Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

previous by date index next by date
  topic list next in topic

Subject: DoMOAS: KISS vs Gimme more!

From: "Dave Bradley" <daveb@...
Date: 1999-09-10

Paul's original idea of a modular sequencer may serve us well here. We have
the "keep it simple to use" folks and the "I want to do sophisticated stuff"

They don't have to be mutually exclusive. I design software for a living,
and a common concept we use is to make something easy and flexible to use on
the surface, then dig deeper for the power users. Now don't start screaming
"I don't want to scroll through no stinkin' menus!" Believe me, I'm with

In the DoMOAS case, to me that means you have a default setup that has all
the most important functions on dedicated buttons. These soft buttons could
take on other functions for more esoteric uses. But in the default case, you
should be able to easily set up a 16x1 or 8x2 pattern, store it, and play
back a chain of them. Then you allow more sophisticated behavior to be
accessed under the covers (like the Obie Page 2 functions). For instance,
default mode accessed from the panel would be to play a pattern in order,
whether backwards or forwards. But if you want to dig, you could edit the
play order of the pattern for stuff like 1-3-2-4-5-7-6-8 etc.

The more I think about it, I'm starting to visualize 2 or 3 panels. A 7U
wide main panel with 2x8 pots, the VFD display and alpha wheel, an led and
set pushbutton for each stage, several output jacks for the final voltage
sequences, maybe some pulse and or gate outputs for gate sequences, basic
clock and glide controls, and some soft buttons for chain playback. Then
maybe a 2U optional panel with gate out and set input jacks for each stage,
jacks to control glide, sequence direction, and other more esoteric things.
Then another 1U optional panel with external interface options - DIN Sync,
Midi Out, Korg, Roland, whatever.

Dave Bradley
Principal Software Engineer
Engineering Animation, Inc.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Bivins [mailto:david@...]
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 1999 11:32 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [motm] DoMOAS live performance features
> From: "David Bivins" <david@...>
> I was very disappointed to hear that MOAS may never be implemented.
> Therefore, for what it's worth, I want as many features as
> possible. I don't
> want to have to go buy some combination of vintage Moog, Roland, ARP, etc.
> gear just to get a full-featured sequencer. I don't think MOTM was ever
> intended to be a budget instrument; I think it's rather luxurious myself.
> I'd like the sequencer to maintain that level of sophistication.
> I'd be more
> willing to accept a ton of compromises and cut-downs on this module if I
> knew a MOAS was in the pipeline, but apparently it is not for sure.
> > I don't think the sequencer should be bogged down with every
> > feature under
> > the sun lest we get MOAS again. I ∗do∗ think it should be carefully
> > crafted to interface well with other modules and that perfection can be
> > found in simplicity.
> >
> > John Speth
> > Object Engineering, Inc
> > mailto:johns@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
> >
> > How would you like to have a voice in the marketplace and be
> > rewarded for it? SurveySpot members earn cash and prizes for
> > taking part in market research studies!
> > <a href=" ">Click Here</a>
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
> Enter ONElist's Friends & Family Program
> WIN $100 to! Through Sept. 17. To enter, click here
> <a href=" ">Click Here</a>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------