Why is Simultaneous Sequence global?

1. Make Sequence 1
2. Set Sequence 2 to play SS 1
3. Goto Sequence 3, it's also SS 1, why?

Shouldn't you be able to set different sequences to have different SS settings? What if you want Sequence 2 to play Sequence 1, but you also want Sequence 4 to play Sequence 3?

the way you suggest would be better for me, i cant remember what it was like on os 1 and 2.

i like it the way it is but i can see also the benefit of the way Jamon suggested.
it would be best to have both options available. you can request it from JJ and see what he says.

What benefit does it have being global? If you want to SS a sequence on lots of sequences, can't you just set it on all of them?

Jamon wrote:Shouldn't you be able to set different sequences to have different SS settings? What if you want Sequence 2 to play Sequence 1, but you also want Sequence 4 to play Sequence 3?

This is a little of topic but it's related, here it goes...

Do you guys think that it could be possible for JJ to implement a feature where you can simultaniously play more than just two sequences? About 10 years ago I was using FL studio (Fruity Loops back then) and there was a song mode where you could get all you patterns (in our case sequences) and arrange them on a grid, it made it really easy for you to be able to arrange a song. This is a terrible but simple example of what it looked like, each square represents a 4 bar sequence (or whatever length you want you your sequences to be), the description of the pattern on the far right would actually be typed in where it says Pattern 1, 2, 3, etc., you could name it whatever you want, I just did it this way for clarity...

PATTERN
Pattern 1 -- -- [] [] [] [] [] -- [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] -- [] [] [] [] -- -- (main pattern, drums, bass, a few other sounds)
Pattern 2 -- -- [] [] -- -- -- --[] []-- -- -- --[] [] -- -- -- --[] [] -- -- (different instrumentation for hook)
Pattern 3 -- -- -- -- -- --[] [] -- --[] [] -- -- -- ----[] [] -- -- -- -- - (synth)
Pattern 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- --[] -- -- -- -- -- --------[] -- -- -- -- -- - (Pattern 1 with change in baseline)
Pattern 5 -- -- -- -- [] [] -- -- ----[] [] [] [] -- -- -- --[] [] -- -- -- - (piano)
Pattern 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ----[] --[] -- -- -- --[] -- -- -- -- -- -- (mandatory gun shots )
Pattern 5 [] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- (first sequence for intro)
Pattern 6 -- [] -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- (sencond sequence for into)
Pattern 7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- [] -- (first sequence for outro)
Pattern 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- [] (first sequence for outro)

I think this could look similar to how the grid programing looks but instead of the left of the screen showing the pads it could show the sequences and you could move around the screen placing markers where you want sequences to play the same way we do now when we are programing sequences using the grig to lay down drums for example.

Do you guys think it's possible to add a feature like this to the OS? or maybe add it as a new feature to OS3, that's if JJ decides to put out another one?

I don't know, because at this point it seems like he's getting tired of working on JJ OS. It's a lot of work I'm sure, and all the bugs aren't even ironed out of XL yet, so I'm not sure they'd want to hear requests for major new features.

But that was one of the things I expected the MPC to do. I also used Fruity 10 years ago, and learned that way of thinking. I thought the MPC would be like Fruity and Ableton Live, where there was more realtime ability, and the patterns could be played independently.

Instead, the MPC uses tracks within the sequences. So in Fruity you could have a sequence for just kick drums, then another one with snares, and if you wanted a section without the snares you just remove that from the timeline. But in the MPC what you do is, make Track 1 with kicks, Track 2 with snares, and use Track Mutes to mute the snares. That's okay, but the problem is, everything has to be in the sequence.

The power of the other way is, you could have a 1-bar pattern with some little melody, and tell it to play in the song at any time you want. With the MPC, if your main sequence is 16-bars, you have to either have a track that repeats the melody over and over and only unmute it when you want, or just copy it when you want. It's not as flexible, and isn't as easy to update a single little pattern to have it change everywhere.

So, the Simultaneous Sequence thing is weak in comparison, and is really just a tiny hack to get a little bit of that flexibility. Really the MPC seems to have been designed long ago, before Fruity and PC audio software, and grew out of simple drum machines. From that perspective, it's amazing it does all it does. But for people who learned on PC software, it seems like it's using limited paradigms and isn't the realtime flexible instrument it could be.

Jamon wrote:I don't know, because at this point it seems like he's getting tired of working on JJ OS.

After his recent influx of JJOS updates I was thinking/hoping the opposite actually... and I hope I'm right, that he's getting tired of that waste-of-time JJ seq rubbish and is back on the case with the real deal which is JJOS for the mpc.
Fingerz crossed X

Jamon wrote:What benefit does it have being global? If you want to SS a sequence on lots of sequences, can't you just set it on all of them?

well, i could just as easily ask you the same question: what benefit is there from having a preselected SS for each sequence? if that is what you want, why not just use SEQ EDIT and copy & paste the sequence you want to simult into a track on your main sequence? then they are always paired up & you can mute/unmute as needed.

The benefit is that if SS were relative, you could do everything you can do now and more. If it's global, you cannot do anything except have every single sequence simultaneously playing another. That is limited. If it's relative, you could have every single sequence playing another if you want, or each sequence could play a different one, some could have no simultaneous playing, etc.

If X can do everything Y can do and more, then X > Y.

Copying and pasting has several major disadvantages. Being able to have patterns that can symbolically be played simultaneously with others is a whole other approach.

Jamon wrote:If X can do everything Y can do and more, then X > Y.

well, that's why i said:

it would be best to have both options available. you can request it from JJ and see what he says.