Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    I believe there's a lap top PC available for MIDI use. Staying
    with the type of computer you already have would definitely be
    to your advantage. I think I saw the ad in Music Technology, or
    maybe it was Electronic Music, perhaps Music, Computers, and Software.
    
    Let me look it up, and give the details later . . .
    
    						John.

    If price isn't much of an issue, how about getting a Compaq portable?
    From the ads I've seen, they look about small-suitcase size, and
    Compaqs are as about as IBM compatible as you can get.
    
    Bill

    Over here, the ATARI 1040 is only peanuts more than the 520, and
    they have a reputation for being pretty robust. Why not splash out?
    
    Richard.

    re. .2 Compaqs are great machines, they run about 1/3 faster than
           an IBM and are cheaper. But portable is in the mind of the
           beholder, like a 19" 'portable' TV. Right... Compaqs are
           'luggable' at best.
    
    re: .0 You can't measure a sequencers capacity as "n minutes at
           x bpm". Sequencers are measured by how many 'events' they
           can store. Events usually equals number_of_notes*2, but
           continuous controller events and sysex are real memory hogs.
    
           If you're looking to do all your editing on a big rig and
           then dump to something small, I suggest finding a cheap
           MSQ-100 or QX-7 (assuming they will meet your memory
           requirements) and hauling that down to the local studio.
           Once you've got a MIDI data stream it doesn't make any
           difference what device is transmitting it.
    
    Edd
           

    The lap tops are WAY too expensive for the purpose (they start
    at $1500). Plus, most of them don't have an option slot (needed
    for the OP4001.  
    I've seen the ads for the rack-mountable PC's too. Once again,
    they are on the expensive side (I'd like to keep it under $1000),
    and heavy.
    It's not THAT important to have the same system (it fact, it might
    be nice to have something different). All we will do is dump the
    completed sequences into it. There may be a little editing done
    on site, but all of these sequencers allow editing.
    Song pointer is the biggie, though (can't be starting the song at
    the beginning each time). I have the Synhance MTS box, so the
    program would have to understand Song Pointer. The guy at Russ
    Jones said PRO24 does read Song Pointer, he just did know which
    version it was introduced in.
    

    The Alesis MMT-8 limit of 5 min at 120 BPM is for any one chunk
    of song- that's because Alesis doesn't believe in looping.  Instead,
    you can chain chunks together- up to 255 of them form a "song".
    It's because each event in an MMT-8 has a beat/subbeat timestamp
    and the timestamp runs out of bits.
    
    But you can just chain to another chunk...
    	
    (or so I recall from the manual.  Worth checking!)

    Something you should probably check in to: A great deal of sequencer
    programs support a standard sequencer stream file. This is a standard
    that was arrived at by various software companies. It stores all
    midi events as a single stream ( as opposed to tracks ). If the
    software on both ends accepts this standard, transporting completed
    files is no problem. I know of a program for the ST that allows
    you to transfer files via RS232 from an IBM. If worst comes to worst,
    however, you can always do a dump to whatever sequencer you like
    using the midi cables. I have an ST, so this question has always
    been moot for me . . . Perhaps you could sell the IBM and pick up
    the ST with some cash to spare . . .
    
    						John.

    
    I've been very satisfied with my MC500.  I picked it up new for
    $895 and I've seen them advertised used for $795.  From what I hear
    though you could probably get the Atari 1040 with a sequencer for
    this price (though a top of the line sequencer would probably cost
    you that much more).
    
    Anyhow the MC500 has plenty of storage.  For the music that we are
    doing (mostly TOP 40) we can fit four or five songs in memory and
    about 18-20 songs on disk.  The editting functions (both global
    and microscopic) are fairly complete and cover 95% of most our editting
    needs.  I believe Len F. wrote a detailed review somewhere
    in this file.
    
    I chose to by the MC500 because some musicians I work with also
    have them and its very easy to exchange songs by swapping disks.
    Also its extremely portable, since it is a single box, it is light
    and you can fit it almost anywhere.
    
    
    

    Well, did a lot of research this weekend...and this is what we
    decided (although it could change again...)
    
    All of your ideas helped alot (gave me some other angles to think
    about). The music store we deal with leant us an MMT-8. This worked,
    but it was time consuming, and each song would have had to be entered
    via tape. The better (more memory) sequencers were mostly in a price
    range that rivals the computers. 
    
    It became increasingly obvious that having a system that COULD run
    the same software as our home system was the smartest (most efficient)
    was to go (some of you suggested that...thanks!). By checking the
    Computer Shopper magazine, I found that there are some Clones of
    the Compaq II-style portables that could be had for $700-$800 (about
    the same as an Atari 1040). Now these aren't very small, but the
    keyboard folds up onto the front of the thing, and it actually has
    6 expansion slots! So this looks like the answer. It's not as 
    exciting as getting a new type of computer (I really wanted the
    Atari to play with!). But this way, I'll you need to do is grab
    a set of floppies and go...
    I hear that Roland has a new PC interface that is about $150. This
    will keep the total price under the $1000 limit. 
    If things change again... I'll let you know.
    Thanks again for all your brain power!!
    
    Pat
    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 2240.0                     Sequencer advice?                     No replies
SNELL::ALLISON                                       12 lines  17-JAN-1990 17:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Folks,
    
    What Sequencer would you recommend for a 2-piece (guitar, keyboard
    & Alesis HR16) band playing small lounges/pubs in Ireland. Music
    is mainly "country-rock", pop, ballads. Funds are limited but main
    requirement is to put together 20-30 "songs" and have them available
    to assist with the "live" music/vocals.
    
    I would be interested in hearing the views of other people in a
    similar situation and what they use.
    
    ...Sean

I know I'm going to get some disagreement from Jens Moller on this, 
but I think the best sequencer for live use is the Roland MC-500 Mark 
II. I did a lot of checking around when I was in this situation a 
couple of months ago.

I initially purchased an Alesis MMT-8 sequencer and the Alesis 
DataDisk floppy drive. The MMT-8 is a very powerful sequencer for the 
money (only about $250), but it doesn't have very much memory. For the 
sequences I had, it could only hold one song at a time in memory, and 
it would take 10-15 seconds to load in another song from disk. This, 
in my opinion, is unacceptable for live performance. If you have 
people out on the dance floor, you can't wait that long between every 
song.

The MC-500 Mark II is a lot more expensive ($1200-1300), but you 
really get what you pay for. The editing software has extremely 
powerful features, but for live use they also provide "Performance 
Software" that basically just lets you load in a greater number of 
songs and play. I can now load 16-18 songs IN MEMORY and access them 
instantaneously in any order I want. This gives a lot of flexibility 
on stage.

I don't know much about the MC-300, but if it can use performance 
software and load a number of songs in memory, this may be a good 
economical "little brother" unit to the Mark II. Other people in this 
conference could probably tell you a lot more about that unit.

Another unit that I heard good things about is the Kawai Q-80 (?). 
It's a 24 (?) 32 (?) (I can't remember which) track sequencer that 
seems to be pretty powerful, and it was going for around $650 or $700. 
I've heard the user interface isn't that good and that it was 
difficult to learn to use, but pretty powerful. (The MC-500, on the 
other hand, is extremely user-friendly.)

I hope this helps.

-Dan

    Are you using the MRP Performance software?
    
    Edd

    ...and does it use expanded rhythm tracks or does it use the patterns
    from the MC500 R-track?
    
    Storing drum data as just another instrument really sucks up memory...
    
    Edd

Re: last couple

Edd,

Yes, I'm using the Super-MRP software V1.0.

I bought most of my sequences "canned" from a place called Tran Trax 
in New York. I found the ad in the back of Keyboard magazine. Out of 
all the places I got demos from that sequence top-40 material, I liked 
his the best. 

He stores drums as an instrument - I usually extract the drums to 
track 8. I haven't learned enough about the sequencer yet to know how 
to utilize the rhythm track.

-Dan

    If he's storing the drums as a seperate instrument then that's the
    'expanded' track I mentioned. The downside of that practice is for
    every measure that requires...
    
    HH    * * * * * * * *
    SD        *       *
    BD    *       * *   *
    
     ...you eat up 14 notes. Using the rhythm track you could store that
    pattern and just have a pointer to it wherever you need it. Over 100
    measures or so you can see the savings.
    
    The plus side is doing it this way makes the sequences real portable.
    (I generally store my drum trax this way.)
    
    16 - 18 songs with expanded drums is pretty damn good!!!
    
    Edd

    Don't forget the Yahama QX3 or QX5fd (there is such a beast, isn't
    there?).  Both have built-in disk drives, and both are very flexible
    units (in terms of programming style). 

    I'm not real sure what decent prices are on all the units, but I would
    think you could find one that will do the job for less than $1000 if
    you shop around.  You could always go used, too. 

-b

    Many (most?) of the sequencers available have capacities of 20-
    25K notes, nowhere close to enough for a set's worth of fully 
    sequenced tunes. If they can't load a tune in less than 10 seconds
    they aren't gonna cut it live.
    
    The 10+ songs on the MC-500 MkII sounds really impressive, especially
    if it'll still use the chain play mode available with the (S)MRC
    software. There *can* be virtually no gap betwixt tunes...
    
    Edd 

	While I prefer my MMT-8 to the MC-500, it's related to my set up,
	and not a issue with the performance of the MC-500. I happen to
	need to be able to do massive SYSEX dumps in a fairly random
	fashion as I have more than one sequencing device. My network is
	also fairly complex since my SGU's are scattered accross 2 racks
	and I allow any of 4 controllers to drive them at any time. If
	you were running things simpler, such as having a single controller
	and didn't need to do bulk SYSEX loads to random MIDI devices,
	The MC-500 would be the best solution. 

	The MMT-8 is a lot cheaper, has most of the features (but, some
	take a lot more effort to accomplish), and is reliable if you
	take good care of it. You do, however need a disk drive and
	you will have delays while loading songs that are longer than
	the MC-500.

	All in all, the MC-500 is a better choice for a general setup
	(see Dan, I didn't disagree), but in my case, the MMT-8 is
	also a very good solution. 

	If you think that you will save money by choosing one over the
	other, you are wrong, you'll just end up spending that money
	on more MIDI stuff (it's a disease).

								Jens

>>    if it'll still use the chain play mode available with the (S)MRC
>>    software. There *can* be virtually no gap betwixt tunes...

This is another great benefit of the MC-500. When you're playing live, 
once a song finishes, it automatically goes to the first measure of 
the next song. If you have a foot controller, you don't even have to 
move over to the sequencer to start the next song!

Jens makes a great point. You're going to spend close to the same 
amount of money no matter which unit you buy. If you buy a less 
expensive sequencer like the MMT-8, you'll have to buy additional 
equipment to compensate for its shortcomings (such as a disk drive).

-Dan

    To add to the input, though I'm sure I've said this elsewhere, I
    started out a few months ago with an MMT-8 and a disk drive, and I am
    already upgrading to an MC-500. While I agree with Jens that the MMT-8
    has some very nice features, I find it lacking for the kind of editing
    that I am doing, and the load time between songs is too long for the
    kind of gigs I am doing. From all I've been told about the MC-500 from
    other happy users it solves these problems, and is also more reliable,
    a significant consideration for the working musician.
    
    Another thing worth noting is that the MC-500 is an integrated
    sequencer/disk drive, which makes porting it around a lot easier than
    having a separate disk drive you have to connect up to the MMT-8.
    In defense of the MMT-8, on the other hand, I think it would be a
    very good choice for non-gigging. Even with a disk drive it costs half
    of what an MC-500 costs, it has some nice features of its own, and one
    of the things you can do with the Alesis DataDisk (that I haven't
    actually used it for, but it is supposed to be good at) is doing bulk
    data transfers (sysex) directly to and from disk from other MIDI devices.
    I would think this would be an attractive feature for someone with a
    lot of controllers and synths to deal with.
    
    - Ram

    Re: .11
    
    Does anyone have any info on the MC-300?
               
    ...Sean

    Basically it's a slightly cheapened version of the original MC-500
    running MRC.
    
    Edd

    Try note 482 - keyword MC300 is tied to that topic.  I haven't looked
    at it, though.

-b

    A recent handout by Roland says the MRP software (thats the sequence
    replay only stuff which allows you to hold more songs in the MC
    memory at one time) is only for the MC300 or MC500 MkI.  However,
    the super-MRC software (as used for the MC500 MkII) includes MRP
    as a subset.  Since I own none of it, I can't comment further -
    maybe someone else can.
    
    If like me you have an Atari-based sequencer package but don't fancy
    hauling a computer to live gigs, you might be interested in a product
    just announced by MIDItemp (Based in Germany).  This is the MP-44   
    MIDI player and has a 3.5" drive compatible with the Atari ST and   
    MS DOS from Vn3.3 on.  It will read songs stored on floppy in MIDI  
    standard format.  It can also record MIDI data via 4 MIDI ins and
    save in MIDI standard format for replay or later processing by the
    Atari.  Internal RAM is expandable up to 4 Mbyte.
    
    It also has 4 MIDI outs and can operate as a 4x4 Router, with
    splits, program change, transpose, filtering, etc. It will store
    256 configurations.
    
    I phoned The Distribution Company (the UK distributors 01-258 3454),
    and they did not seem to know much about it, so I guess that FCS
    has not yet taken place.  I'll be interested to see what it gets
    priced at.
    
    Alex
    
    

    Having just bought an MC-500 Mk II, I can verify that the S-MRP
    software is indeed included with the system as part of the S-MRC
    package. S-MRP is actually a different, trimmed down system, but you
    use the S-MRC software to create S-MRP disks, which can then be loaded
    in directly. You can fit about 18 songs on an S-MRP disk, and some
    large number of different orderings (configurations) of those songs.
    
    It takes the MC-500 less than 20 seconds to load the S-MRP software,
    and then about 5 seconds to load each song into memory. So you can load
    an entire set of 8-10 songs into memory in about 1 minute (I haven't
    tested it yet, but I think you can actually load all the songs on the
    disk into memory, if you have long sets :-) ). Once you
    have them in memory you can select any of the configurations and run
    through all of the songs in order with no delay in between (that is, it
    just stops at the end of each song and waits for you to press Play or
    hit a foot switch to start the next song in the configuration). Once
    you have the songs in memory you can also select them for play manually
    with a spin of the alpha-dial, like if you want to skip over some
    selection.
    
    There are some other features as well, such as the ability to edit
    existing configurations, but i haven't gotten the documentation yet so
    I can't give all of the details. I haven't actually used this for
    performing yet, but all indications are that it is going to work
    extremely well. One minute to load in an entire set, and then literally
    hands-off operation from there on with no delays at all between songs.
    
    - Ram

	As a side note, I know a few people who carry around PC's and
	use them for live performances. I've only seen Atari's and
	Macintoshes (I can't imagine the design of am IBM pc clone to
	be good for lots of transit and moving around). The Atari system
	used by Chuck and Diane (The house band at the Alumni - Colorado
	Springs) tends to fail on him about every 6 months, so he has a 
	spare (its a 1040, I think). He is running Passport (I'm pretty
	sure), and his sequences are excellent. His load time, however,
	averages 30 seconds between songs (not so good). There are two other
	groups that I know of that haul around a Mac & they have not seen
	any failures (both MACplus systems, no hard disk devices), and
	thier load times are about 10 to 15 seconds between songs.

	The MMT-8 & a disk drive runs between 5 an 15 seconds per SYSEX
	dump (could be more than one song). My solution is to add another
	MMT-8 so that I can pre-load the one not playing & be ready for
	the next song. I skip around so much that I find pre-defined sets
	to not be appropriate in most cases. While the MC-500 would
	probably be a good fit for my needs, I prefer to consider the
	hardware based sequencer as a delivery mechanisum & want to continue
	using it in this specific area. I also find that all of the hardware
	based sequencers have limitations that would be better addressed
	by a PC based sequencer. You might want to consider some combination
	of hardware sequencer and PC based sequencer for your solution. By
	this, I mean, travel with the hardware based sequencer, but develop
	sequences with the PC. I've been putting off buying a MAC for a
	while, but plan on it as a summer addition. 

	There are lots of execptional sequencing packages for PC's. There
	are lots of limitations on Hardware Sequencers, no matter which
	one that you choose (besides, they are less prone to get updates
	because they often involve swapping ROMS). While the MC-500 is
	software based, it lacks the facilities that a CRT could provide
	and a more functional keyboard. While I blasted the Mother cheap
	sequnecer with disk drive for it's ability to allow you to create
	complex/editable sequences, it might fit in nicely with a set up
	where sequneces are created via PC, and downloaded into a delivery
	system (it has a built in disk drive).

	In any case, the last thing that you want at a gig is a piece of
	unreliable gear. Hardware sequnecers tend to be more reliable.

	I see quite a few people with MC-500's, a few MC-300's, a lot
	of MMT-8's and a few Yamaha QX21's. I see even fewer MIDI 
	workstations driving everything (like W30's, V50's, SQ80's, VFXsd's
	etc.) but they are definately options.

	You may want to think about how you plan to develop your sequneces
	as well as how you plan to deliver them & try to find the best
	combination to fit your needs.

								Jens

>	Macintoshes (I can't imagine the design of am IBM pc clone to
>	be good for lots of transit and moving around). The Atari system

I've been seeing ads for a Yamaha laptop IBM-PC clone with built-in 
MIDI ports. This may be an option, although probably an expensive one. 
But, on the other hand, you can use it for a lot more than just 
sequencing, too.

-Dan

    
    Atari has just begun shipping the Stacy, which is a 1040 ST laptop.
    Price is somewhere in the $1000 range.
    	
    							Brian

    Somebody else , I forget who, makes a midi interface designed to fit in
    common laptops, Toshiba etc...seems likethe price was better than $300
    though...
    
    dbii

	re: a couple back...

	I don't see why any computer should travel better than
	another...assuming that the cases are relatively stiff.  PC clone
	cases are pretty inexpensive, so if you don't like the one you've
	got, switch.  Tiedowns for the option boards would probably be a
	good idea.  Seems to me that PCs would be simpler to rack-mount,
	too.  A laptop would be cool for MIDI, except that most of the
	ones in my range suffer from display "trails" when onscreen stuff
	moves. While that looks neat on a CRT with a long persistence
	phosphor, it quickly becomes unreadable on the LCD screens I've
	seen.  I use an old Compaq I got used and cheap... 

    Well I wasn't going to enter the fray but...
    
    If I had my "druthers" I would choose an Ensoniq EPS as master
    controller/sequencer, add a hard disk, 4X memory and smile all the way
    through the gig.
    
    The price range we are talking here is quite a bit higher but you would
    get virtually instantaneous loading of songs into the sequencer. You
    would also be able to scroll quickly through your song lists to grab
    any song you wanted, thus be free to choose, as opposed to locked into
    a set list. The EPS with a hard disk can load samples along with the song
    data fast enough to "keep them on the dance floor".
    
    An important component of my strategy here includes backup. If for any
    reason the hard drive should become indesposed, I could fall back to the
    3.5 inch floppy integral to the the EPS. Using this, I have been able to
    load individual songs in a little over a second. The EPS only allows
    one "song" in memory at a time, but if you configure your songs as
    "sequences" you can get many more in. How many that is, depends on the
    legnths of the samples loaded, as memory is shared. However the 4X
    memory option should satisfy any reasonable set of music. As a backup
    stragtegy you would probably want to forget about loading new samples
    between songs, but there would be little problem in loading the songs
    themselves.
    
    As a final backup strategy, I would have one, or many cassettes with all
    of the material recorded, except for the instruments that could still
    play in such an emergency. I'd hate to ever sink that low but it's
    better than cancelling a gig... Besides if Timbuk Three can make hits
    with no more backup than a boom box...
    
    Whether or not you agree with me, on what I have discussed here, you 
    should agree that it is important to have some form of backup strategy
    in the event that your primary sequencer fails.
    
    
    	regards,
    	Mark
    

    I agree completely on having a backup strategy. My group keeps cassette
    recordings of all of our material and takes a recorder to every gig in
    case we have problems with sequencer, synth, etc.
    
    One thing that was mentioned was using pre-configured sets in one file
    to reduce the load time between songs (so you can pull several songs
    into memory at once). I would caution against this practice. One of the
    main advantages of using sequenced material over recorded stuff is the
    ability to easily re-order your song list. When you put several songs
    into one file you lose a lot of this flexibility. One of the things I
    like about the MC-500 (not that I'm saying that's the only or best
    choice, just a feature to consider) is the ability to load about 18
    songs into memory at once, and call them up in any order. It really
    gives a lot of flexibility when performing live.
    
    - Ram

RE < Note 1326.32 by TOOK::SUDAMA "Living is easy with eyes closed..." >

	About backup strategy...

	That's one thing I have been concenred about.  I try to have spares of
everything in one form or another.  For instance, while I may not be able to
afford two synths of each kind, for every patch I use on one, I try to have a 
fairly equivalent patch on another.  As long as I cover the most important
patches, I feel fairly secure.

	Now, since I can't afford a second MC500, I've thought about the various
ways I'd cover for it.  Having tapes is a good idea.  For me, I never want to 
become so automated that I can't perform without my sequencer.  I try to prepare
my shows in such a way that I could do them without any electronic gear in a 
pinch.  That means just me and my ole guitar.

	Now for me that's o.k., because there's no dancers out on the floor 
waiting for me to plug them into a beat.  

	Dan

    re: .32
    
    Ram, you are right. You do want to have the flexibility to select any
    song at a time. Configuring songs into "sequences" on the EPS does not
    preclude this. You merely select the "sequences" as though they are
    songs, which in fact they are. The EPS allows you to name everything as you
    like. Using this, you could use the appropriate song title to name any
    "sequence".
    
    re: backup strategy
    In general no matter what strategy you use for sequencing, tapes
    provide the ultimate backup. They are cheap, and the technology is
    pretty solid. You loose functionality, but that is why we have the
    various sequencer strategies above this.
    
    	Mark

    The recent discussion in note 482 on the performance aspect of the 
    MC500 has prompted me to reopen this topic, as it's something which 
    I'm currently thinking about.
    
    I've got Master Tracks Pro running on my Atari, and this suits me 
    fine for creating sequences but not for gigging.  I'm therefore 
    looking for a hardware unit which will allow me to play back 
    sequences which I've created on the Atari.  Here's my selection 
    criteria:-
    
    1)	Must use random access disks (preferably 3.5") as a storage/load 
        medium.  I've seen some units with Quickdisks, but have heard 
        that you dont get much on them, and they can only be accessed 
        sequentially (like a streamer tape).
    
    2)	Must be able to locate and load a song from disk easily and 
        quickly (I figure that no matter how many songs the unit can 
        store, I'll want the one that is'nt loaded).  By quickly, I mean 
        between 8 and 30 seconds.  Incidentally, this is one feature you 
        rarely find on spec sheets.
    
    3)	Must be as low cost as possible.  I don't want to pay for 
        features I don't need.
    
    4)	Capability to sync the unit to incoming MIDI clocks is highly 
        desireable.
    
    5)	Variable tempo is highly desireable.  Sometimes I may want to run 
        the sequence faster or slower than originally recorded.
    
    6)	I will probably also want to store and load sysex files, but I 
        would be surprised if any unit was not able to offer this.
    
    Here are my current contenders:-
    
    A)	Yamaha DRC20 (from their Clavinova division).  Basic sequencer 
        with 700k internal storage.  RRP 375 pounds.  I saw it loading 
        songs from disk in <8 seconds - impressive.  Meets criteria 1, 2 
        and 5.  Don't know about external sync.
    
    B)	Elka CR99 Midi Disk recorder.  Similair to the Alesis datadisk, 
        but also offers variable tempo, MIDI merge, and external sync.  
        RRP of 379 pounds looks a bit high in price/performance terms.
    
    C)	Brother MDI-40.  Another basic sequencer with 3.5" disk drive. 
        RRP 299 pounds.  They also do a cheaper version with less memory.  
        Looks good pricewise, but I still need to check out load times 
        and sync capability.
    
    D)	Alesis datadisk.  Available used/demo for about 250 pounds plus 
        12-16 pounds for the upgrade.  Cheap, but apparently lacks some 
        features I would like.
    
    Any comments?
    

    I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I use the MC-500 in performance
    mode, and here are the features:
    
    - You can load up to about 18 songs into memory at once. The load takes
    about 1 minute total. Then you can select any song at random, or play
    through them in any pre-arranged sequence (you can even set the pause
    time between songs if you want to go in auto - I've found this useful
    for making backup cassttes of my sets). While the songs are in memory
    you can change the tempo easily.
    
    - Disadvantage: You can't easily load a song that's *not* on the disk.
    In other words, at any given time you're limited to a selection of
    about 18 songs. To load in anything else you have to reload a whole
    disk (minimum time about 30 seconds).
    
    - There is an alternative with the MC-500 if 8-20 seconds is really
    an acceptable load time for you. You can use it in the regular edit
    mode. In that case it takes around 5-15 seconds to load a song (you can
    load up to 8 into memory at a time). In this case you have full edit
    capabilities, including changing tempo, transposing, etc.
    
    - I've also mentioned elsewhere that there is MIDI file software
    available for the MC-500, which might help in transfering sequences
    from your PC.
    
    
    The bottom line for me is that I use the MC-500 in performance mode
    because I need "instant" loads. The difficulty I've had is that I can't
    play anything in my repertoire on demand. The advantage of the Alesis
    Datadisk is that you can stick in a disk and play any sequence on it
    *instantly* with no load time. But as you said, you can't change the
    tempo, etc. I still think for the price it would have a lot of
    advantages for performing, and intend to get one eventually. I'd like
    to know more about the other units you mentioned, which I haven't seen
    around here (US).
    
    - Ram

Ram,

A mutual friend of ours (Betsy) asked me for some advice for this same 
problem last week. I told her about the DataDisk possibility and 
pointed her toward my contacts at EUW.

Wurly's no longer feels really comfortable recommending the Alesis 
line of products and in fact are considering dropping them. 
Apparently, too many problems with reliability, etc.

She ended up buying an MC-50 as a second sequencer, running in edit 
mode, to load in requests and songs not on the current performance 
disk in her MC500 Mark II. The Mark II is still her main sequencer, 
which she runs in performance mode.

Rather expensive solution, but it works.

-Dan

    
    Too low a reliability- or too low a profit margin?  :-)
    
    	-Bill

>    Too low a reliability- or too low a profit margin?  :-)
>    
>    	-Bill

Good point, Bill!

    Following on my reply .35  I have now plumped for the Brother MDI40.
    For a review see note 2253.20
    
    Alex

    
    
    I have a very simple (I think) requirement that somebdoy out there must
    know the answer to.
    
    At the moment we are working a residency at one of the local
    restaurants for which I am using My W30 as the main sequencer. WE
    typically do one hour on 20 minutes off which is probably about 12
    sequences (fairly complex ones with sysex etc). The load time for each
    of these on the w30 is acceptable however the w30 has no way of
    chaining songs together so that It will load the next song as soon as
    the previous one is finished so that after a suitable wait I can just
    kick a pedal and the next song starts. Is anybody aware of a sequencer
    which will do this. I know about the MRP software for Roland MC systems
    but these require all the songs to be loaded into memory and then they
    will chain together. I know there will not be enough space in one of
    these machines for an hours worth of my stuff.
    
    The ideal would be an alessis datadisk or equivelant with the chain
    capability. But I don't think the alesis will do this.
    
    Any ideas?
    
    					Paul.

Re .41:

You mean to say that the W30

(a) doesn't accept a sysex sequence which instructs it to load a song, and
(b) doesn't allow said hypothetical sysex sequence to be sequenced?

I know, you said it couldn't do it, but the above could possibly be missed if
you're looking for something clearly identified as a "CHAIN COMMAND."

Good luck, anyhoo-

	Bob

    
    The Brother sequencer that I own (MD-40? I think) has a "load next"
    mode that will load and play each song on the disk in order. Doesn't
    wait for a start signal between songs though, just pauses however long
    it takes to load the next song and then starts to play it. In general,
    this sequencer has worked well for live performance for me (mostly drum
    tracks for pop/rock stuff, some minimal sequenced keyboards). But, I
    don't use the chain feature, just load and play manually.
    
    Rob
    

    Paul, the Roland Sound Brush sequencer will do it for you.  I believe
    it will read MC500 format disks (which is what the W30 produces,
    right?) directly.  The data sheets mention something about it queueing
    up the files in alphabetical order!  Off to your Roland dealer....
    
    						Brian

    
    
    The brother sounds most likely as I am sure that the sound brush will
    work in a similar way to the other MRP-MRC systems. And actually the
    W30 will read and write MRC disks but is not compatible with them, if
    you see what I mean. I.E. You cann ot read a W30 disk on an MC50. I
    know cos I tried it last night.  Any other suggestions?
    
    					Paul.

    
    
    If you're willing to carry around a computer Twelve Tone Systems'
    Cakewalk Live! product is designed to do what you want.  It's a
    playback only system, though, so to get your existing sequences into a
    usable format you'd need access to a sequencer that can record either
    standard MIDI files or Cakewalk files.
    
    

    Hmmm.  Although you can't read a W30 disk with the MC50 can you do the
    conversion to MC500 format using the MC50 and then read it?  Another
    option might be to borrow an MC500 system disk and load it into the
    MC50 so that it "becomes" an MC50.  Might be able to read it in then.
    
    Steve

    Paul,
    
    Go see the Sound Brush at the dealer anyway.  It may not take the W30
    disks, but is supposed to be a streamer, like the Alesis unit and can
    read standard MIDI files in IBM/Atari ST disk format, which you could
    get off your computer sequencer (umm, I seem to recall you do have one,
    right?).
    
    						Brian

    re: .41
    
    >I know about the MRP software for Roland MC systems
>    but these require all the songs to be loaded into memory and then they
>    will chain together. I know there will not be enough space in one of
>    these machines for an hours worth of my stuff.
    
    Unless your stuff is incredibly dense, this is incorrect. I use an
    MC-500 Mk II, and disk space is more often the problem for me than
    memory space. Even at that, I have never had a problem getting a full
    set worth of material (12 songs) into one S-MRP set. In most cases I
    can get 15 or more songs in. And I think my sequences are about as
    thick as they get, since I use two 8-channel synths and often have
    around 12 channels programmed, as well as drum tracks that are often
    extremely busy.
    
    On the other hand, I'm considering a SoundBrush myself, because I like
    the flexibility of being able to pop in disks and play things on
    demand, in addition to playing preconfigured sets. I wish the
    SoundBrush wasn't limited to labelling sequences with *numbers*. What a
    drag trying to keep track of what's on all the disks. The Alesis
    MicroDisk, on the other hand, allows file names to be entered -
    manually, with an editor that many credit card calculators easily
    improve on. I wish Roland would have designed the SoundBrush to pick up
    title information directly from the MIDI file.
    
    - Ram

    Yup.  The real issue with MRP on the MC50 is load time and disk space.
    It will automatically load in all the songs for the next bank.  That
    is, you program it up to load in a bank of songs.  When it gets done
    with those, it loads the next bank and continues.  Between songs on the
    same bank there's no significant delay unless you want it.  Otherwise,
    you have to live with the load time delays between banks.
    
    Steve

    
    
    Well I've now had a look at the MC50 and the Sound Brush at home and
    think that the sound brush is going to be the one.
    
    Bear in mind that I do not need another recording sequencer.
    
    The sound brush  will allow me to create perforemance disks on my atari
    and reorganise the disks on the atari and will basically churn out the
    song files in ascii filename order with a predetermined gap in beteen
    each song. There are a couple of issues. 
    
    1 It's not going to be as easy to pick out a song from the middle of a
    disk if we want to change the running order during perforemance as the
    display only has song numbers not titles.
    
    2 The midi song file standard does not seem to allow for the sending of
    sysex messages as part of a song file (does anybody know why?).
    
    			I will try it this weekend and report back on how
                        it went.
    
    
    					Paul K.