!Epoch, for the next 4 years

[bungle]

The same guy that did phrazor . ( now sold by sugarbytes) , I think the developer of era/phrazor now works for N.I.

He designed Kore, then Maschine, then left, and now both are either discontinued or screwed in terms of development, o say he has the touch of death when it comes to sequencers is an understatement haha

[gentleclockdivider]

I have heard of era, but don't recall ever using it. I will do a bit of espionage, sorry, research, regarding era, and see what the fuss is about.

I used to use era - it was a good step sequencer but nothing like !Epoch

You're from the future then ?
Or an alpha tester ?

It's sad to seen such good programs die .
Sonicbytes era , abandoned ...now sold by sugarbytes ( I loathe that company ..really )
The most powerfull feature of era was the per step retrigger/gating/step length ...verry easy to do triplets etc.
Don't forget to use the right mouse button when exploring era

[LYTZ]

I used to use era - it was a good step sequencer but nothing like !Epoch

You're from the future then ?
Or an alpha tester ?

This... Fanboy already on pure Fanfiction...

[woggle]

You're from the future then ?

more that you are from the past

[zarf]

Hi Colin I hope it is going well (in the final straight ??)

Anyway - quick question if you don't mind. Earlier you said that one of the differences between this and MaxMsp was that everything was on a sample accurate scheduler, and events were guaranteed to happen at a specified time (if I understood you correctly?)

My question: is that the same whether !Epoch is running as a host or as a vst plugin?

Good luck getting this out to the world soon!

[colin@loomer]

Yes, it's true when running as both a plug-in and as a host. If a MIDI message is received at tick n, it is guaranteed that all events generated by this message will be processed and output at the very same tick.

[zarf]

Thanks for getting back. That's cool. Can't wait!

[gentleclockdivider]

Just a quick question .
Will the standalone mode be full screen (please say yes ) ?

[mooneh]

I was looking at the arranger screenshot. What's the workflow there to get different sequencers on the same track for example? Do you just draw them in and a new step sequencer will open?

[colin@loomer]

Yes, the standalone can be run as full screen.

The arranger has a one track to one object relationship, so you can't have multiple sequencers on the same horizontal track. You can just route the output of said sequencer to multiple locations though.

There are buttons to add sequencers of the various type directly in the arranger, or you can take an existing sequencer and create an arrangement track for it.

[mooneh]

Ok nice but that screenshot has 3 different numbers of 808 sequences on the same track for example. Was that just an early idea?

http://s21.postimg.org/mgy4pz2fr/arr_screen.png

[colin@loomer]

Ah, I was confused by your terminology; my fault, I apologise.

You're talking about having a number of different clips being played by the same sequencer: yes, it still does that. You can either drag in clips directly from a sequencer - remember, linear arrangement is not the only way to compose, so clips don't exist solely for the arranger, or as you mentioned, you can just double-click to create a brand new clip.

[mooneh]

I really need this exactly what Ive been looking for.

[deastman]

So excited to hear that the official release date for !Epoch will be... um... never mind.

[colin@loomer]

I'm trying to decide what would be a fair evaluation limitation. With previous plug-ins, I've muted the audio every few minutes - enough to niggle, hopefully not enough to annoy. But muting doesn't make sense here when it primarily outputs MIDI, and I really don't relish having to add some clever 'evaluation only' logic to ensure note-offs that match previous note-ons pass through during the mute. Besides which, there are so many other ways you can get MIDI or audio or CV data out from it - by writing directly to files, for example - it seems silly to block one route yet allow the others.

I'm also not a fan of time limitations - I've had experiences where I've installed evaluation software, been side-tracked, and by the time I got back around to it I discover that my 28 days have all but expired. I can't be the only one.

Limiting the module count is a possibility, but I'd rather evaluators get a full experience of the product, rather than hitting an imposed brick wall.

So my current method allows full use, including save, with time limits, but places a user's own saved patches behind the paywall. You can create your own complex structures, save them, but only re-open them in the full version. Does this seem like a fair restriction?