Analogue-sequencer

hmmm - interesting. Still inclined to go with the mcv24, but that is something to think about.

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> 
> I have all three ofthe things that you mentioned (lucky me ; ) - the a100, the 
> p3, and the mcv24. 
> 
> The p3 and the a100 are obviously nice. The mcv24 is good, but... 
> 
> Only 4 of its outputs are of good (12bit) resolution. The others are 8bit, so, 
> although they all have things like software lfos and the like, without slew 
> limiters, these can sound lumpy. 
> 
> 
> Colin himself wrote a deapthy explanation of bit depths, and midi controller 
> resoultion on one of the other lists the other day, but the general gist of it 
> seemed (to me) to be that the midi standard itself is sometimes not high enough 
> to worry about the performance of the dac anyway. 
> 
> But, i need to re-read colins explanation. The mcv24 excells in its number of 
> outputs and real flexibility (i have / have had mine plummed over to a selection 
> of different devices at the same time) but, if you can find a real reason why 
> those 8bit dacs will be a problem to you, then maybee youll have to go for a 
> less flexible, although higher resolution product? 
> 
> 
> Comments, if no hard conclusion. 
> 
> Julian 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

> hmmm - interesting. Still inclined to go with the mcv24, but 
> that is something to think about.

Probably not a bad idea...

> > Only 4 of its outputs are of good (12bit) resolution. The 
> others are 8bit, so, 
> > although they all have things like software lfos and the 
> like, without slew 
> > limiters, these can sound lumpy. 

Midi resolution for a single controller is only 7 bit, so 8 bit CV outputs
are fine for them.
As Julian rightly points out, this resolution is too low for smooth LFO
waveforms etc.
But if you have a slew limiter module, or VCLFO, you won't want to be using
digitally generated transients anyway.

I'd think a MCV24 driven by p3 and driving a modular would give you some
excellent potential, assuming the Doepfer modules have a lot of VC
parameters. By redirecting auxes on a few tracks to build up the number of
controllers available, you could pretty much sequence patterns that
radically change the modular patch on every step.
How about randomising the aux values so a pattern plays with a new random
patch on every step ?

Shit, I'm going to have to get my mark II modular assembled sometime, and
finish that multi-channel CV convertor...
;-)

Cheers,
Colin f

Colin,

 How about a single step mode?
So you can 'play' a sequence in, one note at a time, ie, press a note on
midi in and it records it, advances a step, and waits for the next..

This would make programming drum parts so much easier!

Paul

Colin,

 you could always use a PolyDAC, or two :-)

Just a thought :-)

Paul (yeah yeah, blatant self promotion)

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Paul Maddox (Mail LIsts) wrote:

>  How about a single step mode?
> So you can 'play' a sequence in, one note at a time, ie, press a note on
> midi in and it records it, advances a step, and waits for the next..

ooh, yeah, that would be great...

bleep.
out.

---
http://leichenfeld.iuma.com
http://thirdwavecollective.com

>  How about a single step mode?
> So you can 'play' a sequence in, one note at a time, ie, press a 
note on
> midi in and it records it, advances a step, and waits for the 
next..
> 
> This would make programming drum parts so much easier!

Have you tried arpeggio capture with the 'rong' (reset on new group) 
option off ?
That's what it does ;-)

Cheers,
Colin f

> > Have you tried arpeggio capture with the 'rong' (reset on new 
group)
> > option off ?
> > That's what it does ;-)
> 
> Ahhh, is that in the user guide?

Yep.

Colin,

> Have you tried arpeggio capture with the 'rong' (reset on new group)
> option off ?
> That's what it does ;-)

Ahhh, is that in the user guide?

Paul