Is this similar to the master track on the OP-Z?
3 Likes
And still, how many great albums were created using those rudimentary MIDI sequencers in those years?
And what a giant leap forward it felt to use those digital machines with recall and internal memory!!!
Roland MSQ-700
Korg SQD-1
Latronic Notron
Alesis MMT-8
Manikin Schrittmacher
Doepfer MAQ and Regelwerk
Yamaha QY700
Sequentix P3
Akai MPC60
…
6 Likes
Oh plenty 
Plenty of good albums!
I don’t think anyone would ask for some of the machines back though, while others like many in your list would be welcome.
The P3 comes to mind (edit: in your list)
Later the Octopus too
Then Elektron.
And really there were a lot of PCs, Amigas, Atari STs with Pro24, Cubase, Cakewalk, etc. some trackers, etc. Macs, and later software.
I used Cubase for the longest time. Probably wrote about 200+ tracks in it. Never want to see it again either 
If I had the space (and the time to use them) I’d love to collect old MIDI sequencers. They all had their own singularities and quirks that led to different, often unexpected results.
I’d give a kidney for a Notron and I’d love to have my Cubase/Atari ST rig back (lent to my young cousin who was starting to make music, but he trashed it after a few months without even telling me…)
2 Likes
Circuit Tracks kind of does that, although it‘s not really meant to be used for performance.
Yeah this is why bitwig and ableton both offer the groovebox, live arrangement option in the session mode, which records into the arrange layout and then allows for long modulation,transitions that cross over the bar line …etc.
I’m not sure there is a more intuitive way than this currently, if one wants to live perform an arrangement, capture it and then edit and polish it.
A lot of people skip the session view and just arrange by hand in the arrange area. It’s a natural inclination if you started on Cubase or protocols and got used to doing in that way.
But even in the pro tools era, a ton of music was made by tracking out of an MPC. And that MPC arrangement was typically done live by hand and then exploded into its own sequence before getting dumped into the daw.
So ableton basically copied that workflow, and I think that is one big reason why it is so popular with electronic artists to this day.
4 Likes
I don’t know if this is such an uncommon thing, you’ll find it on many step sequencers and OP-Z has something along these lines as mentioned (it’s not a simple transpose, but individual steps (or all of them) can be set to respond that way.)
M8 has a global transpose that you can sequence, adjust in real time and also map to MIDI (although I think that’s a CC rather than notes.) That’s in addition to a phrase transpose in chains.
I’m not trying to create a debate here but being as I’ve received a few corrections I’ll reply to yours @ubiquitous
So far I’ve heard the OPZ, the Novation Circut and now the dirty wave. Admittedly I have never used any of these three. However I have literally used nearly every other one. All of the Elektrons (A4 does it kind of), electibes, Roland boxes, maschine, maschine +, MPC 2500, 500, 1000, Live & Live II. Deep down I know there are more but those are the ones that are coming to mind.
Most of them have some type of transpose function. Most however only do one track at a time and the function is not designed with performance in mind.
The ones that do don’t typically transpose in key in a similar way to the OXI One which I’ve used as well and the implementation is simple and brilliant.
If the OPZ, Circuit and dirtywave truly do this than I stand corrected, somewhat. But if they do that’s 3 out of 300 and 3 out of 300 is a super low number.
I think if more would implement this feature it would be a big step in the right direction and would turn a pattern into something a bit more dynamic with relative ease.
1 Like
The entire “Groovebox is for performance” is a misnomer. I’d like to know what percentage of Elektron boxes ever see the lights of a stage. I would guess that the vast majority are used in the bedroom studio for constructing beats, then turning those beats into songs. I was using a Sequential Drum Trax on stage in the 1980’s. It had the ability to string patterns into complete songs. At some point manufacturers decided that they needed to remove song modes features to give their products street credit. All they really do is push people back to the computer. In the 90’s you could compose entire songs on Roland boxes. There is no reason we should not be able to do that now.
8 Likes
Agreed 100%.
1 Like
I’m interested! - what are those reasons?
In short: saving time and having clarity on the inputs.
The printed tracks are compatible with any DAW and can be laid out to fit the engineer’s personal workflow and preferences. Moreover, the musician decides which tracks should actually be printed and which not. It also encourages the musician to name each track in such a way that the counterpart can at least relate to. In turn, the engineer can map these names to their own.
Providing the song structure metadata (sections, bpm, time sigs, etc) is still useful, otherwise communication can become a bit complicated.
It might be a misnomer, but music gear sells on aspiration. And the fantasy of being a performer on a stage is a lot more enticing than the fantasy of being a composer.
2 Likes
The op-z does exactly this using master track.
You can select any of the 8 audio tracks to transpose to any note, and the interface LEDs/app highlights which intervals are in key. Allegedly it uses the bass track (and other synth tracks) to detect your key. You can also transpose drum tracks to create fills. You can transpose live by playing a key or record a sequence of transposes which could be individual steps in a bar up to 16 bars long. Track length of master track can be independent from the other tracks which could lead to complex and evolving musical progressions. It’s quite powerful.
You can also transpose individual tracks and steps within tracks using step components and trigger those components on defined intervals or randomly.
I believe (but might be wrong) that you can also transpose incoming audio from the module track. But I might have that wrong and you can only transpose notes going out to a synth via midi.
The opz master track is a great and rather rare example of a groovebox sequencer that engages seriously and creatively with chord progressions. It’s magical and brilliant when running slower than the other channels in a pattern. Unfortunately you can’t run it with the rest of the channels’ patterns changing around it (you can at least record mute for all drums or all synths on them, using a slow running performance tricks track).
Shame the opz synths are a bit dull but it’s still brilliant overall.
1 Like
So, one thing I love about the Digi box layout is that the 8-over-8 layout of the pattern bank helps me compose and rework songs.
Before it had a Song Mode, I still thought of the two rows of 8 as a sort of “cheat sheet” to break my compositions or sets into pieces that were easy to think about. Like so…
FIRST
Since most songs have a main part, usually in one key (“verse”), and a second part in another key (“chorus,” “bridge,” etc.) I almost always keep the main key on the top row and the second key on the bottom one. Same goes if Part B is based on a different tempo, dynamic, etc.
It really helps to separate the “A” and “B” parts like this because then…
THEN
Once I have my patterns kind of laid out in a logical way on the pattern bank, I put what seems like the intro on the left, and the outro on the right and try to “walk” from the leftmost pattern across the bank, either going right or down/up to change patterns.
This way I have two clear options:
- Move right to the pattern one slot over and continue the current section of the song
- Move down to the pattern below to transition into Part B, whatever it may be (“Take it to the bridge”)
And I can try different walking “paths” through a song and feel which one’s “right” in a pretty intuitive way. You quickly get an instinct for whether you want to move across or down.
It also makes typing in long chains easier and less of a mindbender.
This is why I wish the digiboxes had a “swap pattern slot” option for non-destructive editing, so that I could move a pattern into its “correct” slot and know that I’m not overwriting anything.
6 Likes
that is proof of the raw talent and dedication that bands in the 80s used to create their ground breaking music. I am impressed watching OMD bang out Enola Gay on a Korg MS20 and Depeche Mode or Skinny Puppy perform on the ancient drum machines and ancient Roland synths years ago.
1 Like
Another thing on this—not sure if other folks do this, but I often use blank patterns as a visual reminder of a big change in a song.
Like, if the back half of a song is much louder, or has a different main sample, etc, I like to leave a “gap” pattern between it and the one before.
That way when I come back to the song later, there’s a clear visual separation between like and unlike patterns.
I have to admit, in my younger days I bought a lot of instruments and imagined myself playing all of them on stage.
1 Like
Ok, the state sounds enticing and it also depends on the stage. They come in any size and usually do not live up to the vision 
Nevertheless, it is always a great feeling.