tooll666 Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 Hi All, I am having an issue I can't seem to figure out if it's a bug or I'm doing something incorrectly. I have a sequence programmed in to the Logic sequencer and I want it to only trigger the notes fairly infrequently. I set it up to have 2 steps that have Chance on them. It seems that when I enable chance the step either plays every single time or it never plays at all. You can see in my screenshot one step is set to a chance of 63% and one is at 42%. The step with 63% triggers every time and the other never does. Any idea what I'm missing? Running Logic 10.5.1 on Mac OS 10.14.6. Thanks, Cameron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 You're not missing anything, that's how the Chance parameter is expected to work: "Chance controls the probability that the step plays each time the pattern repeats. The active state of the step is determined when you edit the Chance value and does not change until you edit it again." I wouldn't have expected such an implementation of the Chance parameter either, but it does work as advertised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des99 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Yep, I thought it was a little counter-intuitive too. I would have expected different values each time, rather than one set calculated up front... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooll666 Posted February 14, 2021 Author Share Posted February 14, 2021 I'm not sure I understand how this is working as advertised? If I set Chance to 42% then it should trigger randomly 42% of the time the pattern repeats. Mine doesn't ever trigger. The other is set to 63% and it triggers 100% of the time. How is there anything probabilistic about either of those? Thank you for the responses! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des99 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Read David's quote from the manual again, it explains the behaviour. How you *think* it works is not *actually* how it works, ie it doesn't calculate each time that step arises a 43% chance of that step happening - when you set it to 43%, the dice is rolled *then* to determine, with a 43% chance, whether that step should be active or not, and it will play as such on every repeat - each repeat will be identical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooll666 Posted February 14, 2021 Author Share Posted February 14, 2021 Thank you for the clarification. I understand now and unfortunately that means this function is completely useless to me. I appreciate the help in understanding what it's doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 FWIW I do agree with you and the function is also useless to me. I would expect it to work as you do and was, as you are, surprised to find out that it does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooll666 Posted February 14, 2021 Author Share Posted February 14, 2021 It seems the coders must have been going through feature requests and didn't understand the request as they implemented it. That's the only thing I can think of because I see no situation where this would be useful as is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des99 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Same as the above. I would prefer it to work as we all expected it to work, and don't really see why it was implemented like this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 It seems the coders must have been going through feature requests and didn't understand the request as they implemented it. That's the only thing I can think of because I see no situation where this would be useful as is. That's not what happened. The coders are MUCH smarter than you think. Just because you (or we) don't understand why they're doing something doesn't mean they don't understand a feature request. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakobP Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 It sort of works if you expand the pattern region as opposed to loop it though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Nahmani Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 It sort of works if you expand the pattern region as opposed to loop it though... Yes! You're completely right (of course). I must have not tested this thoroughly enough the first time. Thank you for pointing it out. I tried it now by extending my 16 step pattern over 16 bars and now the Chance parameter does make much more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakobP Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 It sort of works if you expand the pattern region as opposed to loop it though... Yes! You're completely right (of course). I must have not tested this thoroughly enough the first time. Thank you for pointing it out. I tried it now by extending my 16 step pattern over 16 bars and now the Chance parameter does make much more sense. You're very welcome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipxe Posted October 22, 2023 Share Posted October 22, 2023 I love the way the chance parameter works. I want randomness at creation time and not at playback time. This lets me lock in the randomness and “re-roll” as I need it. Love it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.