Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2007-09-20 by seanzoega
I am looking to purchase an analogue sequencer, and am wondering between a doepfer MAQ/ doepfer schaltwerk and a p3. Is there anyone out there who has used all three that can give me the benefit of their experience Thanks Sean Zoega
2007-09-20 by James R. Coplin
I actually have all three and the P3 is the only way to go. The MAQ is now quite old and is really lacking in several key features and not that usable. It has problems with sync and limited CV options. I'm selling mine as it really doesn't have a point now that I have a P3. I can't think of anything the MAQ can do that the P3 doesn't. I am keeping my Schaltwerk because I mainly use it to trigger events on my modular. For that, the is really great. However, the Schaltwerk never was really finished, there are bugs and holes in the software. The sync to MIDI is terrible. In fact, I am actually using the P3 as a filter to cleanup the MIDI clock and outputting the DIN sync to the Schaltwerk. Now it syncs perfectly. James R. Coplin _____
From: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com [mailto:analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of seanzoega Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 4:04 AM To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com Subject: [analogue-sequencer] why P3 I am looking to purchase an analogue sequencer, and am wondering between a doepfer MAQ/ doepfer schaltwerk and a p3. Is there anyone out there who has used all three that can give me the benefit of their experience Thanks Sean Zoega [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2007-09-20 by Hans Greuber
Well, one cool thing that I wanted Colin to implement ( and still want) is; You do a sequence on the MAQ, then you can auto expand/ contract on the fly to 1 to 5 octaves the only thing why I still keep mine. Hans ________________________________> To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com> From: james@ticalun.net> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:55:12 -0500> Subject: RE: [analogue-sequencer] why P3>> I actually have all three and the P3 is the only way to go. The MAQ is now> quite old and is really lacking in several key features and not that usable.> It has problems with sync and limited CV options. I'm selling mine as it> really doesn't have a point now that I have a P3. I can't think of anything> the MAQ can do that the P3 doesn't. I am keeping my Schaltwerk because I> mainly use it to trigger events on my modular. For that, the is really> great. However, the Schaltwerk never was really finished, there are bugs> and holes in the software. The sync to MIDI is terrible. In fact, I am> actually using the P3 as a filter to cleanup the MIDI clock and outputting> the DIN sync to the Schaltwerk. Now it syncs perfectly.> James R. Coplin> _____> From: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of seanzoega> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 4:04 AM> To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [analogue-sequencer] why P3> I am looking to purchase an analogue sequencer, and am wondering> between a doepfer MAQ/ doepfer schaltwerk and a p3. Is there anyone> out there who has used all three that can give me the benefit of their> experience> Thanks> Sean Zoega> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> _________________________________________________________________ ¡Ya está aquí Windows Live Spaces! Ahora podrás crear fácilmente tu propio sitio Web. http://spaces.live.com/signup.aspx
2007-09-20 by Zahir Manek
one thing the MAQ can do that I don't believe the P3 can do (unless i'm missing the feature), is that each row on the MAQ can be transposed by midi on separate midi channels, so different transpositions are possible for each row. i believe the P3 only responds to global transpose for each track through midi, although you can activate transpose defeat for any track you don't want transposed.
this type of tranposing can be done on the P3 through playlists but not through midi i don't believe.
that being said, i haven't used my MAQ or Notron since I've had my P3.
"James R. Coplin" <james@ticalun.net> wrote:
I actually have all three and the P3 is the only way to go. The MAQ is now
quite old and is really lacking in several key features and not that usable.
It has problems with sync and limited CV options. I'm selling mine as it
really doesn't have a point now that I have a P3. I can't think of anything
the MAQ can do that the P3 doesn't. I am keeping my Schaltwerk because I
mainly use it to trigger events on my modular. For that, the is really
great. However, the Schaltwerk never was really finished, there are bugs
and holes in the software. The sync to MIDI is terrible. In fact, I am
actually using the P3 as a filter to cleanup the MIDI clock and outputting
the DIN sync to the Schaltwerk. Now it syncs perfectly.
James R. Coplin
_____ From: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of seanzoega
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 4:04 AM
To: analogue-sequencer@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [analogue-sequencer] why P3
I am looking to purchase an analogue sequencer, and am wondering
between a doepfer MAQ/ doepfer schaltwerk and a p3. Is there anyone
out there who has used all three that can give me the benefit of their
experience
Thanks
Sean Zoega
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]2007-09-23 by duncan
time for me to add my 2 cents-worth, being as I've got three maqs & have just shoved a schaltwerk out of the studio & out of the country. there are a couple of slightly more fundamental reasons why we keep the maq- it's very very easy to use. especially if you hook up a midi controller (e.g. one of those keyboards with freely assignable controllers all over it). we use controllers to change the end-step of the three rows. another controller can be used to transpose the rows, or change the range over which each pitch-knob works. with FTS applied, what you get is a tune that's the same shape but plays different notes... it's hard to explain in writing. it's also much easier to change the notes played by the three rows live- on the p3, you have a couple of key-presses to get from one pattern to another, where on the maq, the three patterns are right in front of you, allowing you to adjust two or three tunes at once. if your style needs it, this is quite handy. much harder to do this on the p3. not impossible, though. duncan.