exploring deeper seq~ object, I wanted to know a bit more about your experiences with it.
I used to patch my own sequencer logic (sequence storing + visual feedback)
When I exaggerate a bit, it can lag a very bit.. (I mean, when I push the limit too far but it means a lot for me)
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 :
- a master script JS (feeded by the time tick clock, writing notes in seq~, drawing an ui)
- a seq~ playing note (feeded by the time tick clock (basically a phasor~))
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.
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.