Meh... I honestly don't see the point of dedicating an effect specifically for something that can look and sound different in so many ways.
The same thing can already be said about arps, vibrato, tremelo, and note slide vs. pitch bend. Why have an effect for them when we can just build 'em into the instrument definition? You said it already, convenience/flexibility.
But yes, an arpeggio-based kick effect would double as a grace note feature that you can specify without having to score and time the individual notes (or define a custom instrument arpeggio just for that).
I don't understand what you're trying to get across with this.
The problem with this thread is that the request in itself is way too specific (and to me it came out as that). An effect that is solely meant for kicks sounds like the effect would be irrelevant for other channels, (maybe) too complicated, and also that the topic is way too broad. If you want to do more complex things, then you're probably better off with the instrument editor. Effects are meant to do a simple task and also to be useful for more than just one or two channels. That's one of the reasons why I suggested an effect for grace notes, because it would probably solve his problem with percussion to some extend (the OP also wanted to change the duty but I feel like that's too much if we're still talking about the same effect). And it would also be useful for other channels as well. Anyway, HertzDevil's arpeggio scheme already does grace notes pretty nicely, so I take back my suggestion.
But seriously though, what was the point of your response?
_______________________
Ponies, Mega Man, Meshuggah, Rotten Sound and ice-cream! <3 YOUTUBE
Well, grace notes are one of those tasks that is simple conceptually, but scoring it effectively is tricky. If you don't want to define an instrument solely for grace notes (because then you'd have to do that for every instrument that uses them), the only real options you have are:
1 - Note slides. Pro: Sounds close enough to fool. Con: Has to be placed at the start of the note, which means you can't control the timing of it (Gxx delays everything on the row, not just note or effects) and you have to compensate the played note by the slide distance; you can't just add it and be done.
2 - Note delays. Pro: Straightforward. Con: Requires a free row in front of the note to put the grace note on. Also resets the volume envelope (key-on effect), and if you don't want that to happen you end up defining a separate instrument anyway.
3 - Faster song speed so you can score the note explicitly. Pro: Similar results as #2 but without needing the extra row. Con: Changing song speed midsong throws off pattern highlighting, and just like #2, it repeats the key-on effect.
At any rate, an effect for arpeggio-based kicks (grace notes) seems like a good candidate for implementation because it's something you can use with any existing channel note without involving extra steps to compensate for its presence. So if I may refine the idea a little:
Kxy = Kick or grace note effect. Overrides the currently played note by a lower or higher note for a short time.
X = Kick type; the first bit (+0 or +8) dictates whether the kick is lower or higher (respectively) than the currently playing note and the other three bits dictate its length (actual # engine cycles = value+1). (Sidenote: It's unlikely you'd need a kick longer than ~8 engine cycles anyway, because most songs are less than 8 cycles per row)
Y = # semitones above/below current note to play.
Like the note slide, this is not a persistent effect (i.e. one you must manually switch off when you're done, like portamento). It's typically something you supply on conjunction with a new note, but you can actually insert it anywhere while a note is playing.
I think jrle's response was a little harsh (maybe that's just the mood I'm in right now), but then again, this isn't something that would be incredibly difficult/convoluted to do manually (like vibrato)....
Consider the angle of raw pitch bend vs. portamento vs. note slide -- all three of them yield a similar result, but the differences in how they do it are significant.
If I come off as a little bit annoyed, that's because I absolutely am. So many people take so much for granted around here, it isn't even funny. I can sort of understand if this is the first tracker someone's ever used, but people need to realise that Famitracker actually has a shit ton more features than most other trackers out there and is way user-friendlier than any other tracker you're likely to encounter, so people signing on to this forum only to ask for more kind of rubs me the wrong way, I guess.
Kick effect? Hell, most trackers don't even have built-in arp effects, let alone an arp macro feature in the instrument definition. We should all consider ourselves lucky Famitracker supports all that natively instead of asking for more of what's already in there.
Jeroen Tel. He's often known as the best composer on C64, and the best western composer on NES. This is one of my favorites of his: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pil4P93zST8
.gif)