| Hmm, missed this one first time around.
What do you mean by chaining? Synching them together in parallel
or serially. The former is straightforward, the latter virtually
impossible.
By parallel, I mean they both play at the same time, one serving
as the master clock, the other as a slave. I do this all the time
not for performance reasons but to move data between my MSQ-700
(where I do time correct and multitrack merge) and my MSQ-100 (where
I do inserts and deletes and exotic step mode programming). Just
route the MIDI out of the master to the MIDI in of the slave, set
the master to internal clock, and the slave to MIDI/external clock,
start the slave (it will hang, waiting for a MIDI clock) then start
the master (the slave will also start). I have done this to do
"overdubs" too, so it will work when you just want both to play
rather than have one play while the other records (i.e., I have
overdubbed from one MSQ to the other).
By serially, I mean when one sequencer stops the other starts, keeping
perfect synch. I know of no sequencer that such a facility. This
could be done with a suitable MIDI system exclusive message, or
maybe just by having the first sequencer send a START command over
an appropriate channel to another sequencer. My MSQs emit clock
even when not playing, so they could stay in synch if there was
some way to start the second sequencer in the chain.
What my band did in live situations was use the two sequencers serially,
but not automatically. We did this to get around absolute memory
limitations, but we never split a song across the two sequencers.
We'd put 6 songs in one and two songs in the other, slave them together
and set the tempo with one and have the other display current bar
number for cues (the MSQs can display tempo or bar number, but not
both at the same time).
len.
|
| Since I'm upgrading the JX3-P to get out of OMNI, this note is now
purely academic, but anyhow...
I hoped to put them in "parallel", using one as a master timing
module and the other as slave (natch). But here's the catch...
I want one to feed data to the JX ONLY and the other to feed the
Yamaha. Since the JX would have a dedicated sequencer, it would
effectively be OMNI OFF'd, yet everything would still be in synch.
Still not sure if I could do it, but it doesn't matter too much
now anywho.
Edd
|
| There's two ways you can get what you want; my Rolands will do either
but I don't know about your gear.
1) use a different sync than MIDI. I can sync my two MSQs together
using their Roland DIN sync interface. Then their MIDI outputs
are completely independent of one another except for timing.
2) use MIDI to sync, but make sure the slave sequencer is not in
"mix" mode. In mix mode, the sequencer merges incoming data
with internally originated data, and both appear at the MIDI
out. When not in mix mode, incoming data appears only at the
MIDI thru, and only internally originated data appears at the
MIDI out. This way the two sequencers would play in sync but
keep their data streams separate.
len.
|
| Sunday I got a chance to do some practical experimentation along
these lines. A friend appeared at my doorstep holding a Roland
Juno-2, a Sequential Circuits TOM, and a second QX21. Not 5 minutes
later, everything was synched and running.
How? Like this....
Connect QX21(a) "thru" to QX21(b) "in". Set (a) as master and (b)
as slave. Connect (b) "thru" to TOM in. Set TOM to slaved. (The
TOM would only work on a "thru" port.) Record 1 bar of nothing on
(b) and place it in infinite repeat mode.
DX21 "out" to QX(a) "in". QX(a) "out" to RX21 (drums) "in". RX "out"
to DX "in". DX "thru" to Mirage "in". Mirage "thru" to JX "in".
Nothing needed to be started other than QX(a). That is, nothing
needed to be "hung" whilst waiting for the clock to start. All
was started by pressing "start" on (a).
Edd
|