Computer Controlled wrote:See, now i think the opposite with the 303. I think it's rather easy to program. Sure, you have to do it in 3 parts, but it's not complicated in the least. Clumsy, but not complicated. The 202 IS a PITA though! But yields much better results as far as patterns are concerned. The old MC series sequencers are a complicated bunch as well.
How about easiest? SH-101/JX-3P!
The 303 was like the total opposite of efficiency, which is why I find it's sequencer horrible (but at the same time it's part of what makes it who/what it is). It's not that it was hard, it was just plain out terribly inefficient.
It's not that it's hard, but there's absolutely no reason why one should go through 16 steps 3 times in order to complete one 16 step sequence. When you put it more blatantly 48 steps = 16....
I mean 48 = 16 just doesn't make any sense.
The whole start over from the beginning bit makes it even worst.
The MC-50 I didn't find half bad at all though (can't speak for the other MCs prior to it)
anywho, yeah the 101 was DAMN easy. Limited as all mad, but very simple.
It's kinda funny, looking back at how it's sequencer was well....considered a sequencer...and fast forwarding today, it's sequencer would pretty much fall in the appregiator (functionality) category of many a synth.
the stuff going into appregiators now adays absolutely astounds me; as they essientially aren't just what was once considered a full blown sequencer, but they're often more than 5 times more full blown than the the full on sequencers of the past (80s and back) were.
Crazinnnnnnnnes