This topic contains 17 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by 
Christian 9 years, 3 months ago.
-
Posts
-
@zaq: i understand your concerns. i think every user needs to understand that these hardware limitations in regards to memory are simply there. this actually seems to mean that any progress in features can only be made by cutting off other features and that this is nothing you can influence (significantly). so, as long as you still offer the current version of the zaquencer i don’t really see a problem. zaq 1.1 runs well and bugfree (?). if some people need 192 patterns so be it. many others (like me) would probably call 24 patterns plenty and 48 pattern even massive, and would rather see certain refinements in the sequencing possibilities added to future versions.
@pure:I second this. 32 patterns, or maybe even half of 192, gimme a sec, 96, would be plenty of patterns in my opinion.
I was also thinking about maybe offering different firmwares, which offer differing feature content. I.e. you could have one bcr running as it is now with 1.01 and another on hypermode, which only comes with 96 patterns, but which in turn would have more CC lanes and per step ratcheting.
i’d be very interested in that.
Hi guys,
thanks for all your suggestions! I really appreciate it, with combined brainpower we get more refined ideas.Regarding this topic, I´m not decided on how to proceed yet though.
My plan is to first keep working on the SysEx export and if I can get that to work maybe it´ll be an easier decision. 192 patterns were decided at the beginning when it looked like export was impossible (which it might still be – I´ll see very soon).Working on the flash pattern arrangement is a hassle, also for the user, as everytime a new parameter is added or changed everyone has to do a flash init, which is deleting all your old patterns.
Also, to rework the flash would be quite time-consuming and I have to see if that time can be funded/justified.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.