Analogue-sequencer

Folks,

There is a news update just posted to the Sequentix web page, which 
I'll quickly summarise here...

I am ceasing production of P3 after the current run has sold out.

The production cost of P3 in its current form has proved to be much 
too expensive.
With the benefit of experience, I believe I can design a replacement 
that will be more efficient to produce, and which can be assembled 
entirely under sub-contract.
But I'm not able to devote the necessary time to that adventure 
while I'm still putting P3s together.
I expect to take a few more weeks to assemble the remaining units I 
have parts for, and after that, there will be a hiatus of at least a 
few months while I get the new unit ready for production.

This does not mean the end of support for P3.
I fully intend to finish off the remaining few things I want to add 
to the P3 OS, and will be just as fastidious in clearing up any 
unlikely bugs that may emerge.

The last few P3s will be available though the usual suppliers, at 
the same unrealistically low price as before.

I'd like to thank all P3 owners for their support and feedback over 
the past year, and welcome any suggestions you might have for the 
future Sequentix sequencer.

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

Really sad news! This is the best sequencer I ever met. I'm really worried about how small companies doing great things like this are quiting the bussiness, some other from USA don't ship to Europe due to the ROHS. Will all of we be working with software only in a next future? I hope not.

Thanks a lot Colin for your brilliant work.

Miguel Mendoza.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sequentix 
  To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 12:25 PM
  Subject: [analogue-sequencer] Sequentix News


  Folks,

  There is a news update just posted to the Sequentix web page, which 
  I'll quickly summarise here...

  I am ceasing production of P3 after the current run has sold out.

  The production cost of P3 in its current form has proved to be much 
  too expensive.
  With the benefit of experience, I believe I can design a replacement 
  that will be more efficient to produce, and which can be assembled 
  entirely under sub-contract.
  But I'm not able to devote the necessary time to that adventure 
  while I'm still putting P3s together.
  I expect to take a few more weeks to assemble the remaining units I 
  have parts for, and after that, there will be a hiatus of at least a 
  few months while I get the new unit ready for production.

  This does not mean the end of support for P3.
  I fully intend to finish off the remaining few things I want to add 
  to the P3 OS, and will be just as fastidious in clearing up any 
  unlikely bugs that may emerge.

  The last few P3s will be available though the usual suppliers, at 
  the same unrealistically low price as before.

  I'd like to thank all P3 owners for their support and feedback over 
  the past year, and welcome any suggestions you might have for the 
  future Sequentix sequencer.

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



   

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

Hi Miguel

Miguel Mendoza wrote:
> Really sad news! This is the best sequencer I ever met. I'm really worried about how small companies doing great things like this are quiting the bussiness, some other from USA don't ship to Europe due to the ROHS. Will all of we be working with software only in a next future? I hope not.

Erm, Colin didn't mention anything about quitting - on the contrary! 
It's about making his time available for the successor of the P3 - I'm 
definitely looking forward to what the future brings!

Bye
Martin

-- 
http://www.navisto.ch
http://www.myspace.com/navisto

P4....

bring it on bitches....

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Martin Naef 
  To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:12 AM
  Subject: Re: [analogue-sequencer] Sequentix News


  Hi Miguel

  Miguel Mendoza wrote:
  > Really sad news! This is the best sequencer I ever met. I'm really worried about how small companies doing great things like this are quiting the bussiness, some other from USA don't ship to Europe due to the ROHS. Will all of we be working with software only in a next future? I hope not.

  Erm, Colin didn't mention anything about quitting - on the contrary! 
  It's about making his time available for the successor of the P3 - I'm 
  definitely looking forward to what the future brings!

  Bye
  Martin

  -- 
  http://www.navisto.ch
  http://www.myspace.com/navisto


   

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

Well, maybe I made my own interpretation, let's wait and hope that something good is coming.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Martin Naef 
  To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [analogue-sequencer] Sequentix News


  Hi Miguel

  Miguel Mendoza wrote:
  > Really sad news! This is the best sequencer I ever met. I'm really worried about how small companies doing great things like this are quiting the bussiness, some other from USA don't ship to Europe due to the ROHS. Will all of we be working with software only in a next future? I hope not.

  Erm, Colin didn't mention anything about quitting - on the contrary! 
  It's about making his time available for the successor of the P3 - I'm 
  definitely looking forward to what the future brings!

  Bye
  Martin

  -- 
  http://www.navisto.ch
  http://www.myspace.com/navisto


   

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

> Miguel Mendoza wrote:
> > Really sad news! This is the best sequencer I ever met. I'm 
> really worried about how small companies doing great things 
> like this are quiting the bussiness, some other from USA 
> don't ship to Europe due to the ROHS. Will all of we be 
> working with software only in a next future? I hope not.
> 
> Erm, Colin didn't mention anything about quitting - on the contrary! 
> It's about making his time available for the successor of the 
> P3 - I'm 
> definitely looking forward to what the future brings!

Yes, I'm certainly not planning to quit yet.
But RoHS did have an unexpected side-effect - soldering by hand with
lead-free solder is unbearably slow, and made it certain I couldn't carry on
assembling units myself.

Possibly more likely to kill off small-scale electronics manufacture than
RoHS is its friend, WEEE.

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment directive becomes law in the
UK next year.
This directive makes manufacturers responsible for ensuring electronic
equipment is recycled at the end of its life.
While that is not a bad idea, the proposed UK implementation will require
manufacturers to join a 'disposal scheme'.
They will pay into the scheme some amount related to the amount of product
they sell.

Where this may become a problem is if there is a high minimum level of
payment required.
That could make low-volume production uneconomical.

The directive is really aimed at makers of disposable items, like mobile
phones etc.
I can't imagine anyone with a P3 will decide if they no longer wish to use
it that they will just return it for disposal.
Can you imagine anyone sending their TB303 back to Roland ?

So while RoHS is not really a problem, the cost of WEEE will be passed onto
buyers of all electronic equipment, even if they will keep that equipment
for many years, and sell it on to another user when they are finished with
it.
It's sad that so many things have become disposable in this way.
We should really be looking to extend the life of the things we need, rather
than just trying to reduce the enviromental impact of needless
over-consumption.
Rant over ;-)

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

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "sequentix" <colin@...> wrote:
> I am ceasing production of P3 after the current run has sold out.

Will that make like 150 production units? Man, I love owning 1/75th of
an entire product inventory. I wish I had done that for the Mini Moog
and Les Paul guitars;^)

> I'd like to thank all P3 owners for their support and feedback over 
> the past year, and welcome any suggestions you might have for the 
> future Sequentix sequencer.

No, thank you!

Well, with two of the beasts in my arsenal, I should exhaust the
possibilities and have to start repeating myself in 2026.

My only suggestion would be for a 16 track system (so I could make use
of my 16 channel multitimbral synths) and a memory card system for
extra/external storage of banks. Oh, and while I'm at it, a way to
bring in one bank at a time and build the banks in the order you need
for a gig. Maybe enough memory on board to be able to shift banks
around as needed. And a song function for stringing together or
preprogramming a series of parts (so I push play and the whole song
plays out of the P3).

Stop me P4 I get carried away;^)

-Jim

> Will that make like 150 production units? Man, I love owning 1/75th of
> an entire product inventory. I wish I had done that for the Mini Moog
> and Les Paul guitars;^)

There will be 137 production units in total.
I built 24 units in pre-production form, so that's 161 ready-built units
that have left here.
Another 86 kits have gone out, though how many of them have been assembled I
can't say.
I'd guess there must be somewhere over 200 P3s in existence.

> My only suggestion would be for a 16 track system (so I could make use
> of my 16 channel multitimbral synths) and a memory card system for
> extra/external storage of banks. Oh, and while I'm at it, a way to
> bring in one bank at a time and build the banks in the order you need
> for a gig. Maybe enough memory on board to be able to shift banks
> around as needed. And a song function for stringing together or
> preprogramming a series of parts (so I push play and the whole song
> plays out of the P3).

Without wanting to give too much away, you're getting warm ;-)
 
> Stop me P4 I get carried away;^)

One thing that won't feature on the next sequencer will be the name "P4".
Google on P3 and you get 60 million irrelevant pages.
For P4 that rises to nearer 90 million.
Whereas if you Google on Sequentix, the vast majority of hits refer to the
P3 Sequencer.
We'll need to come up with a more distinctive name...

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

>>One thing that won't feature on the next sequencer will be the name
"P4". Google on P3 and you get 60 million irrelevant pages. For P4
that rises to nearer 90 million.
Whereas if you Google on Sequentix, the vast majority of hits refer to
the P3 Sequencer.<<

I disagree. if someone's really looking for "our" p3, they're probably
bright enough to feed google a few more clues via the "advanced
search" page instead of just typing "p3" & trawling the million hits....
typing "p3", "sequencer" & "midi" into the "all of these words" box
yielded almost 60,000 hits, but the right ones were at the top, &
that's without mention of either "analogue" or "sequentix", which
would be harder words to get right in other languages.
now, if someone's too dumb to use google like this, they aren't going
to get the best out of something like the p3, are they?
anyway, someone's made sure it's in wikipedia, so that's that.
[ends rant]

duncan.

Duncan,

That's correct, if they are really looking for it. But if someone has
just heard of "something called the p3" and wants to find it, that's
what they'll search on.

This isn't about smart person vs. dumb person, it's simply about the
desire to have a unique name. This is very important for establishing
brand recognition and a simple sense that a product is unique and
different. If the next Sequentix (which is a great name, by the way)
sequencer were called the P4 not only would the name get lost in the
mass of other P4s out there (Pentium 4, etc), it would just sound like
the P3 plus some.

I think Colin is right on track with the idea of a new name. The
problem is finding one. :) (I could think of a few, but they aren't
good. The product name should be equally as good as the company name,
I think.)

-Steve


--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "ferrograph632" 

> I disagree. if someone's really looking for "our" p3, they're probably
> bright enough to feed google a few more clues via the "advanced
> search" page instead of just typing "p3" & trawling the million hits....
> typing "p3", "sequencer" & "midi" into the "all of these words" box
> yielded almost 60,000 hits, but the right ones were at the top, &
> that's without mention of either "analogue" or "sequentix", which
> would be harder words to get right in other languages.
> now, if someone's too dumb to use google like this, they aren't going
> to get the best out of something like the p3, are they?
> anyway, someone's made sure it's in wikipedia, so that's that.
> [ends rant]

Dear Colin,

It's a very sad message you send out indeed. As a musician who makes music for over 30 
years the P3 realy was a dream come true.

Hoping to buy you a drink or lunch at the Unconvention .... !

Martin ( I.O.U ... ! )

I think sequentix is a great name, like you pointed out, just build on that!

Last model was the Sequentix P3, next one can be Sequentix ?whatever?
Each model just has its own name, under the Sequentix brand....

seems easy enough...

Sequentix Unity
Sequentix Isis
Sequentix P303
Sequentix GT
Sequentix RS
Sequentix Sequencer - ha!

good luck with the naming colin, that the least of your worries! haha

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Steve 
  To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 9:44 AM
  Subject: [analogue-sequencer] Re: Sequentix News


  Duncan,

  That's correct, if they are really looking for it. But if someone has
  just heard of "something called the p3" and wants to find it, that's
  what they'll search on.

  This isn't about smart person vs. dumb person, it's simply about the
  desire to have a unique name. This is very important for establishing
  brand recognition and a simple sense that a product is unique and
  different. If the next Sequentix (which is a great name, by the way)
  sequencer were called the P4 not only would the name get lost in the
  mass of other P4s out there (Pentium 4, etc), it would just sound like
  the P3 plus some.

  I think Colin is right on track with the idea of a new name. The
  problem is finding one. :) (I could think of a few, but they aren't
  good. The product name should be equally as good as the company name,
  I think.)

  -Steve

  --- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "ferrograph632" 
  > I disagree. if someone's really looking for "our" p3, they're probably
  > bright enough to feed google a few more clues via the "advanced
  > search" page instead of just typing "p3" & trawling the million hits....
  > typing "p3", "sequencer" & "midi" into the "all of these words" box
  > yielded almost 60,000 hits, but the right ones were at the top, &
  > that's without mention of either "analogue" or "sequentix", which
  > would be harder words to get right in other languages.
  > now, if someone's too dumb to use google like this, they aren't going
  > to get the best out of something like the p3, are they?
  > anyway, someone's made sure it's in wikipedia, so that's that.
  > [ends rant]



   

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

On 9/6/06, Colin Fraser <colin@sequentix.com> wrote:
>
>  We'll need to come up with a more distinctive name...

Ooh! Contest!!!

- F.

> >  We'll need to come up with a more distinctive name...
> 
> Ooh! Contest!!!

I thought I might have a contest, get lots of great ideas in, then just go
with "P3 - The Next Generation".

;-)


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

Can I add to the wants list more flashing lights? :-)

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com [mailto:analogue-
> >sequencer@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin Fraser
> >Sent: 06 September 2006 10:05
> >To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: RE: [analogue-sequencer] Re: Sequentix News
> >
> >> My only suggestion would be for a 16 track system (so I could make use
> >> of my 16 channel multitimbral synths) and a memory card system for
> >> extra/external storage of banks. Oh, and while I'm at it, a way to
> >> bring in one bank at a time and build the banks in the order you need
> >> for a gig. Maybe enough memory on board to be able to shift banks
> >> around as needed. And a song function for stringing together or
> >> preprogramming a series of parts (so I push play and the whole song
> >> plays out of the P3).
> >
> >Without wanting to give too much away, you're getting warm ;-)
> >

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Colin Fraser" <colin@...>
wrote:

> I thought I might have a contest, get lots of great ideas in, then
just go
> with "P3 - The Next Generation".
> 
> ;-)

No no, have a contest and the winner gets the first new machine off
the production line ;)

Oh well, just a suggestion. Anyway congratulations on the success of
the P3, I think we're all looking forward to see what you come up with
next. No pressure or anything...

"A few months?"

So, frantically e-mailing Analogue Haven and then pre-ordering one of
the final P3's to be sent to the U.S. was a little pre-mature?

Oh well. ;)

The new product should be called the Sequentix Stepaliser. Or the
Stepulator. Stepathon? Sequentix Steptrix? Say that 3 times fast...

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "timetrippad"
<muellermclaren@...> wrote:

> 
> The new product should be called the Sequentix Stepaliser. Or the
> Stepulator. Stepathon? Sequentix Steptrix? Say that 3 times fast...

The Sequentix Stepwerk!

With my like of simple, recognizable names I'd be apt to pick
something like the 'Sequentix Next'. It captures the spirit of the
next generation of sequencer, and the word doesn't appear (based on my
initial checking) to have any poor meanings in most major languages.
It's also a short enough English word to be understood by most
everyone who's had basic first-year English classes.

Also, there don't appear to be any other sequencers called 'Next', and
the name harkens back to earlier technical days (fitting in with the
analog controls -- if those are maintained) while still sounding
somewhat futuristic.

But that's just my late afternoon caffeinated rambling. :)

-Steve


--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, Martin Naef <lists@...>
> My vote is on Sequentulator. ;-)

Hi there,

my wish for a P4 would simply be double memory: 24 Banks with 8
Patterns, 16 Tracks with 8 Aux-Tracks, 16 Playlists. Thats it.
Everything else is perfect for me. 

And maybe as pure luxury some kind of storage device, like a smart
media card.

Stoffel

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Stoffel" <chr.stoffel@...>
wrote:

> my wish for a P4 would simply be double memory: 24 Banks with 8
> Patterns, 16 Tracks with 8 Aux-Tracks, 16 Playlists. Thats it.
> Everything else is perfect for me. 
> 
> And maybe as pure luxury some kind of storage device, like a smart
> media card.

I'm much of the 'more of the same' school of thought myself; as far as
I'm concerned the best way to improve on the P3 would be to add a
bigger screen and a few more buttons so that some of the more cryptic
messages / key combinations are a bit, erm, less cryptic.

Peter Lunnon wrote:
>> The new product should be called the Sequentix Stepaliser. Or the
>> Stepulator. Stepathon? Sequentix Steptrix? Say that 3 times fast...
> 
> The Sequentix Stepwerk!

My vote is on Sequentulator. ;-)

Bye
Martin

-- 
http://www.navisto.ch
http://www.myspace.com/navisto

Or perhaps.... 
   
  Sequentix SequencAhhh!
  Sequentix Step Aerobix
  Sequentix Multistepper
  Sequentix StepTrax
   
   
  

Peter Lunnon <yahoo@chime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
          --- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "timetrippad"
<muellermclaren@...> wrote:

> 
> The new product should be called the Sequentix Stepaliser. Or the
> Stepulator. Stepathon? Sequentix Steptrix? Say that 3 times fast...

The Sequentix Stepwerk!



         

 		
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

> --- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Stoffel" <chr.stoffel@...>
> wrote:
> 
> > my wish for a P4 would simply be double memory: 24 Banks with 8
> > Patterns, 16 Tracks with 8 Aux-Tracks, 16 Playlists. Thats it.
> > Everything else is perfect for me. 
> > 
> > And maybe as pure luxury some kind of storage device, like a smart
> > media card.
> 
> I'm much of the 'more of the same' school of thought myself; as far as
> I'm concerned the best way to improve on the P3 would be to add a
> bigger screen and a few more buttons so that some of the more cryptic
> messages / key combinations are a bit, erm, less cryptic.

I've considered a P3 MkII as an alternative or parallel development to
(codename)P4.
It would be a simpler project to develop a CPU board transplant for P3 users
who are essentially satisfied with what they've got, but would like more
storage, independent MIDI outs etc., and I might go down that path if
there's sufficient demand.
If it appeals to you, let me know.

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

I can pretty much say 5 here here's for the 5 that we have out here....


Dave

Colin Fraser wrote:

>
>
> > --- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:analogue-sequencer%40yahoogroups.com>, "Stoffel" <chr.stoffel@...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > my wish for a P4 would simply be double memory: 24 Banks with 8
> > > Patterns, 16 Tracks with 8 Aux-Tracks, 16 Playlists. Thats it.
> > > Everything else is perfect for me.
> > >
> > > And maybe as pure luxury some kind of storage device, like a smart
> > > media card.
> >
> > I'm much of the 'more of the same' school of thought myself; as far as
> > I'm concerned the best way to improve on the P3 would be to add a
> > bigger screen and a few more buttons so that some of the more cryptic
> > messages / key combinations are a bit, erm, less cryptic.
>
> I've considered a P3 MkII as an alternative or parallel development to
> (codename)P4.
> It would be a simpler project to develop a CPU board transplant for P3 
> users
> who are essentially satisfied with what they've got, but would like more
> storage, independent MIDI outs etc., and I might go down that path if
> there's sufficient demand.
> If it appeals to you, let me know.
>
>
>
>

--- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Colin Fraser" <colin@...>
wrote:
>
>  
> > --- In analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com, "Stoffel" <chr.stoffel@>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > my wish for a P4 would simply be double memory: 24 Banks with 8
> > > Patterns, 16 Tracks with 8 Aux-Tracks, 16 Playlists. Thats it.
> > > Everything else is perfect for me. 
> > > 
> > > And maybe as pure luxury some kind of storage device, like a smart
> > > media card.
> > 
> > I'm much of the 'more of the same' school of thought myself; as far as
> > I'm concerned the best way to improve on the P3 would be to add a
> > bigger screen and a few more buttons so that some of the more cryptic
> > messages / key combinations are a bit, erm, less cryptic.
> 
> I've considered a P3 MkII as an alternative or parallel development to
> (codename)P4.
> It would be a simpler project to develop a CPU board transplant for
P3 users
> who are essentially satisfied with what they've got, but would like more
> storage, independent MIDI outs etc., and I might go down that path if
> there's sufficient demand.
> If it appeals to you, let me know.
> 
> Best regards,
> Colin Fraser
> Sequentix Music Systems Ltd
> http://www.sequentix.com
>



Definite yes from me... 

maybe a way to integrate it with the new Sequentix (NextStep?) as
well?  A way to allow the new sequencer to harness the P3?

dreamin... I'm still reading my P3 manual my baby is so fresh :o)

Steve

"It would be a simpler project to develop a CPU board transplant for P3 users who are essentially satisfied with what they've got, but would like more storage, independent MIDI outs etc.,"

yes! especially if that can be combined with some kind of memory card option - though I'm not sure how that could work. data memory is the only thing which limits the P3 for me.  I basically never want to need to attach it to a computer - I'd like a chunk of RAM or a removable card, or both

Richard 

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

P4 .Bin the front panel and start again :)  , P3 ?  Amazing Great features and potential  , a magic creative machine BUT.,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ' The '  control surface i rate alongside the Dx7  ..Your p3 is quite ' left'  and needs more ' right ' .
   
  http://www.funderstanding.com/right_left_brain.cfm
   
  most coders and circuit builders are heavy on the left , like quantum fizzisists and algebra crossword makers  .at least 75 % of artists are more ' right '.You can be both  .....
   
  The left brainers no doubt love the cryptic code and multi menu browsing ' i dont but love its features and abilities , i can 'get by ' with its control surface and ' ways and means ' p3 =  universal brain in a matchbox .I just wish it had a right brain interface.
   
  P3 is a left brain technological work of art without a doubt and amazing.
   
  Having said all this i cant help but feel that maybe thats its niche ? deep , confusing to some and complex , no great realtime control and more a brainbox sequencer ( i like this quality about it but it can kill my creative flow ' i would like to be able to lose ALL multi menus , have more realtime control and more one button per function selection.
   
  
Richard <richardscott@btconnect.com> wrote:
          "It would be a simpler project to develop a CPU board transplant for P3 users who are essentially satisfied with what they've got, but would like more storage, independent MIDI outs etc.,"

yes! especially if that can be combined with some kind of memory card option - though I'm not sure how that could work. data memory is the only thing which limits the P3 for me. I basically never want to need to attach it to a computer - I'd like a chunk of RAM or a removable card, or both

Richard 

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



         


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

Vrx wrote:
>    
>   most coders and circuit builders are heavy on the left , like quantum fizzisists and algebra crossword makers  .at least 75 % of artists are more ' right '.You can be both  .....
>   
Totally agree dude. For example, coding can and should be both artistic 
and creative. I tend to agree with Leonardo Da Vinci: the only divisions 
between art and science are those we erect ourselves.

So the P4 could be a P3 but with a pretty Macintosh colour scheme - and 
just one button ;)

Paul

---
www.softroom.co.uk / www.JointIntelligenceCommittee.com

> P4 .Bin the front panel and start again :)  , P3 ?  Amazing 
> Great features and potential  , a magic creative machine 
> BUT.,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ' The '  control surface i rate alongside 
> the Dx7  ..Your p3 is quite ' left'  and needs more ' right ' .

...snip...

>   Having said all this i cant help but feel that maybe thats 
> its niche ? deep , confusing to some and complex , no great 
> realtime control and more a brainbox sequencer ( i like this 
> quality about it but it can kill my creative flow ' i would 
> like to be able to lose ALL multi menus , have more realtime 
> control and more one button per function selection.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I don't think we want to throw the
baby out with the bathwater...

When I designed the user interface for the predecessor of P3, which you can
see here -
http://www.colinfraser.com/images/p2ui.jpg (taken around 1998 IIRC)
it did far, far less than P3 is capable of.
There were only two modes of operation - play and edit.
The PLAY/EDIT key toggled between these two modes.
There were no parts, no playlists, no FTS, no auxes, no events.
The lower knobs set the note, the upper knobs set velocity, the only step
modes were gate or tie.
There was only a single page of information for the LCD display in each
mode.
It was a straight-forward, 16 step pattern sequencer.
By virtue of that, it was very simple to grasp.

After P2 evolved into P3, I starting building units for other people.
Over time, more and more features were added, but rather than extending the
physical user interface I chose to add extra pages of soft-keys.
Re-engineering hardware is much more work than adding to software, and much
harder to undo if you go down a dead end.
I decided to leave the physical interface as unchanged as possible until a
'final' feature set had evolved.
Ultimately, P3 ended up with three modes of operation, a number of display
pages in each mode, and only a couple of additions to the front panel
hardware.

Now, navigating multiple pages of soft-keys may be a left-brain activity,
but for a significant proportion of users, once you are familiar with the
layout it doesn't require so much thought, and P3 use becomes a much more
right-brain experience.
That's certainly not the case for everyone, but as the saying goes, you
can't please all the people...

More significantly, since you must define every function that a device will
have before you can implement a one-button-per-function physical user
interface, you can't then add any extra functions that occur to you later.
Many of the features in P3 have been the result of a collective thought
process among the user community (thanks guys ;-)).
If it hadn't had such a flexible method of adding new functions, it would
never have reached the level of functionality it has.
That does mean it won't appeal to everyone, but that is true of any
instrument.
The people it does appeal to have an immensely good time with it.

Having said all that, one of the main aims of P4, or even a possible P3+,
will be to take the functionality that has evolved in P3, and give it a
right-brain interface that makes it more widely accessible.

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