Welcome to the new and improved Native Instruments online community. Join our active forum of 40,000+ members for discussions and much more.

Maschine Plus Probability

DoverBeach Member Posts: 13 Member
edited January 31 in Maschine

Hello everyone. Joined the M+ one week ago and I can def say that's one my best purchase I've ever made.

there are a couple of improvements I'd like to see:

1- an improved step sequencer

2- probabilities.

3- more arp mode (pretty easy to implement)

I'm not a finger drummer and probabilities/conditional trigs à la elektron are the best way to achieve an everchanging beat in 16 steps without having to double the pattern every time.

Some kind of probability over pitch would be appreciated too.


  • TheLoudest
    TheLoudest Member Posts: 97 Advisor

    of course we are all waiting for this...

    once someone answered me that it would be enough if they integrated Reaktor better with Machine+ (standalone) because we could have ALL that

    there are already plenty of modules of this type for Reaktor (and it is always possible to make more)

    I think that's what would do the least work for them...and which would satisfy the greatest number (since everyone gets the module they need)

  • DoverBeach
    DoverBeach Member Posts: 13 Member

    Well I'd love to see reaktor better integrated in maschine +, but I'd prefer probabilities to be perfectly integrated with the step sequencer withouth having to load an instance of reaktor.

    I guess their biggest issue with probability is how to handle patterns and song mode.

  • djadidai
    djadidai Member Posts: 207 Advisor

    Could be bcs the whole maschine ecosystem is much more complex than say a circuit tracks. Who knows. Make a 16 or 32 bar loop and incorporate your own variations, that’s what I do. Variety is important but not as important as not knowing what comes next. At least not for me. Sometimes the probability function finds a really nice groove and for the next bar it’s lost and might not happen again for a while and since I export my stems I like to know what’s coming:)

  • TheLoudest
    TheLoudest Member Posts: 97 Advisor

    in this area, the best experience I've had on a sequencer (and I've tried a lot ..) this is when it was implemented as "midi FX" format (much like the midi plug-ins in Ableton live) it is very flexible to use, very effective. We find this in particular on the Squarp Pyramid/Hapax or (slightly differently) on the Sequentix Cirklon for example

  • DoverBeach
    DoverBeach Member Posts: 13 Member
    edited February 3

    A 16 bar loops with conditional trigs (c.trigs are the real game changer, not simple probability) is more like a 256 bar loops. Good luck editing a 256 bar loop per 16 voices in a drum group. Much easier to handle that amount of variation in 16 steps with probabilities.

    It depends on the music you make tho. Of course for hip hop, edm or more traditional styles, you don't need probabilities because a 32 bar loop is perfect. But for electronica/idm they are an essential part of the workflow. I know that probbly we are only a small portion of the NI audience, but we exist :D

  • DoverBeach
    DoverBeach Member Posts: 13 Member
    edited February 3

    Well I own a vector sequencer (kind of a cirklon in eurorack format) and there probabilities are not incorporated as midi fx. I'm on the Cirklon waiting list and I've studied it a lot, there are no such things like midi fx at all. There are AUX events that are a different story but at the end of the day are more similar to elektron c.trigs than a max for live/reaktor device

    I've owned an hapax and also there probabilities and c.trigs (or MATHS as Squarp calls it) are not midi fx, but a part of the step sequencer.

  • TheLoudest
    TheLoudest Member Posts: 97 Advisor
    edited February 3

    yes but therefore which format do you prefer?

    Actually, I think it depends...because there are some situations where we want to put a condition on a specific step

    and in this case it is better to have this directly on the sequencer (for example in the piano roll window)

    but sometimes we need midi effects on the track, globally,

    and in this case MIDI FXs in a "plugin form" are the most effective imo

    the 2 are perhaps also for different situations..

    the first case will be more on a composing phase, and the 2nd case (midi FXs) more for a live performance

  • DoverBeach
    DoverBeach Member Posts: 13 Member

    I agree with you. I want fine control over probabilities on a per step level and the ability to load midi fx on a track.

  • Trevor Meier
    Trevor Meier Member Posts: 69 Helper

    Yeah I’d love to see this.

  • ozon
    ozon Member Posts: 715 Guru
    edited February 14

    Probability and conditional triggers would make Maschine a lot more useful even as a sketching tool for or within other sequencers. C.Ts make handling long evolving patterns actually a lot more manageable.

Back To Top