything?

[davebrubaker]

In response to Bohan’s comment, and with all due respect, I feel that Eventide might be placing unnessesary limitations on the development of the H9 by restricting features to the hardware control limitations of the H9 pedal. There are plenty of examples of other pedal companies having robust features that can only be accessed via software control applications. TC Electronics tone print features come to mind as one example. And while I’m not a huge fan of tone print personally, it doesn’t seem to have hurt their products. Customers simply see these features as a benefit.

Eventide is one of the most creative software companies in the world. You guys make groundbreaking products. I am a huge fan and own 3 H9s. But I have to say that there are countless opportunies to add features to the H9 algrithims that are not being pursued due to the idea that every feature must be accessable via the hardware controls on the pedal. Simply put, it’s a self imposed limitation.

It’s hard to imagine that any H9 owner would object to additional features because they are only accessable via a software editor. Not sure if you guys have done any significant customer surveys lately, but I would be curious of the results.

I appreciate the time, effort and expense that goes into software development. I’m also aware the processor limitations of the H9. Budgets and manpower are not unlimited. But adding new features to existing or future algorithims that can only be accessed through H9 control would only add to the customer experience.

 

[skywriter]

Further comment:
1) I never use the pedals without H9 control. I never bothered to learn to use the pedal controls since H9 control, is so much more accessible, and the pedal is so much less accessible.
2) It’s a huge expense dedicating an iOS device because H9 won’t multitask with the rest of the apps. H9 control goes through re-init when you use the iOS app switcher. If you’re going fix something, fix that.
3) Memory must be getting tight this far into the development – I would prefer new algorithms. I never use arps, sequences, Mannheim rockets, etc… for composition. They’re fun idea generators, but that’s it. Does anyone ever use Korg’s KARMA for a real song?
4) Harpeggiators main drawback is fixed arps, I don’t have a use for.

A complex system is going to have multiple use-cases to satisfy.

[davebrubaker]

After my comments in response to Bohan’s suggestion that the interface functions in the H9 Control software have to match the hardware controls on the pedals I started to wonder what other H9 users thought about this limitation. Afterall the “ten knob rule” is based on the hardware design of the Factor pedals, which the H9 took a bold step beyond. There’s a lot more life in the sales cycle of the H9, but maybe some “radical” new ideas would be helpful.

To find out what other H9 users thought I created two short polls on the H9 Facebook users group.

The first poll asked how people adjusted the algo parameters. 149 people responded.

     • 108 only use the H9 Control software

     • 35 use both the pedal controls and the H9 Control software (I’m one of those)

     • 1 person uses the pedal controls exclusively

     • and 5 people use an Evenmidi controler

In the second poll I asked if Eventide added extra controls or features to an algorithm that were only accessible via software control, would that be a problem or a benefit? 49 people responded.

     • 46 people said that extra controls or features would be welcomed

     • 3 people said that it would limit their control on stage

It seems pretty clear that H9 owners would welcome some extra features that go beyond the “ten knob rule”. Food for thought. Just sayin’ 🙂

 

 

[skywriter]

Thanks for the poll David! I concur with your findings.

[skywriter]

It’s time to admit H9 Control is considered by your customers as part of the product. Not just a feature for smart phone and tablet users. Charge for it if you have to, but it’s getting cramped in there with the current user architecture.

[Author]

Posts