Rev 2 firmware is it just me?

[Pym]

I'm not here in a totally "official" capacity, I do this on my own time (it's nearly midnight right now) because I actually do believe in what we do and really hate it when you guys get frustrated to a point where it interferes with the joy you get from the instruments we make. If you have read my posts over the years I think you'd have less reason to doubt me and I hope others will speak to my willingness to be upfront and honest about tough issues; but it is what it is.

What I hope you can understand is I'm not trying to make "excuses". I'm just trying to give you information to help you manage expectations of what we will be able to do and in what timeframe as I see things in this moment. I know it's impossible to tell the difference through text and especially given the current extreme hand we've been dealt over the past year, but we are doing our best.

If we can agree that I'm not trying to lie or mislead you I am willing to try and communicate more, but if I'm going to be fighting against that baseless narrative constantly I'm just going to stop posting. It's just exhausting for me and it caused a serious burnout last time.

Not my intention to be a party pooper... there's just too much "strange" going on with this, for me to believe the excuses and "explanations". I assume the covid excuse was more convenient than true. But prior to that one, we were supposed to think that they've been working on an update for years... "just wait a little longer, it'll be here soon" repeatedly, would imply they were actually working on it, wouldn't it...? then all of a sudden "oops, we just realized there was no space left for updates"... to "ok, we'll have a look at it... oh, btw, what bugs were we supposed to have been trying to fix, all this time, again?" I mean, if they didn't even keep a log of the bugs, wth were they trying to fix these previous years?

The impression I get from this, and the rest of it, is that SCI are not genuine in their communications with their customers... I don't want to accuse them of straight out LYING, but it's getting pretty hard to explain away now, isn't it?

Shitty behaviour, or making mistakes, is one thing. But not owning up to it, pretending stuff, lying, is something else...

Some forum members here have asked to be told what's going on, straight up... like, either way, just TELL US! (preferably years ago)... why? Because SCI have been anything but transparent on this one, pretending to be working on an update, and up until lately, hardly even communicating directly with their Rev2 customers on this issue on here.

Sorry for blasting SCI, I really wish the situation was different, but I had to get this off my chest.

[jok3r]

I don't know why this thread heated up that much again?

I thought Sacred Synthesis is going to collect the major bugs, and Sequential will eventually fix it (or not, if not possible or no time... ). Can't we just wait what will happen now?

Most of you are repeating yourself over and over again, instead of testing and testing your Rev2s for reproducible bugs, that are not described yet.

It is perfectly ok to give vent to one's anger, but after there is at least a kind of roadmap (collecting bugs and then we will see), this has to end and go in a more constructive direction. Otherwise I can perfectly understand why Pym and other don't communicate more in this forum. The sound makes the music... as we say here... ;-)

[maxter]

Don't take it personally, Pym! I'm just airing my concerns and impressions (aka "ranting") of SCI customer communication relating to the Rev2. I'm sorry you're "caught in the middle". I'd put the blame for that on SCI though, as I don't think WE, the customers, are to blame. We've been quietly and patiently waiting for YEARS, given the "silent treatment", years when I have barely even touched the Rev2, as I've been awaiting an update fixing the bug(s) that'll let me continue my work I was doing on the P'08 all those years ago... yeah, that's a LITTLE frustrating, and then comes the message that "ooops, there's no space left for updates..."    on which I called BS, and then it changed to "takes time to optimize the OS" (which I was suspecting, vocally, all along). Well, time is long overdue, WHY haven't SCI been working on this in the first place, when we've repeatedly been told "it's coming soon", for years? That's my criticism of the COMPANY that is SCI. Rhetoric questions if you will, not asked to get a definitive answer.

Please excuse me for blasting SCI, I have nothing personal against you. It's just that the information given throughout the years has turned out to be INCONSISTENT, inconsequential... a good word in case SCI is thinking of a name change. I'll use it from now on.

I'm not here in a totally "official" capacity

Well, I think someone SHOULD be communicating in an official capacity with us on this. That's obviously NOT your fault, but inconSequentials again...

I do this on my own time (it's nearly midnight right now) because I actually do believe in what we do and really hate it when you guys get frustrated to a point where it interferes with the joy you get from the instruments we make. If you have read my posts over the years I think you'd have less reason to doubt me and I hope others will speak to my willingness to be upfront and honest about tough issues; but it is what it is.

Well, that sucks... again NOT your nor OUR fault, but inconSequentials once again.
"...really hate it when you guys get frustrated to a point where it interferes with the joy you get from the instruments we make"
That's mildly put in my case. And yes, I hate it too... a lot.

If we can agree that I'm not trying to lie or mislead you I am willing to try and communicate more, but if I'm going to be fighting against that baseless narrative constantly I'm just going to stop posting. It's just exhausting for me and it caused a serious burnout last time.

I'll agree with that, I really don't think you're to blame for this mess at all. I'm honestly sorry that you're the one who gets to clean it up, as I think/assume it's not "your" mess to begin with. Not a fun spot to be. I was just trying to point out that the information given by inconSequential through the years has been inconsistent, it just doesn't add up, and there's no explaining that. SOMEONE, in "official capacity" I don't know, has apparently dealt us misleading or false information (coming soon, coming soon, coming soon?). I'm sure you can understand the shock, disbelief and distrust after then being told it's not coming, after these years... A feeling of being deceived and then insulted on top. But I'm sorry that it is you who gets to deal with the flack against inconSequential for this crap. It's just that you're the only representative of inconSequential here, but it wasn't my intention to accuse you of anything personally, I apologize if I did, or if that's how I came across... But please do forward the message to those who made the mess!!! -A lot of us Rev2 owners are not happy...

Sorry jok3r for repeating myself, and for not being very constructive, but I've had it up to here... and quietly, patiently waiting obviously didn't work, so I suppose I have some trouble with "just waiting" these days... This is the steam from years of boiling, but I meant no offense to anyone personally, but to the COMPANY I refer to as inconSequential. If customers don't complain, nothing will happen, as we've seen. We probably should've been this vocal a long time ago...

I applaud and thank Pym and the other forum members here for still working on it, personally I just get so frustrated even by just looking at the Rev2. I think I hate it. My apologies if I've been rude or improper, too blunt or whatever, no personal offense was meant.

[maxter]

I should add, that Pym having to step up and make these efforts on his own spare time, does anything but change my impressions of inconSequential...

[jok3r]

Sorry jok3r for repeating myself, and for not being very constructive, but I've had it up to here... and quietly, patiently waiting obviously didn't work, so I suppose I have some trouble with "just waiting" these days... This is the steam from years of boiling, but I meant no offense to anyone personally, but to the COMPANY I refer to as inconSequential. If customers don't complain, nothing will happen, as we've seen. We probably should've been this vocal a long time ago...

Maxter, I can perfectly understand your feelings and I think most users here are feeling at least 80% the same. I just wanted to point out that at a certain point in a discussion everything is said. At least that's what I believe. Until that point everything said can be understood as "customers speak out loud" for something... but after this point is reached, if everything is running in circles, it would be just annoying to me, if I was a Sequential employee. And I don't think that will lead to anything...

So please, let's all just calm down a bit and wait and see what Pym can or cannot do for us... of course, a regular update on this case would be nice and not asked too much.

[Pym]

You're still doing it and it's getting more disrespectful

The OS is full on the DSP. There is nothing more we can do for a large category of bugs, period. We (myself included) spent a long time trying to optimize it for size constraints and we reached a wall. While it may not feel like we've spent any time on it, we definitely have. Have you written assembly code where you are literally down to 16 bits of space left and have to add more without losing functionality? This isn't a trivial problem where you just spend a few extra hours and it's magically fixed. If you feel like I'm lying about that then the conversation has ended, regardless of what I say, because we aren't communicating. We aren't moving this dialog forward. I'm not going to start offering more information when it will just be dismissed if it doesn't fit your narrative.

I have gone out of my way to solve bugs for people who has asked me politely, discussed the issue and have been patient when I couldn't prioritize it immediately. All I ask for is some civility and respect not just for me, but for everyone who works at Sequential. I don't want this turning into a situation where the louder and more emotionally charged the dialog becomes we are suddenly forced into fixing things and reprioritize based on some fear of being cancelled.

I get that you are upset and I am sorry the communication hasn't felt consistent. I will try and give more details if my explanations don't make enough sense or feel like an excuse as long as people ask questions and don't accuse me of misleading them. We both want the same things here

Don't take it personally, Pym! I'm just airing my concerns and impressions (aka "ranting") of SCI customer communication relating to the Rev2. I'm sorry you're "caught in the middle". I'd put the blame for that on SCI though, as I don't think WE, the customers, are to blame. We've been quietly and patiently waiting for YEARS, given the "silent treatment", years when I have barely even touched the Rev2, as I've been awaiting an update fixing the bug(s) that'll let me continue my work I was doing on the P'08 all those years ago... yeah, that's a LITTLE frustrating, and then comes the message that "ooops, there's no space left for updates..."    on which I called BS, and then it changed to "takes time to optimize the OS" (which I was suspecting, vocally, all along). Well, time is long overdue, WHY haven't SCI been working on this in the first place, when we've repeatedly been told "it's coming soon", for years? That's my criticism of the COMPANY that is SCI. Rhetoric questions if you will, not asked to get a definitive answer.

Please excuse me for blasting SCI, I have nothing personal against you. It's just that the information given throughout the years has turned out to be INCONSISTENT, inconsequential... a good word in case SCI is thinking of a name change. I'll use it from now on.

I'm not here in a totally "official" capacity

Well, I think someone SHOULD be communicating in an official capacity with us on this. That's obviously NOT your fault, but inconSequentials again...

I do this on my own time (it's nearly midnight right now) because I actually do believe in what we do and really hate it when you guys get frustrated to a point where it interferes with the joy you get from the instruments we make. If you have read my posts over the years I think you'd have less reason to doubt me and I hope others will speak to my willingness to be upfront and honest about tough issues; but it is what it is.

Well, that sucks... again NOT your nor OUR fault, but inconSequentials once again.
"...really hate it when you guys get frustrated to a point where it interferes with the joy you get from the instruments we make"
That's mildly put in my case. And yes, I hate it too... a lot.

If we can agree that I'm not trying to lie or mislead you I am willing to try and communicate more, but if I'm going to be fighting against that baseless narrative constantly I'm just going to stop posting. It's just exhausting for me and it caused a serious burnout last time.

I'll agree with that, I really don't think you're to blame for this mess at all. I'm honestly sorry that you're the one who gets to clean it up, as I think/assume it's not "your" mess to begin with. Not a fun spot to be. I was just trying to point out that the information given by inconSequential through the years has been inconsistent, it just doesn't add up, and there's no explaining that. SOMEONE, in "official capacity" I don't know, has apparently dealt us misleading or false information (coming soon, coming soon, coming soon?). I'm sure you can understand the shock, disbelief and distrust after then being told it's not coming, after these years... A feeling of being deceived and then insulted on top. But I'm sorry that it is you who gets to deal with the flack against inconSequential for this crap. It's just that you're the only representative of inconSequential here, but it wasn't my intention to accuse you of anything personally, I apologize if I did, or if that's how I came across... But please do forward the message to those who made the mess!!! -A lot of us Rev2 owners are not happy...

Sorry jok3r for repeating myself, and for not being very constructive, but I've had it up to here... and quietly, patiently waiting obviously didn't work, so I suppose I have some trouble with "just waiting" these days... This is the steam from years of boiling, but I meant no offense to anyone personally, but to the COMPANY I refer to as inconSequential. If customers don't complain, nothing will happen, as we've seen. We probably should've been this vocal a long time ago...

I applaud and thank Pym and the other forum members here for still working on it, personally I just get so frustrated even by just looking at the Rev2. I think I hate it. My apologies if I've been rude or improper, too blunt or whatever, no personal offense was meant.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I thought Sacred Synthesis is going to collect the major bugs, and Sequential will eventually fix it (or not, if not possible or no time... ). Can't we just wait what will happen now?

That's seems to have ended in no time.  I thought I would be receiving tons of information from members, but it came in as a trickle and quickly ended.  So the bugs amount to only several, but they are apparently substantial from users' perspectives.

I think the fury of this issue will cool only when Sequential announces that the Rev2 is altogether "finished," with or without the debated bug fixes.  Thinking back on my own efforts to get the final update, emailing the company and posting here to encourage people, perhaps that wasn't prudent after all.  Because now we're all back in a state of limbo, waiting and hoping all over again, and with no promises. 

Pym obviously doesn't run Sequential, so he can't give us a final decision about the update.  He's voluntarily served as the company's apologist in this mess, so I don't envy him.  Nor is he the cause of the problem; he's just been the spokesman, so that in asking for the update we're asking the impossible from him.  Meaning, he's obviously not the decision-maker, but can only try to persuade the boss.  And here on the forum, he can only offer explanations, like them or not.

Personally, I'm still confused as to what exactly happened, when it happened, who's to blame, and how things actually degenerated to this point.  What I do know is that something changed, and it caught us by surprise, to put it lightly.  We might have our own theories about this - the purchase by Focusrite probably stands at the top of the list, and the pandemic lock-up at the bottom - but I don't expect ever to know the details.  It's a big mystery to me still.

However, in the interest of not morphing into the dreaded Gearsluts amatuer boxing site, let's back off a tad.  Both sides of the issue have staked their claims, and there's little more to add to them.  If all the important bugs have been reported, then it's time to forget about it for a while and revisit the discussion only when Sequential has made a decision.  I only ask the company to be blunt and clear when that point arrives, and to avoid the problems before they begin again.  Perhaps Dave himself could make that announcement here, as he did, I believe, in ending the "tempest" over the Tempest.  This argument has not only been about OS updates; it's equally been about poor communication.  May we all live and learn.

[jg666]

@pym - I do know what you're going through believe me.... I'm a software developer so understand what it's like. As I'm now 60, I only work 16 hours a week and I'm working on our legacy product. There's only me in the whole company working on this product so i feel the weight of every single reported bug personally. In my case, nobody in the management team cares about the product I work on (unless there are customer complaints!!) so I always feel very isolated.

I do appreciate the work you do and appreciate even more you commenting on the forums. It shows that you care in my opinion.

[Manbird]

@pym - I do know what you're going through believe me.... I'm a software developer so understand what it's like. As I'm now 60, I only work 16 hours a week and I'm working on our legacy product. There's only me in the whole company working on this product so i feel the weight of every single reported bug personally. In my case, nobody in the management team cares about the product I work on (unless there are customer complaints!!) so I always feel very isolated.

I do appreciate the work you do and appreciate even more you commenting on the forums. It shows that you care in my opinion.

I'm always grateful that pym and other Sequential peeps take time to post on the forum. On top of that, I'm grateful for the work they do, period. Maybe I'm "lucky" to own Sequential gear - a P5 and a P6 - that I don't expect to be much upgraded or in need of considerable bug fixing, but my experience with the company has always been very positive. And while I think of Dave Smith as a rock star, by synth-geek standards anyway, I think of Sequential as an organic whole. There's always a good vibe coming from anyone at the company that I've had contact with or whose posts I've read on forums like this. While I don't deny that many here are frustrated - wishing either for upgrades, bug fixes or more immediate/direct communication from Sequential - I hope that the general tone of posted complaints doesn't continue to grow into a GS-style garden of ugliness.

[dsetto]

pym, Sequential, creativespiral, Sacred Synthesis and everybody working towards closing out this Prophet Rev2 OS: thank you.

Perhaps a dedicated constructive, thread focused strictly on this goal would be the least energy drag on pym. ... And there could be a separate vent thread.

These two threads can be split to start the two. Typically I'm wary of excessive control of a forum. However, this OS close-out goal is important, and this is an excellent use of the up-sides of a forum. We currently have a positive two-way communication between forum and designer.

Sometimes the length of a long post itself communicates negative energy, intended or not.

Add my vote to creativespiral's agenda. It was quite useful to make an effective video detailing the issue.

[maxter]

You're still doing it and it's getting more disrespectful

Sorry, that wasn't my intention.

The OS is full on the DSP. There is nothing more we can do for a large category of bugs, period. We (myself included) spent a long time trying to optimize it for size constraints and we reached a wall. While it may not feel like we've spent any time on it, we definitely have.

Thank you for explaining, I appreciate it! We on the outside have not had a clue as to what's going on, or the reasons behind it, so we've been left to mere speculation... That's why this kind of information is very valuable to us (or to me at least), and highly appreciated when you do share! So we can at least have an idea of what's going on, and why. That goes a long way. Sometimes it's as simple as that, communicating.

Have you written assembly code where you are literally down to 16 bits of space left and have to add more without losing functionality?

No, I have not, I'm not a programmer, and I'm on the outside with very little info, so I obviously couldn't have a clue as to what's actually going on! But again, thanks for telling us! I appreciate it, and I think others do too. This is more like what I'd expect from a company representative!

This isn't a trivial problem where you just spend a few extra hours and it's magically fixed. If you feel like I'm lying about that then the conversation has ended, regardless of what I say, because we aren't communicating. We aren't moving this dialog forward.

OK, I had no idea of any of this, how could I have until just now? And I don't think you're lying about this, I tried to clarify that in my last post. Again, thank you for giving us some more information!

I'm not going to start offering more information when it will just be dismissed if it doesn't fit your narrative.

OK. I didn't mean to dismiss you. But you DID offer some more information this time, which I highly appreciate, and it didn't "fit my narrative", which is a very good thing. I don't think I totally understood what you meant there, as I obviously would prefer information that DOESN'T fit "my narrative", as you call it. So thanks again for this information, the information you gave in this post explained a lot more than you have told us before.

I get that you are upset and I am sorry the communication hasn't felt consistent. I will try and give more details if my explanations don't make enough sense or feel like an excuse as long as people ask questions and don't accuse me of misleading them. We both want the same things here

Thank you for your understanding! I wasn't accusing you of misleading, which I tried to clarify with my last post, but I really appreciate that you maybe get what I'm saying about the consistency of the communication, which has been the most upsetting part to me personally. What's done is done, but I really appreciated the first sentence above, as well as the information you provided, it makes a lot more sense. Again, the kind of communication I would expect from a company representative!

I honestly didn't mean anything personal towards anyone with my last post, which I tried to make clear. But as a company, a company must be prepared to take some criticism, at least in a case like this?! -without making it personal. I'm happy with the information you gave, that's what I was hoping for. I was trying NOT to make it personal, I encourage you to as well, or try to not take critique of the company you work for as personally against you. Remember, we the customers have had VERY little to go on. Thanks for understanding!

I apologize again if I was rude or whatever. It was not my intention.

Peace!

[Pym]

All good. Thank you for hearing me, really appreciate you listening! It's easy to create your own reasoning behind all this if you don't have accurate information. I'll keep trying to get better at explaining. It's tough to know how much technical detail to give you guys here... what is important vs. what is just noise and confuses people.

We're all passionate people. I mean come on, we make MUSIC. When something prevents you from doing what you love to do, this is totally expected.

I'll update you guys when I get on the Rev2 code, I plan to soon finalizing the Pro3 code right now for the release tomorrow and the Rev2 won't be too far off that.

You're still doing it and it's getting more disrespectful

Sorry, that wasn't my intention.

The OS is full on the DSP. There is nothing more we can do for a large category of bugs, period. We (myself included) spent a long time trying to optimize it for size constraints and we reached a wall. While it may not feel like we've spent any time on it, we definitely have.

Thank you for explaining, I appreciate it! We on the outside have not had a clue as to what's going on, or the reasons behind it, so we've been left to mere speculation... That's why this kind of information is very valuable to us (or to me at least), and highly appreciated when you do share! So we can at least have an idea of what's going on, and why. That goes a long way. Sometimes it's as simple as that, communicating.

Have you written assembly code where you are literally down to 16 bits of space left and have to add more without losing functionality?

No, I have not, I'm not a programmer, and I'm on the outside with very little info, so I obviously couldn't have a clue as to what's actually going on! But again, thanks for telling us! I appreciate it, and I think others do too. This is more like what I'd expect from a company representative!

This isn't a trivial problem where you just spend a few extra hours and it's magically fixed. If you feel like I'm lying about that then the conversation has ended, regardless of what I say, because we aren't communicating. We aren't moving this dialog forward.

OK, I had no idea of any of this, how could I have until just now? And I don't think you're lying about this, I tried to clarify that in my last post. Again, thank you for giving us some more information!

I'm not going to start offering more information when it will just be dismissed if it doesn't fit your narrative.

OK. I didn't mean to dismiss you. But you DID offer some more information this time, which I highly appreciate, and it didn't "fit my narrative", which is a very good thing. I don't think I totally understood what you meant there, as I obviously would prefer information that DOESN'T fit "my narrative", as you call it. So thanks again for this information, the information you gave in this post explained a lot more than you have told us before.

I get that you are upset and I am sorry the communication hasn't felt consistent. I will try and give more details if my explanations don't make enough sense or feel like an excuse as long as people ask questions and don't accuse me of misleading them. We both want the same things here

Thank you for your understanding! I wasn't accusing you of misleading, which I tried to clarify with my last post, but I really appreciate that you maybe get what I'm saying about the consistency of the communication, which has been the most upsetting part to me personally. What's done is done, but I really appreciated the first sentence above, as well as the information you provided, it makes a lot more sense. Again, the kind of communication I would expect from a company representative!

I honestly didn't mean anything personal towards anyone with my last post, which I tried to make clear. But as a company, a company must be prepared to take some criticism, at least in a case like this?! -without making it personal. I'm happy with the information you gave, that's what I was hoping for. I was trying NOT to make it personal, I encourage you to as well, or try to not take critique of the company you work for as personally against you. Remember, we the customers have had VERY little to go on. Thanks for understanding!

I apologize again if I was rude or whatever. It was not my intention.

Peace!

[creativespiral]

In regards to the other gated sequencer issue that was first reported by Razmo a couple years back, I did some more testing to try and narrow down the exact issue, and my interpretation of how it could be fixed.  I have run into this a few times through the years, but never spent the time to really deconstruct what's happening.

I'm not sure if its appropriate to call this a "bug", or just an "issue that limits usefulness, based on its current design" .... but at any rate, if you're looking into fixing the Key Stepping Bug, maybe you can also take a look at this issue with the "No Reset" and "No Hold/Rst" modes as well. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjCa-TsLosE

This video explores the functionality of Rev2's Gated Sequencer, when in "NO RESET" or "NO HOLD/RST" modes.   As of current 1.1.5.9 OS, there is an issue that when the Rev2 is slaved to a external drum machine or DAW, and using these seq modes, there is no repeatability between exact same sequences played, and sometimes the gated sequencer will be "out of phase" with the clock... the modulations will switch part way through, and it results in odd, glitchy behavior, and makes it hard to use the synth with a drum machine or DAW.   This is also an issue when using the internal clock and ARP with the sequencer in no reset modes.   

Potential Solution:
My interpretation is that the solution is just that the Rev2, when in a "no reset mode", still needs an initial reset/synchronization, when it first receives a MIDI Start Message, or when the Play Button is pressed on the Synth.   After that initial synchronization, then it should operate in a sort of free running mode as it is currently, and as expected for No Reset modes.   It just needs an initial sync event to prevent being out of phase, and give more repeatable performances.

[Pym]

I'm going to look into this stuff next week and poke around a bit, see if I can find an obvious solution. I'll update you guys when I know more

In regards to the other gated sequencer issue that was first reported by Razmo a couple years back, I did some more testing to try and narrow down the exact issue, and my interpretation of how it could be fixed.  I have run into this a few times through the years, but never spent the time to really deconstruct what's happening.

I'm not sure if its appropriate to call this a "bug", or just an "issue that limits usefulness, based on its current design" .... but at any rate, if you're looking into fixing the Key Stepping Bug, maybe you can also take a look at this issue with the "No Reset" and "No Hold/Rst" modes as well. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjCa-TsLosE

This video explores the functionality of Rev2's Gated Sequencer, when in "NO RESET" or "NO HOLD/RST" modes.   As of current 1.1.5.9 OS, there is an issue that when the Rev2 is slaved to a external drum machine or DAW, and using these seq modes, there is no repeatability between exact same sequences played, and sometimes the gated sequencer will be "out of phase" with the clock... the modulations will switch part way through, and it results in odd, glitchy behavior, and makes it hard to use the synth with a drum machine or DAW.   This is also an issue when using the internal clock and ARP with the sequencer in no reset modes.   

Potential Solution:
My interpretation is that the solution is just that the Rev2, when in a "no reset mode", still needs an initial reset/synchronization, when it first receives a MIDI Start Message, or when the Play Button is pressed on the Synth.   After that initial synchronization, then it should operate in a sort of free running mode as it is currently, and as expected for No Reset modes.   It just needs an initial sync event to prevent being out of phase, and give more repeatable performances.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Are you guys and gals finished reporting bugs?  I've compiled the list but still have a lot of sorting out to do.  Other than that, this should be the end of it for now.  Going...going....

[jg666]

I've had issues with the poly sequencer in the past but hardly used it so it might be me using it wrong! I will have a play with it today to see what happens.

Edit - OK so with the Poly Sequencer, for example, I have a sequence on Track 1 of 12 steps. How do I change this to a sequence of 8 steps? I can't work out how I should do this. If I enter rests on steps 9 to 12 I get the rests which is not what I want. I don't think you can specify the length of the sequence either. I don't find the sequencer very intuitive to use to be honest.

[maxter]

Ah, it's all coming back to me now, like a déjà-vu...

Another important bug in my case, which I had only a vague memory of, is this second sequencer bug reported by creativespiral. This post may not bring very much constructive to the table, but one potential idea perhaps. Which is this:

Could it be worth taking a look at the P'08 OS in this case, to see how it handled that functionality? (Remember, I'm not a programmer, just an idea) Because I know for a fact, that neither of the sequencer bugs were present on the P'08, and it "just worked"... flawlessly. So perhaps the solution could lie within the P'08 OS?

Sidenote, going OT:
I remember now, how I used to use the P'08, first in KeyStep mode, slaved to an external midi arp/sequencer, triggering the voices at various rhythmic intervals with LFO-keysync on (some of the LFOs MIDI-synced to some rhytmic interval as well), then turning keysync off for that LFO (so the LFO phase was independent for each voice), so that LFO was free-running for each voice, while still rhythmically "coherent". Then the same method applied to the next LFO (with different rhythms/syncopations), and then the next, and the next, in succession...

After having done that, I stopped the external arp, and switched the gated sequencers to No Reset. Then I triggered the voices with the arp again (or did I, maybe they were already free running by then?  ), at different rhythmic intervals. (I don't remember if I set the clock to internal first, or when, or if at all, did I still slave it to midi clock...?) So then I had all these voices running independently, while in sync with eachother (but not in phase, rhythmically), with the weird quasi-generative rhythm patterns I had generated with the sequencers. So all note events (not MIDI note events) were ON the "beat" or on a syncopation of it, ie on a rhythmical interval. And it all just flowed seamlessly...

I did this in stacked mode, one layer at a time, and one LFO at a time... so it took some time, not only the patch programming, but also just setting it up to play/run. With the No Reset mode, I could transpose the voices however I liked, without having to worry about timing issues, as the sequencers just kept running at the point they were in at that moment.


So ie BOTH of these sequencer bugs are what killed my work, when I switched over to the Rev2.

Edit - OK so with the Poly Sequencer, for example, I have a sequence on Track 1 of 12 steps. How do I change this to a sequence of 8 steps? I can't work out how I should do this. If I enter rests on steps 9 to 12 I get the rests which is not what I want. I don't think you can specify the length of the sequence either. I don't find the sequencer very intuitive to use to be honest.

Yes, I remember that as well. If you accidentally put in one note too many, you have to start over. Not an important thing for me personally, as I probably won't be using it, I think I only tried using the Poly Sequencer when I couldn't work with the gated ones, but quickly abandoned that. I found it very hard to work with.

I'm guessing this Poly Sequencer eats up a whole lot of code...? Again, I'm not a programmer, but looking at all the NRPN's for the Poly-S... from #192-1043, whereas the rest of the parameters are #0-187 (including the gated sequencers) and that's for EACH layer.

There are plenty of similar software, and some hardware, sequencers, and many use a DAW for the purpose. It's probably the ONLY added feature (compared to P'08) on the Rev2 that I saw no real need for upon its release. I still don't. The gated sequencers were something else though, really special and just marvellous. They REALLY set the P'08 apart from anything else. Which is why it's such a HUGE loss to me, personally.

[jg666]

The Poly sequencer does not always clear down for me when starting from scratch again. I can’t work out the exact steps to recreate the issue but it wasn’t clearing at all for me at first, then I noticed that it did start from scratch properly if I’d just turned on the synth. It also seems that it will clear down and start from scratch when you write the patch.

I’ve had many occasions though where all it did was to overwrite the steps that I played but left the extra ones in the sequence still.

EDIT - just realised it’s probably me being an idiot! I think what I was doing was hitting record, then scrolling through the steps on track 1 to see how many had been entered, then put it back on step 1 and then started playing. I’m now thinking that when you do that, you are in ‘edit mode’?

[maxter]

Just a thought... perhaps a dumb idea (I'm not a programmer), but anyhow:

If it's possible to fix the sequencer bugs at the cost of possibly losing some other functionality, I'd be all for it! For instance, I wouldn't mind losing the Poly-Sequencer (if that could free up some space for everything else)... I know this is not the "preferred" route, but IF it could in some way ease the work for Pym, I'd be all for it! Like if it's too hard to squash ALL the remaining bugs with a SINGLE OS update, to cram EVERYTHING into one, or if it's in any way easier to focus on squashing the sequencer bugs with one OS, and the others with a different OS. Not very concisely put I know, but I hope you get the idea... Depending on the way you use it, you could even use one OS in some instances, and another OS in others.

I remember for instance the Ensoniq ASR-10 having different bugs with different OSs. I believe some later OSs which added some functionality, also introduced some bug(s). So, if not using that functionality, you could go with the older OS. Depending on how and for what you use the machine, you could pick a different OS... When I sold an ASR-10 some years back, the buyer quickly asked about a bug he instantly encountered that I hadn't come across the way I used it (I believe it was a sequencer bug), so I encouraged him to try with a different OS, which sorted the issue he was having.

Quotes on the Ensoniqs:
"For common everyday use, we suggest using 1.61 (yes, the older one!). However, you will have to use 2.0 for Audio-Tracks, and 3.53 for Audio-Tracks and/or Akai/Roland translations."
"Ensoniq did recommend at the time of the ASR 2.01 release that using 1.61 would be a good idea to those who did not desire the audio-track features."
"one for the 16-Plus OS 1.3
Fix the amount of bars registered to a Song after translating a Original EPS Song; they list 0. Workaround: use OS 1.1."


I just remembered that the M-Audio Venom also was similar in this regard, if I remember correctly on an older OS you could switch sequencer/arp patterns seamlessly on the fly, but that OS had some MIDI clock sync timing issues. An OS update fixed the timing issues, but lost the mentioned functionality. So depending on how you'd use it...

[RobustAmerican]

But then you have two O.S.'s to keep track of and maintain resulting in even more work for Pym and the Sequentialnauts. I don't remember the details of Ensoniq's demise but decisions like that couldn't have helped. I know this is supposed to be a last pass on the Rev2 OS revisions but famous last words and all. Something else will come up and then you have twice the troubleshooting...Twice the everything. Probably near the top of the list when it comes to a coder's worst nightmares.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for improvements/fixes when possible but it sounds like the box is full.
"A pint cannot hold a quart, Mr. Pizer. If it holds the pint it is doing the best it can."

Thanks for everything Pym! Still loving my Rev2!