Which sequencer has the BEST midi implementation?

[pdxindy]

Here's exactly what I have been looking for.. For about a decade. And these options were in studio vision in the 90's

"Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8."

"Vision had a window where we could have several sequences open at the same time, and all active. Each sequence had a letter assigned to it. Also, the sequences could be triggered by MIDI. Each sequence could be triggered at the original pitch from the computer keyboard (by pressing the letter assigned to it) or could be "played" from the MIDI keyboard, if it was assigned to it.

You could also create a "sequence of sequences", which has its own master tempo, but each nested sequence runs as a "block" nested in the main sequence, but still has its own tempo track, etc. With that feature, you could create arrangements where you quickly drag entire sequences, one for the chorus, one or more for the bridges, one for the verses, one for the solos, and you could rearrange that very fast by drag and drop each "block". DP chunks work more or less the same way, but you cannot have more than one block active, while in SV these could be layered,

That's where people started to mess around, and sometimes created really crazy things.

The window where we had all the sequences opened at the same time is something that, AFAIK, still no other sequencer has, as of today. The closest thing to that is the "chunks" window in Digital Performer, but the way DP deals with "chunks" (a "chunk" can be an entire sequence) is not as advanced as Studio Vision (see above)."

can someone please confirm that these specific features are available in any daw or vst? It would make my year

What is the objective? I mean, what is the result that is desired that this functionality gives one?

Have you looked at Numerology?

[andrew732]

wow talk about an ancient bump memysefandus!

I guess the topic is as valid as always though. I still believe cubase and logic are the two "best" daw midi ninjas of this world today. Even though many love the fruity piano roll more than those two, overall nothing can compete with their logical editors and overall functionality. For pure midi power, i always recommend one of those two. IMHO of course.

I haven't rigorously compared DAWs in years, but I think Cubase is still peerless when it comes to MIDI. The one and only thing I hate about MIDI in Cubase is that you cannot view or assign note "names" for drum hits in the piano roll like "snare," "ride," etc. You basically have to remember which note triggers which type of drum hit, which can quickly become a major PITA. In the Cubase drum editor you can do this, and in Ableton Live's piano roll you can do this, but not in the Cubase piano roll.

[xbitz]

it can read out the names from the instruments



can write them into the notes, Beat Designer also displays them(which is better than the PR anyway for this type of task and pattern based)

[andrew732]

That must have been added in a newer version of Cubase than the one I'm using. Well, good to know they finally added it. Thanks!

[memyselfandus]

Here's exactly what I have been looking for.. For about a decade. And these options were in studio vision in the 90's

"Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8."

"Vision had a window where we could have several sequences open at the same time, and all active. Each sequence had a letter assigned to it. Also, the sequences could be triggered by MIDI. Each sequence could be triggered at the original pitch from the computer keyboard (by pressing the letter assigned to it) or could be "played" from the MIDI keyboard, if it was assigned to it.

You could also create a "sequence of sequences", which has its own master tempo, but each nested sequence runs as a "block" nested in the main sequence, but still has its own tempo track, etc. With that feature, you could create arrangements where you quickly drag entire sequences, one for the chorus, one or more for the bridges, one for the verses, one for the solos, and you could rearrange that very fast by drag and drop each "block". DP chunks work more or less the same way, but you cannot have more than one block active, while in SV these could be layered,

That's where people started to mess around, and sometimes created really crazy things.

The window where we had all the sequences opened at the same time is something that, AFAIK, still no other sequencer has, as of today. The closest thing to that is the "chunks" window in Digital Performer, but the way DP deals with "chunks" (a "chunk" can be an entire sequence) is not as advanced as Studio Vision (see above)."

can someone please confirm that these specific features are available in any daw or vst? It would make my year

What is the objective? I mean, what is the result that is desired that this functionality gives one?

Have you looked at Numerology?

One objective is to be able to have Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8.

[pdxindy]

What is the objective? I mean, what is the result that is desired that this functionality gives one?

Have you looked at Numerology?

One objective is to be able to have Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8.

there are various ways to do poly-rythmic stuff

But sure... I don't mind if a DAW adds that sort of functionality.

[memyselfandus]

What is the objective? I mean, what is the result that is desired that this functionality gives one?

Have you looked at Numerology?

One objective is to be able to have Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8.

there are various ways to do poly-rythmic stuff

But sure... I don't mind if a DAW adds that sort of functionality.

AFAIK no daw on the market does this. Excellent feature request!

Daws I KNOW don't have the features needed to do it like you could in the 90's in studio vision.

You can't do this
"Complete sequences running nested inside other sequences. This way, you can have, for exemple, a sequence, written in 3/8 running inside anotjher sequence that has a base tempo, and tracks, in 4/4. It plays inside the 4/4 but stil in 3/8."

"Vision had a window where we could have several sequences open at the same time, and all active. Each sequence had a letter assigned to it. Also, the sequences could be triggered by MIDI. Each sequence could be triggered at the original pitch from the computer keyboard (by pressing the letter assigned to it) or could be "played" from the MIDI keyboard, if it was assigned to it.

You could also create a "sequence of sequences", which has its own master tempo, but each nested sequence runs as a "block" nested in the main sequence, but still has its own tempo track, etc. With that feature, you could create arrangements where you quickly drag entire sequences, one for the chorus, one or more for the bridges, one for the verses, one for the solos, and you could rearrange that very fast by drag and drop each "block". DP chunks work more or less the same way, but you cannot have more than one block active, while in SV these could be layered.


In any of these daws

Reaper NOPE
FL NOPE
Ableton Live NOPE
Cubase NOPE
Sonar NOPE
Studio One NOPE
Samplitude NOPE
Bitwig NOPE
Pro Tools NOPE
Acid Pro NOPE
Audition NOPE
Logic NOPE
Garage Band NOPE
Digital Performer NOPE
Orion NOPE
Renoise NOPE
Reason NOPE
Sawstudio NOPE
Tracktion NOPE
EnergyXT NOPE
Podium NOPE
And a few others I tried with a couple friends

But it was easy in vision pro in the 90's

[memyselfandus]

Some quotes

Anybody remember Opcode's Vision as fondly as I do? The best part about it that hasn't been replicated in any other MIDI sequencing software that I'm aware of was the capability to record in "subsequences" (fully multitracked song segments as short as 1 measure long). Then, to construct a "song", you would string these subsequences together in whatever order made sense, reusing them as many times as you liked. Then Vision would play back the whole song arrangement. If you didn't like it, you could easily move the segments around until you had the perfect arrangement. You'd name the subsequences A, B, C, etc. Then to play a "song", you'd just type A B C C B B C F D E C C A (or whatever), and the song would play in that order. It was perfection. Nirvana. At least for the way I write music...not having the benefit of being a keyboard virtuoso, or knowing the perfect arrangement in advance.

Does any new commercial sequencer have this capability? If so, I will buy it TODAY.

I own DP4.5 and ProTools LE 7.3. Both have collected dust because I can't compose the way I want to.

Seems like most of the innovation of the past decade has been in audio recording/editing/plugins/effects, etc. Nobody, not even Apple's Garage Band, makes MIDI recording as easy as Vision was."

"
I still have my Studio Vision hooked up on a old G3 and Proteus Modules. I'm still salvaging projects in Midi file format to dump into Logic 9. I'm with you. I really enjoyed Vision."

"The ONLY thing that was close for me was FL Studio's playlist feature. Otherwise, none of the apps mentioned below (like Live, etc..) come close. FL Studio is PC only at the moment, unfortunately."

He said "Close" ^^^^ the other important thing is multiple time signatures which het messed up in FL..


"I also truly miss Studio Vision. It's audio to Midi capabilities have never been equaled. I could sample a spoken sentence and get an amazing amount of pitch bend info (i.e. inflection) from it. Even Melodyne which is purporetdly all about that sort of thing falls WAY short… I too went to DP from there and then Logic, never use them any more, just Ableton with lots of Plug-ins like MAX 4 Lve, Reaktor and Kontakt…some Rewired Reason for special moments :0. I mainly perform live thru the software so I'm not so interested in Linear editing but truly none of these can hold a candle to Visions MIDI editing capabilities…big steps backwards, like "Flowers for Algernon"..."


"I was blown away to read your post just last night. Studio Vision is the ONLY sequencing software I have ever used, and I have not used it since 1994, sad but true. It has been a monkey on my back for two decades. I've wanted to design my own studio and I couldn't imagine using anything but Studio Vision. I really want to know if you have found your answer. Is the best option now Ableton Live? I really wouldn't know. All I know is Studio Vision. I took a course at The Evergreen State College in 93/94 called Intro to Music Technology, but I didn't know that we were using something that was not only the first of its kind, but that would also become obsolete. Is this true? Is there really no way to build that old piece of Nirvana back together again? It's all I really want, and I've used nothing since. (We were also using Sound Designer for digital audio recording and editing.)I really can't say how much I appreciate your question, Dave, as well as the way you described the nice capabilities I once knew"



"Who created the first integrated audio and MIDI recording application? Digidesign? Steinberg? Emagic? No, Opcode, the Palo Alto‑based pioneers of MIDI sequencing on the Mac. Prior to Opcode's 1990 Studio Vision, you either locked your sequencer to tape, via SMPTE, or triggered playback of audio clips from samplers. It is, of course, a short step from inserting sample‑trigger notes in your sequence data to having the application call the audio clips directly — in fact, it's exactly the same process, other than that the integrated application can easily include graphic representations of the audio alongside the MIDI.

Opcode's Vision, one of the leading MIDI sequencer programs in 1989, was upgraded to Studio Vision by integrating it with Digidesign's Sound Tools hardware — a Nubus card‑based audio accelerator and hard disk controller. Yes, you read that right; the computers of 1990 needed DSP help just to process audio and get it on and off the drives. You couldn't do very much with the audio once it was there, other than basic editing (although the Strip Silence feature was a major innovation), and I/O was strictly limited until Digi developed multi-channel hardware, but it was clearly the future of music production and Opcode got there first. Where are they now? Bought by the Gibson guitar company in 1998, the brand and product line were terminated just a year later. Dave Lockwood"

[pdxindy]

My original question was not so much the how, but why... Are you actually going to run a 3/8 sequence inside a 4/4 sequence? And running them at different Tempo? How often would that be musically useful?

Song mode... stringing sequences together ABCABCCCBBAA etc...

In Bitwig or Live, there is the Clip Launcher (Session View). You can trigger scenes (which is a multi-track set of sequences) in any order and do exactly that sort of 'song' mode thing. You can do it spontaneously on the fly in any order you want and record it as a performance in Arrangement. Each clip in Live can have its own time signature.

Some linear DAW's have the ability to trigger marker regions so you can do similar. The sub-projects in Reaper and Tracktion are powerful too.

Geist has a song mode in its sequencer that lets you string patterns together. Nora can do some stuff like that too. Numerology, Reaktor, etc. - lots of powerful tools out there.

I don't feel limited in what I can do today with complex sequencing.

[memyselfandus]

My original question was not so much the how, but why... Are you actually going to run a 3/8 sequence inside a 4/4 sequence? And running them at different Tempo? How often would that be musically useful?

Song mode... stringing sequences together ABCABCCCBBAA etc...

In Bitwig or Live, there is the Clip Launcher (Session View). You can trigger scenes (which is a multi-track set of sequences) in any order and do exactly that sort of 'song' mode thing. You can do it spontaneously on the fly in any order you want and record it as a performance in Arrangement. Each clip in Live can have its own time signature.

Some linear DAW's have the ability to trigger marker regions so you can do similar. The sub-projects in Reaper and Tracktion are powerful too.

Geist has a song mode in its sequencer that lets you string patterns together. Nora can do some stuff like that too. Numerology, Reaktor, etc. - lots of powerful tools out there.

I don't feel limited in what I can do today with complex sequencing.

How complex do you get with your sequencing?

[pdxindy]

My original question was not so much the how, but why... Are you actually going to run a 3/8 sequence inside a 4/4 sequence? And running them at different Tempo? How often would that be musically useful?

Song mode... stringing sequences together ABCABCCCBBAA etc...

In Bitwig or Live, there is the Clip Launcher (Session View). You can trigger scenes (which is a multi-track set of sequences) in any order and do exactly that sort of 'song' mode thing. You can do it spontaneously on the fly in any order you want and record it as a performance in Arrangement. Each clip in Live can have its own time signature.

Some linear DAW's have the ability to trigger marker regions so you can do similar. The sub-projects in Reaper and Tracktion are powerful too.

Geist has a song mode in its sequencer that lets you string patterns together. Nora can do some stuff like that too. Numerology, Reaktor, etc. - lots of powerful tools out there.

I don't feel limited in what I can do today with complex sequencing.

How complex do you get with your sequencing?

I asked you first

[memyselfandus]

It doesn't matter why

[Gonga]

Jan Hammer waxes poetic about his days with Opcode, and his frustrations since. It sounds wonderful by your description - very much a composer's approach to sequencing.

[pdxindy]

Jan Hammer waxes poetic about his days with Opcode, and his frustrations since. It sounds wonderful by your description - very much a composer's approach to sequencing.

I think that is just nostalgia...

[pdxindy]

It doesn't matter why

That is because you are not actually trying to accomplish something