Analogue-sequencer

On 11 Feb 2006, at 11:18, Paul Nagle wrote:

> As for more remote control, yeah, I think this is
> something Nick Rothwell was pushing for too

Not necessarily. It really depends on whether the P3 is a performance  
interface or a box for generating information (audio or otherwise).  
Since the P3 interface seems designed to be right there at one's  
fingers, all the time, then so long as one can navigate its controls  
and program it directly without hassle, there's little need to  
automate the process.

It's similar to the whole editor/librarian arguments of the 80's and  
90's: if the instrument is right in front of you all the time, and if  
it has a nice user interface, and if one has no need to automate or  
facilitate interaction with it, then there's not much use for an  
editor, and I think far too many crap editing packages have been  
brought into the world over the last twenty years.

(There's almost always a use for a librarian, since making backups to  
a computer is usually cheaper and safer than using any kind of built- 
in storage, and since GUI's are often pretty weak when it comes to  
patch management, and since not many devices provide facilities for  
swapping and sharing patches. I could imagine a device which did not  
require librarian software, but it would be a rather odd beast.)

	-- N.


   nick rothwell -- composition, systems, performance -- http:// 
www.cassiel.com