Analogue-sequencer

>Yes, I knew that it is only possible to edit one at once... but Can I jump 
in the fly from one to another?[big snip]

[naglecakes:]If you like you can record via MIDI input directly from track 
view; hold down record and the track number. To jump to another, select another 
track. [another snip]

The MAQ has just three rows so comparisons, while interesting, can only be 
taken so far. They are different machines. If you have both, you are lucky. <

I turn my back for a moment, & they start playing my favourite tune.... 

hans, my band uses two maqs. we got our first in 1993 & immediately tried to 
get all the "berlin school" effects on it. obviously, having three active rows 
of knobs, for up to 3 independent patterns, was great for improv, but the 
early ones didn't have any memories. the midi implementation was a bit weak, & 
required writing strings of hex into a pc1600 controller to do anything we 
thought was musically useful, like shifting the range or shortening the loop. 

we had to use two rows & fiddle for ages to make a chris franke trill come 
out of it. 
we wrote special patches for a sampler & later the proteus box so that it 
wouldn't play bum notes on stage, & I built a doepfer quantiser into one of them 
so we could do the same with the moogs.
to do anything else than "note-on, note-off-again" took two rows, which were 
tricky to keep synchronised when sending hex-midi-strings to change the row 
lengths.
only 3 years later did we get a better motherboard with a rotary encoder, 
some memories (& what a pain they are to use, too), proper midi controller 
implementation.... still no auxiliary controller events, still no step level timing 
adjustment.... no FTS.....

I could go on. 

I have a schaltwerk that's a piece of junk, always locking up, never in sync 
with anything, loses it's mind from time-to-time..... I have a notron that's 
fallen to bits after a mere 15 gigs though, in fairness to this latter, it was 
an excellent tool & endured many plane trips & vans.

if you are looking at a p3 now, I have made my point. I will be buying a 
second & retiring the maqs too. 
there's no contest.

paul points out that the p3 can hop amongst the tracks with minimal button 
pushes whilst entering notes into the patterns from a live keyboard (which can 
also be FTS'd on it's way past the sequencer to the soft-through at the 
midi-out, keeping your leadlines & chords in the right key aswell). 
I'd like it to switch tracks by programme change on the global channel, with 
higher numbers operating pattern & bank changes, & some of the useful options 
like "hold bank mute", the FTS "base note learn" & stuff like that, so's I 
could keep both hands on the keyboard & monkey around underneath with a behringer 
footpedal controller that lies idle nearby.

but what you need to know is that in this mode, the pitch knobs still work 
aswell. simply go into either version of live-pattern-record & use the knobs. 
the p3 doesn't do the maq thing of rescanning knobs that are now suddenly 
"pointing the wrong way", like when you recall a preset on the maq & as soon as you 
move one knob, it starts changing notes all over the place...... p3 doesn't do 
that.
but they will jump when you do move them. 
colin?

if it's important to have your hands do things to two patterns at once (& 
let's face it, even on the maq you can't actually change all three patterns at 
once without using a broom...), then use one row's aux events to influence the 
notes in another pattern directly, or as directly as needed.

the p3 just gets better.

duncan/r.m.i./p3-73