I like Logic for many reasons. Sometimes I like that the sequencer is totally regular and orderly and normal. Sometimes I don't. I can do all kinds of awesome things with sequencers in Pd, like making sequencer patches with individual lanes that run at independent rates, for example. So I'm setting out to design a big improvisatory sequencer patch that includes drums, synths, samples, and loop-based recording. It will be totally awesome.

So designing sequencers and using vintage drum machine samples has got me thinking. I've read a handful of interviews with hiphop and techno producers who swear by hardware sequencers and drumboxes. They particularly tend to talk about the "feel" of particular sequencer or drumbox. I get that I won't really be able to replicate the metal frame of a LinnDrum in Pd, that there's something about the buttons, the knobs, the hardware-ness of these machines that encourages a certain style of composition unique to each box.

Given that I'm accepting certain limitations in GUI with any sequencer I design in Pd, how can I effectively create a sequencer that has a unique feel? And then, how can I create another one, with another unique feel? And on and on.

I also understand that certain sequencers, apart from the compositional elements of their front panels, also "color" their rhythmic outputs by leading or delaying the notes in a pleasing manner. Are there schematics somewhere that indicate how this occurs, per individual sequencer?

Also, an appeal to y'all imaginations. Who has cool ideas for sequencers? How can we flavor our sequencers uniquely so they aren't just spitting out Logic-esque, highly regulated streams of notes?

You guys are awesome!

D

PS - Best believe I am working on weirding up Logic's sequencer from within!

i find, one of the good things to do, is to play round with a normal sequencer, and when you get a thought like "oh man, i wish i could just turn off the second half of the sequence every now and then", write that down, and then include that function in your own sequencer.

also, if you're designing a sequencer using pd's gui, those toggle buttons are absolute crap. but you can make them better with a bit of tweaking. instead of having just the little X show up in the middle of the toggle box, send a message like this:

[r $0-toggle-1(
|

• <- whatever number you put in here, is the colour
  |
  [color $1 $1 $1(
  |

that way, the whole box gets turned on and off with a click. makes it much easier to see what's happening.

also, one of the biggest strengths with sequencing in pd is the ability to randomise, either randomly or intelligently. for example, if you are making a random drum pattern, then you probably want more notes to fall on 0,4,8, 12 than on 5, 7, 11....etc , so you build a patch that does that with weighted randoms and then you get reasonably cool sequences right off the bat that can be tweaked manually to work well.

just thinking of your idea about 'colouring' sequencers so that they lead or delay notes, and i think a cool way to do that would be to actually colour the individual sounds. so, for example, with a typical bass drum and hihat thing, you probably want the bass drum to be pretty steady, so you could assign it a colouration factor of 0.2 or something. but the hihat should be allowed to roam a bit, so maybe give it a 0.4.

but yeah, i think one of the best things about pd, is that you can program in all sorts of bends and tweaks that regular sequencers don't have. especially randomising stuff, makes it easy to try a heap of sequences very quickly. only problem i find with this type of method, is that it does tend to lead to the sounds becomign very erratic very quickly. with traditional sequencers, it takes a while to get all the notes in there, and you're more likely to just let it loop for a while and keep the same groove. but once you start getting into highspeed loop prototypes with randomization, you can switch between heaps of different sounds really quickly. this is really cool and definitely has advantages, but on the other hand, music is also something which has to come from the soul, so the jitterbug randomness does often mess things up too much. it's a bit of a balancing act, maybe. but if you can program the randomising stuff to work well and generally hit on good results, then that is better.

not sure if i answered much of the original question, but good to have a think about these things. cheers

A fantastically helpful reply. I had been making a patch that manufactures sequencer grids, which I might finish, though it's more of a cool idea than a practical necessity. While I was making it I did have many many thoughts about what would be cool, and I came up with a really big one, which I will share when I've finished a version of it. It presents one solution to the randomness/inhumanity problem.

Yeah I was considering using color changes with the toggles. I am pondering allowing for color-based velocity for each note, or maybe using an "accent" system that loudens accented notes by a certain modifiable percentage. I was also considering using structures to make a sequencer, but I don't want it to be really processor heavy. I might also purchase Max at some point to get another perspective on this live machine I'm building.

I do like the idea of weighting different sounds, timewise, maybe having some sort of changeable lead/delay param for each sequencer lane. Of course I am making pretty straightforward beat music, so anything weighted too heavily will have to be for texture and color rather than the core of the beat itself. I am also curious about the different ways to shuffle sequences, as with the MPC having a particularly pleasing shuffle algorithm. I guess I'm interested in rhythmic algorithms.

Anyway, I'm gonna just build as many different kinds of sequencers as I can think of, put them in a big patch, then have a MIDI router that allows me to output the sequences as note, CC, or other types of messages, then control various Pd and Logic synths from there. My true mission is to design a performance instrument that allows for tons of flexibility (independent sequence lengths, or being able to switch the output of a given sequence element), and with a very special twist. I can barely contain myself.

I think the ability to output any kind of message is one of the true strengths of Pd when compared with Logic. If I want to generate movement with a synth's params, I have to use that synth's internal mod matrix (if it has one), or I have to use automation which exists in a GUI element separated from any note information. I don't want to go digging into the nested windows of my sequencer program to be able to quickly program automation.

This conversation has me really excited. Thanks for the valuable input. And who are you, by the way?

D

A very interesting approach to give sequencers a feeling is called "groove mapping". Sofwares like live or acid implement it.

Basically, the idea is to separate the groove/feeling from the score, so that you can apply the groove to any score. The main parameters are velocity, duration and timeshift for every note position.

It enables you to write new scores that automatically groove or swing, without editing individual notes. I used this principle for the swing in the patch posted there: http://puredata.hurleur.com/sujet-4544-drums4dummies, though it is a standalone player from which all barely usable editing stuff was removed.

My implementation of groove mapping is very messy as I started to learn pd for this purpose, but I'd be happy to share it with anyone interested.

Kyro, I know that Reason also has broader parameters for modifying the groove of a project. Thanks for the reminder. That also gives me a really interesting idea.

Start with a 16-element bipolar array. The x-values correspond to position in a 16-step sequence. The y-values correspond to lead or delay for an individual step. And then maybe more macro controls like, "lead every third note," etc. Oh the math has me drooling. Automating such a sequencer over time would be particularly interesting. Obi did something along these lines, as I recall.

Also, groove mapping seems like a really good project for learning pd. My hat goes off to you!

D

You're right, arrays are perfect for this. Data structures to save and display scores, and dynamic patching for scripting are very helpful tools too. But these aspects of pd are not very rewarding for a beginner. I must admit that sound synthesis, that I only started recently, is far much funny.

Yeah. Structures are crazy. I started to get into it as a beginner (I think I am intermediate now), and it was so frustrating to me. I haven't actually gotten too far into sound synthesis, though I'm going to have to soon if I want my live box to be really complete.

Hey mod, your toggle color idea is amazing. I used it to make a three-stage toggle that gives a different color on each click. So basically I can now select one of two velocities per sequencer cell. I put in a delay object so that a single click gives one value, and a double-click gives another, then a click to either value clears.

I don't see any reason why I couldn't do four-stage toggles, or five, or whatever. The implications for sequencer programming in Pd are vast and awesome. Again, props for the original idea. I've included the patch. I will clean it up and repost later (is that bad form?). The next project will be a router system that allows me to change the states of individual toggles with a single instance of the three-stage counter. Computer science can be so sexy...

Oh, and has anyone already done this, and I just didn't know it?

D

http://www.pdpatchrepo.info/hurleur/three-stage-toggle.pd

...and there is totally something wrong with this patch. But I'm gonna keep working on it!

@mod said:

but on the other hand, music is also something which has to come from the soul, so the jitterbug randomness does often mess things up too much.

I like to think of the randomness as dither for the soul. (My soul is a WWII aircraft computer.)

Hey, thanks for that link. I just read about dither for the first time a couple of days ago in a textbook for a music technology class. From my understanding, It can be used in low-signal waveforms so that frequencies that can't be read accurately are portrayed as noise. Otherwise, we could get unwanted harmonics that could interfere with everything else going on.

I didn't think about any other possible uses the process could have. That thing about the aircraft is pretty interesting. You learn something new every day, and sometimes you learn even more about the same thing the day after that.