Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

Ok, if the arp is anything like as sophisticated as the K5000 one then I'd happily go for that as a priority over the sequencer. As long as I can still have my slide notes and accents. The arp on the Novation Nova might also be a good, simpler model. It's somewhere between an arp and a sequencer too, in that it allows different gate-lengths, slides and accents to be preprogrammed, while still acting like an arpeggiator.

I still want my NRPNs though,and velocity mappable to various things.

a|x


--- On Wed, 12/11/08, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:

> From: Atom Smasher <atom@smasher.org>
> Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Bugs, 303's and sequencers
> To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, 12 November, 2008, 11:58 PM
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> 
> > i) I plan to implement an arpeggiator with features
> somewhat similar to 
> > a cut down version of the Kawai K5000 arp. Obviously
> how much "cut down" 
> > depends upon time and my inclination to do it which
> depends upon 
> > musician input and how much pizza and beer is
> provided. :-)
> ================
> 
> http://optimolch.de/jens.groh/K5000/GregWaltzer/egw/equipment/k5000arp.htm
> 
> that sounds... ambitious. the more of a good job you do
> implementing it, 
> the more i'm afraid of how bad the UI will be ;)
> 
> 
> > ii) Route the sequencer to VCF cutoff, resonance or
> EG1/2/3 attack (with 
> > the sequencer notes either playing or not).
> ==================
> 
> overkill. see below about the sequencer.
> 
> as long as velocity can be routed to amps, filters, etc
> (envelope 
> parameters would be nice, but IMHO not crucial) then a
> *reasonable* 303 
> emulation can be done with the hawk-800. *BUT* the hawk-800
> will never 
> ~really~ emulate a 303 because, among other things, the
> filters are too 
> different. so... i say do what's reasonable, but
> don't go overboard trying 
> to turn the hawk-800 into a 303 emulator.... make it do
> some of the 303 
> tricks (apparently it already does!) and support for a
> velocity/accent 
> (which i think it can do?), but then let people use it for
> the 2 DCO, 
> 2/4-pole DCF, weird ENVs, 4(?!?!) LFOs, 21st century
> firmware/hardware 
> modified 80s geek synth that it is. the world does *not*
> need another 303 
> emulator.
> 
> to emulate a 303: all non-accent notes have a velocity 1.
> all accent notes 
> have a velocity 127. edit a patch so the velocity makes it
> a little 
> louder, opens up the filter a bit, and if it implemented,
> shorten the 
> filter-env attack (or something like that, it's been a
> while since i 
> studied the 303 schematics).
> 
> personally, i don't want a 303 emulator, as such. it
> would be nice to have 
> those features available so i could use it as a hawk-800
> that's just that 
> much funkier, and be able to program ~other~
> "accent" and/or slide style 
> tricks. ya know, not the kind of things where people hear
> it and say "that 
> sounds almost like 303", but they'd say "holy
> shit! that has a 303 kind 
> groove, but how the hell did he do that??"
> 
> 
> > iii) Provide multiple sequencer patterns that can then
> be sequenced in a 
> > user set order.
> ===================
> 
> no comment. see below.
> 
> 
> > Now the big issue here, is that the ARP will take a
> lot of work and I 
> > have it as the highest priority of things to do. But
> the question should 
> > be directed to HAWK-800 owners as to what they would
> rather see first. 
> > ARP or better sequencer? Since I think using a Poly as
> a sequencer is 
> > just plain silly ( :-) ), that is why I chose to work
> on the ARP first. 
> > I do know that I would like to have points ii and iii
> though because 
> > they would make a really bad sequencer - well - a
> little less bad.
> ======================
> 
> i'd rather see a good arp, and don't care about a
> sequencer. but... maybe 
> an arp can be a mini-sequencer too?
> 
> good hardware or software sequencers are easy to find and
> cheap. the same 
> cannot be said for good arpeggiators. my logic, then, is
> that nearly 
> anyone with the resources to get a hawk-800 should have the
> resources to 
> find a suitable external sequencer. the same does not apply
> to a good 
> arpeggiator. so (IMHO) the hawk-800 should skip the
> sequencer and focus on 
> the arpeggiator.
> 
> maybe a good feature that would blur the line between a
> mini-sequencer and 
> an arpeggiator would be this: enter a series of notes that
> can be played 
> back entered. program arpeggiator functions. then (per
> "sequence") assign 
> a value that determines what percentage of the notes are
> arpeggiated. 
> so... select a "arp" value of zero and the notes
> play back as entered; 
> select an "arp" value of 99 and all of the notes
> are arpeggiated; select 
> an "arp" value of 50 and each note has a 50%
> chance of either playing as 
> entered or being arpeggiated. i'm not sure if the
> hardware can handle that 
> (we've already discussed the random generation issues
> of the CPU) but it 
> might solve the "arpeggiator or sequencer"
> question.
> 
> 
> > Anyway, the bottom line is ARP or sequencer features -
> which to do 
> > first?
> =================
> 
> arp.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	"Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is
> the
>  	 goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other
>  	 living beings, we are still savages."
>  		-- Thomas A. Edison
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
>