Analogue-sequencer

I own and Oberheim Xpander, and am stunned when I read accounts of it
being a tough synth to program, or that it is really awesome but the
interface is awkward.  The interface on the Oberheim Xpander is
absolutely wonderful - it has a huge amount of parameters and almost
all of them can be modulated, and you can literally get from anywhere
to anywhere in just two button presses.  Just two, and for most moves
just one!  So you can be adjusting envelope 5's decay and be on the
filter cutoff or vco tune in just one button press, or be on LFO 3's
frequency in two.  This means that after spending a couple days using
it you are super fast at moving around - it becomes like typing.. it
really does. So lots of parameters, but very easy to navigate.  

On the flip side I used to own a Waldorf Microwave XT and no matter
how long you used it, and despite the many, many knobs, the interface
I found difficult for two main reasons.  To really edit it, ie: add
any modulations etc you had to go via the menu system, and this meant
multiple button presses cycling through parameters and if you pressed
the button fast you risked scooting past the parameter you wanted to
edit and having to re-press the button many times to get back there. 
Always a different number of button presses to get there depending on
where you were starting from etc.  Modulations were in matrix format
which is not as intuitive as having the modulation attached to the
parameter like in the Xpander where you simply press the button under
the parameter and the up to five modulations sources for that
parameter instantly display and can be adjusted.. and etc..  So it was
powerful, and in time you could get a lot programmed, but because this
process was slower, you could never hope to really perform adjustments
of these more deep (is modulation routing really that deep?) aspects
of the synth because you could never be perfectly sure as to how
quickly you could get an adjustment or addition to the sound done.

How does the P3 with all its many parameters and capabilities rate in
this category?  Do people find they get really fast moving around in
it or is it always a very conscious step by step process to add and
adjust tracks.  

I really do appreciate you time and help on this.

thanks,
Greg.

"circuitsea" <circuitsea@...> wrote:
>
> I own and Oberheim Xpander, and am stunned when I read accounts of it
> being a tough synth to program, or that it is really awesome but the
> interface is awkward.  

> On the flip side I used to own a Waldorf Microwave XT and no matter
> how long you used it, and despite the many, many knobs, the interface
> I found difficult for two main reasons.  

> How does the P3 with all its many parameters and capabilities rate in
> this category?  

The Waldorf Wave has an interface similar to the Expander - pressing a
module button immediately brings up the proper page with all the
necessary info on that module - any knob, such as filter cutoff, could
be patch to any modulation source.

The issue with the XT is that it doesn't have a direct page button
that jumps directly to the page that you want.  You have to negotiate
the page matrix, first pressing the correct column button and then
repeatably pressing it until the proper display comes up.  This means
that you are spending a great deal of time navigating on the XT,
compared to the Expander - which has a simple one button access to
each page.

Unfortunately, (IMHO), the P3 accesses its pages via a matrix, which
is subdivided like the XT, with each feature page accessible only
through going to the top level, entering the proper mode and toggling
through the pages to find the proper page.

That having been said, I still have my XT because of what it does. 
And I think that the P3 is also worth the inconvenience.  The P3
simply does a lot of things that no other sequencer does - period.

Earlier in this forum, I made a suggestion of committing midi notes to
be assignable to access pages, so that one could use a midi keyboard
or drum pad controller to be dedicated page buttons, essentially
transforming the p3 from an XT into an Expander....

Now, if there were more of us were interested in this direct midi
button access to each page, I would love anyone else to speak up!

This would really make the P3 WAY more usable in live performance than
it already is.

Gary

circuitsea wrote:

>How does the P3 with all its many parameters and capabilities rate in
>this category?  Do people find they get really fast moving around in
>it or is it always a very conscious step by step process to add and
>adjust tracks.  
>  
>
It's a good question and my answer may be slightly biased because the P3 
has opened up avenues for me live that were previously closed. I 
therefore bathe in a warm glow of appreciation each time I use it.
As for conscious - I work on mine, mostly, stoned so it has to be 
something I can use without thinking. This is the only reason I sold my 
DSI Evolver and Waldorf Pulse - couldn't program them when wasted. The 
P3 I could play if rendered into a pile of drool in the corner of the 
stage...

So yes, the P3 *has* an initial learning curve. This is mostly because 
it packs in a hell of a lot of features, many of which have evolved over 
time. So at first you do get confused over simple stuff like how to edit 
a pattern or how to string two patterns together to make something 
that's 32 steps long etc. The panel doesn't have too many labels and 
those it has have arcane names like "Func"... no avoiding some learning 
to get started, sorry.

But after a while, when you are able to find your way around the menus, 
it does sort of click. I've had an Xpander too and a Microwave XT - so I 
know what you mean. In fact I found the Microwave 2 more logical and 
faster than the XT despite its lack of knob real-estate. And here is 
where I find the P3 very fast - having a small keypad and those 
great-quality trigger buttons and knobs gives an interface that, when 
learned, your fingers can fly over way, way faster than you can 
physically travel over a far larger, knobby surface (especially if your 
eyes need to keep zipping back to the display). I have therefore become 
pretty fast with the P3 - so much so that I would eagerly improvise an 
entire set from a blank P3 live and in front of an audience. And I mean 
not just banging in notes looper-style but adding auxilliary events, 
randomisation, cool variations. I'm not saying this ability will come 
over night - I play my P3s every day - even more than I play my 
keyboards - and I still encounter some things that slow me down 
slightly, such as the order of some menus. But I don't even have to 
think anymore, I can just do it.

So I don't want to paint an impossibly glowy picture - I've seen first 
time users and know they don't always get the way it all hangs together. 
I think the updated manual, tutorial video and help from this forum will 
make all the difference - but this is the deepest sequencer I know of 
(and it'll get deeper and more powerful yet!) and I believe we have a 
good compromise with user interface and functionality. If the P3 does 
well (and any magazine actually reviews it) I think Colin can totally 
rewrite the concept of the step sequencer...

OK, enough gushing from me, check out some of our (JIC) live tracks to 
hear what can be done in a spontaneous  P3 improvisation. There's a 
couple I'd recommend: "Greg The Moose" and "A Wreck No Phobia" from the 
JIC site.

Hope this helps,

Paul

---
Paul Nagle / Soft Room Music / Bogus Focus Records / Binar / Headshock / The Joint Intelligence Committee
        www.softroom.co.uk / www.BogusFocus.com / www.JointIntelligenceCommittee.com 
** New JIC Live CD available at the BogusFocus site now!! **

Paul,

Your explanation is a valid argument that I agree with - the P3 is an
amazing device that is worth learning and mastering and it has opened
new and interesting avenues for creative sequencing in live circumstances.

It is just that when, in order to master the device for performance,
the majority of "chops" necessary are navigational skills -
remembering where you are, knowing how to exit to the main page and
access the next mode to get to the next needed page.  The structure is
a tree architecture, where pages are sequentially selected from a
common access point. 

If one could put the device into auto-save and simply, with a single
keystroke select a specific page, it would revolutionize the P3's
operation.  I suggested midi notes in lieu of more buttons on the
panel - which then implies the opportunity to record you actual live
performances on the P3, or even create subroutines from controllers in
the midi domain.

I have been a long time Synclavier owner/player.  The Synclavier, like
the P3, is based on the Main Page format - one selects ENTER to return
to the Main Page to further access other pages of controls.

When Macros were first implimented, allowing for one button access to
each page, (using the Function keys on a Qwerty keyboard), it reduced
the number of keystrokes by literally hundreds in an hour of working -
seriously improving work flow on a major scale.  Suddenly, what
originally was 6 keystrokes became one - which meant that in the time
that you then made 6 keystrokes, it was eqivalent to 36 keystrokes in
the system before the macros were implimented.

I have had all of this stuff (Matrix 12, XT, etc.), too.  I think that
the P3 is more like the Synclavier than those synths - it is far more
conceptually complicated than a synthesizer.  Especially when one
editting a multi-pattern, polyphonic sequence, it is a challenge to
get into pattern edit from playlist edit in time to edit the
particular sequence while it is running.  It take alot of practicing
to memorize the key sequences - not that it is impossible, of course,
but I think that one button access who make this type of editting a
breeze.

Of course, I submit this opinion with all due respect - this is
already a tremendous leap forward.  I am just trying to "nudge" the P3
into the next universe, where I can use it as a really time keyboard
alternative....

Gary

Gary Chang wrote:

>Of course, I submit this opinion with all due respect - this is
>already a tremendous leap forward.  I am just trying to "nudge" the P3
>into the next universe, where I can use it as a really time keyboard
>alternative....
>  
>
Wouldn't argue with any of your points dude, implementation of something 
simple like a common Exit key and dedicated playlist edit and pattern 
edit keys would be something I'd push for in any future sequencer. 
Similarly, a set of dedicated track/part buttons would be ace as would 
more dedicated buttons for various things or user-programmable 
functionality. As for more remote control, yeah, I think this is 
something Nick Rothwell was pushing for too and only Colin knows how far 
he can take the current OS in that direction. Initially I'd settle for 
remote control of the knobs in any mode and perhaps remote mode 
switching, part switching, remote transmission of scales and so on. 
Personally, I'm more into direct interaction with gear rather than 
remote control via some other kit; the remote side is just another layer 
of complication for my tiny, befuddled brain to cope with.

All good stuff.

Paul

-- 
---
Paul Nagle / Soft Room Music / Bogus Focus Records / Binar / Headshock / The Joint Intelligence Committee
        www.softroom.co.uk / www.BogusFocus.com / www.JointIntelligenceCommittee.com 
** New JIC Live CD available at the BogusFocus site now!! **

Couple points:

I'm also one of those people that has bought (and sold) gear because 
of the interface.  Still have the Matrix 12, Wave, JP-8, etc.  
(although I still kept the Cyclone despite the interface.  What is 
does is just too cool to pass up, and the P3 is a lot like that in 
some regards).

The P3 was one of the hardest buying decisions for me.  I downloaded 
the manual, read it and decided not to buy it - too much info packed 
into too sparse an interface.

I revisited it monts later and started bugging Paul N and Duncan 
since both of them have/had Notrons and P3s.  I think the Notron 
gives you a lot of realtime interaction w/o much thought or fuss (if 
you grok their overall approach to things).

After much hesitation I decided to spring for a P3.  What helped me 
get started was reading (and re-reading) the manual for about a month 
before the P3 arrived.

I'm still not nearly as fast as the more experieced on the list, but 
I do find that for pattern/song creation it's pretty easy.  When I 
want to do more advanced stuff I need to either scroll through the 
I/F or look in the manual (which I find easier since I get more of an 
explanation).

One reason I cut down the amount of gear around here was that there 
was too much new/different stuff to learn.  If the P3 is going to be 
your primary sequencing tool then you'll learn it fast enough.  If 
it's just one of many sequencing tools in your arsenal it will take 
much longer.

Use it every day and you'll be comfortable.

On 11 Feb 2006, at 11:18, Paul Nagle wrote:

> As for more remote control, yeah, I think this is
> something Nick Rothwell was pushing for too

Not necessarily. It really depends on whether the P3 is a performance  
interface or a box for generating information (audio or otherwise).  
Since the P3 interface seems designed to be right there at one's  
fingers, all the time, then so long as one can navigate its controls  
and program it directly without hassle, there's little need to  
automate the process.

It's similar to the whole editor/librarian arguments of the 80's and  
90's: if the instrument is right in front of you all the time, and if  
it has a nice user interface, and if one has no need to automate or  
facilitate interaction with it, then there's not much use for an  
editor, and I think far too many crap editing packages have been  
brought into the world over the last twenty years.

(There's almost always a use for a librarian, since making backups to  
a computer is usually cheaper and safer than using any kind of built- 
in storage, and since GUI's are often pretty weak when it comes to  
patch management, and since not many devices provide facilities for  
swapping and sharing patches. I could imagine a device which did not  
require librarian software, but it would be a rather odd beast.)

	-- N.


   nick rothwell -- composition, systems, performance -- http:// 
www.cassiel.com

> It is just that when, in order to master the device for performance,
> the majority of "chops" necessary are navigational skills -
> remembering where you are, knowing how to exit to the main page and
> access the next mode to get to the next needed page.  The structure is
> a tree architecture, where pages are sequentially selected from a
> common access point. 

This is one aspect of P3 that I agree is less than ideal.
I tried to keep the menu depth as low as possible - under the top levels of
play mode, pattern edit and playlist edit, there is only really one level of
menu for most other options. But there a lot of pages.
It's a bi-product of the way P3 was designed - I simply didn't know where it
would end up when I first laid out the front panel.
It was just supposed to be a simple analogue-style pattern sequencer.
Now that I know what it does, I could build a much larger interface, with
dedicated sections for pattern edit, play mode, and playlist edit, each with
dedicated keys for the softkey functions in these modes.
But it would be huge and expensive, and not everyone would want it.
 
Something I thought of a while back but only just got round to implementing
is to provide quicker menu access using PAGE in combination with the step
keys. At the moment this just applies to pattern edit, but I can extend it
to play mode if it proves popular.
v3.1.006b40 is in Yahoo files now.

In pattern edit there are 8 softkey pages. PAGE cycles through 4 of these,
and FUNC+PAGE toggles this selection to the other 4.
For direct access, if you press a step key from 1 to 8 while *holding* the
PAGE key, it will jump immediately to that page.

So if you want to access 'Acc Conf' from the tbase page, rather than
pressing FUNC+PAGE, PAGE, PAGE, PAGE, you would press PAGE+8.
I've been playing this for a while, and I'm tempted to lose the old method
altogether.
To select a new page in the old method, you have to know both where you are,
and where you are going.
The number of key presses required varies depending on these two factors.
With the direct access, you are always right there with a two-key press.
A label along the front of the step keys, with
"EDIT PAGE: tbase / direction / cut&paste / shift / rnd note / rnd upper /
sculpt / config"
would probably help the unfamiliar find their way around too.
Let me know what you think...

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com

I totally understand that with design there are trade-offs, and I also
don't mind a learning curve - even a very steep one.  But what I find
is that some designs (and I did feel this way about the XT which I had
for years) are just incapable of giving you `traction' so-to-speak. 
What added to this with the XT was the exponential curve effect of the
encoders, where the faster you turned them the further their effect
would be - so a quick quarter turn would move you very very far and a
slow quarter turn would not move you far in adjusting a parameter. 
That ensured that you could never quite know what you were going to do
to the sound, and if you wanted to perform rhythmic adjustments and
repeat what you were doing, it was absolutely impossible.. I felt like
was moving around in a very slippery environment both with the matrix
of patch editing and with the knobs themselves.  And no mater how much
time I spent with the interface, it just had to be that way.  

Judging by the responses so far it seems like this is not the way
things feel once you are used to using the P3.  Is that right?  Things
like key combinations are great too in my mind because you learn the
ones you use very fast, and once you do, then you have predictable
speeds at which you can move from one place to another and develop
that sense of traction in the environment that I found impossible to
achieve with the XT.  

The problem of course is that you can never know this stuff absolutely
for sure until you work with the thing for a while, and I'm about a 45
hour drive from Analogue Haven.. if traffic is good.  Reading the
manual gives me some ideas, but hearing your honest thoughts on this
subject is really very helpful.  Thanks.

I think the remote midi 'screen jumping' buttons sounds interesting,
but I also agree somewhat with the opinions expressed about focusing
ones attention to the front panel of a device and not being split
between two panels.  Again more trade-offs to try to weight out, and I
know how tough that can be sometimes.  I just finished unplugging and
removing everything in my studio in order to set up again in a more
ergonomic fashion - trust me, right now I know all about weighing out
the advantages and the drawbacks!  (but I do like how things are set
up now!)

Greg

> What added to this with the XT was the exponential curve effect of the
> encoders, where the faster you turned them the further their effect
> would be - so a quick quarter turn would move you very very far and a
> slow quarter turn would not move you far in adjusting a parameter. 
> That ensured that you could never quite know what you were going to do
> to the sound, and if you wanted to perform rhythmic adjustments and
> repeat what you were doing, it was absolutely impossible..

That's one of the main reasons I didn't use encoders on P3.
If the encoders had more than 20 or 30 steps per revolution, acceleration
alogrithms wouldn't be needed, but encoders like that cost big bucks.
The infinite pots Alesis used on the Ion seem like the best alternative, but
I haven't found a supplier of those to try them.

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "tmoravan" <tom@...> wrote:
> Use it every day and you'll be comfortable.

Getting there slowly. Not everyday, but everytime I fire up the beast,
a new song pops out like magic. 

The sign of a good interface is one that allows beginners to be
functional (hell, I sounded like Vince Clarke today to my great
delight) and power users to be efficient. I think the P3 does that.

I also think that P3 Tools adds a second user interface, albeit
non-realtime. And it seems to have everything within a click or two of
each other.

The 6-person company I work for is just starting a rather large
redesign of a big company's customer care (call center) application
user interface, moving from client/server to a web platform. We just
spent 4 months researching how the agents on the phone use the
application, and how the customers calling on the phone use the
agents. (We actually went to the call centers and people's homes to
videotape hours of calls) From this "ethnographic" research, we
determined how the UI was helping or hindering the agent (or
ultimately the person on the phone) do what they had to do. And now
we're using that research to guide our design of the new interface.

That all being said, what I would have given to point a DV Cam closeup
at each P3 at Paul N.'s JIC gig in London last year and pull in 21
hours of (combined) video to be able to do a task analysis of JIC and
the P3 interface during that gig! It'd be fun to know what buttons got
pushed most often and which menu items got a workout.

-Jim

"Colin f" <colin@...> wrote:
>
> A label along the front of the step keys, with
> "EDIT PAGE: tbase / direction / cut&paste / shift / rnd note / rnd
upper /
> sculpt / config"
> would probably help the unfamiliar find their way around too.
> Let me know what you think...
> 

Great, Colin!  SO, now, by changing the Function, Play Edit, and Page
Buttons to Pattern Edit, Play Mode, and Playlist Edit buttons, you can
directly enter an actual page with a single keystroke! Now any page
can be immediately accessed by holding down the MODE key and hitting
the page number key.  IMHO, you've made a major breakthrough!!!

Gary

> SO, now, by changing the Function, Play Edit, and Page
> Buttons to Pattern Edit, Play Mode, and Playlist Edit buttons, you can
> directly enter an actual page with a single keystroke! Now any page
> can be immediately accessed by holding down the MODE key and hitting
> the page number key.  IMHO, you've made a major breakthrough!!!

That's not quite what I've done.
You need to be in edit mode before PAGE+<step key> accesses the pages for
it.

If you consider play mode the top level, FUNC+track selects playlist edit
for the chosen track.
There are no further levels of menu below the playlist screen.
Another press of FUNC returns you to play mode, via save/back/lose.
PLAY/EDIT+track takes you to pattern edit for the current pattern on a
track.
From there, all pattern edit pages are a PAGE+step key away.
PLAY/EDIT again returns you to play mode, via save/lose/back.

What this change does is to eliminate the multiple presses of PAGE that were
needed in pattern edit.
I'll apply the same change to play mode, so all the pages there are directly
accessible.

If had more keys, I would be able to have dedicated PLAY MODE, EDIT MODE and
PLAYLIST EDIT keys.
But FUNC has another purpose in pattern edit mode, so it couldn't be used to
switch directly to playlist edit.

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com

Hi Colin,

I am frequently amazed not just by the P3 but by your reponsiveness to
people's individuals comments and needs - and i think it takes some balls to
admit the unfinished nature of the P3 and it takes respect to listen the way
you do. I really appreciate it, and it is soooooo different from the
attitude of the most music tech  companies (Yamaha, Akai, anyone? )

For me the P3 has been the most fantastically creative tool and i doubt I
would ever sell it, but the interface is taking a long time to learn and is
not quite fast enough for me, but I think if one day you made a 16 track P3
with dedicated controllers and rows for each channel (and maybe a dedicated
drum channel) I personally would be very interested in it ...obviously it
would be expensive, but I suspect it would be the greatest hardware
sequencer ever made

Richard


----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin f" <colin@colinfraser.com>
To: <analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 12:46 PM
Subject: RE: [analogue-sequencer] Re: top speed - interface questions


>
> > SO, now, by changing the Function, Play Edit, and Page
> > Buttons to Pattern Edit, Play Mode, and Playlist Edit buttons, you can
> > directly enter an actual page with a single keystroke! Now any page
> > can be immediately accessed by holding down the MODE key and hitting
> > the page number key.  IMHO, you've made a major breakthrough!!!
>
> That's not quite what I've done.
> You need to be in edit mode before PAGE+<step key> accesses the pages for
> it.
>
> If you consider play mode the top level, FUNC+track selects playlist edit
> for the chosen track.
> There are no further levels of menu below the playlist screen.
> Another press of FUNC returns you to play mode, via save/back/lose.
> PLAY/EDIT+track takes you to pattern edit for the current pattern on a
> track.
> From there, all pattern edit pages are a PAGE+step key away.
> PLAY/EDIT again returns you to play mode, via save/lose/back.
>
> What this change does is to eliminate the multiple presses of PAGE that
were
> needed in pattern edit.
> I'll apply the same change to play mode, so all the pages there are
directly
> accessible.
>
> If had more keys, I would be able to have dedicated PLAY MODE, EDIT MODE
and
> PLAYLIST EDIT keys.
> But FUNC has another purpose in pattern edit mode, so it couldn't be used
to

> switch directly to playlist edit.
>
> Best regards,
> Colin Fraser
> Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
> http://www.sequentix.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Colin,

I am about to recieve my P3 kit. I planning the front panel design 
right now. I was wondering how far along you are with the PAGE & 
stepkey interface, so I can design the panel with the proper 
lettering for the P3. 

Many thanks,
RM

>  
> Something I thought of a while back but only just got round to 
implementing
> is to provide quicker menu access using PAGE in combination with 
the step
> keys. At the moment this just applies to pattern edit, but I can 
extend it
> to play mode if it proves popular.
> v3.1.006b40 is in Yahoo files now.
> 
> In pattern edit there are 8 softkey pages. PAGE cycles through 4 
of these,
> and FUNC+PAGE toggles this selection to the other 4.
> For direct access, if you press a step key from 1 to 8 while 
*holding* the
> PAGE key, it will jump immediately to that page.
> 
> So if you want to access 'Acc Conf' from the tbase page, rather 
than
> pressing FUNC+PAGE, PAGE, PAGE, PAGE, you would press PAGE+8.
> I've been playing this for a while, and I'm tempted to lose the 
old method
> altogether.
> To select a new page in the old method, you have to know both 
where you are,
> and where you are going.
> The number of key presses required varies depending on these two 
factors.
> With the direct access, you are always right there with a two-key 
press.
> A label along the front of the step keys, with
> "EDIT PAGE: tbase / direction / cut&paste / shift / rnd note / rnd 
upper /

> sculpt / config"
> would probably help the unfamiliar find their way around too.
> Let me know what you think...
> 
> Best regards,
> Colin Fraser
> Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
> http://www.sequentix.com
>

> I am about to recieve my P3 kit. I planning the front panel design 
> right now. I was wondering how far along you are with the PAGE & 
> stepkey interface, so I can design the panel with the proper 
> lettering for the P3. 

I *think* the PAGE + step assignments that are there now are likely to stay.
The play mode and pattern edit pages have been pretty static for a long
time.
And I have left one play page slot blank, for future expansion...

The one area that might change is the order of event groupings.
Some people have suggested it might be easier to remember them in
alphabetical order.

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com

> Colin f wrote:
> > The one area that might change is the order of event groupings.
> > Some people have suggested it might be easier to remember them in
> > alphabetical order.
> 
> Not sure. I'm usually in favor of logical grouping.

I'll take that as a vote for the status quo...
Which is easier for me, so gets my vote too.

Best regards,
Colin Fraser
Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
http://www.sequentix.com

Hi Colin

Colin f wrote:
> The one area that might change is the order of event groupings.
> Some people have suggested it might be easier to remember them in
> alphabetical order.

Not sure. I'm usually in favor of logical grouping.

But then, I've printed a label with all the menu and even shortcuts...

Bye
Martin