Yahoo Groups archive

Analogue-sequencer

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:15 UTC

Message

Re: [analogue-sequencer] Re:P4 editor

2007-05-16 by PAUL NAGLE

I recently bought a Korg Karma (for reasons that are now becoming baffling) and it's quite clear the only way I might understand what it is doing would be to use an editor and computer screen. Fortunately the P3 is considerably more intuitive and easy to get into - but I do see what you're getting at.
   
  Of more value to me would be a means to import v3 sysex into a v4 P3, especially as we have gigs looming and all our stuff is in the old format. Don't mind if there are no visuals involved there!  ;)
   
  Obviously there are lots of takes on this, none are more right than others. For me, I have to say music took its largest downward turn when visual representation and editing became elements to consider. I only realised this when I abandoned the computer in my own music and went back to only listening and playing. It remains to be seen whether I will judge the Karma worth the effort of taking up the mouse once again... 
   
  Paul
   
  

Jesse <jesse@shurhitrecords.com> wrote:
  Still, to be able to see and edit your sequences visually on your computer screen and on your P3 or P4, then being able to take that edited sequence on the road w/o a stupid PC seems like a huge feature for some people. Not saying I would want to start a sequence on a computer screen but maybe for clean up or for some things i missed without a visual representation of it could be nice...

Currently obviously its easy to just record your P3 via midi, then edit it in say a DAW for playback, but to be able to then take that "cleaned up" sequence and put it back into your P3 or P4 would be prety slick!

I guess being able to record midi from your DAW to your P3 would be the same thing as an editor?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: josh! 
To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: [analogue-sequencer] Re:P4 editor


>
> well, wouldn't that be called a *software* sequencer then ?
> sorry, but IMHO going back to software is not really what a hardware
> sequencer needs... apart for librarian purposes..
>

that's exactly what I was thinking

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






---
"Effectus super absolutionem"
http://www.JointIntelligenceCommittee.com
http://www.myspace.com/jointintelligencecommittee

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.