hardware sequencer

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:28 am

Hi, i'm wondering, does anybody here use a hardware sequencer?

I'm a bit tired of fiddling with software sequencers that aren't tight, etc etc...

Well, tired of all the problems that they cause. Humm, yep, software sequencer on PC (or mac) are 'comfortable', nice, great visual feedback, etc... But... I hate them

What's your opinion on hardware sequencers? Having any comments? Do's and don't? Tips? Brand?

Thanks to all in advance

[ This Message was edited by: marcuspocus on 2005-03-10 02:30 ]

nprime · Post by **nprime** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:32 am

I...guess...can you still buy a hardware sequencer? You mean MIDI? I...can't recall seeing any lately.

That's a good question.

What is it about hardware sequencers that gets you so excited? I'm interested to know.

R

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:50 am

Timing,portability, complete midi implementation (like, recording sysex event from hardware synth without crashing).

Also, the possibility to startup the sequencer and work directly on a sequence. The fact that it isn't disturbing me and help keep focus on music. Also, if i still use PC, i can dump midi track on it, an i don't need a second license for nuendo on my laptop, etc... I can go on like this for a moment you know...

BTW, there is stil a couple of hardware sequencer on the market, in fact it's becoming a new trend. Constructors are using this as a selling argument on new 'workstation'. Some are considered as really good sequencer, comparable to cubase or nuendo in features, but with tightness in extra

In fact, i saw a test where they proved that almost any hardware sequencer was light years more tight than any software sequencer, running on any platform.

Apart from all this, that a bit why i'm asking, are you using one? Have you ever used one? what's you're gripe about it? If any...

[ This Message was edited by: marcuspocus on 2005-03-10 02:52 ]

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:57 am

Here's a small list of some that a found on internet:

Yamaha, with their QY series (qy70, qy100, qy300, and the praised QY700).

The yamaha's rm1x and RS7000 also, oriented for live.

Roland have some also (SQ80?) don't remember the model. MCs (303,505,909)

Quasimidi with rave-o-lution

E-MU with their MP7, XL7...

Akai MPC (1000,2000,2000xl,3000,4000)
Roland MV-8000 (which cost SO MUCH!

)

Obviously, big workstation lke fantom all have their sequencer, but i'm not interrested in workstation, really only the sequencer part.

They are all said to have horrible sounds, but i wouldn't buy a sequencer for it's sounds, but more for their sequencing abilities. Beside, i have plenty of sounds with pulsar

[ This Message was edited by: marcuspocus on 2005-03-10 02:59 ]

nprime · Post by **nprime** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:28 am

Last time I used a hardware sequencer was in the eighties.

My opinion probably doesn't count.

R

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:12 am

Ok, thanks anyway

I'm looking at the Yamaha RM1X actually.

Any one?

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:48 am

Well, I'm another ex-1980s sequencer refugee. I couldn't exit from those tiny little displays fast enough. Last one I used was a Korg SQD80, we called the 'Squid'. Was a two-track ! Maybe what you need is an Atari ?

Zer · Post by **Zer** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:18 am

what about Maq Doepfer

or Atem or Phaedra?

or Sq 16 MAM ?

If you just want to yamaha perhaps the RS 7000 maybe a good choice as well?

kensuguro · Post by **kensuguro** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:57 am

Hey, speaking from the limits of my experience, sequencers from workstations do kind of lag. I'm speaking of Korg Trinity and Triton. When there's high polyphony, it definitely lags. I'm not sure about the other companies but my conclusion is that I think PC has much better timing. Strange how we ended up with opposite conclusions.

My point is, see if you can "stress test" the sequencer before you buy it. Fast sequences with high polyphony.

[ This Message was edited by: kensuguro on 2005-03-10 10:01 ]

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:40 am

Thanks all for those responses

Zer, for the rs7000, it's exactly the same sequencer than rm1x, but with a sampler an a yamaha motif included, i don't need this, i really only need the sequencer part.

And, good point Ken, i'm gonna check this before i buy. But, have actually read alot about yamaha sequencer, and, simply put, on paper, and in real life they blow PCs out of the water for timing.

I know nothing about Korg thou, and Roland didn't impress me at all with their sequencers...

Well, maybe you can read this ken from SOS :

"So how good is the QY700's timing? The answer, you'll be pleased to hear, is 'too good for these ears to fault!' Whilst I would not claim to have the most sensitive ears to timing problems, I can certainly hear a difference between the solidity of the QY700 and that of most sequencing packages on the market. In fact, there was only one moment in the whole time I spent with the QY700 where I noticed something flaky, and that was a Phil Collins-style drum fill in one of the demo sequences provided on disk. On investigation, this turned out to be human frailty because it was programmed like this. In fact, the QY700's 1/480th of a quarter-note resolution had perfectly captured the inexactness of the original playing, and I was easily able to tighten this up with the Quantisation Strength parameter (see later)."

At this adress :

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1996_ar ... qy700.html

Zer · Post by **Zer** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:13 am

perhaps you want to habve a look at:

http://www.s120339565.websitehome.co.uk ... index.html

as well

or at

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1997_ar ... orton.html

But in case of Timing issues and so on - ever musician I know counts on either atari 1040 ST or Atari Falcon or even the good old c64 when it comes to midisequencing and computers.

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:23 am

Yahama RM1x is their version of Roland's Groovebox. I think you may want to go for something more dedicated, without built-in sound module.

Even if you have the world's best MIDI sequencer, MIDI bandwidth is limited. Some calculations with MIDI data rate will tell you that 4 decent polyphonic MIDI channels can cause looser timing just by the amount of data being transported over the wire. There's nothing a hardware sequencer can fix about that.
So even with the best sequencer sending data over MIDI wires, you have to keep in mind your bandwidth is limited. As you'll understand CC# data can cause a lot of traffic too.
If your sequencer has different MIDI output ports you don't have to thru-put stuff and you're working much tighter again, especially on busy wires.

My 2 €cents.

Good luck on your search, marcuspocus

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:24 am

I noticed something in the SoS links. It apears the reviews date back to 1996 and 1997. As far as my merory serves me, we are talking DX4, Pentium 1 and Pentium mmx, and people where upgrading from win 3.11 to win95. I actually do not do sequenzing, so I can not talk of todays standards. I didn't read thru the reviews, but I would sertainly take up Ken's advice, if I was to buy a hardware sequencer, and I would only take peoples word for it, if I was sure they had done the same thing.

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:44 am

Thanks all for your good advices.

I'm certainly gonna put to rm1x to the stress test

But, i'm not actually risking alot...300€ second hand, that's a bargain for what it offer, and i could eventually resell the rm1x if it doesn't work for me

I think it's gonna be OK for a couple of pulsar synths

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:24 am

A friend of mine who is a music producer says the Akai machines have the best groove.

kensuguro · Post by **kensuguro** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:20 am

and I've heard akai actually coded the "groove" into their software on purpose.

I'd love to hear the "stress test" results. Please post them if you get around to conducting them.

paulrmartin · Post by **paulrmartin** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:14 am

Well, I still use my trusty Roland MC-50 but it only does MIDI.

marcuspocus · Post by **marcuspocus** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:28 am

I got the rm1x now

So, i guess, time to learn the beast, and so far, my impressions are pretty good! Timing is rock solid, even with snare shots at 1/64th with a BPM set at 200

Better than what i actually got with my current nuendo setup.

Now, i didn't overload the machine in my stress-test, but, i first gotta learn a bit how it work

There is a couple of very cool midi features in, like midi delay, octaver, 2x harmonizer and unison.

Héhé, my new toy is coOl