0S2XL Simult discussion

this thread is dedicated to focusing more directly on the changes to simult.
the new simult spec opens up new possibilities but not without a trade off. what do you guys think, and how do you use simult?
to get us started

new simult pros:

1. A simulted pad will now send a midi note to external midi equipment. You can now layer more easily when sequencing other synths/samplers from the mpc. I can imagine this might have creative potential for some users too?

2.A midi note is recorded for the source pad and all destination pads too. This means that the simulted pad can be adjusted after recording, independently of the source pad. Imagine altering durations, and velocitys after recording to tweak sounds or add variations. More simply, you could delete source and destination pads independently too.


new simult cons

1. Layering sounds after recording.
Some users decide that their drums need something extra after recording a pattern. Formally we were able to simult extra pads to the source pads that had been previously recorded in a sequence. Notes were not added to the sequence, but these new destination pads were triggered along with the source pads as the seq plays. This is no longer possible.

2. program switching. interesting variations can be made by switching programs as the sequnce plays. you can use it like a "pad mute" if you copy programs and alter a few settings here and there. it is useful for live performance. with the new simult, you couldnt switch between a pgm with simults and one without to make these type of chnages- because the note is recorded and not just triggered by the source pad.

3. simple copying,editing (seq mode, grid edit ) becomes more complicated.. as simult pads have to be included as well as the source pads.

potential work arounds?

new simult
i often simult pads lik this kick a11 snare a12 simkik b11 simsnare b12... if i set up a program like this to start with (when b11 and b12 are blank) i can add a layer later because the notes will already be recorded. (obviously i might decide to layer further on top of this- in which case im back to square one)

old simult

for seperate editing of note durations etc youd have to get busy in seq edit copying,transposing notes and making variations of your programs.

if old simult was returned you could use the chord feature to record notes into a sequence and trigger external instruments if you wanted. albeit without some of the niceties of simult.


Im sure this isnt everything so please contribute pros/cons and possible work arounds for either simult types.

I dont want no workarounds for this important feature (old simult)...

Nudging notes in step edit is much more time consuming now.

I thought you could use the chord thing to achieve the same effect as the new simult?

I thought you could use the chord thing to achieve the same effect as the new simult?

thats what i meant when i said this

if old simult was returned you could use the chord feature to record notes into a sequence and trigger external instruments if you wanted. albeit without some of the niceties of simult.

if old simult was to come back, you could do new simult type things with chord tracks. the draw backs to this would be related to the chord feature- you can only save one set of templates(which are chord track specific and not program specific) and it it is saved to the flash memory.

Also for the record i would prefer old simult.

Ok thanks, forgot that you could only save one set of chords, that kinda made me lose interest in that feature. If JJ could make them save with the sequence (and return simult to the old behavior) OS2xl will be near perfection.

Btw., i jumped the gun and mailed to JJ about this a few days ago already. I´m not the one who bombards him with requests but this is too important for me to accept it...

I also vote to bring back the "old simult" system.

Another point on this topic: Didn't the JJ once write that OS2XL would have a parameter in GPE to stagger the simulted pads? I was basically drooling over this, so it couldn't have been my imagination.

Maybe it was a dream but I would've swear that there WERE a very few versions of os1 where you could also choose simulted pads simply by hitting them. That would be cool.

I'm a bit dissapointed, that he's adding new stuff, while he could just add sugar to existing features, like he's done with ie: tc strenght, zoom in grid, undo key copy, q-link for numerical input, pgm mode and MORE..

Here's my take.
Both the Chord and the Arp need work to make them worth the code space.
No harm meant but they are just too lacking.
Lots of potential, but a lot needs to be done in that area.

It's probably those 2 features that cause the change in the SIMULT function.
In it's current process the SIMULT is just like sequencing pads manually.
In fact you can go to the SIMULT screen add PAD A03 to PAD A01 play something, then change it so PAD A05 is linked instead of PAD A03 and play something.
It will then just stack that on top, so you end up with notes from A01, A03 and A05, which you could have done in multiple passes anyway.
You could go to the pad (A01, A03, A05) and assign different samples if you want to try different sounds, but that's no different than normal sequencing.

The previous trigger mode was like the older MPC's and allowed for quicker more flexible trigger/layering methods.
It was much easier to fit and tweak samples together while listening as well as being able to edit a single note for all the triggers.

As I said I'm not sure if this change was because of the Chord and Arp but if it was those 2 features would have to deliver a lot more to be a fair trade off.

Sovereign wrote:Here's my take.
Both the Chord and the Arp need work to make them worth the code space.
No harm meant but they are just too lacking.

Agreed.

+1 for "Old Simult"
I used it all the time to layer drums! It was one of my most loved JJos features.
It just gave so much creative freedom while making drum tracks!
And dont forget This is a classic MPC feature def not one to mess with.
Please JJ bring "Old Simult" back!
Peace!

+1 old (big time..)

Not to disagree with you mikolo, just trying to get people discussing the SIMULT

new simult pros:

1. A simulted pad will now send a midi note to external midi equipment. You can now layer more easily when sequencing other synths/samplers from the mpc. I can imagine this might have creative potential for some users too?

Still just as easy to copy to a track and assign a MIDI channel for the EXT gear

2.A midi note is recorded for the source pad and all destination pads too. This means that the simulted pad can be adjusted after recording, independently of the source pad. Imagine altering durations, and velocitys after recording to tweak sounds or add variations. More simply, you could delete source and destination pads independently too.

Could do this in a sequence as well but without the manditory clutter the new creates


new simult cons

1. Layering sounds after recording.
Some users decide that their drums need something extra after recording a pattern. Formally we were able to simult extra pads to the source pads that had been previously recorded in a sequence. Notes were not added to the sequence, but these new destination pads were triggered along with the source pads as the seq plays. This is no longer possible.

this is the real area where the new SIMULT starts to become a problem or loses it's efficiency

2. program switching. interesting variations can be made by switching programs as the sequnce plays. you can use it like a "pad mute" if you copy programs and alter a few settings here and there. it is useful for live performance. with the new simult, you couldnt switch between a pgm with simults and one without to make these type of chnages- because the note is recorded and not just triggered by the source pad.

sadly enough you have to make changes at the sample assignment level in the new SIMULT to try new variatioins on existing data

3. simple copying,editing (seq mode, grid edit ) becomes more complicated.. as simult pads have to be included as well as the source pads.

creates a pretty clutter environment when you look at a sequence and a true headache to edit

potential work arounds?


Honestly unless JJ can pull off a selective option for the 2 modes, it would really be hard to retain the current SIMULT as the only choice.
All that you can gain from it could already be done with simple sequencing and is probably less of a used method than the old SIMULT.
It's almost as bad as when Akai thought they could replace SIMULT with layers that use the same settings.

mikolo wrote:new simult pros:

1. A simulted pad will now send a midi note to external midi equipment. You can now layer more easily when sequencing other synths/samplers from the mpc. I can imagine this might have creative potential for some users too?

Yeah glad this was finally added.. I tried setting a simult to play a fifth (C & G notes) sent to an external synth, but when you release the pad the C note decays but the G note which was simulted on gets stuck sustaining. Seems like a bug to me. Is anyone experiencing the same thing?

I'm hoping to eventually be able to set up my own chord programs which will function with note repeat because the current chord mode doesn't lock to note repeat.

Rinseout---

And anyone else who has written to JJ about bringing back the old simult system-- Have you received a response? I'd like to know where the JJ stands regarding our general unhappiness with the change.

elevated wrote:Rinseout---

And anyone else who has written to JJ about bringing back the old simult system-- Have you received a response? I'd like to know where the JJ stands regarding our general unhappiness with the change.

I would say it's very important for people to let JJ know they prefer the old SIMULT, in hopes of getting it changed back.

No response yet.

This is important to me, i´m right now back at OS2 and already miss the t.c. strength.
So who´s got the best connection to JJ here? He def. needs to go back to the old way.