mate_stubb@... wrote: > > One of my personal favorites is CV stage selection. Mine too. Imagine using the output of the 320 to control stage selection and then playing with the shape to change the time relationships between notes with the overall sequence length remaining constant. I also like the implementation used in the Wiard sequencer, in that if both clock and VC stage select are present the resulting stage selected is an XOR of the two inputs. By manually changing the VC stage select you can change the order the stages play on the fly. However, I've gone down the same road and reached the same conclusions as you. A kitchen sink sequencer just won't do. I'd rather see the sequencer broken out into separate modules like the SuperMoe. Alternately, try to keep the cost down on the first MOTM sequencer. As soon as you have one you'll want two, ad infinitum. Four simple sequencers are probably more useful than one monster sequencer. And while I'm at it, I'd like to vote for a SuperMoe Panel run. Tomy
Message
Re: [motm] Re: sequencer design - NOT SuperMoe feature - dash of reality?
2001-01-28 by Thomas Hudson
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.