Stab Frenzy wrote:I wonder what you're basing that idea of the 'sequencing crowd' on. As somebody who probably falls into that category I don't agree with your reasoning at all, in fact it's probably the polar opposite of the reality. When you're playing a sequence, as calaverasgrande pointed out, you want maximum timbral variation to contrast the repetition of the notes. You also want the smoothest, most flexible variation in modulation, which is where analogue excels.
So, in essence, you're saying that you are representative of the average of sequencing musicians who employ analog. Is that what you're saying, Stabby? That you embody the voice of the thousands who cry out for analog to go along with their DAW? That all of the tons of people who seek to emulate music they like and have no idea what benefits analog has, but know that they should want it? In fact, are you saying you are the exact person you so frequently mock?
Because I don't think any of those things about you, and I don't think you are who I'm talking about at all.
All of that being said, I do appreciate those who seek variance in their sequencing. But most seem to want modulation that syncs with the tempo of their music. And they don't want to have to tune. And they want all of the things they're getting from the synth at the time of programming to always happen exactly as they did when the programming happened. No one seems to be addressing those issues. But if they're all fine, and the "sequencing crowd" wants ultimate variation, doesn't mind having to tune, doesn't mind that it's almost impossible to sync modulation with tempo, and likes unpredictable outcomes< etc. ... then I rescind my spectulation.