Personally I still think start/end plus attack/release would be more flexible.
It would for example allow you to drop a 30 second sample in then zero in on a part of it with start/end and then add attack/release to taste.
Plus conceptually people are used to AD envelopes for drums and ADSR is a bit weird when there is no incoming gate.
OK! I’ll see what I can do about adding sample end. It’s possible that I can get that done tonight – minus the de-clicking code, which might take another coding session. 
Awesome - thanks Bret!
By the way - one more idea for a param lock if there is still room…
Again from the Lomas sampler (which I am a big fan of as you can probably tell!) - a sample select knob, which scans through the samples in the same directory as the selected sample. This would be awesome to have as a per step param lock - allowing you to change hi hat or snare samples per step for example.
Because you clearly don’t have enough on your plate already… 
Did I mention a sample visualisation window yet? like er… Lomas has…
(I’ll change the record and shutup now )
I’ve had this request before. Let me think about it. My only hesitation would be that the sample load time might cause a “hiccup” in the playback. Also … it might just be a bit outside of scope for this module. I’m itching to move on to new things! Ha ha ha.
Did I mention a sample visualisation window yet? like er… Lomas has…
This is the first mention of it! If the sample visualization only appears (for example in a window) while you are adjusting certain parameter locks, such as sample offset, sample end, and attack/release, then it might work!
Super rough mockup:
Bingo! that would be awesome! particularly if you could have markers which show the sample start/end and ideally the attack/release curves superimposed on top as you are adjusting them.
Exactly! Ok, I’ll make it happen. I’m also going to rename “offset” to “sample start” for consistency. I should be able to do all of this without breaking existing patches. 
Amazing - even just ‘Start’ and ‘End’ would work.
Thank you!
Perfect.
I thought of that too, but in the context of tracks, start and end could be confused with the sequence playback as opposed to the sample playback. Even “offset” was probably a poor name in hindsight. Hmm. Maybe [ S. Start ] [ S. End ] for the function labels?
or … maybe the sample modifying function can be a slightly different color, similar to how the delay labels are a blue-ish color. 
Outside the scope of the most powerful drum sampler and groove box the VCV world has ever seen?
Is such a concept possible? 
I do take your point about hiccups though - maybe the used samples can be stored in RAM after they have played for the first time (on the edge of my knowledge here so might well be talking out of my rear end…)
That would certainly be the case! That’s how it currently works.
Personally, I have a tendency to load in extremely long samples… like 4 minute clips of classical music… and that loading time would certain be a problem. If the samples were to load in a different thread, that might work, but I’ve tried that in the past and ran into issues.
I would think that the best approach, although time consuming, would be to splice together multiple samples into one larger sample (see Jeron’s conversation above) and use the sample start and sample end parameters to isolate the different parts. I don’t want to get too overly crazy with features like “multiple samples per track” with this module. I’m trying to keep the GrooveBox fairly beginner-friendly, which means keeping the core features simple. I hope that you understand!
Ah yes, I can certainly see how it would be problematic in that scenario.
I was thinking more of a classic drum machine scenario using one shots which are perhaps on average around a second or two - swapping samples would certainly be very cool when used like that.
But if you don’t feel comfortable adding this feature I totally understand
“I’m trying to keep the GrooveBox fairly beginner-friendly, which means keeping the core features simple.” exactly what you should do but it doesn’t seem to me to be what is happening.
I am very concerned about the direction (or lack off) that this project is going. This started off as a great idea. It was something that was needed and as I see it would be very useful. However, it is now not clear where this thing is going or why. There is way too much “this would be cool”, “make it do this”, why not add…" going on. As someone who has developed software for many years this is very dangerous territory. Every feature that is added, especially after a majority of the project is coded, adds the possibility/probability for bugs. What is this going to be? It seems like you are getting a lot of advice and feature requests wanting this to be a general-purpose sampler. There are many suggestions appearing on this thread that I feel shouldn’t even be considered.
There was a discussion about swapping samples and scanning directories on the fly. This does not seem to be within the scope of what I think a “Groovebox” should be. That would add a lot of complexity in both the UI and underlying memory management and would offer verry little musical functionality to the average user. Also, one thing that is very nice is loading the first 8 samples from a directory. How is that all going to fit together?
I don’t think that all of this sample editing /manipulation is a great idea at all. There are many ways to edit and prepare samples.
I think you should freeze this project and get it out to the world. Then get feedback on what people are really doing and what would be useful and not just “hey make it do this because we can”. This could easily not end well.
I wonder if perhaps my comment above (which was said with tongue very much in cheek) has been taken a little too literally and raised some hackles, even with the winking emoji - my apologies if that’s the case. For the avoidance of any doubt, it was said in jest.
I do understand and agree with the dangers of feature creep but really we’re just talking about a ‘sample end’ feature which pairs with the existing offset/start and was originally suggested/requested much earlier in the thread and a ‘sample select’ feature. Both of these features sit comfortably within the concept of a Groovebox rather than a general purpose sampler imo - ymmv. I don’t think sample select would add complexity to the UI - it’s just a single param lock like any other after all, but understand concerns about memory management. Anyway it sounds like Bret may have already decided not to implement this and therefore concerns about it are probably moot.
Just as an aside, it’s normal to consider oneself as ‘an average user’ and therefore because you wouldn’t use a feature or find it musically useful, it follows that ‘the average user’ wouldn’t find it useful either - which is not necessarily the case. Randomising / Param locking different short samples can be very musically useful I assure you.
I just want to be clear that the suggestions I’'ve made are because I know exactly how I’d like to use this module and are not just ‘what about this because we can’ ideas.
Considering all the input Bret has had from users on this thread, and his openness and willingness to implement suggestions, while occasionally saying ‘no’, I’d say he’s managed to retain focus and done an incredible job in making this Groovebox an amazingly useful music making tool for a wide variety of users. I don’t share your concerns about a loss of direction - I think it’s headed in the right direction from start to finish.
The end result is rather like 8 channels of the Lomas drum sampler (which has start/end, attack/decay and sample select) in one module, with a built in sequencer with param locks for those controls, plus the addition of volume, pan, ratcheting and probability - which all together makes it a pretty much perfect GrooveBox imo.
Hi @shofb,
I sympathize with you.
This 
is a good example of a feature that isn’t making the cut for exactly the reasons that you point out.
I haven’t really talked about the direction, but I have some thoughts in mind. Generally speaking, the module is almost “done”, meaning that I think that it’s as complex as I want it to get. There’s a chance that I’ll make the existing user experience better, such as displaying the ratcheting patterns in a tooltip as you’re adjusting them, or displaying the waveform while adjusting the sample start and sample end parameters. The front panel is also slated for a new design, which was planned from the outset.
I’m trying to be very careful about adding features in ways that don’t complicate the core user experience. For example, the method to to shift tracks left or right isn’t distracting. The drag handles for resizing the playback window (hopefully) aren’t distracting either.
Sorry, I’m getting a bit off topic. Here’s the plan in a nutshell:
So, in short, you’re not going to see many updates that affect the learning curve of the module.
In my experience, collaborating with users during development is really rewarding, which is why I often release modules early and shape them based on people’s real-life needs. However, I will step in and gently say “nope” to feature ideas that don’t fit my vision!
I love that you’re passionate about the module! It’s a huge compliment that you spent so much time making recommendations, and I really appreciate it. I hope that I’ve addressed some of your concerns, and please continue to speak up if you see the project going in the wrong direction. I’m listening!! 
I really think that editing the sample start/end is a perfect example of something that is not needed and will add complexity to the project.
There are many wav editors that do that job without any problems. You would have to add controls for setting the start/end and display the waveform. Then people are going to want to zoom in/out. The list goes on for something that can easily be accomplished in other modules. So, this adds no real functionality but does add complexity to the existing code.
This is a modular system. If someone wants to have 8 channels of the Lomas drum sampler, no problem. Load in 8 copies, a mixer, a sequencer and you are there.
