Re: analogue V1 #992-Doepfer

From fEEd
Sent Mon, Apr 8th 1996, 07:50

On Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:06:16 -0500,
dvorkinm@pcs.mot.com wrote...

>How does MAQ16 stack up against let's say Arp sequencer?

You had to put me on the spot didn't you?  You want me to compare my 2 fave 
sequencers? ;>  That is a tough one, i guess i should have thought a little bit 
before i said the MAQ was "the best".  The ARP is hard to beat cv\gate-wise 
that is for sure.

What does the MAQ do that the ARP can't?  The obvious thing is MIDI.  Being 
able to have all 3 of the rows of the MAQ run at differnt speeds (all synced to 
the MIDI clock) in different modes with different lengths of sequences all 
interacting with one another is quite amazing.  Want to have 1 row do the notes 
and the next one do the velocities?  No prob.  Want to have one row change the 
MIDI channel another is sending on?  sure, what the heck. 

Not only can the MAQ run things via MIDI, the controlability OF the MAQ via 
MIDI is intense.  You can control literally every function on the MAQ from MIDI 
controllers and pgm changes.  Want the MAQ to switch 1 row from a random seq to 
a simple forward stepping one at exactly the right time?  Sequence it right 
out.  No little switch to try to flip at exactly the right time like on the 
ARP. BTW, I am in the final stages of putting together a Logic environment that 
lays out all of the control you can have over the MAQ in case anyone is 
interested.

CV\gate wise?  Well, the MAQ is a bit vanilla i guess.  6 cv\gate outputs, few 
surprises here.  Some of the cool things you can do with MIDI on the MAQ is 
lost in the cv-out potrion of it.  For example, you can still transpose the cvs 
going out of the MAQ by MIDI notes going into it if the row is one of the 
"relative" modes, but the setting at which one row can transpose another row 
internally seems to have no effect on the cv outputs, only the MIDI notes.  I 
usually end up running the MAQ's MIDI through the pro4 so i can use its 
modulation abilities to spice the cv up a bit and have the advantage of all the 
pro4s outputs and perks (like being able to turn portamento on if i want to).

What does the ARP have going for it?  Well the most obvious thing is the gate 
bus system.  To me, that is the whole key behind the ARP sequencer being such a 
joy to use.  For those of you unfamilair with the ARP seq, it has a 3 position 
switch above each step of the seq which decides which of 3 gate outputs that 
step is gonna put a trig out on.  No stupid 3 digit display and 8 ambiguous  
buttons like on the often-confusing MAQ.  I am very surprised that more analog 
sequencers did not put this sort of implementation to use, are there any 
others?  

Another obvious advantage is that the ARP has alot more cv options than the 
MAQ, both in and out.  While the MAQ is simple cv\gate out pairs, the ARP has:

Gate bus 1 out
Gate bus 2 out
Gate bus 3 out
Position 1 out
Clocked Gate out
Start trig in
reset trig in
Step Trig in
Stop trig in
Start\stop in
Footswitch out
Clock Out
Clock FM in
PWM in
Quantized Output A and B
CV input (for transposing)
Input A and B (for running extneral CVs through the quantisers)
Sequencer output A and B (unquantized)
4 Multiples

So as you can see, the ARP is much better suited up for interfacing with other 
cv-ready gear.  The only input on the MAQ is via MIDI and as i discussed before 
some of the incoming MIDI data is lost on the CV gate outputs.

All in all i have to say i use the MAQ more compositionally. The lines i can 
come up with on that thing are like no other. It is unlimited what i can use it 
with, MIDI or not.  The modulation between the rows  (sequences) on the MAQ is 
what i find most useful, especially when they run at different speeds and 
lengths.  I can also dump its output and edit it down in logic quite nicely and 
still sendout through the pro4 to get to my cv stuff.  With all the 
cv-patchability fo the ARP, i find myself using it more in the middle of 
complex patches as a mod\trig source than as a sequencer in the conventional 
sense.  It usually ends up tangled in the middle of a synthi\2 voice\eml100 
patch that has me thoroughly confused about 2 hours into it. ;>  Please don't 
make me choose!



Rob - excuse the typos, I am in a perpetual hurry

http://www.umn.edu/nlhome/m211/feed/ (new songs, new pics, same old crap)

     "The patch in fig. 2-23 gives the sound of a cracking whip.  (Why don't 
     you try to synthesize some screams to go along with it?)"

                                     - Roland Model 104 Sequencer Manual