Analogue-sequencer

> why don't I just use the part xpose? because there will be other 
> things passing through the p3 & being F'd-T-S; I need them to do a 
> corresponding /chromatic/ shift aswell, & part xpose won't shift 
> incoming notes.

You know I quite often get annoyed by this - if I'm recording into a part
that is transposed, the right notes don't pass through so you don't hear
what the pattern is going to sound like until the next time round.
Maybe it would be more logical for the notes passed through to be transposed
by the current PXPos setting.

> what I'd /like/ it to do is offset all the midi note numbers passing 
> through FTS processing. so if you start off in Cmaj & then change to 
> a part using Dmin, all the notes that would've been C should now be 
> D, while all the notes that aren't C also get moved up two semitones 
> & then nudged again so that they conform to the new scale. this would 
> work on all notes leaving the p3, wherever they came from, except 
> where they are set to non-xpose.
> this would make it possible to play any sequence of midi notes 
> through the p3 & transpose them into any other key, by changing the 
> FTS root & scale together (i.e. a full key change).
> 
> any thoughts?

There's a problem with part transpose as it stands in that it is applied
POST-FTS.
To cut a long story short, it should be selectable, and probably default to
pre-FTS.
If that were the case, I think you'd get the behaviour you want by using
part transpose.
I'll add pre/post selection, and PXPos to thru notes, and post a beta with
it tonight for experimentation.

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com