Analogue-sequencer

Folks,

I finally got a quote from the factory today for the run of 
production P3 cases.
I can confirm the EU price for complete, ready-built units will be 
450 ukp plus shipping.
For US customers, Shawn Cleary of http://www.analoguehaven.com will 
be handling P3 sales for me, and will set the final price himself.
I've already discussed pricing with Shawn, and taking various 
factors into account, his price wont be much more than you would 
have to pay for me to ship one directly, but without the worry of 
customs fees, international money transfer etc.

Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether 
you'd prefer:

a) a PCB/CPU kit only
b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case

Pricing for the PCB/CPU kits should be the same as previous runs - 
around 85 ukp.
The set of keys will add 40 ukp. The case will add another 120 ukp.

My next step will be to order a single case as an engineering sample.
To keep the price of the cases down, I need to make quite a large 
order, so I need to be sure it's exactly right.
The lead times I was quoted originally were very good, but given 
their rather poor speed at coming up with the quote, I guess it 
could be anywhere between 4 and 8 weeks until I have cases.
In the meantime, there is a mock-up of how the final case will look 
here:
http://www.p3sequencer.com/final-p3-mockup.jpg
Remember the keys will be a set of these:
http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-keys.jpg
Note the lack of screws on the front panel (replaced with concealed 
press-fit standoffs), and the detachable rack ears. Wooden end 
cheeks will also be supplied.
The graphics on the front and rear panels will be silk-screened, 
though I'm yet to finalise the artwork for that. It could maybe do 
with some more lines and shit... suggestions welcome.
The bottom part of the case will be a great improvement, there are 
some 3d model images here:
http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-1.jpg
http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-2.jpg
The actual rear cases will be black, but that doesn't show up too 
well.
Note the recessed rear connectors - it will be rackmountable without 
losing an extra space for the cables.

I'll keep you posted on progress.

Cheers,
Colin f

hi Colin,

> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether 
> you'd prefer:
> 
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case


i think 3 p3's might be a bit much but if i was to buy another i'd 
probably go for option B, as i find the price for the case is pretty 
high compared to the rest of the kit, although it does look fine. i'd 
probably build my own again, in a shoebox for all i care...and save 
about 50% of the kit-cost while i'm at it. but hey i'm just a cheap 
dutch bloke...

grtz Chiel

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, colinfraser_com wrote:

> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether
> you'd prefer:
>
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case

well, i'm not waiting for a kit, but if i were to buy a second P3, i'd
choose option c.

will there be extras of all the bits? i would be interested in upgrading
my P3 with the new keys, case, and midi I/O board sometime in the future.

> lines and shit... suggestions welcome. The bottom part of the case will
> be a great improvement, there are some 3d model images here:
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-1.jpg
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-2.jpg

*beautiful*

bleep.
out.

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

Option "c" for me...

James R. Coplin
***************
If anyone asks of my whereabouts,
simply tell them i've gone out the window
for a spot of tea and am not
expected back any time soon.
***************

> -----Original Message-----
> From: colinfraser_com [mailto:colin@colinfraser.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 2:46 PM
> To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [analogue-sequencer] Production P3 Pricing
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I finally got a quote from the factory today for the run of
> production P3 cases.
> I can confirm the EU price for complete, ready-built units will be
> 450 ukp plus shipping.
> For US customers, Shawn Cleary of http://www.analoguehaven.com will
> be handling P3 sales for me, and will set the final price himself.
> I've already discussed pricing with Shawn, and taking various
> factors into account, his price wont be much more than you would
> have to pay for me to ship one directly, but without the worry of
> customs fees, international money transfer etc.
> 
> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether
> you'd prefer:
> 
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case
> 
> Pricing for the PCB/CPU kits should be the same as previous runs -
> around 85 ukp.
> The set of keys will add 40 ukp. The case will add another 120 ukp.
> 
> My next step will be to order a single case as an engineering sample.
> To keep the price of the cases down, I need to make quite a large
> order, so I need to be sure it's exactly right.
> The lead times I was quoted originally were very good, but given
> their rather poor speed at coming up with the quote, I guess it
> could be anywhere between 4 and 8 weeks until I have cases.
> In the meantime, there is a mock-up of how the final case will look
> here:
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/final-p3-mockup.jpg
> Remember the keys will be a set of these:
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-keys.jpg
> Note the lack of screws on the front panel (replaced with concealed
> press-fit standoffs), and the detachable rack ears. Wooden end
> cheeks will also be supplied.
> The graphics on the front and rear panels will be silk-screened,
> though I'm yet to finalise the artwork for that. It could maybe do
> with some more lines and shit... suggestions welcome.
> The bottom part of the case will be a great improvement, there are
> some 3d model images here:
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-1.jpg
> http://www.p3sequencer.com/p3-case-model-2.jpg
> The actual rear cases will be black, but that doesn't show up too
> well.
> Note the recessed rear connectors - it will be rackmountable without
> losing an extra space for the cables.
> 
> I'll keep you posted on progress.
> 
> Cheers,
> Colin f
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

> will there be extras of all the bits? i would be interested in
> upgrading
> my P3 with the new keys, case, and midi I/O board sometime in the
> future.

I'm kind of hoping it'll work out such that one person will want a 
PCB/CPU only kit, and that'll leave a free set of keys and a case 
for someone else.
The new keycaps fit on the old keys, so that's a potentially easy 
upgrade.
The new PCBs will take the Cherry keys or the Maplin types, so I can 
keep Chiel happy if he goes for No. 3 ;-)
I may do a small run of 6 way I/O boards to go with case upgrades.
The new I/O board is not pin compatible with the previous mainboard.
I'm putting a DIN sync to midi clock PIC chip onto the new mainboard 
so one of the outputs can be jumpered for either DIN sync or clock 
only midi out. The other sockets will be one midi in and four midi 
outs. The outs will all be parallel on P3, but if I ever find the 
time to get P3.5 done, they could become independent.
However, in about three or four weeks, I'm set to become a father, 
so I don't expect my spare time to increase...

Cheers,
Colin f

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "colinfraser_com"
<colin@c...> wrote:

> However, in about three or four weeks, I'm set to become a father, 
> so I don't expect my spare time to increase...
> 
> Cheers,
> Colin f

Congratulations :) - should we defer any further P3 feature requests &
tentative enquiries as to the status of other projects ( R3 / P3.5 /
P4) for 18 years or so?  

Pete

> > However, in about three or four weeks, I'm set to become a 
father, 
> > so I don't expect my spare time to increase...

> Congratulations :) - should we defer any further P3 feature 
requests &
> tentative enquiries as to the status of other projects ( R3 / P3.5 /
> P4) for 18 years or so?  

Nah, you should all buy more P3s, so I can do this as my full time 
job ;-)

Cheers,
Colin f

> > What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?
> 
> That's a *fatantic* good idea!!
> 
> Boele

Now would SOS get Paul Nagle to review it or would he have to claim a
conflict of interest...?

Incidentally and just out of interest I'm not sure if I saw numbers
mentioned anywhere - how large is the first 'production' run going to be? 

Pete

colinfraser_com wrote:

> Nah, you should all buy more P3s, so I can do this as my full time
> job ;-)
> 

What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?

Gert
www.waveworld.tv

on 30-11-2004 15:15, Gert van Santen at g.vansanten@chello.nl wrote:

> 
> colinfraser_com wrote:
> 
>> Nah, you should all buy more P3s, so I can do this as my full time
>> job ;-)
>> 
> 
> What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?

That's a *fatantic* good idea!!

Boele

scd wrote:
> on 30-11-2004 15:15, Gert van Santen at g.vansanten@chello.nl wrote:
> 
>> 
>> colinfraser_com wrote:
>> 
>>> Nah, you should all buy more P3s, so I can do this as my full time
>>> job ;-)
>>> 
>> 
>> What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?
> 
> That's a *fatantic* good idea!!

That's a strange word...

;-)

Gert
www.waveworld.tv

on 30-11-2004 15:38, Gert van Santen at g.vansanten@chello.nl wrote:

OK, ok. After two days of migraine my brain isn't working 100% yet...

:-)))

Still, a FANTASTIC idea Gert!

What do you think Colin?

Boele

> 
> scd wrote:
>> on 30-11-2004 15:15, Gert van Santen at g.vansanten@chello.nl wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> colinfraser_com wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Nah, you should all buy more P3s, so I can do this as my full time
>>>> job ;-)
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?
>> 
>> That's a *fatantic* good idea!!
> 
> That's a strange word...
> 
> ;-)
> 
> Gert
> www.waveworld.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

hi  Paul,

> I was thinking that a way of making Playlist Edit more intuitive to 
> a newcomer would be to have the first 8 keys represent playlist 
> position and the second 8 act as selectors for patterns. 

if i'm understanding this correctly it sound like a pretty neat idea. 
although for me personally the current situation is fine..i think i 
could get used to your proposed setup quite quickly. i've never used 
any setup other than 6x8, although i've been thinking about setting 
my second p3 to 4x12 to get some more variations & combinations in 
the livesets.

grt Chiel

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:40:10 -0000, "Peter Lunnon"
<yahoo@chime.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Now would SOS get Paul Nagle to review it or would he have to claim a
>conflict of interest...?

I certainly could not be dispassionate about it - plus I know it so
well there are issues that I'd probably bring up that other reviewers
may not spot. But I honestly don't know whether it would be the right
thing to do; I suspect not.


On a different tack, does anyone use the 3 bank/16 pattern config?

I was thinking that a way of making Playlist Edit more intuitive to a
newcomer would be to have the first 8 keys represent playlist position
and the second 8 act as selectors for patterns. If lots of people use
16 patterns this may be less useful than now (could use page and LED
colour change to access the second 8) but it would enable Colin to
label the panel in a similar way to the Tracks/Parts he's aiming to
put on the prod versions. 

Playlist edit could be more intuitive then as you could select the
playlist step by button, use hold to keep it there, and have a pretty
lightshow as the playlist progresses and the patterns change. 

What do you all think?

This idea also depends on Colin altering Playlist Edit accordingly of
course.

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk
          Bogus Focus Records - www.BogusFocus.com

Peter,

I've been down this road with the Monowave, drove to Gordon Reids house and ahve
a long chat about it..

> Now would SOS get Paul Nagle to review it or would he have to claim a
> conflict of interest...?

Paul wouldn't be allowed to review it as he was involved in its development, at
quite a significant level.

Also getting it reviewed is a VERY scary process, you wouldn't beleive how
scared I was about visiting Gordon Reid!
Something else to bare in mind, I was told that it can take upto 4 months to get
a review/article into the magazine, though i guess that depends on how high a
profile your company/gear is.. For example I bet the VirusTI review comes out
very quickly.

Paul

Paul,

> On a different tack, does anyone use the 3 bank/16 pattern config?

initially I did, but I couldn't work out how to select the extra 8 patterns, so
I switch to 6/8 mode..

and now, I don't beleive in RTFM.

Paul

>>>
>>> What about sending one to FM and SOS for a review?
>>

Yes, that's been part of the plan for a while.
Just need to find the right reviewer...

Cheers,
Colin f

> > I was thinking that a way of making Playlist Edit more intuitive 
to 
> > a newcomer would be to have the first 8 keys represent playlist 
> > position and the second 8 act as selectors for patterns. 
> 
> if i'm understanding this correctly it sound like a pretty neat
> idea. 

Sounds pretty good to me too, though it could take some getting used 
to.
I don't disagree that playlist edit could be easier to use...

Cheers,
Colin f

colinfraser_com wrote:
> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether 
> you'd prefer:
> 
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case

Colin,

I'm not decided either way on the kit vs. built question, but
I'd go for c) if I did want a kit.

thanks,
Paul

Colin,

> Yes, that's been part of the plan for a while.
> Just need to find the right reviewer...

Not sure how it works, but, you may not get a choice. I don't think they
want manufacturers deciding who reviews what in the hope of getting a better
review. The people at SOS seem to know their beans though, so they should be
able to decide who best to place it with.

Paul

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:52:46 -0000, "colinfraser_com"
<colin@colinfraser.com> wrote:

>Sounds pretty good to me too, though it could take some getting used 
>to.

Pretty lights would make up for that surely? I mean, the playlist LED
would progress along the first 8 LEDs and at each step the LED
corresponding to the pattern (on the right hand side) would light. You
know it makes sense, trussssst in meeeeeee, votch deee votch, you are
feeling verrrrry sleeeeepy.....

Erm, sorry, dunno what came over me.. 8)

Paul
---
Paul Nagle / Soft Room Music
Email: paul@softroom.co.uk www.softroom.co.uk
                           www.BogusFocus.com

> > Yes, that's been part of the plan for a while.
> > Just need to find the right reviewer...
> 
> Not sure how it works, but, you may not get a choice. I don't 
> think they
> want manufacturers deciding who reviews what in the hope of 
> getting a better
> review.

I must have forgotten the smiley ;-)
I'd be happy just as long as some PC-loving Cubase fiend didn't get it, and
totally miss the point...

Cheers,
Colin f

Colin,

> I must have forgotten the smiley ;-)

Indeed.

> I'd be happy just as long as some PC-loving Cubase fiend didn't get it, and
> totally miss the point...

I credit SOS with more intelligence than that :-)

Paul

> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether 
> you'd prefer:
> 
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case

As a long time lurker and envious wanna be owner of a P3, my vote 
goes to option c) the full monty.....

I am also building the oakley 3031 and the introspectiv 9090.....The 
p3 is all I need to complete my holy trinity of hardware.  I almost 
wet my pants just dreaming of having them all completed :)

anyone already use the p3 with these machines? I'm curious to find 
out how well they work together

Hey! I'm a "PC-loving Cubase fiend" and I'm just waiting to purchase a kit
for one of these...

James R. Coplin
***************
If anyone asks of my whereabouts,
simply tell them i've gone out the window
for a spot of tea and am not
expected back any time soon.
***************

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Colin f [mailto:colin@colinfraser.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 4:36 PM
> To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [analogue-sequencer] Re: Production P3 Pricing
> 
> 
> > > Yes, that's been part of the plan for a while.
> > > Just need to find the right reviewer...
> >
> > Not sure how it works, but, you may not get a choice. I don't
> > think they
> > want manufacturers deciding who reviews what in the hope of
> > getting a better
> > review.
> 
> I must have forgotten the smiley ;-)
> I'd be happy just as long as some PC-loving Cubase fiend didn't get it,
> and
> totally miss the point...
> 
> Cheers,
> Colin f
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

hello Colin and list,

> Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether
> you'd prefer:
>
> a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case

i'm a lot handier with a soldering iron than any other kind of tool 
(save maybe a pencil), so my vote would be for option c). i wouldn't be 
excited about building my own case. it would also be super keen to have 
a case that racked up as nicely as the one have the computer picture 
of. more rack space than desk space here.

cheers,
geoff womeldorff

Folks,

Paul said...

> I was thinking that a way of making Playlist Edit more intuitive 
to a
> newcomer would be to have the first 8 keys represent playlist 
position
> and the second 8 act as selectors for patterns.

It occurs to me that a big part of the problem is the overlap of the 
steps used to indicate playlist position and current pattern, and 
the indirectness of choosing the patterns on steps other than the 
current one.

Modifying Paul's idea slightly, what if the first 8 keys are for 
selecting patterns, and keys 9 - 16 represent playlist steps.
The labelling for PART could become PART/PLAYLIST STEP to make this 
clear.
One LED above the playlist step keys would be green to indicate the 
current playlist position, the rest would be red to indicate the 
length of the playlist if it were longer than one step.
The playlist will always start on step 1 (key 9), and a bar of LEDs 
will always show the length. The PLED display can lose the length 
indication and be less cluttered.

The pattern on the current playlist step would be indicated by red 
on one of the LEDs 1 to 8, and pressing one of the step keys 1 to 8 
alone would select a new pattern for the current step.
But if you hold one of the playlist step keys (9 - 16) the LEDs 
above 1 - 8 will show the pattern on that playlist step, and the 
keys will allow it to be edited.
To alter the length, you would hold the current softkey and press 
the playlist step key for the last step.
Transpose and repeat control would move to the knobs above the new 
playlist step keys, but otherwise operate in the same way, as would 
chg and hold. No need for adv when stopped though - all playlist 
steps would be directly accessible.

This would leave the PAGE key free to somehow enable selection of 
patterns 9 to 16 in 3 bank mode. Holding PAGE plus a playlist step 
plus a pattern key seems a bit much, so maybe PAGE could toggle an 
indication in the display showing whether 'upper' or 'lower' 
patterns would be selected.

I don't think this version would be any more space consuming than 
the current implementation. When I get a chance, I'll implement it 
as a test build and see what people think.

Cheers,
Colin f

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, colinfraser_com wrote:

> One LED above the playlist step keys would be green to indicate the
> current playlist position, the rest would be red to indicate the
> length of the playlist if it were longer than one step.
> The playlist will always start on step 1 (key 9), and a bar of LEDs
> will always show the length. The PLED display can lose the length
> indication and be less cluttered.

sounds great to me... but would making the led amber make more sense? i
think of red and green as full and empty, but maybe i'm the only one. so
to me, amber would mean there's a playlist step here and it is the current
one. i know that it should be obvious that there's a playlist step in a
given location (though it would be less obvious fro the last step), but i
think this is more consistent with standards set elsewehre in the P3...
like adding ties to steps where the gate is active, etc.

> The pattern on the current playlist step would be indicated by red
> on one of the LEDs 1 to 8, and pressing one of the step keys 1 to 8
> alone would select a new pattern for the current step.
> But if you hold one of the playlist step keys (9 - 16) the LEDs
> above 1 - 8 will show the pattern on that playlist step, and the
> keys will allow it to be edited.

*awesome* how would you switch back to playlist edit?

> To alter the length, you would hold the current softkey and press
> the playlist step key for the last step.

length of what, the pattern? i'm also not sure what you mean by "current
softkey."

> Transpose and repeat control would move to the knobs above the new
> playlist step keys, but otherwise operate in the same way, as would
> chg and hold. No need for adv when stopped though - all playlist
> steps would be directly accessible.

makes sense.

> This would leave the PAGE key free to somehow enable selection of
> patterns 9 to 16 in 3 bank mode. Holding PAGE plus a playlist step
> plus a pattern key seems a bit much, so maybe PAGE could toggle an
> indication in the display showing whether 'upper' or 'lower'
> patterns would be selected.

if the display could show "1-8" and "9-16" that would be better...

bleep.
out.

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

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:56:23 -0000, "colinfraser_com"
<colin@colinfraser.com> wrote:

>Modifying Paul's idea slightly, what if the first 8 keys are for 
>selecting patterns, and keys 9 - 16 represent playlist steps.
>The labelling for PART could become PART/PLAYLIST STEP to make this 
>clear.

Certainly the labelling of this in production units would give newbies
a better starting point. Sounds good. You might even consider the term
"Pattern Sequence" instead of playlist. OK, too radical maybe. 

>One LED above the playlist step keys would be green to indicate the 
>current playlist position, the rest would be red to indicate the 
>length of the playlist if it were longer than one step.

What colour if one step?

>The playlist will always start on step 1 (key 9), and a bar of LEDs 
>will always show the length. The PLED display can lose the length 
>indication and be less cluttered.

Nice. Can some be amber? The look of a row of amber LEDs would make it
visually very obviously different from the other modes.

>The pattern on the current playlist step would be indicated by red 
>on one of the LEDs 1 to 8, and pressing one of the step keys 1 to 8 
>alone would select a new pattern for the current step.
>But if you hold one of the playlist step keys (9 - 16) the LEDs 
>above 1 - 8 will show the pattern on that playlist step, and the 
>keys will allow it to be edited.

And could you use hold at this point and keep this step running until
you released it? Could be useful. Could be very useful actually.

>To alter the length, you would hold the current softkey and press 
>the playlist step key for the last step.
>Transpose and repeat control would move to the knobs above the new 
>playlist step keys, but otherwise operate in the same way, as would 
>chg and hold. No need for adv when stopped though - all playlist 
>steps would be directly accessible.

Cool. I wonder if it's possible to have a "mute" option to mute a
playlist step's output but still have it last the same duration? Oops,
here I go again...

>This would leave the PAGE key free to somehow enable selection of 
>patterns 9 to 16 in 3 bank mode. Holding PAGE plus a playlist step 
>plus a pattern key seems a bit much, so maybe PAGE could toggle an 
>indication in the display showing whether 'upper' or 'lower' 
>patterns would be selected.

And maybe toggle the colour of the LEDs to show the patterns are in a
different range. Mind you, might not be worth the effort if nobody
actually uses this mode. Does anyone?

>I don't think this version would be any more space consuming than 
>the current implementation. When I get a chance, I'll implement it 
>as a test build and see what people think.

Well, I feel sorta bad for bringing all this up - it's not actually a
priority of mine even (my priorities are always knob-related, ask my
wife). But I started to think how I'd review it and how hard I
initially found playlists to get to grips with and reckoned it was
worth a look before a certain sharp SOS reviewer gets his hands on it
and his head round it...

Hopefully it'll help in the long run

Paul
---
Paul Nagle / Soft Room Music
Email: paul@softroom.co.uk www.softroom.co.uk
                           www.BogusFocus.com

On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:12:05PM +0000, Paul Nagle wrote:

> Well, I feel sorta bad for bringing all this up - it's not actually a
> priority of mine even (my priorities are always knob-related, ask my
> wife).

with the advent of sampling technology, rimshots are but a note-on away ;)

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

> You'll probably hate me for this but... supposing playlists worked
> like parts do? I mean, you can play parts in series starting at the
> first you hold down and ending at the last you hold down. 

> If playlists worked the same way you could have the same flexible
> interaction that would feel intuitive because it's used elsewhere. You
> could select each step individually and it would play the pattern
> (along with any transpositions and chg mode) but if you selected two
> or more they would play round and round with the repeat setting coming
> into place in the same way as parts...

I think I see where you're coming from Paul.

OK, how about we think of playlist steps as 'pattern selections', and the
current pattern selection is chosen by pressing the step keys 9 to 16 in
playlist (to be renamed 'pattern selection') edit.
Holding one step then pressing another would enable a 'pattern selection
chain', equivalent to a playlist with a length > 1.
Each pattern selection can be thought of as having a repeat count and
transpose setting akin to PXPos and PCReps for parts.
The relationship between each track and its 'pattern selections' would be
much the same as the relationship between a bank and its parts.

There would need to be some way to assign the pattern for a particular step
without having to make that the current step, or upset the chain start end
endpoint - need to think about that one. 
The underlying data structure would remain the same, except you would need
to be able to have your playlist start on any step.
The playlist length variable is currently a full byte but only holds a value
from 1 to 8, so this would be easy to retrofit without affecting the current
setup or any saved banks. I would make the high nybble the start 'pattern
selection', and the low nybble the end. Since the high nybbles are all 0,
and the low nybbles the playlist lengths, existing playlists would translate
perfectly into 'pattern selection chains'.

I hope I'm explaining this well enough - I think it may be pretty cool.

Cheers,
Colin f

You'll probably hate me for this but... supposing playlists worked
like parts do? I mean, you can play parts in series starting at the
first you hold down and ending at the last you hold down. 

If playlists worked the same way you could have the same flexible
interaction that would feel intuitive because it's used elsewhere. You
could select each step individually and it would play the pattern
(along with any transpositions and chg mode) but if you selected two
or more they would play round and round with the repeat setting coming
into place in the same way as parts...

Sorry, I'll go away now. I know it isn't too radical cos with
playlists you're only able to select one pattern per step but still,
just a thought...

Paul
---
Paul Nagle / Soft Room Music
Email: paul@softroom.co.uk www.softroom.co.uk
                           www.BogusFocus.com

Paul Nagle wrote:
> You'll probably hate me for this but... supposing playlists worked
> like parts do? I mean, you can play parts in series starting at the
> first you hold down and ending at the last you hold down.
>
> If playlists worked the same way you could have the same flexible
> interaction that would feel intuitive because it's used elsewhere. You
> could select each step individually and it would play the pattern
> (along with any transpositions and chg mode) but if you selected two
> or more they would play round and round with the repeat setting coming
> into place in the same way as parts...
>
> Sorry, I'll go away now. I know it isn't too radical cos with
> playlists you're only able to select one pattern per step but still,
> just a thought...
>

I like it. It's good to use options that are used elsewhere. It makes the
machine easier to use.

Gert
www.waveworld.tv

Hi;

Sorry to say,but I hate playlist as my tracks are minimal-same  half bar 
pattern based.


Hans



>
> > You'll probably hate me for this but... supposing playlists worked
> > like parts do? I mean, you can play parts in series starting at 
the
> > first you hold down and ending at the last you hold down.
>
> > If playlists worked the same way you could have the same flexible
> > interaction that would feel intuitive because it's used elsewhere. 
You
> > could select each step individually and it would play the pattern
> > (along with any transpositions and chg mode) but if you selected 
two
> > or more they would play round and round with the repeat setting 
coming
> > into place in the same way as parts...
>
>I think I see where you're coming from Paul.
>
>OK, how about we think of playlist steps as 'pattern selections', and 
the
>current pattern selection is chosen by pressing the step keys 9 to 16 in
>playlist (to be renamed 'pattern selection') edit.
>Holding one step then pressing another would enable a 'pattern selection
>chain', equivalent to a playlist with a length > 1.
>Each pattern selection can be thought of as having a repeat count and
>transpose setting akin to PXPos and PCReps for parts.
>The relationship between each track and its 'pattern selections' would 
be
>much the same as the relationship between a bank and its parts.
>
>There would need to be some way to assign the pattern for a particular 
step
>without having to make that the current step, or upset the chain start 
end
>endpoint - need to think about that one.
>The underlying data structure would remain the same, except you would 
need
>to be able to have your playlist start on any step.
>The playlist length variable is currently a full byte but only holds a 
value
>from 1 to 8, so this would be easy to retrofit without affecting the 
current
>setup or any saved banks. I would make the high nybble the start 
'pattern
>selection', and the low nybble the end. Since the high nybbles are all 
0,
>and the low nybbles the playlist lengths, existing playlists would 
translate
>perfectly into 'pattern selection chains'.
>
>I hope I'm explaining this well enough - I think it may be pretty cool.
>
>Cheers,
>Colin f
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Móviles, DVD, cámaras digitales, coleccionismo... Con unas ofertas que ni te 
imaginas. http://www.msn.es/Subastas/

Boele bows deeeeeeep for Paul and Colin!


Op 2-dec-04 om 0:27 heeft Colin f het volgende geschreven:

>
>> You'll probably hate me for this but... supposing playlists worked
>> like parts do? I mean, you can play parts in series starting at the
>> first you hold down and ending at the last you hold down.
>
>> If playlists worked the same way you could have the same flexible
>> interaction that would feel intuitive because it's used elsewhere. You
>> could select each step individually and it would play the pattern
>> (along with any transpositions and chg mode) but if you selected two
>> or more they would play round and round with the repeat setting coming
>> into place in the same way as parts...
>
> I think I see where you're coming from Paul.
>
> OK, how about we think of playlist steps as 'pattern selections', and 
> the
> current pattern selection is chosen by pressing the step keys 9 to 16 
> in
> playlist (to be renamed 'pattern selection') edit.
> Holding one step then pressing another would enable a 'pattern 
> selection
> chain', equivalent to a playlist with a length > 1.
> Each pattern selection can be thought of as having a repeat count and
> transpose setting akin to PXPos and PCReps for parts.
> The relationship between each track and its 'pattern selections' would 
> be
> much the same as the relationship between a bank and its parts.
>
> There would need to be some way to assign the pattern for a particular 
> step
> without having to make that the current step, or upset the chain start 
> end
> endpoint - need to think about that one.
> The underlying data structure would remain the same, except you would 
> need
> to be able to have your playlist start on any step.
> The playlist length variable is currently a full byte but only holds a 
> value
> from 1 to 8, so this would be easy to retrofit without affecting the 
> current
> setup or any saved banks. I would make the high nybble the start 
> 'pattern
> selection', and the low nybble the end. Since the high nybbles are all 
> 0,
> and the low nybbles the playlist lengths, existing playlists would 
> translate
> perfectly into 'pattern selection chains'.
>
> I hope I'm explaining this well enough - I think it may be pretty cool.
>
> Cheers,
> Colin f
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:27:13 -0000, "Colin f" <colin@colinfraser.com>
wrote:

>I think I see where you're coming from Paul.

I had misgivings later about mentioning it because it would be quite a
change from the current method.

>OK, how about we think of playlist steps as 'pattern selections', and the
>current pattern selection is chosen by pressing the step keys 9 to 16 in
>playlist (to be renamed 'pattern selection') edit.
>Holding one step then pressing another would enable a 'pattern selection
>chain', equivalent to a playlist with a length > 1.
>Each pattern selection can be thought of as having a repeat count and
>transpose setting akin to PXPos and PCReps for parts.
>The relationship between each track and its 'pattern selections' would be
>much the same as the relationship between a bank and its parts.

Yep. I guess the main difference being that there are less things you
can do with a playlist step than a part. I mean, each step can be
transposed, repeated and sync to the global bar or not. 

>There would need to be some way to assign the pattern for a particular step
>without having to make that the current step, or upset the chain start end
>endpoint - need to think about that one. 

Yeah, which is why I started to think your previous idea was better
and to regret mentioning this until I'd thought it through... a last
minute thought as I was cleaning my teeth ready for bed.

The Page key could alternate between step play and step edit, I
suppose. 

>The underlying data structure would remain the same, except you would need
>to be able to have your playlist start on any step.
>The playlist length variable is currently a full byte but only holds a value
>from 1 to 8, so this would be easy to retrofit without affecting the current
>setup or any saved banks. I would make the high nybble the start 'pattern
>selection', and the low nybble the end. Since the high nybbles are all 0,
>and the low nybbles the playlist lengths, existing playlists would translate
>perfectly into 'pattern selection chains'.
>
>I hope I'm explaining this well enough - I think it may be pretty cool.

It could be but I worry it may be too distracting for you to plunge
into a change of this magnitude now.

Sorry.... 

Paul

---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk
          Bogus Focus Records - www.BogusFocus.com

When would you likely be accepting orders for one of these bad 
boys.  I see a kit type c in my future as soon as you can take my 
order.

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, pelo reads lists <mailing-
lists@p...> wrote:
> hello Colin and list,
> 
> > Those of you waiting for kits, I'd be interested to hear whether
> > you'd prefer:
> >
> > a) a PCB/CPU kit only
> > b) a PCB/CPU kit plus a full set of keys
> > c) a PCB/CPU kit, full set of keys and pro case
> 
> i'm a lot handier with a soldering iron than any other kind of 
tool 
> (save maybe a pencil), so my vote would be for option c). i 
wouldn't be 
> excited about building my own case. it would also be super keen to 
have 
> a case that racked up as nicely as the one have the computer 
picture 

> of. more rack space than desk space here.
> 
> cheers,
> geoff womeldorff