Analogue-sequencer

On Friday 16 January 2004 11:34, Colin f wrote:
> It means a change in the way the sequencer playback
> engine works, which is why I've been putting it off.
> Instead of processing each track in turn, it will have to
> load in the current step data for all tracks in parallel.

I understand.

> Then any functions that modify the current step data
> based on other tracks can read the relevant data for the
> other tracks, and modify the current data for the track
> being modified. Then the data is all transmitted.

But how do you account for different playback speeds (i.e. 
different step lengths)? Could be that step 1 on track 1 
modifies 8 steps on track 2, right? So you have to keep the 
current state of each track? That sounds like a major 
change indeed.

> I'll also add some other state variables for each track
> variables that allow cumulative modifications.
> e.g. 'transpose pattern relative +1' will add a semitone
> to the 'transpose accumulator' each time that step is
> played. So you could set a pattern to move up a semitone
> at the first step, and each time it loops, it will go up
> a semitone until it reaches the transpose limit and
> wraps. This is a Notron inspired thing. But this
> implementation should be more flexible.

Sounds great! :)

>
> Some examples of the planned functions are:
>
> 	grab note value from alternate track
> 	transpose by note from alternate track
> (cv mixing anyone ? - multiple aux controllers doing this
> from multiple source tracks will cumulatively transpose
> the current step so that all the tracks involved are
> 'added')
>
> 	transpose pattern absolute	(+/- 48)
> 	transpose pattern relative	(+/- 48)
> 	set pattern length absolute (1 - 16)
> 	set pattern length relative (+/- 15)
> (add 1 to the length of a pattern each time round, and it
> will play steps 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 4,... and so
> on)
>
> 	set global tempo
> 	set global FTS scale
> 	set global FTS root absolute
> 	set global FTS root relative

Wow. Impressive!

>
> I'm sure there were other Nagle suggestions I've got
> written down somewhere...
>
> And in order to provide some randomness, there will be
> functions that can be assigned to a controller to modify
> the value of another controller or step data by a certain
> random amount, or to select whether it takes effect or
> not based on a probability.

I'm curious how all this beautiful stuff is offered on the 
user interface level. Doesn't sound easy at all.

- Robert