controlvoltage wrote:PS) related topic: is there an ATMEGA with larger code space that is compatible with x0xb0x?
controlvoltage wrote:Is the "live edit with MIDISYNC" mode (x0x plays slaved to MIDI clock, while step and realtime pattern editing is enabled) still gone?
Maybe I'm the only one, but this was the mode I used almost 100% of the time. For me, it was completely perfect for live jamming and improvisation...
pangrus wrote:Very good job!
I've upgraded my xOxbOx this morning, is better to have the triplet mode than fast editing...perharps the lenght of a triplet pattern should be 12?
SokkOS is amazing, far better than the original TB303 sequencer!
3phase wrote:with legato i mean tie..
the slide on a real 303 sets in after the step is passed so having one note with 3 steps.. with the second and third tie.. but the last one on slide, followed by a rest and than a single step one oktave up will makes something totally different than anything you could do with a xox..
do you know this article?
The gate goes high at the start of clock pulse 0 - the positive edge.
The gate goes low half-way through clock pulse 3 - on its negative
That is for a normal, 1/16 note. So there are 3.5 clock pulses on
and 2.5 off.
3phase wrote:guys..you allways make patters where every 16th not is posessed.. try to make some more original lines that use notes from various length and rest steps.. and compare than..
a 303 sequencer emulation that is limitetd to sequences that have every 16 note posessed? its allowed to have a quarter note silence in a sequence..or in music in general
3phase wrote:and.. the missing legato event.. that wouldnt effect older sequences that just dont use it..
Acrobatics wrote:3phase wrote:and.. the missing legato event.. that wouldnt effect older sequences that just dont use it..
The legato tricks works perfectly, mr, are you sure of what you are saying?
Or it is probably the case you have listened to a damaged x0x or x0x OS?
3phase wrote:the last time i tried to convert my 303 lines to xox lines it hasnt worked in a singkle case out of 4...than i gave up...
Sokkan wrote:pACHE wrote:That was I supposed Do you think it's hard to do code pattern transpose "on the fly", i.e. dissociate this with pattern start ?
I have to figure out a way to do changes with my machine drum now
It should actually be trivial and may not even take up any more code space, it is perhaps a good idea? Since you are already using external means of controlling the x0xb0x I see no point in having it transpose only on pattern boundaries. I will look into it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests