Jan 31, 2012 at 10:45am
I used to patch my own sequencer logic (sequence storing + visual feedback)
To separate ui & engine wins almost always.
A lot of people are also using JS to fire notes, which I don’t trust absolutely even if that JS is now fast & furious.
my latest explorations are around :
does it make sense ?
Jan 31, 2012 at 2:39pm
In my experience, yes. The timing you’ll get from seq~ is going to be superior (though I would add that I haven’t gone back and tested with Max6), plus you get all sorts of fun things via phasor~. I like using pow~ to alter the shape of the wave in order to create accelerandi and ritardandi.
Jan 31, 2012 at 3:17pm
Thanks a lot Peter for your answer.
What do you think about this architecture:
Tweaking that these hours :)
Jan 31, 2012 at 7:03pm
Seems pretty reasonable to me, though it depends on what you’re doing and how precise your timing has to be.
If you want to see an almost all signal-rate sequencer, check out the EML-200 model project. Its sequencer is modelled on analog step sequencers and can be driven as an oscillator. It’s more than a little weird in the way it works, and I wouldn’t necessarily advise that architecture, but it may give some ideas as well.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.