Does Solaris really need a step sequencer?

[wireangel]

Hey John,

thanks for the reply. I hope you don't mind a couple of follow up questions as i don't use software synths, so i am not familiar with the plug in. When you say that each envelope can trigger from the keyboard or one of the rows, does each row have a trigger pattern associated with it or is it just per step? Does each row run on it's own clock division? Finally can you set the sequence triggers to be per step or on the loop start boundary.

I hope you don't mind, but I'm a step sequencer nerd.

Thanks.
Chris

[wireangel]

OOPS...last question. Can the output of each row be run independently through a lag processor?

[stardust]

I am worried about the access to a sequencer on the synth. In the scope plugin I can program with a mouse. How shall that work smoothly in Solaris HW without 8 or 16 encoders/buttons. Sorry I have seen the awkward programming in Andromeda.

[John Bowen]

Hey John,...When you say that each envelope can trigger from the keyboard or one of the rows, does each row have a trigger pattern associated with it or is it just per step? Does each row run on it's own clock division? Finally can you set the sequence triggers to be per step or on the loop start boundary.
Chris

Each row has 16 steps, with each having a check box to trigger or not for that step. Each row does have its own clock division, and length as well, so you can run different length patterns for each row. It does not have the ability to trigger on the loop boundary, other than if you set that one step to trigger.

-john b

[John Bowen]

OOPS...last question. Can the output of each row be run independently through a lag processor?

Each step has a choice of 2 'glide' or pitch bend type settings, but there are no lag processors in the software to separately smooth out the outputs....at least, not yet! (can be added to v5 easily.)

-john b.

[John Bowen]

I am worried about the access to a sequencer on the synth. In the scope plugin I can program with a mouse. How shall that work smoothly in Solaris HW without 8 or 16 encoders/buttons. Sorry I have seen the awkward programming in Andromeda.

Yeah, this worries me as well, which is one of the reasons I asked for this Poll about needing a step sequencer.

The main way is to use the graphic display knobs, and there are 2 rows of 5 knobs there. To make it easier to display multiples of 4, I'd use 4 of the 5 knobs for step values, with the 5th knob adjusting something overall per row perhaps....but still, you'd have to page the sets of 2 x 4 knobs to get multiples of 4 steps. One scenario would be as follows:

Because of the graphic display, there's room to show 16 steps viewable at once for a single sequence row. You would have to press the up/down cursor buttons to 'move' the knobs to access all the values:

Row A:
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16

page....

Row B:
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16

etc.

Of course, this also allows multiples of steps, so you could have a 32 or 64 step row.

The other option is to show 2 parallel rows for each sub-page, so the data would look something like this:

Row A -1 Row A -2 Row A -3 Row A -4
Row B -1 Row B -2 Row B -3 Row B -4
Row A - 5 Row A -6 Row A -7 Row A -8
Row B - 5 Row B -6 Row B -7 Row B -8

etc...

Neither of these 'solutions' are very pleasing to me.

The other typical way to do it is to select a number of knobs on the panel and make them do "double duty" via a Shift or Mode button. Because I've chosen groupings of 5 knobs (based on the largest size of display we could find), it doesn't lend itself very well to showing 16/32 step sequence data.

[wireangel]

John,

Thank you for your replies on the sequencer. It sounds very flexible and useful. In regards to the challenge presented by the arrangement of the pots in groups of 5, maybe there could be an interesting 'lateral' solution.

If you consider the first 4 pots in the row as the programming pots, the 5th could become a 'loop counter'. What I mean is that if the first 4 pots are set in a note row as : C C D# F and the 5th pot is set to '4'. Then the notes would be repeated 4 times before moving to the next page of 4 notes. So on and so on. this is a little unorthodox, but could be a method of extending the power of the sequencer.

I think having 2x4 pots is more appealing as you would be able to set note and velocity (or filter cut off directly) together.

Happy New year and best of luck for Anaheim.

[Tiitu]

Hi,

This is my first post. I have a rather long musical background with several years pause a few years ago, however. I'm not experienced in sequencing, but did answer no, because I think that sequensing should be able to be done well externally, either with a software or hardware, and, I do have a couple of choises in my home studio for that.

In any case, to tell my sincere opinion, 16 steps (or, even 64) sequencers are producing monotonic, if not boring music. KARMA is much better, but although often too lacking any melodic idea, i.e. sounding like meaningless random plim, plom, back and forth.

However, Stephen Kay has several times mentioned that he may in the future produce a General KARMA II box or software that can be attached to any MIDI synth. It could be wise to ask him directly, if this will happen soon. In KARMA 2 you can not only 'randomize' notes and parameters, but sounds of instruments or waves.

Wouldn't it be interesting, if in a high-resolution X/Y pad you could assign a different instrument or waveform or combinations of several waveforms in each x/y position, and, then play with them in real-time! If the synth would allow the path of your finger(s) to be recorded, you could make (very long) sequences with this technique! Does this sound feasible? You ofcourse would (maybe later) need a software to help you to develop and assign good x/y instrument/wave tables to the XY pad matrix.

Secondly, a buttonboard similar to the following would be quite useful, when playing chords one-handed or producing huge chords with both hands, or playing lightning fast solos.

http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=layout

In addition, the buttons could be here too assignable to any MIDI commands/sequences/waves, in addition to just MIDI notes i.e. pitches. It doesn't need to be this many buttons, and 1/2 would do quite fine. Same fingering (i.e., mirrored keys) would be the best for both hands to make the learning curve faster!

http://www.c-thru-music.com/cgi/?page=prod_axis-64

If there are no room, I would even replace part of the long piano keyboard with this type of buttons. By the way, a chromatic accordion buttonboard similar to Roland MIDI accordion, is as well faster and better for single (or, double) hand(s) playing than a piano keyboard. It is a second possibility. Again, I don't mean to be rude, but in my opinion the large piano keyboard is nothing but optimal in size and construction. And, I think it would need to be improved, if not gradually replaced. I'm sorry if these ideas are too 'wild', but this is just how I feel (as a Ztarist).

Best wishes for the development of new hardware instrument with great voice and controls!

Cheers,
Tiitu.
PS. I did send John my pre-order today.

[stardust]

Thanks for these thoughts.

Exactly what I was dreaming of when speaking about Karma.
I did not know that a Korg independent box is planned by Stephen Kay.

Dreaming on for me means that it will not only be a midi box but also incorporates the OSC protocol over ethernet like jazzmutant Lemur does it to talk to native instruments Reaktor or Cycling74 Max/MSP. http://opensoundcontrol.org/introduction-osc

This then needs of course consideration, at least preparation in Solaris.

[dreaming off]

[///OSS]

I vote a HUGE yes... everybody thats doing niche experimental work can complain left and right that we don't need it... but arpegiators and step sequencers increase speed and work flow in countless styles of music...whether your doing crazy underground headmusic, or commercially viable work, theres always a need for it..and honestly theres not much out there that does it right which is even more frustrating...

We need...8 16 32 steps

each step needs:

note on off

note select

Accent

Slide

Gate length

Needs to have tempo, midi sync, and swing ratio.


if you want to add to that some frosting, then make it key selectable like the arpegiator to change keys with the user pattern and even Chord arpegiator style....


it be wonderful to be able to assign different step sequencer tracks to the AMP, OSC, FILTERS as well..but Id be happy with the basic list...


as far as the concerns of the way to access it...honestly even if it was just a decent graphic on the main center screen that lets you grid like pin select note value and on off switches for every note feature like gate or slide etc...that be fine.... obviously to go and slap on 16 switches with page selects etc is not necessary.... it can be done at the software level and just assign it as a mod source...

if it cant be done in the board then maybe just package it as a software editor for the synth with those capabilities and just save it on the board that way?

[konkrete]

Massive YES here. A step sequencer makes a synth a stand-alone musical instrument for people other than keyboard players.

[HUROLURA]

My suggestion:

Just let each step of each parameter of the stepsequencer being assigned to a MIDI CC message. Then anybody unhappy with a "paged" step seq control could extend the SOLARIS with external MIDI controller dedicating the built-in pot to the use of the synth itself.

I would use two cheap BCR 2000 to achieve a 16 step seq control.

See the quick puzzle below:

[HUROLURA]

Maybe an even better idea would be to use NRPN midi message rather than CC to let CC messages dedicated to the sound design parameter. Just thought about that because it is the way it is done in the NOAH...

My 2 cents.

PS: my 2nd BCR 2000 should be on the way.
What I need now is to find money to buy the SOLARIS to achieve the puzzle ...

CheerZ

[stardust]

Any decision taken on this one John ?
I would be happy to have the sequencer as a 'next release' feature.

[John Bowen]

No final decision, but I expect we will have some form of step sequencer in there - it's too important in light of today's method of making sounds.

-john b.