JJ Sequencer may become the greatest music arranger.

hmmmm.... but come to think of it, if the MPC would support Multitimbrality i wouldn't need any programm to integrate my mpc with the daw... i could simply use the daw as sequencer and the mpc as expander. that would be soo awesome

DrNibbert wrote:And in my opinion: I never had a single Bug in JJ OS, most of you are really just smartasses

That's a good one.

-storage:
the jj sequencer does absolutely nothing for backing up your projects from your mpc, your computer hard drive will be doing that and can do that with no software or applications needed. Everyone has been doing that since before the 2000xl came out. I remember there was an app for the computer that allowed you to save and add files to floppies for the 2000 classic because putting the disk and normally copying the data wouldn't work in the classic.

-looks:
i'm sorry, but it looks like shit. they could have at least made a skin to cover the shitty graphics or something... not sure how that works but that is no excuse. Hell, cubase for atari looked better!
this was cubase in 1989-1990:



you can see the article related to those pics here, and it seems that you can download cubase for atari at the bottom.
http://tamw.atari-users.net/cubase.htm

need I say more?

I mean if mpc users wanted software... for the past 5 years they had the FPC for fl studio (which also opens some of the files) or we would just be doing what we already have been doing.

this program offers nothing at all, the features are prehistoric in the DAW world, the graffics are almost as prehistoric as the features....

point is, the odd time that we feel like working with software we use ableton live, fl studio, reason, pro tools, and all of those programs can spin loops around the jj sequencer.
http://tamw.atari-users.net/cubase.htm

DrNibbert wrote:hmm, but taking a look at the NI Maschine I sometimes DO get a little jealous...

it really would be cool to integrate the MPC to the PC (AND Mac!) but the JJ Sequencer looks really lame, no offense Evil Sulli. Maybe instead of a whole Sequencer JJ could make a Plugin (VST/au etc.) for common DAWs, which can communicate with the mpc. So you could have the comfort of a "real" sequencer and the possibility to integrate the MPC as a controller(like in JJ sequencer).
I would buy that.


And in my opinion: I never had a single Bug in JJ OS, most of you are really just smartasses

Hey I just went to guitar center and tried out that Maschine you just stated, and it has the 4X4 sequences in it.It's also backwards. When I do my track mute like the Maschine set up I put pad 1 as 13 and pad 13 as 1, so it starts from the top.

evil A Sulli wrote:Hey I just went to guitar center and tried out that Maschine...

They have Guitar Center in Japan?

T7 wrote:

evil A Sulli wrote:Hey I just went to guitar center and tried out that Maschine...

They have Guitar Center in Japan?

hahaha exactly what i was thinking

The MPC already is 100% integrated with any computer. Just sequence and control your favorite software sampler with the MPC via MIDI (I like NI's Battery)... and then record the midi data that comes out the MPC into whatever DAW you want. What's so hard about that? Why is there a need for a JJSeq that basically does the exact same thing? I guess I'm just confused about this whole issue, the only people who know about JJ basically are JJ's customers who are people who either own an MPC1000 or an MPC2500. Why would he create something that it seems the majority of his clients think is pointless?

vsr600 wrote:I guess I'm just confused about this whole issue, the only people who know about JJ basically are JJ's customers who are people who either own an MPC1000 or an MPC2500. Why would he create something that it seems the majority of his clients think is pointless?

Exactly, you hit the nail right on the head. The main thing that helps JJ OS sell is word of mouth, either through forums like this one or by actually knowing someone who uses the JJ OS; that's how I found out about it and based on all the possitive feed back on this forum I bought it. So far, word of mouth isn't looking very good for the JJ sequencer. I wish JJ would just post a message on his site that said that the production of the JJ sequencer is temporarily on hold for a couple of months so that he can finish OS2XL, I bet after he finished he'd probably get more support for his sequencer.

-B.A.

vsr600 wrote:The MPC already is 100% integrated with any computer. Just sequence and control your favorite software sampler with the MPC via MIDI (I like NI's Battery)... and then record the midi data that comes out the MPC into whatever DAW you want.

Jeah, thats my opinion too, but what if you use more than one MPC-Program?
-> screw JJ Sequencer and enable multitimbrality

You have multitimbrality. Just set one progam to recive on one midi channel and the other to recieve on another midi channel (you have 16 per output). In the mpc you can record one part on one track with the midi channel set to the first program's and the other part to another track with the midi channel set to the second program's midi channel. You can play up to 32 software instruments on the mpc1000 and 64 software instruments on the mpc2500 (if you have that many midi inputs that is). If you only have 1 midi input, you can still play up to 16 seperate instruments.

Yeah everyone brings up great points.. NONE of which are able to be further disputed by evil a sulli..
surprised?

My thoughts are.. in light of noone really wanting JJSEQ, if JJ really wants to make software, Why not work on something that can streamline the process of moving samples from the computer to the mpc.

I have well over 150,000 samples on my computer. Stuff I have sampled and tweaked, downloaded, been given, sample packs from other apps, etc. Having to Catalog these, and renaming them for 16 character mpc format, and chopping larger waves in recycle, then mapping chops and/or one shots/drums in MPCMAID and other similar & somewhat buggy apps all gets TIRESOME as fiduck.

If JJ really wants to create a piece of software that mpc users will actually wanna buy because it actually serves a good purpose, I feel that addressing the tasks I mentioned above is what he should concentrate on. Having to use multiple apps to accomplish all that is annoying and worse, TIME CONSUMING. Plus he could incorporate some backup functionality as well, and other little features that could just make mpc life so much easier.

But I maintain my original opinion which is that JJ is not doing this because HE thinks you want or need it.. He is doing it because HE LIKES TOO. for him, the writing the software is probably challenging and in many ways a learning process. I think JJOS became too much like work for him. And when a hobby becomes work, it can remove the fun.

vsr600 wrote:You have multitimbrality. Just set one progam to recive on one midi channel and the other to recieve on another midi channel (you have 16 per output). In the mpc you can record one part on one track with the midi channel set to the first program's and the other part to another track with the midi channel set to the second program's midi channel. You can play up to 32 software instruments on the mpc1000 and 64 software instruments on the mpc2500 (if you have that many midi inputs that is). If you only have 1 midi input, you can still play up to 16 seperate instruments.

I guess I have gullible written on my forehead because I just tried this on JJOS2 and it's BS. Maybe this is only in XL?
Unless you can tell me where to "set one progam to recive on one midi channel and the other to recieve on another midi channel". All I can find is where to set the track's transmit channel.
Please tell me I'm wrong. I would love to be wrong about this.

right, you can only set the transmit channel, not the recieve channel. thats the problem

"JJ really does have a moral responsibility to continue to support the OS. ESPECIALLY if he is attempting to develop a Sequencer that is intended to be purchased "for use with JJOS"."

really? morals? we all bought stolen code for our mpc's. thats like saying if a dealer sells some chick some bad dope and she o.d.'s he has a moral obligation to report the bad smack to the cops' see how rediculous that sounds. sales of the os went way down and the money just isnt there. and you want a moral stand to be made.

on the side. it is easier to program for windows. there are alot of tools the make it easier. you think there is an mpc programming set? try hand typed line by line and recoded until the bugs are worked out.

Triple-X wrote:Yeah everyone brings up great points.. NONE of which are able to be further disputed by evil a sulli..
surprised?



But I maintain my original opinion which is that JJ is not doing this because HE thinks you want or need it.. He is doing it because HE LIKES TOO. for him, the writing the software is probably challenging and in many ways a learning process. I think JJOS became too much like work for him. And when a hobby becomes work, it can remove the fun.

im with ya 100% on this.
and also, jj revolutioned the mpc code and surely when it started it was all feckin excitin'.
now its probably more like: "fix bug, fix second bug, fix third bug, add small improvement, fix fourth bug" and so on. so i can see that the joy of creatin something new was transferred to this jj seq.
but...who needs a bad replica of a simple daw which is similar to the mpc (and maybe a bit compatible?) we all use mpcs for a lot of reasons (not only pads) so if we need to operate in a daw is more likely that we'll choose something really advanced and\or innovative and\or professional.
i really cant see the point of this software. maybe when its finished i'll change my mind but dont think so.