Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

On 15 Jan, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Michael Hawkins wrote:

At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.

Let me know,

Mike

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins wrote:
>
> At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
>
> Let me know,
>
> Mike
>

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "scituate_mass" wrote:
>
> Sequencer? This thing has a sequencer?
>
> :)
>
> Arpeggiator, please!!!!
>
> D
>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> >
> > At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
> >
> > Let me know,
> >
> > Mike
> >
>

--- On Tue, 1/15/13, Alex Drinkwater <the_voder@...> wrote:

From: Alex Drinkwater <the_voder@...>
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 15, 2013, 2:12 PM

 

I must admit, I'm fairly neutral on this one. I have a Hawk-modded EX-800, so I can't really get any sound out of it without connecting it to something else via MIDI. That being the case, if I want either step-sequencing of arpeggiation, there are good software and hardware options for doing that already. If I had to make a choice between the two, I'd probably go for a better step-sequencer, with some kind of limited automation of something other than just note values- maybe a 2nd 'layer' allowing MIDI notes to create control values that could then be mapped to parameters, as a kind of 'sequenced LFO' to create modulation patterns to run in parallel with the note sequence. Either that, or just add the ability to 'accent' and 'slide' notes, bass-synth style. Actually, some of these ideas could probably be adapted for an argeggiator, too.

a|x

From: k9k9dog <domgoold@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 19:24
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose

PLEASE KEEP SEQUENCER. (try to have both, even if it
involves either/or switching)
why? i have owned an Oberheim Cyclone AND a Akai ME20a.
i also had a Juno-60, my first ever synth. you can get
bored of up/down/up-down very quickly and there are products
that offer it via MIDI.

the sequencer could also be a way of inputting note intervals,
or timing intervals, or maybe chords. and it could also be
used to run 'off-clock' as well as with midi clock, or accept
external gate triggering (like jx3p/sh101).

The Cyclone was a very complex, pain in the arse machine, hard
to figure out and program via the matrix an 2x 7seg UI. but
very capable.

the Akai ME20a, by contrast was oversimple, but could produce
interesting MIDI effects, like swoooshing piano expression (haha,
i can't play, so...), but the note entry was simimar to the
ex800. it isn't a 'real' arpeggiator as such. and you can get
one of those by buying an Akai mini Keyboard now(LPK??etc?)

how about something a bit funky and 'vintage'? even the old
SH101 has BOTH step input and arpeggiator. that would be perfect.

it's true that the current sequencer isn't *much* use, without
an external gate trigger to step it, but the basics are there.

just my opinion.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "scituate_mass"  wrote:
>
> Sequencer? This thing has a sequencer?
>
> :)
>
> Arpeggiator, please!!!!
>
> D
>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins  wrote:
> >
> > At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
> >
> > Let me know,
> >
> > Mike
> >
>




------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    korgpolyex-digest@yahoogroups.com
    korgpolyex-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    korgpolyex-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins wrote:
>
> At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
>
> Let me know,
>
> Mike
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael Hawkins

To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:30 AM

Subject: [korgpolyex] HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose

At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.

Let me know,

Mike

--- On Tue, 1/15/13, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

From: Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...>
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 15, 2013, 5:59 PM

 

You got any soundcloud or youtube of your performances? I'd love to check it out.

Mike

From: Harvey Peekar <audaciouspen@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose

 

PLEASE KEEP THE SEQUENCER.  i use the poly 800 as the main bass-maker in my band, and having 7 sequences stored at once has made my live show so much more dynamic and fluid.  this was one of the main reasons that i bought the upgrade in the first place.

--- On Tue, 1/15/13, Alex Drinkwater <the_voder@...> wrote:

From: Alex Drinkwater <the_voder@...>
Subject: Re: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose
To: "korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com" <korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 15, 2013, 2:12 PM

 

I must admit, I'm fairly neutral on this one. I have a Hawk-modded EX-800, so I can't really get any sound out of it without connecting it to something else via MIDI. That being the case, if I want either step-sequencing of arpeggiation, there are good software and hardware options for doing that already. If I had to make a choice between the two, I'd probably go for a better step-sequencer, with some kind of limited automation of something other than just note values- maybe a 2nd 'layer' allowing MIDI notes to create control values that could then be mapped to parameters, as a kind of 'sequenced LFO' to create modulation patterns to run in parallel with the note sequence. Either that, or just add the ability to 'accent' and 'slide' notes, bass-synth style. Actually, some of these ideas could probably be adapted for an argeggiator, too.

a|x

From: k9k9dog <domgoold@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 19:24
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: HAWK - sequencer or arpeggiator - you choose

PLEASE KEEP SEQUENCER. (try to have both, even if it
involves either/or switching)
why? i have owned an Oberheim Cyclone AND a Akai ME20a.
i also had a Juno-60, my first ever synth. you can get
bored of up/down/up-down very quickly and there are products
that offer it via MIDI.

the sequencer could also be a way of inputting note intervals,
or timing intervals, or maybe chords. and it could also be
used to run 'off-clock' as well as with midi clock, or accept
external gate triggering (like jx3p/sh101).

The Cyclone was a very complex, pain in the arse machine, hard
to figure out and program via the matrix an 2x 7seg UI. but
very capable.

the Akai ME20a, by contrast was oversimple, but could produce
interesting MIDI effects, like swoooshing piano expression (haha,
i can't play, so...), but the note entry was simimar to the
ex800. it isn't a 'real' arpeggiator as such. and you can get
one of those by buying an Akai mini Keyboard now(LPK??etc?)

how about something a bit funky and 'vintage'? even the old
SH101 has BOTH step input and arpeggiator. that would be perfect.

it's true that the current sequencer isn't *much* use, without
an external gate trigger to step it, but the basics are there.

just my opinion.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "scituate_mass"  wrote:
>
> Sequencer? This thing has a sequencer?
>
> :)
>
> Arpeggiator, please!!!!
>
> D
>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins  wrote:
> >
> > At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
> >
> > Let me know,
> >
> > Mike
> >
>




------------------------------------

Feel free to upload into the files section any sysex dumps and tape dumps of patches that you may have but please discuss (with the entire group) the posting of other files *before* posting them. This helps us to keep redundant information from showing up everywhere and also allows us to constantly improve the format and structure of the documentation. We talk about the HAWK-800 quite a bit but we also discuss and help owners of the original Poly-800 models. So don't be shy if you haven't got the HAWK-800.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/korgpolyex/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    korgpolyex-digest@yahoogroups.com
    korgpolyex-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    korgpolyex-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

On 15/01/2013 09:31, Nate King wrote:

 

The sequencer is dead to me. A flexible, programmable arpeggiator would be very welcome.

Nate

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

 

At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.

Let me know,

Mike

--
   n   a   t   e

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins wrote:
>
> At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
>
> Let me know,
>
> Mike
>

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:
>
> At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
>
> Let me know,
>
> Mike
>

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:
>
> At this point, the HAWK has been a wonderful project. I've met alot of great people from all over the world. Most of you would have noticed that development of the HAWK software has slowed down to almost none at all. However, I would still like to put an arpeggiator into the HAWK. To do that I would like to ask you all if you would mind if I took the old step sequencer out entirely. I doubt many of you use the sequencer at all. But before I pursue that direction, I thought I would ask all HAWK owners if they would mind if the sequencer was removed.
>
> Let me know,
>
> Mike
>

Definetly arpeggiator, with latch as the other Korgs.
The sequencer is not usefull imo ...