RE: [analogue-sequencer] another question: triggering a pattern
2004-07-06 by implode7@comcast.net
ok - so then it is using the temporary last step as set in the aux event, rather than the one at the pattern level? That is what seems to be happening....but I'll have to look again later tonight. If it looks at the aux event last step to determine one repeat, then it seems to me that one complete time through the pattern may not be reached.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
-------------- Original message -------------- > > Reading back over it, I'm still not sure I understand your > > (Colin's) explanation of how one repeat is determined > > exactly, but it seems to me that the sequence could move on > > before an elaborate pattern of steps is completed, which > > somehow seems wrong to me. It forces you to avoid chaining > > the pattern in a playlist (I think) if you want it to play > > all the way through. > > Obviously I didn't explain it that well... > The pattern will play all the way through if chg=P on the playlist step. > Let me try another explanation... > > After each step in a pattern is played, P3 has to calculate which step > should play next. > It does this using a number of different methods depending on the > pattern 'direction'. > For 'forward' it just adds one to the position until it finds a step > that is not skipped. > If, while it is stepping through the pattern looking for a non-skipped > step, it passes the last step, it jumps back to the beginning and a flag > is set to indicate the pattern wrapped round. > Then it checks if either chg=P and the pattern wrapped, or chg=B and the > current global 'beat' has reached the end of the global bar. > In either case, one playlist 'repeat' is counted, and if all repeats are > done, the next pattern is selected. > > So, if chg=P, the pattern will continue to play for as long as it takes > to 'wrap' round. > If that isn't happening, it may be because of some other factor, such as > a part chain. Or it could be some weird bug I've not found... > A sysex dump of a pattern that contradicts this behaviour would be > interesting. > > Cheers, > Colin f > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]