MOTM

Well - I've decided it's time to add an modular sequencer to my MOTM
system.  I made this decision once before and then put it off, but I
can't wait any longer; I want some sequencing madness in my life!!

I have been building and playing with MOTM modules for the past 6 years
or so, but I do not have much personal experience with sequencers.  I've
read about various sequencer designs, looked at what is available on the
market, etc.  My major concerns would be functionality, modularity,
capabilities for expansion, and of course it must look cool (but that
should be automatic). :)

I think it would be very rewarding and a good learning experience to
design and build a sequencer from scratch.  Having said that, if I had
access to the PCBs of a powerful sequencer, I may just go in that
direction.  If I do end up designing something, I would be happy to
share it with the list.

A couple of features that I know I will want:
at least 3 channels of CV
up, down, up/down and random clock
CV selection of stage
8 stages minimum
gang-able stages for longer sequences
MOTM-format

There are a lot of good people on this list that have a lot of
experience.  I would like to take advantage of this if I may and ask for
your opinions regarding the features that an analog modular sequencer
should possess, and also if you are aware of any kits or PCB sets for a
sequencer that you believe would fit the bill.

PS: I looked at Milton, but a) the pot board is too big and b) that list
looks dead.

Cheers!
George

1. Milton is the best hardware step sequencer out there, that is actually being built. 2. MOTM format is incompatible with 16 stage sequencers. Your module

Yes, the milton list is dead. Yuck. The milton is stil your best bet,
as it addresses all of your list mostly. The pcb's and schems are
still available, although the custom made pic that does some of the
more cool things isn't available anymore. I've got a milton in motm
format (sort of - it's been squished somewhat) that is still in 98%
complete format - something on one of my bank boards is blowing out
the engine board chips, and its just something I need to track down.
You can see it in my modular at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sduck409/474563097/in/set-72157600140486163/
Note that only 2 of the knobs are on in this picture - I'm still
debugging so the bank boards are moving in and out a lot, and the
knobs get in the way. I've got a set of the same kind of knobs as Paul
uses, just the next size down, and they look really good.

I'm not sure what you mean by the pot board being too big - that's
about as small as you can make a 16 step board.

I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
nice.

Steve

On 6/3/07, groovyshaman <groovyshaman@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Well - I've decided it's time to add an modular sequencer to my MOTM
>  system. I made this decision once before and then put it off, but I
>  can't wait any longer; I want some sequencing madness in my life!!
>
>  I have been building and playing with MOTM modules for the past 6 years
>  or so, but I do not have much personal experience with sequencers. I've
>  read about various sequencer designs, looked at what is available on the
>  market, etc. My major concerns would be functionality, modularity,
>  capabilities for expansion, and of course it must look cool (but that
>  should be automatic). :)
>
>  I think it would be very rewarding and a good learning experience to
>  design and build a sequencer from scratch. Having said that, if I had
>  access to the PCBs of a powerful sequencer, I may just go in that
>  direction. If I do end up designing something, I would be happy to
>  share it with the list.
>
>  A couple of features that I know I will want:
>  at least 3 channels of CV
>  up, down, up/down and random clock
>  CV selection of stage
>  8 stages minimum
>  gang-able stages for longer sequences
>  MOTM-format
>
>  There are a lot of good people on this list that have a lot of
>  experience. I would like to take advantage of this if I may and ask for
>  your opinions regarding the features that an analog modular sequencer
>  should possess, and also if you are aware of any kits or PCB sets for a
>  sequencer that you believe would fit the bill.
>
>  PS: I looked at Milton, but a) the pot board is too big and b) that list
>  looks dead.
>
>  Cheers!
>  George
>


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Drake
sduck409@...
makeme1witheverything@...

> Yes, the milton list is dead. Yuck. The milton is stil your best bet,
> as it addresses all of your list mostly. The pcb's and schems are
> still available, although the custom made pic that does some of the
> more cool things isn't available anymore.

As soon as Peter and I work out the details of the two bank boards
that he still owes me (for over two years now, sigh...) I may take
over the "analog" Milton design and maybe even the Milton email list.
I've already changed the design so that you can have each bank be a
different step length - right now all the banks are locked together,
so if one is five steps, they all are five steps - that's part of the
reason I still have two MAQ16/3 sequencers around.  I think I've
already got the new PIC coded up - I just have to test it out, but I
was waiting for the bank boards for that.

You can still get Milton boards from Roger over at Big City - he
should have several in stock...

> You can see it in my modular at
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sduck409/474563097/in/set-72157600140486163/

Sort of looks like Jeff's design...

Doug

http://www.analognotes.com
http://www.stoogepanels.com
http://www.softsampling.com
http://www.dougwellington.com

Hey Moe!

I agree, Milton looks like the best overall design.  Problem is the
design is "locked up" and not easily prone to changes, and _no_ design
is perfect. (except maybe a J.H. design) :)  I'm also not certain if the
PCBs are available any more, I'd check the milton list but it appears to
have dried up (unless you're looking for some "fun").  And based on
input from others, I wonder how good the support for any issues or
questions that come up would be.  But, there are quite a few ideas I
have picked up from the design (which themselves were picked up from
earlier Buchla designs and others).

Hmmm, a mile long sequencer module... sounds pretty cool.  But
seriously, the synth cabinet I've designed (but never implemented, a
recurring theme) is 26U wide and has two rows.  I plan to have two of
these and a base unit so I will tend to think in those terms.  In any
case I agree that crunching the pot spacing is probably the right thing,
it's just a matter of knobs and usability.  (I think the milton spacing
is 0.75 inches, which is too tight.)  It'll take some R&D to get it
right.  I'll also likely change other aspects of the MOTM grid for
better human factors.  I'm sure the biggest expense is going to be the
FPE front panels.

The SuperMoe.. I remember salivating at all of the possibilities.  And
then you made it better, TWICE!  I have definitely been stimulated by
some of your designs, and will be incorporating.  Thank you for putting
your page up for all to see and learn from.  I hope you do implement
this sucker sometime in the future, before you redesign it again. :)  It
would likely supplant the original MOAS. [early list reference]

Cheers,
George

Dave Bradley wrote:

> 1. Milton is the best hardware step sequencer out there, that is
> actually being built.
> 2. MOTM format is incompatible with 16 stage sequencers. Your module
> will end up being a mile long - you should consider compressing the pot
> spacing (although I hate going with the tiny Expressionist sized knobs
> for a sequencer).
> 3. Feel free to steal any ideas from my modular SuperMoe designs if you
> find them useful. It may stimulate your thinking for your own designs. I
> never finished the hardware design of pieces of mine, but hope to do so
> sometime.
> 
> http://www.hotrodmotm.com/seq3.htm
> 
> Moe
> 
> On 6/3/07, *groovyshaman* < groovyshaman@...
> <mailto:groovyshaman@...>> wrote:
> 
>     I think it would be very rewarding and a good learning experience to
>     design and build a sequencer from scratch.  Having said that, if I had
>     access to the PCBs of a powerful sequencer, I may just go in that
>     direction.  If I do end up designing something, I would be happy to
>     share it with the list.
>

On 6/3/07, Doug Wellington <DougWellington@...> wrote:
>
>
>  > You can see it in my modular at
>  > http://www.flickr.com/photos/sduck409/474563097/in/set-72157600140486163/
>
>  Sort of looks like Jeff's design...
>

That's because it is, may he rest in peace. He also helped me a lot
with picking out various hardware pieces to use.



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Drake
sduck409@...
makeme1witheverything@...

On 6/3/07, Stephen Drake put forth:
>I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
>you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
>nice.

Yes, Numerology is very nice.  Imho, if you "want some sequencing
madness" in your life, it is your best option.

Even if you do not already have a Mac, or a MIDI-to-CV converter,
buying of a used G4 Powerbook (~$400), an MOTM-650 ($500), a USB MIDI
interface ($40), and Numerology ($99), might cost less than building
large hardware sequencer.

Much more importantly, Numerology has features and flexibility that
go way beyond any hardware sequencer.  Musically, it can handle two
things that are often difficult with a hardware sequencer --
polyphony and complex timing.  You can have as many sequencer modules
as you want, which can control the parameters (eg. first step, last
step, clock division, length, range, interpolation, direction, etc.)
of any other sequencer module.  You can also have as many clocks as
you want, and use a sequencer module to control the parameters (BPM,
timing offsets, groove scale, etc.) of each clock.

In addition to clocks and sequencers, you can set up numerous other
modules -- Audio Unit instruments and effects, mixers, quantizers,
LFO's, switchers, virtual joysticks, MIDI input/out modules, etc. --
all of which can be patched to control each other.

Otoh, you can simply ignore all of that, and quickly set up a basic
step sequencer.  That's one of the great things about Numerology.
You can make things as simple or as complicated as you want.

You also have virtually unlimited patch storage.  You can start to
work on something, save it, then go on to work on something else
without having to take notes or lose any of your work.

While I realize that it is not a hardware sequencer, it is a modular
sequencer worth considering.

>> Sort of looks like Jeff's design...
>
> That's because it is, may he rest in peace. He also helped me a lot
> with picking out various hardware pieces to use.

I didn't interact much with Jeff, but he was very friendly to me when
I was working on my first Milton.  I still have his FPD file around
here somewhere for that design...

Maybe Jeff, Larry, Bob, Doug and John are playing together somewhere
with the cosmic modular synth...  :-)

Doug

http://www.analognotes.com
http://www.stoogepanels.com
http://www.softsampling.com
http://www.dougwellington.com

IIRC nobody's mentioned the CGS sequencer thing yet so i will -

http://cgs.synth.net/modules/cgs59_prog.html

- not quite as outre as the supermoe but its modularish nature might 
permit some fun hacking.

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Jason Proctor wrote:

> - not quite as outre as the supermoe but its modularish nature might
> permit some fun hacking.

On the modular sequencer, particularly the supermode-type.  Has
anyone tried vertical modularity to avoid the 19" limitation?
6x32... What *would* that feel like?

--
Monty Brandenberg

At 02:49 PM 6/4/2007, Jason Proctor wrote:

>IIRC nobody's mentioned the CGS sequencer thing yet so i will -
>
>http://cgs.synth.net/modules/cgs59_prog.html
>
>- not quite as outre as the supermoe but its modularish nature might
>permit some fun hacking.

Agreed, it's tempting stuff. There's no voltage-controlled stage 
selection, though. Of course, you did mention hacking! VCSS of a 
16-stage sequencer requires only a 4-bit ADC, far short of rocket science.

Ray Wilson makes a 16-step seq board, I think.
--
john


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM

yes - could use that as a core and then add various logic modules to 
beat on it. CGS makes plenty!

i like the button-activated stages, handy for resyncing....

>Agreed, it's tempting stuff. There's no voltage-controlled stage
>selection, though. Of course, you did mention hacking! VCSS of a
>16-stage sequencer requires only a 4-bit ADC, far short of rocket science.
>
>Ray Wilson makes a 16-step seq board, I think.
>--
>john
>

Can I stir this up some more?  What about the MOTM-600?

http://www.synthtech.com/new_stuff.html

That was a prototype for Robert Rich, but still, what is the status of it?

And then there is Modcan.

http://www.modcan.com/bseries/vcseq.htm

Has anyone seen and played with one of these?  It should drop right in 
to your MOTM cabinet.

But the MOTM-600 and the Modcan VC Sequencer are off-the-shelf.  No DIY :(

As for the software/MIDI route, I tried out the Bankstep program from 
Algorithmic Arts with the MOTM-650.

http://algoart.com/

It worked, but I am averse to Windows/GUI.  Playing my synthesizer is a 
refreshing break from all that.

-Richard Brewster
http://www.pugix.com

I don't fully understand the CGS sequencer, but it got me thinking 
about doing a sequencer in 4 stage slices.  It seems like you could 
use one of the inexpensive AVR processors, like the ATMEGA8, couple it 
with an inexpensive quad DAC like the AD5726, and have a neat little 
slice.  4 of the 10 bit A/Ds could be for sequencer controls and two 
could be used to for an input control CV.  Other I/O could be used for 
clocks and carry in/outs for daisy chaining these slices together.  
You could parallel and series connect as many as you want, and use the 
carry out / carry in to transfer clock control from slice to slice.  
Or you could run them all off a master CV, such as a ramp or triangle, 
and use an offset control to set a range of the CV for each slice to 
operate in without any master clock.  You could even get fancy with 
the serial interfaces to pass control or data between slices or 
driving an LCD.  Quite expandable.  So far this is only  2 inexpensive 
chips per slice plus appropriate buffers.  There is enough I/O on an 
ATMEGA8 for all sorts of gate outputs, LED indicators, etc.

Food for thought (actually, out of current modular projects).

Dave

Hi Stephen,

Interesting.  I wonder what was the cost of that FPE panel.  Can you put
up a better picture of it?

The 16-pot board size, well, I guess I would have to see it in person.
I'm thinking an 8-pot board may give more flexibility, and better
spacing.  It would be nice to design a 8x4 core module and provide chaining.

Although Numerology looks like an excellent tool, a hardware sequencer
is the driving force.

George

Stephen Drake wrote:

> Yes, the milton list is dead. Yuck. The milton is stil your best bet,
> as it addresses all of your list mostly. The pcb's and schems are
> still available, although the custom made pic that does some of the
> more cool things isn't available anymore. I've got a milton in motm
> format (sort of - it's been squished somewhat) that is still in 98%
> complete format - something on one of my bank boards is blowing out
> the engine board chips, and its just something I need to track down.
> You can see it in my modular at
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/sduck409/474563097/in/set-72157600140486163/
> Note that only 2 of the knobs are on in this picture - I'm still
> debugging so the bank boards are moving in and out a lot, and the
> knobs get in the way. I've got a set of the same kind of knobs as Paul
> uses, just the next size down, and they look really good.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by the pot board being too big - that's
> about as small as you can make a 16 step board.
> 
> I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
> you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
> nice.
> 
> Steve
> 
> On 6/3/07, groovyshaman <groovyshaman@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Well - I've decided it's time to add an modular sequencer to my MOTM
>>  system. I made this decision once before and then put it off, but I
>>  can't wait any longer; I want some sequencing madness in my life!!
>>
>>  I have been building and playing with MOTM modules for the past 6 years
>>  or so, but I do not have much personal experience with sequencers. I've
>>  read about various sequencer designs, looked at what is available on the
>>  market, etc. My major concerns would be functionality, modularity,
>>  capabilities for expansion, and of course it must look cool (but that
>>  should be automatic). :)
>>
>>  I think it would be very rewarding and a good learning experience to
>>  design and build a sequencer from scratch. Having said that, if I had
>>  access to the PCBs of a powerful sequencer, I may just go in that
>>  direction. If I do end up designing something, I would be happy to
>>  share it with the list.
>>
>>  A couple of features that I know I will want:
>>  at least 3 channels of CV
>>  up, down, up/down and random clock
>>  CV selection of stage
>>  8 stages minimum
>>  gang-able stages for longer sequences
>>  MOTM-format
>>
>>  There are a lot of good people on this list that have a lot of
>>  experience. I would like to take advantage of this if I may and ask for
>>  your opinions regarding the features that an analog modular sequencer
>>  should possess, and also if you are aware of any kits or PCB sets for a
>>  sequencer that you believe would fit the bill.
>>
>>  PS: I looked at Milton, but a) the pot board is too big and b) that list
>>  looks dead.
>>
>>  Cheers!
>>  George
>>
> 
>

Opinion alert: There is no legal substitute for the tactile feedback of
a hardware sequencer.

Thanks for the Numerology information, I'll check it out down the road.
 Sounds like a flexible, versatile, feature rich sequencer for a very
reasonable price - nothing like most hardware sequencers.

Hey, there's no reason why you can have it all.  Once I have myself a
good ol hardware sequencer I can add a soft sequencer too, and for a
heck of a lot less money and a heck of a lot less work. :)

Cheers,
George

Mark wrote:

> On 6/3/07, Stephen Drake put forth:
>> I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
>> you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
>> nice.
> 
> Yes, Numerology is very nice.  Imho, if you "want some sequencing
> madness" in your life, it is your best option.
> 
> Even if you do not already have a Mac, or a MIDI-to-CV converter,
> buying of a used G4 Powerbook (~$400), an MOTM-650 ($500), a USB MIDI
> interface ($40), and Numerology ($99), might cost less than building
> large hardware sequencer.
> 
> Much more importantly, Numerology has features and flexibility that
> go way beyond any hardware sequencer.  Musically, it can handle two
> things that are often difficult with a hardware sequencer --
> polyphony and complex timing.  You can have as many sequencer modules
> as you want, which can control the parameters (eg. first step, last
> step, clock division, length, range, interpolation, direction, etc.)
> of any other sequencer module.  You can also have as many clocks as
> you want, and use a sequencer module to control the parameters (BPM,
> timing offsets, groove scale, etc.) of each clock.
> 
> In addition to clocks and sequencers, you can set up numerous other
> modules -- Audio Unit instruments and effects, mixers, quantizers,
> LFO's, switchers, virtual joysticks, MIDI input/out modules, etc. --
> all of which can be patched to control each other.
> 
> Otoh, you can simply ignore all of that, and quickly set up a basic
> step sequencer.  That's one of the great things about Numerology.
> You can make things as simple or as complicated as you want.
> 
> You also have virtually unlimited patch storage.  You can start to
> work on something, save it, then go on to work on something else
> without having to take notes or lose any of your work.
> 
> While I realize that it is not a hardware sequencer, it is a modular
> sequencer worth considering.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

> Interesting.  I wonder what was the cost of that FPE panel.

If Stephen doesn't have the fpd file handy, I'll dig my copy up.  (For
some reason I seem to think it was about $160 but that may have been
with some additions.)  FWIW, you'll spend more money on pots and knobs
than on anything else...

Here's the original picture that I saw...

http://www.buzzclick-music.com/jeff_milt.jpg

--
-Doug

http://www.analognotes.com
http://www.stoogepanels.com
http://www.softsampling.com
http://www.dougwellington.com

On 6/5/07, djbrow54 put forth:
>It seems like you could use one of the inexpensive AVR processors,
>like the ATMEGA8, couple it with an inexpensive quad DAC like the
>AD5726, and have a neat little slice.  4 of the 10 bit A/Ds could be
>for sequencer controls and two could be used to for an input control
>CV.  Other I/O could be used for
>clocks and carry in/outs for daisy chaining these slices together.
>You could parallel and series connect as many as you want, and use the
>carry out / carry in to transfer clock control from slice to slice.

Many years ago, I had designed a "nanosequencer" that was a 1 X 4
combination CV-step and gate sequencer that fit nicely in a 2U
module.  The idea was instead of one large expensive sequencer, any
number of nanosequencers could be stacked together, either
horizontally or vertically.  So if you had four of them, then you
could patch them together to make a 1 X 16, 2 X 8, or 4 X 4 sequencer,
or two 1 X 8 sequencers, or one 2 X 4 sequencer and two 1 X 4
sequencers, etc.  I had a working prototype built around a small
handful of discrete CMOS.  It was simple and inexpensive.  Larry and
I had worked out a 2U expander module that added 2 more CV channels
and another row of gates.  Moe had drawn up a number of different
Stooge panels.  Many people thought that it was a very clever and
innovative design.  So I had thought about doing a run of PCB's, but
right around the same time Paul announced the 600, and it was decided
that introducing a possibly competing sequencer in MOTM format was a
bad idea.

On 6/4/07, groovyshaman put forth:
>Opinion alert: There is no legal substitute for the tactile feedback of
>a hardware sequencer.

I totally agree with that, although parallel input isn't that much of
a tactical advantage when using a step sequencer.

>Thanks for the Numerology information, I'll check it out down the road.
>  Sounds like a flexible, versatile, feature rich sequencer for a very
>reasonable price - nothing like most hardware sequencers.

Even ignoring price, imho, it can beat any hardware sequencer out
there as a compositional tool.  Although, I have not tried using a
CV-to-MIDI converter to see if I can select steps with a control
voltage.  That is one function that would be easier with a voltage
sequencer.

>Hey, there's no reason why you can have it all.  Once I have myself a
>good ol hardware sequencer I can add a soft sequencer too, and for a
>heck of a lot less money and a heck of a lot less work. :)

Numerology does have a fader box module.  Although I have never tried
it even though I have a Peavey PC1600x.

On Jun 3, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Stephen Drake wrote:
> I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
> you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
> nice.

Numerology happened because Jim Coker (Mr Five12 Dot Com) and i were  
outgrowing the arpeggiators in our Z1s and ER-1s. we wanted to make  
the leap into modular-land, and started investigating sequencing.

he asked me, and this was now five years ago (we should throw a  
party) ... around this time of year, "is it possible for me to  
modulate the number of steps in a sequence in an analogue sequencer  
with a voltage?" and i racked my brain thinking about what was out  
there and said "no. not that i'm aware of."  he said "okay well then  
i'm going to write my own MIDI sequencer." a few months later i  
recorded a track with it an a bit after that i started gigging with  
it. even early on it never screwed me at a gig, but the Apple Store  
did screw my Pismo before one once .... that was a very ambient show.

Numerology is a software sequencer, but it is also the only thing  
that makes me want to take a computer to a gig. i've used it  
alongside a TR-909 and other drum machines, it plays nice with other  
sequencers. being able to edit _anything_ without stopping the  
sequencer is another positive attribute.

it's also no replacement for a 960 or a Milton or whatever other kind  
of analogue uberseq you're into. even though aspects of Numerology  
(step skipping) are there specifically because i had no 960 (or in  
the case of Gate Divide, because i have no Projekt Elektronik 960  
Assist Units), it really is it's own unique "thing" that allows you  
to explore the paradigm of analogue sequencing, abstracting it into  
modules in a way that is just not possible without infinite money and  
privately-engaged hardware engineers.

i realise this may be redundant as a latecomer to the thread, but i  
just wanted to chime in about Numerology in the context of a  
discussion of hardware sequencers. i _love_ analogue hardware, i love  
analogue sequencers, but everything has its place and IMHO having  
both is really probably quite incredibly synergistic.
---
Suit & Tie Guy
suitandtieguy.com
stgsoundlabs.com

Well, Guy, I for one am glad you did chime in!

Numerology sounds like a neat package.  Naturally, the wife and I are
pretty much married to PC since she finished her dissertation on our
old Powerbook.  She bought that baby in '91.

Still, the cost factor doesn't sound too terrible.  I'm sure I'd get a
lot of use out of a Powerbook aside from the sequencer.  Numerology
would be a nice addition to my 16-step Ray Wilson seq, Encore UEG and
the modified CGS Gate seq.  Does the Numerology package allow for
clock inputs?

On my way to the Five12 website...

Chub

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Suit & Tie Guy <erwill@...> wrote:

>
> On Jun 3, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Stephen Drake wrote:
> > I don't know of anything that's anything close to the milton, unless
> > you go into the realm of software sequencers - numerology is pretty
> > nice.
> 
> Numerology happened because Jim Coker (Mr Five12 Dot Com) and i were  
> outgrowing the arpeggiators in our Z1s and ER-1s. we wanted to make  
> the leap into modular-land, and started investigating sequencing.
> 
> he asked me, and this was now five years ago (we should throw a  
> party) ... around this time of year, "is it possible for me to  
> modulate the number of steps in a sequence in an analogue sequencer  
> with a voltage?" and i racked my brain thinking about what was out  
> there and said "no. not that i'm aware of."  he said "okay well then  
> i'm going to write my own MIDI sequencer." a few months later i  
> recorded a track with it an a bit after that i started gigging with  
> it. even early on it never screwed me at a gig, but the Apple Store  
> did screw my Pismo before one once .... that was a very ambient show.
> 
> Numerology is a software sequencer, but it is also the only thing  
> that makes me want to take a computer to a gig. i've used it  
> alongside a TR-909 and other drum machines, it plays nice with other  
> sequencers. being able to edit _anything_ without stopping the  
> sequencer is another positive attribute.
> 
> it's also no replacement for a 960 or a Milton or whatever other kind  
> of analogue uberseq you're into. even though aspects of Numerology  
> (step skipping) are there specifically because i had no 960 (or in  
> the case of Gate Divide, because i have no Projekt Elektronik 960  
> Assist Units), it really is it's own unique "thing" that allows you  
> to explore the paradigm of analogue sequencing, abstracting it into  
> modules in a way that is just not possible without infinite money and  
> privately-engaged hardware engineers.
> 
> i realise this may be redundant as a latecomer to the thread, but i  
> just wanted to chime in about Numerology in the context of a  
> discussion of hardware sequencers. i _love_ analogue hardware, i love  
> analogue sequencers, but everything has its place and IMHO having  
> both is really probably quite incredibly synergistic.
> ---
> Suit & Tie Guy
> suitandtieguy.com
> stgsoundlabs.com
>

On Jun 6, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Charles Osthelder wrote:
> Numerology sounds like a neat package.  Naturally, the wife and I are
> pretty much married to PC since she finished her dissertation on our
> old Powerbook.  She bought that baby in '91.

fortunately you don't need the best mac ever to run Numerology as a  
MIDI sequencer. any AUs you host will be a bit more processor  
intensive of course.

> the modified CGS Gate seq.  Does the Numerology package allow for
> clock inputs?

it can be MIDI slave, but generally if you let it be your master you  
can exploit the more mind-bending aspects of its approach to time.

it would be a perfect companion to the MOTM MIDI-CV interface. i am  
personally looking forward to those being available.

the Encore Expressionist would also be nice, you could dedicate 4 of  
the gate outputs to reference clock pulses (bar, beat, eighth,  
sixteenth) so ridiculously easy in Numerology inside the Clock group,  
and then save that project as a template so every time you make a new  
file that aspect of your setup is always ready.

or even a "random clock" where it would send a pulse a few times in a  
16 bar period, and then even set that sequencer to reset every 16  
bars (Numerology sequencers have hardsync), so you can have something  
that's random yet have that predictable aspect if you'd like it. some  
of the things you can do with the program become almost-generative  
probability games ... which is extremely useful.
---
Suit & Tie Guy
suitandtieguy.com

Try BankStep for Windows/PC analog style sequencers.  It is free.

http://algoart.com/bankstep.htm

John Loffink
The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: motm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:motm@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Charles Osthelder
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:57 AM
> To: motm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [motm] Re: modular sequencer for MOTM
> 
> Well, Guy, I for one am glad you did chime in!
> 
> Numerology sounds like a neat package.  Naturally, the wife and I are
> pretty much married to PC since she finished her dissertation on our
> old Powerbook.  She bought that baby in '91.
> 
> Still, the cost factor doesn't sound too terrible.  I'm sure I'd get a
> lot of use out of a Powerbook aside from the sequencer.  Numerology
> would be a nice addition to my 16-step Ray Wilson seq, Encore UEG and
> the modified CGS Gate seq.  Does the Numerology package allow for
> clock inputs?
> 
> On my way to the Five12 website...
> 
> Chub
>

Has anyone here tried the MFB sequencer?

Ivan