@keremkoff When you put the OP-1 into loop mode on the tape, it essentially becomes an overdubbing looper. With overdubbing loopers, you don’t have to worry about transients, because the end and start audio are linked seamlessly. It most definitely is a bug. Your thinking is more along the lines of looping in DAWs where the audio is typically overwritten if it cycles back to the beginning of the loop (at least, this is the behavior in Reason).
Bug or not, it is 'fixable' (he says knowing nothing about coding) so here's hoping that TE update it in the next firmware update....
1 Like
Just playing devil’s advocate…
Say you had a loop of a long evolving pad sound and there’s an unpleasant click on the loop boundary, if TE were to implement a tiny fade out at the loop end point and fade in on the loop start point, wouldn’t that end up with a slightly more pleasant, but still noticeable blemish over the boundary? Ie, instead of a pop, you’d hear a tiny gap. Or would the gap be unnoticeable if small enough?
Say you had a loop of a long evolving pad sound and there's an unpleasant click on the loop boundary, if TE were to implement a tiny fade out at the loop end point and fade in on the loop start point, wouldn't that end up with a slightly more pleasant, but still noticeable blemish over the boundary? Ie, instead of a pop, you'd hear a tiny gap. Or would the gap be unnoticeable if small enough?
if you’re really interested in how this works, the loop might be implemented on playback, or in the waveform, or both - it involves smoothing out the difference in the next few samples (that is waveform samples, the digits) right after the loop point. you could also look at the upcoming few samples in advance and start the smoothing process early. when none of this is known (recording), then you’d go back around the end loop point and smoothen that destructively on the tape. an edit like this is a lot less noticeable than a click. at worst it may become a pop of sorts, but still not the full spectrum of a click. a click lasts 0 samples - it’s a large difference between one sample and the next. ramp that over 20 samples, you’re still under a half millisecond. volume ramping, interpolation, etc, it’s not a new concept.
Agreed @eesn .
Repair (manually) in sound forge is excellent at removing vinyl pops or digi clicks(99% of time). Waveform interpolation.
Wishing for a basic click remover/interpolater with shift+drop.
1 Like
all of this < envelopes associated w/ loop pointsNo @speckdrum, fades don't solve everything. I don't think there is a fix-all solution.everything that everyone is saying is correct and it ain't rocket science.
millisecond fades implemented with loop points solves EVERYTHING.
Fades within the loop create zero-crossing points, but they introduce problems if your loop displays a continuous ambient pad for instance (your pad would get cut where the loop repeats, which is unfortunate)...
Alternative : when arriving at the end of the loop, a quick fade out should occur until next zero-crossing point for the current waveform while a fade in occurs for the next loop start.
Problem is : where to get these zero crossing points ?
To prevent losing zero-crossing points, the "cut" action should occur only on the closer zero-crossing point.
But then, what is outside the loop for one loop may be inside the loop for another.
Let's forget zero-crossing points and just say a slight fade/interpolation is introduce to match loop start and loop end levels. This way a continuous waveform is created. I think the solution is around this.
The thing is it suppose some good computation because you can change what is going to be the next loop a millisecond before arriving to the end of the loop, where the calculation has to be made...
EDIT : damn, it took me too long to write this... ^^
if you're really interested in how this works, the loop might be implemented on playback, or in the waveform, or both - it involves smoothing out the difference in the next few samples (that is waveform samples, the digits) right after the loop point. you could also look at the upcoming few samples in advance and start the smoothing process early. when none of this is known (recording), then you'd go back around the end loop point and smoothen that destructively on the tape. an edit like this is a lot less noticeable than a click. at worst it may become a pop of sorts, but still not the full spectrum of a click. a click lasts 0 samples - it's a large difference between one sample and the next. ramp that over 20 samples, you're still under a half millisecond. volume ramping, interpolation, etc, it's not a new concept.
Cool - thanks for explaining… I didn’t think of that interpolation thing. I will have to try that out in my development playground 
I had some old Mike Ink records that were nothing but clicks and pops. Love those tunes. So I just make sure the click or pop is in a place that makes rhythmic sense, and move on.
I hear you @lyingdalai
but i think, as @eesn said, a slight momentary (millisecond) dip in volume is much less intrusive than a full frequency click.
i ain’t no programmer, and my physics is rusty at best… but i hazard that a micro fade is way better than a macro click.
anyway, it’s great to hear so many thoughts on the subject, and hopefully TE can find a way to implement a solution, though it’s probly pretty tricky.
and @adamjay — you’re totally right. hectic noise is grand — when it’s calculated. i guess it’s the loopers that want a smooth transition option. i’m happy to have clicks in the right place… and as the first beat is usually a kick it often shuffles by unnoticed anyways.
this vid for example:
the first pass – the click is very audible, but as the beat is layered it becomes less of a problem (though still audible)
p.s. sorry if i was a bit forward with that ‘THIS SOLVES EVERYTHING’ msg…
may have been slightly drunk and thought i could solve the unsolvable.
might be slightly drunk now.
great vid!
p.s. sorry if i was a bit forward with that 'THIS SOLVES EVERYTHING' msg...may have been slightly drunk and thought i could solve the unsolvable.might be slightly drunk now.
Enthousiasm is good !
I wonder how Ableton tackled this problem…
This is an interesting topic for sure. I look forward to the day we never have to hear about clicking loops again.
DJTW
This is an interesting topic for sure. I look forward to the day we never have to hear about clicking loops again.DJTW
Hint hint, j/k!!
such a tease!
This is an interesting topic for sure. I look forward to the day we never have to hear about clicking loops again.DJTW
Haha that was almost too easy! But hell it’s good news!
(Unless it’s a bait?.. Suspense)
This is an interesting topic for sure. I look forward to the day we never have to hear about clicking loops again.DJTW
Ha!
This would be too cool!
Just got my brand new op-1 today. This bugs me so much 