Quantum from midiSequencer dev is available now!!!

gonekrazy3000

@midiSequencer said:
This is my work in progress converting midiSequencer to VCV rack.

Any chance I could test this out ? Already helped vult catch some bugs

midiSequencer

@gonekrazy3000 said:
Any chance I could test this out ? Already helped vult catch some bugs

Only just started (so has all midiSequencer loop types, start/end), but sure - message me.
It will be completely free.

samboom

do you mean just lines of leds/labels - so a collapsed view without the ABCD & transpose

I find myself looking at the way Cenk builds up his tracks using the Elektron sequencer and thinking how well the Elektron interface balances complexity with immediacy. Personally my head can’t really manage more than 4 simultaneous things at once, so losing the ABCD Transpose in favour of 8 tracks seems less favourite, but that’s just my preference.

Another variation is to have the Button/Light merged with the Note Descriptor which would give room for four lanes and allow the second page of elements to be exposed on the main page.

midiSequencer

@samboom said:

do you mean just lines of leds/labels - so a collapsed view without the ABCD & transpose

I find myself looking at the way Cenk builds up his tracks using the Elektron sequencer and thinking how well the Elektron interface balances complexity with immediacy. Personally my head can’t really manage more than 4 simultaneous things at once, so losing the ABCD Transpose in favour of 8 tracks seems less favourite, but that’s just my preference.

Another variation is to have the Button/Light merged with the Note Descriptor which would give room for four lanes and allow the second page of elements to be exposed on the main page.

Not familiar with Cenk although realise he works for Elektron so will know how to build up sequences. Any vid in particular demonstrates this? btw, going to get an analog four myself soon.
Not sure I like the clarity of combining buttons, colours & labels. I'm thinking I need to offer different views of a sequence so that you can focus on just minimal or full details say. e.g. entering notes using sliders should just focus on label/skip/mute so you focus on pitch & rhythm only. You can then have another view to look at ornaments etc.

aplourde

@midiSequencer
I know that these are rough concepts and I like where they are going (and combining the step "LED" with the step options button could work), but please don't remove the step mute buttons! I make use of those extensively!

One other thing: Quantum only shows the active steps. In midiSequencer you could still see the inactive steps. Generally, the Quantum approach is a lot visually cleaner, but there are a lot of benefits to knowing what those other steps are and being able to select them directly as you could in midiSequencer. Is there any chance for an alternate view in Quantum where you could still see "greyed out" versions of currently inactive steps?

analog_matt

New design looks great! The black is sexy.

Will

@samboom said:
The vcv rack seq1 sounds great.

I wanted to chime in about the interface and say how much I like Syrupcore’s design - very clean and focused.

I wanted to suggest a small modification to this and suggest merging the ‘led light’ and grey buttons (much like Elektron) to make vertical space for an extra pair of sequencer rows. I see this as a trade off between keeping to the physical hardware trope vs being able to see at a glance four lanes at a time - making it easier to understand the interrelated elements of at least four parts of the melodic or rhythmic structure of whatever you are working on.

We've talked about some alternate views for use cases like this (seeing more at once, etc).

I like the reductionist approach. I removed the per-step mute buttons in the comp with the same idea in mind: tap the light to mute the step, tap the button to open the step editor. No need for dedicated mute buttons. Not sure the second version where they're all combined into a single element (indicator, note and button) leaves enough interaction possibilities. Though swiping might work (on iPad anyway). Swipe up to mute, tap to open the step editor, swipe down to skip. Sounds like it might be a recipe for interaction sadness though.

Will

@wellingtonCres said:
please consider putting the step skip buttons on the main page beside the mute buttons

Would like to see something like this too as I use skip a lot. Fitting it all on there is a tough challenge though. Maybe a more "kitchen sink" view of each sequencer would be possible if the total number racks visible per page was two instead of the current three. That's exactly the challenge Tony faces though—just in this thread you can see some folks want to see more sequences at once—more visible sequences or more interaction/details per sequence?

Alternate views would sorta solve it but there's only so many hours in a year! Especially for the sort of thing that might be hard to charge for.

Will

@aplourde said:
@midiSequencer
I know that these are rough concepts and I like where they are going (and combining the step "LED" with the step options button could work), but please don't remove the step mute buttons! I make use of those extensively!

One other thing: Quantum only shows the active steps. In midiSequencer you could still see the inactive steps. Generally, the Quantum approach is a lot visually cleaner, but there are a lot of benefits to knowing what those other steps are and being able to select them directly as you could in midiSequencer. Is there any chance for an alternate view in Quantum where you could still see "greyed out" versions of currently inactive steps?

In the mock-ups, the dimmed sliders/buttons are inactive steps (6 & 11). Is that what you mean? Or do you mean seeing steps beyond the current 'length' step? So if you set the seq to 5 steps in length, you'd see steps 6-16 dimmed out?

midiSequencer

@syrupcore said:

@wellingtonCres said:
please consider putting the step skip buttons on the main page beside the mute buttons

Would like to see something like this too as I use skip a lot. Fitting it all on there is a tough challenge though. Maybe a more "kitchen sink" view of each sequencer would be possible if the total number racks visible per page was two instead of the current three. That's exactly the challenge Tony faces though—just in this thread you can see some folks want to see more sequences at once—more visible sequences or more interaction/details per sequence?

Alternate views would sorta solve it but there's only so many hours in a year! Especially for the sort of thing that might be hard to charge for.

Yep - skip is going to make it to the front! Might just split the button into two - still need mute I think - so have the mute/chord/latch as left, skip as right.

midiSequencer

@syrupcore said:

In the mock-ups, the dimmed sliders/buttons are inactive steps (6 & 11). Is that what you mean? Or do you mean seeing steps beyond the current 'length' step? So if you set the seq to 5 steps in length, you'd see steps 6-16 dimmed out?

I like the dim effect for inactive(will use it for skip too). I can include an option that hides (like now so a trim) or shows 16 steps always. There is a time when seeing them is good - I found that it could be useful to setup steps beyond the end so that you can then extend the range. Without seeing them you have to either set them up at the start (or if the seq is not playing) or add a R ornament to the end step then extend the R adjust then remove the R - very fiddly.

samboom

@midiSequencer said:

Not familiar with Cenk [...] Any vid in particular demonstrates this?

I like this video:

At about 1.59 the beat gets established, then more variation is put in with the sound and sequencing getting worked up into more complex patterns - the overall effect is organic and humanistically evolving.

Cenk repeats the process at 06:15 starting with a straight 16th hi-hat pattern.

I appreciate that in part this is due to the direct sequencing of the sound parameter locks on the Digitakt but the idea of starting with something simple and adding increasing levels of complexity appeals. I guess with some careful midi CC set ups, some of this could be achieved on the Quantum.

Thinking to your comment about my reworking of Syrupcores original elegant design - perhaps the last iteration went a bit too far, but I was thinking how to avoid switching to the secondary sequencer panels for Actions or Scales as we have to do at present.

IMHO whatever you decide keep it as a singular interface - otherwise it will be too much work.

re the skip button, why not have a switch on the side that selects the operation of the button row - normatively the buttons are set to mute steps, press the side switch again and the mute button row become a skip button row, press the side switch again and the skip button row becomes a velocity accent row or some other setting or ornament and press the side switch again and the button row cycles back to mute operation and so on.

Keeping all 16 steps visible is good and as you suggest, dimming the inactive ones to maintain visual continuity.

aplourde

@syrupcore said:

In the mock-ups, the dimmed sliders/buttons are inactive steps (6 & 11). Is that what you mean? Or do you mean seeing steps beyond the current 'length' step? So if you set the seq to 5 steps in length, you'd see steps 6-16 dimmed out?

The latter; seeing the steps before and after the active steps range.

@midiSequencer said:
I like the dim effect for inactive(will use it for skip too). I can include an option that hides (like now so a trim) or shows 16 steps always. There is a time when seeing them is good - I found that it could be useful to setup steps beyond the end so that you can then extend the range. Without seeing them you have to either set them up at the start (or if the seq is not playing) or add a R ornament to the end step then extend the R adjust then remove the R - very fiddly.

Yes, this is the exact use case: setting up or viewing steps outside the current range so you can then go to them knowing what they are.

I would make one suggestion: only dim steps that are skipped. The idea being that a muted step is still "there" timing-wise and the UI should reflect that. A skipped step "isn't there" from a timing perspective, so dimming makes sense.

This also ties into my request to keep the mute button. I'm concerned that other approaches would make it harder to see.

@syrupcore said:
I like the reductionist approach. I removed the per-step mute buttons in the comp with the same idea in mind: tap the light to mute the step, tap the button to open the step editor. No need for dedicated mute buttons. Not sure the second version where they're all combined into a single element (indicator, note and button) leaves enough interaction possibilities. Though swiping might work (on iPad anyway). Swipe up to mute, tap to open the step editor, swipe down to skip. Sounds like it might be a recipe for interaction sadness though.

Right now tapping the "LED" makes the playhead jump to that position, so making that the mute would eliminate that function; not that I really use the manual jumps...

I would strongly discourage swiping actions, that never seems to work right.

I would suggest keeping the quantity of buttons (currently 3 per step), but allow the user to assign the function they want. e.g. I really don't use skip steps that often, but I would like to quickly toggle ratchets...

RajahP

So Custom Scales and a new GUI is in the 'near' future?