MOTM

>
> It was very easy with Dr. T to do weird things, like sequences that
> were different lengths. For example, you could have a sequence in 4/4
> running at the same tempo as a sequence in 7/8, so they phased in and
> out of sync. You could also incorporate probability into your
> sequenced phrases, so certain notes might only play 60% of the time.
> It was very handy for generating interesting variety from a limited
> set of material.

Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more! The 'WALK' function is VERY cool
(it 'flips a coin' and randomly goes 1 step above or below the current position in the sequence).

Paul S.

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@a...> wrote:
> Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more! The 
'WALK' function is VERY cool
> (it 'flips a coin' and randomly goes 1 step above or below the 
current position in the sequence).
> 

Paul

The uSeq looks like it will be very powerful.

I'll admit, though, that I've had trouble wrapping my head around its 
functionality. 

I'll be especially interested to hear how other people use them. The 
$600 cost to try it out is a hurdle for me...it's a good portion of 
what I can afford for the year. The mega-modules all look cool, too, 
making it that much harder to pick just one.

Because of that, I'll probably be a fence-sitter until I hear 
everybody gush over how great it is...

My personal experience with sequencers is that they have a steep
learning curve; sometimes *years* before you truly "get your head around
one"!

In the meantime, much fun can be had. Many folks will form amazingly
different opions about the same piece of gear based on how they use it
and how much work they put into comprehending the possibilites.

--
Regards,
--/////--
John Blacet
Blacet Research
http://www.blacet.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Product Announcements, Specials, Hot Deals, join our mailing List:

http://www.blacet.com/mailform2.html

> I'll be especially interested to hear how other people use them. The
> $600 cost to try it out is a hurdle for me..

Err...$429.

The UI *is* different than the standard "rows of knobs and blinky lights", But what it can
actually *do* is a mind-boggling thing. Just being able to sync MIDI clock to a LFO is cool
enough :)

And...I just received all of the NKK front panel switches/LEDs, which was the longest lead-time
item. Full steam ahead!

Paul S.

> Just being able to sync MIDI clock to a LFO is cool
> enough :)

AAARRRGGHHHH!!! (oops sorry)
so you can send it an LFO and it'll generate midi clock at the appropriate
tempo..?
can you send it triggers, some sort of pulse train..?
can you sync it to audio (suitably filtered of course)

can i throw away my kahler human clock..?

cheers
paul b
sheffield
uk

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@a...> wrote:
> > I'll be especially interested to hear how other people use them. 
The
> > $600 cost to try it out is a hurdle for me..
> 
> Err...$429.
>

I'll need a new power supply, too, if I understand it correctly. That 
puts it in the $600 range for me.

I know that's the price of admission to get to use some of the 
powerful new modules. Since I can't afford to just get them all - :(
- it does make me want to want to understand the new modules more,
and hear how they are being used before I commit to just one.

> The UI *is* different than the standard "rows of knobs and blinky 
lights", But what it can
> actually *do* is a mind-boggling thing.

I'm sure that the uSeq has tremendous power beyond what "knobs and 
blinky lights" offer. I understand knobs and blinky lights, though, 
and am still a little mind-boggled by the uSeq. My impression is that 
it brings a range of interesting new functionality to the modular,
but that it may complement, rather than replace, a more traditional 
sequencer.

I'll look forward to hearing more about it and will daydream about
the new lineup in the meantime....

> so you can send it an LFO and it'll generate midi clock at the appropriate
> tempo..?
> can you send it triggers, some sort of pulse train..?
> can you sync it to audio (suitably filtered of course)

The way External Clocking works is:

a) you feed in a min. +-3V pk-pk waveform. Square/pulses will work the best.
b) you have to feed in 2 pulses to "get it going", because......
c) the PIC times the interval between successive pulses, calculates the BPM, and uses THAT to
generate MIDI clock.

So, I suppose there is "room for abuse" using non-repetitive waveforms and filtered audio.

Paul S.

Paul wrote:

>Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more! 
The 'WALK'function is VERY cool (it 'flips a coin' and randomly goes 
1 step above or below the current position
in the sequence).<

Er....

That sounds like a rather useless feature.  I mean, what's the point?

johnm (who otherwise finds the uSeq rather tempting...)

> Paul wrote:
>
> >Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more!
> The 'WALK'function is VERY cool (it 'flips a coin' and randomly goes
> 1 step above or below the current position
> in the sequence).<
>
> Er....
>
> That sounds like a rather useless feature.  I mean, what's the point?
>
> johnm (who otherwise finds the uSeq rather tempting...)

The point is to get away from strict determinism by introducing a
"controlled" random element.  Not a feature usually associated with
sequencer, which traditionally is a very deterministic module.  Hence, the
cool factor.

-Richard

hello all,

> a) you feed in a min. +-3V pk-pk waveform. Square/pulses will work the
best.
> b) you have to feed in 2 pulses to "get it going", because......
> c) the PIC times the interval between successive pulses, calculates the
BPM, and uses THAT to
> generate MIDI clock.

so the tempo is re-calculated every second pulse..?
does it trigger on rising or falling waveforms..?
so a square wave LFO with pwm would be a mess, unless it was a very very
slow pwm..?

i can see this function alone is going to be great fun (though possibly not
for the neighbours)
cheers
paul b
sheffield
uk

"WALK" does not sound useless to me. That sounds like the "drunk"
module in 
max/msp which is used in almost everybody's patches.

At first I was wigged out too by the idea of a sequencer with hardly
any UI for 
programming pitches. But all you have to do is hit two buttons and
bang the 
notes you want in order on a midi keyboard, right? And then they play
back in 
tempo perfectly quantized? I think I can get used to that. 

Max


--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "konkuro" <konkuro@a...> wrote:
> Paul wrote:
> 
> >Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more! 
> The 'WALK'function is VERY cool (it 'flips a coin' and randomly
goes 
> 1 step above or below the current position
> in the sequence).<
> 
> Er....
> 
> That sounds like a rather useless feature.  I mean, what's the
point?
> 
> johnm (who otherwise finds the uSeq rather tempting...)

> That sounds like a rather useless feature.  I mean, what's the point?

Part of the point is to figure out WHAT the point *is* :)

Ever hear the term "walking bass line"? Besides, the issue is: it's there, you don't HAVE to use
it, but you just may, by *accident*, find it useful.

Paul S.

That code is still being written, so I don't know if you can abuse it the way you are hoping
(which is, a fast-responding MIDI clock generator from a variety of external sources. That's NOT
the indented use, so don't be disappointed if you have to be 'gentle' to it).

Paul S.

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

From: "Sikorsky" <vulture.squadron@...>
To: <motm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:53 AM
Subject: Re: [motm] Re: Dr. T vs the uSeq


> hello all,
>
> > a) you feed in a min. +-3V pk-pk waveform. Square/pulses will work the
> best.
> > b) you have to feed in 2 pulses to "get it going", because......
> > c) the PIC times the interval between successive pulses, calculates the
> BPM, and uses THAT to
> > generate MIDI clock.
>
> so the tempo is re-calculated every second pulse..?
> does it trigger on rising or falling waveforms..?
> so a square wave LFO with pwm would be a mess, unless it was a very very
> slow pwm..?
>
> i can see this function alone is going to be great fun (though possibly not
> for the neighbours)
> cheers
> paul b
> sheffield
> uk
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

> At first I was wigged out too by the idea of a sequencer with hardly
> any UI for  programming pitches.

Well, you give up "instant access" (1 knob per pitch) for 50 OTHER features. Which will still
'wig' some people out. So, I take away your favorite red Crayon, but I give you 50 new and
different Crayons to use. Some people will resists and still draw with the red, but (hopefully),
many others will discover the "World Besides Red".

Paul S.

For 'structured' music, how about using it to control a filter 
(cutoff or res)?  How about slight variations in amplitude?  PWM?  
Shaping an LFO waveform?

The trouble with structure is that it sometimes interferes with 
creativity.

Mike

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "konkuro" <konkuro@a...> wrote:
> Paul wrote:
> 
> >Good thing the MOTM-600 uSeq can do stuff like this, and more! 
> The 'WALK'function is VERY cool (it 'flips a coin' and randomly 
goes 
> 1 step above or below the current position
> in the sequence).<
> 
> Er....
> 
> That sounds like a rather useless feature.  I mean, what's the 
point?
> 
> johnm (who otherwise finds the uSeq rather tempting...)

> "WALK" does not sound useless to me. That sounds like the "drunk"
> module in 
> max/msp which is used in almost everybody's patches.

Any similarity between functionality in the uSeq and Max/MSP objects is
strictly coincidental.


;-)
--Adam