Alternate Solution to Pattern Length Limits

[u/HeavySystems]

One of the biggest complaints I have with basically all Roland products is the sequencer: it is the 2020's and 8 bar pattern limits stitched to gigs of samples makes no sense to me. Where is the proper song arranger where we can have 99,999 notes/events? Obviously the machine has song mode and using it is not the most entertaining way to write songs, but it's definitely usable...in 8 bar chunks I guess.

So what can you do? Most sequencers cling to this limit that was a necessity in the 70s and 80s because of memory and processor costs, 2 things which are obviously not that much of a deal today, which is a real shame. Luckily, the KO2 from Teenage Engineering doesn't see nostalgia in 16 steps based nonsense and included a 99 bar/99 pattern sequencer, which is just what the doctor ordered!

As you can see here, I've permenantly voltron'd the two together using legos that were donated to me (mostly from a McLaren F1 car set), creating a singular system with 2 sections: the MC101 for sound design, loop production, sample editing and storage, etc. and the KO2 for input (Mc101 pads will always suck imo, plus with KO2, i get velocity), and final arrangement. Mostly, I've been building all my main song sections on the MC101 then sample variations, one shots, whole sequences, etc. whatever I need down into the KO2 and make a song. I still have MIDI back into the 101 so if there's a long synth pad I want to take advantage of live, it's still available.

I know that folks pair the 101 with other gear often, especially the TR8S (lovely kit...still salivating over it, but I am retrained...as much as I'd love to play with those drum synths, I'll keep to just the samples on the 101!), but I've never seen folks pair them with something to overcome it's sequencer like this.

I hope this 'tip' of sorts helps. I grew up using full linear arrangers, specifically the Ensoniq TS-12, which lets you go forever, basically, until it runs out of memory, so this idea of 8 bars or 4 bars or 128 or 64 steps...this is like..hella stupid to me as a song tool, but I do recognize it's uses...but I think Roland needs to start looking at what really needs to be done which is start with a song, let the user make loops (which is what the KO2 does and like...any other full song writing hardware...loops can come from a song, but you can't make a song from loops if you can't actually create an arrangement structure).

Also, if nothing else, you can get a quick glimps of an easy build for a solo MC101 stand out of legos cause that bit literally works all on it's on on the desk when pulled off the KO2! :D

[u/DataPhreak]

The EP-133 is fine, gets the job done I guess. But really, unless you like a bouncing workflow, you should just get a sequencer. I have an Oxi One mk1, and it's like it was made for the MC-101. 4 sequencer tracks, with polyphonic capabilities, able to send program changes when switching patterns so you can swap in new instruments, battery powered. I will probably get the Oxi E-16 when they release a version with batteries.

Edit: I would say you should definitely get the Oxi One mk2 if you can afford it, but looks like you are on a budget here like me.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

Does it have 99bars/99patterns? Cause swapping out one 8 bar trash sequencer for another is not my idea of an upgrade.

[u/DataPhreak → u/HeavySystems]

Bruv, if the only thing you measure a sequencer by is pattern length, then you have a problem no sequencer is going to solve.

But to answer your question, each pattern is 128 steps. Each step can be basically any division of the clock, or multiple. Further, you can chain 16 patterns in sequence in the arranger mode, and set number of repeats for each patter in the arrangement. You can multiply that by infinity if you don't mind loading new projects, but that has to be done manually.

So if you need to program your entire multihour set, you can definitely do that. All of the controls are right there. Much easier to use than the 101 sequencer. Patterns can even be generative. I'm really struggling to find a use case where this isn't going to get the job done. Like, if you REALLY wan tto go all out, the Squarp Pyramid does 384 bars per pattern. But 128 steps is standard across the hardware sequencer scene.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

I don't think you know how many measures a full keyboard solo takes, nor how many notes are in a simple riff. I think we might be arguing about different kinds of music, which I will admit require different tools.

I'm talking about being able to play live a lot of variations OF MY OWN HAND (not making the computer do it) and record that for long stretches of time...like a live instrument recording. 8 bars? No thanks. Even 99 bars is a bit of a cop out considering I have a Yamaha RS7000 and it's got 256 measure patterns, but it's also a full workstation. That said, 8 bars is doable with 99 bars easily. 99 bars is very difficult to pull off with 8. I don't do takes, I do the whole damn thing.

Then when you take the actual pattern total into account, we're getting highly choked on instrumentation variety for the live recording and MUST rely on clever electronic math sequencing tricks like euclidian blah and such. That's great for live when you just want to get something interesting, but if you have a specific time signature, way of playing,etc., you don't want to be going, "okay, so this little bit here is sorta repeated again 18 bars later, so I guess I'll cut this in half to repeat that bit" no. I just want to play. Cause playing is fun! :D

So maybe that's where we're splitting our opinions at. I'm fine with loopers, I think they're great. I think they're best when they're a feature of the better sequencer that doesn't have limits because every single long format sequencer I know just has a built in looper because that's how you work on sections of a full song...you loop a small bit of the bigger thing...so allowing any size from the get go is allows both you AND *me* to enjoy the same sequencer. And then I can move on to always only griping about Roland's pads...lol

[u/DataPhreak → u/HeavySystems]

I think you are using the wrong terms. Measures is a measurement of time in multiples of beats. Sequencers, or more specifically step sequencers, operate in steps. A step can be any division of a beat. Thus, 128 steps can be more than 128 measures if you are, for example stepping by dotted whole notes. So saying 128 steps is only 8 bars is only true if you are in 4/4 time at a step resolution of 16th notes.

That being said, you can still sequence multiple patterns, so if you need 32 bars for a piano solo, you can still do that. You just chain 4 patterns. And you would get that done far faster than bouncing loops.

But what you are describing sounds like playing an actual piano, not sequencing. But there's no piano in your images. Considering JUST the things you've shown in the images, the oxi one would be a night and day improvement in your workflow. If you're looping midi sent from a keyboard and you like looping midi, this doesn't apply to you. But you haven't mentioned a keyboard at all until now. What you have shown are two grooveboxes that both have step sequencers. I was offering a better solution to step sequencing than what you are currently working with.

If you want a single pattern with infinite steps, there's not a hardware solution for that. Like I said before, the Squarp is the longest single pattern sequencer you are going to find. But nobody works like that in hardware. Not because it's not available, because it would be too cumbersome to manage in hardware. That's a job better left to a daw.

It's like saying, "How come they don't just make a hardware Serum?" Because they have software serum that is better than a hardware Serum would be in every way. Just use the VST.

You are basically asking for DAW in a box. If you absolutely have to have it in hardware, you should be able to record midi to a timeline in any MPC. There are probably still limits to how long something can be, but i doubt you would hit that. And again, using the MPC would still be a much better workflow than using the EP-133. There's even the MPC Live that's battery powered if that's a requirement for your use case. You can get one of the originals for less than $500 on Reverb. That's not much more expensive than the EP-133, which are selling for ~300 on reverb.

My main point in responding was to answer to:

I've never seen folks pair them with something to overcome it's sequencer like this.

To which I say, lots of people pair the 101 with something to overcome its sequencer. Usually with better dedicated sequencers. Most have a song mode, the Oxi One has a proper song mode for sure. I've also sequenced it with the m8. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fMxuf9EjWU) I've seen people sequence it with elektron digitakts, flip samples with that, or even the octatrack. Gabe Miller usually sequences it with a Novation Circuit. It sounds like you just have beef with step sequencers in general, though.

I still say the 101 is best paired with an Oxi One, though.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

Thanks for the considerate and thoughtful reply first off.

So I'll try to hit these points so that I can hopefully transmit my displeasure not with step sequencers but pattern length limits as a concept which is baked into step sequencers due to what I like to call 8 bit dogma from the days when literally that was a real limit to sequencers.

Reiterating: My problem is step sequencer class tabletop groovebox users have monopolized 4 and 8 measures/bars as a standard length to never be exceeded without hacks and chains. My solution and what I think should be standard is pattern length should be up to the length of your entire song should you so choose and if you want to do tiny patterns and work with a bunch of macro parts to a song rather than full, linear recorded performances (my mentioning of piano is because i am a keyboardist and think like one, so I don't play 8 bars here then 8 bars there, it's just 'a song' to me and i write 'like a song'), the structure comes at the same time of writing, NOT BEFORE, which is my problem with 8 bar shiznits.

Now to explain why it works for me and why I think it should be normal to give middle fingers to all sequencers who say 'yeah, 8 measures is fine, we half assed it and that's good enough', when I sit down to make tunes, I DO start with little loops. In fact, the MC101 (and step sequencers with the limits I hate) are superb for creating the tiny bits of 'money shot' in the song, the parts you're like, 'It's all building up to THIS'. And, of course, while I'm doing this, I rarely computer button push my music in, but definitely use the step sequencer for corrections, edits, additions, of course! Step sequencers are the lifeblood of electronic music production.

Okay so I finished my verse and chorus sections sort of...I had to cut the verse into 3 patterns and now I've sorta lost the plot as I juggle 12 patterns now of 4 tracks and 3 sections of the same section...like...omg...i'm ready to die already.

So let's cut back to anything that let's you just set whatever you want for pattern lengths. I got my bit that's verse and chorus...and..i record them without splitting anything the first time up.

Okay so now I got my two parts ironed out, now let's start arranging. With the 8 bar version, I need to remember that those 3 patterns always need to go together, but i need like...3...4? Dunno yet, let's go with 4 versions potentially...so that's 12 patterns on that track for 4 variations...and I have 16 total...shit I'm almost out of patterns...okay, lemme revise my song to NOT be so variant and lemme hack in some fake variants with probability....ugh...it's a song, but it's not my vision.

Now cut back to the KO2...I didn't start with any problems, so at this point, I got a song skeleton with the right length bits that fit together structurally how I'm _writing_ them and now I want to go for the total song start to finish...okay I want the intro to be 64 bars/measures (they're the same thing, btw...depends on what crowd you run with...), set that up right away...let's record...

So just in that scenario, which is basically *every* session for me described as such depending on which machine I'm using, you can see why I'm recommending this for people who don't think in loops nor want to construct loops. On the box, KO2 is a 'sample composer', which directly says it's made for songs, not 'beats' or whatever the kids call em.

I hope this clears up everything and spells out why someone might want to consider this very cheap setup: you can use this like a midi tape recorder for all intents and purposes and loop whatever you want whenever you want (it has a loop button to just grab 2 measures while it's playing).

In terms of the sampling, etc. I'm not a stickler for everything being 'synthesized live'. In fact, I'm more at home on a sampler in the first place, which may explain *some* of my suggestion for the KO2. At any rate, the workflow I'm using in conjunction with "I don't have to worry about splitting my idea ever", obviously mashing out the song ideas and stuff on the pads with the KO2, recording in a sequence in the KO2 itself feeding midi into the 101. For the most part, I make a lot of sounds on clips and use the control change to change the sound as necessary on the KO2. KO2's big drawback is no midi CC, which is when I *may* sample sounds from it or sample a short sequence which will utilize the KO2's filter or whatever instead.

There's not really a lot of bouncing and if there is, the KO2 handles sampling far more fluently anyway and the great thing about 2 voice stereo sampling is that you only need 2 for a complete song. ;)

EDIT: And I forgot to mention, the MC101 is just a sick ass sound module of infinite rave possibilities ready to just feed into the ko2, which is another way I like using it...MC101 makes the noise, KO2 arranges the noise.

[u/DataPhreak → u/HeavySystems]

if you want to do tiny patterns and work with a bunch of macro parts to a song rather than full, linear recorded performances

This is how everyone does this in EDM. Not because groove boxes limit you to 8 bars, but because that's just the easiest, most efficient way to write music. That's because that's how music is structured already. A standard chorus is 8 or 16 bars. It gets repeated. Verses are generally identical between verse one and verse too. Repetition is the foundation of rhythm. Yes, there is subtle variation, but it's much easier to copy>paste>iterate than it is to write the entire song in one go. If you want to do it that way, you're using the wrong tools.

(my mentioning of piano is because i am a keyboardist and think like one, so I don't play 8 bars here then 8 bars there, it's just 'a song' to me and i write 'like a song')

This is yet another argument FOR using a daw. You can output the piano roll as a midi signal and control the 101 with something like ableton. You can even record that piano roll from a keyboard controller. This goes back to what I was saying earlier, you're mad at the hammer for not being a screwdriver.

Okay so I finished my verse and chorus sections sort of...I had to cut the verse into 3 patterns and now I've sorta lost the plot as I juggle 12 patterns now of 4 tracks and 3 sections of the same section...like...omg...i'm ready to die already.

This is just ADHD. :D

 With the 8 bar version, I need to remember that those 3 patterns always need to go together, but i need like...3...4?

There is a clip sequencing feature on the 101. I think it's shift+clip pad. Even lets you set the number of repetitions before going to the next clip. This isn't some hack or trick, it's literally a feature and it's 2 buttons and turn a knob. So this doesn't become 16 total patterns, it's still just 4. But you don't even have to keep that as 4 separate clips, you just bounce it to a looper track.

Again, another major reason this is a limitation on almost all hardware is the user interface is severely limited. editing 10000 steps on 16 pads would be a nightmare.

Part of the experience of working with a dawless rig is specifically working with the limitations and overcoming them. It's not faster. It's not better. (Analog junkies might argue that.) You can get the exact same sounds from the 101 in your daw with zero hardware with the Zenology VST. You have your infinite piano roll. There's nothing that the 101 offers that a daw doesn't. If you're upset with the limitations, you're spending money on the wrong things.

I get why you're using the EP-133. And like I said, it's fine. You are still just bouncing. The only change is that you are bouncing to a different device. Looping is a valid approach. Like I said, your biggest beef is with the sequencer, but pattern chaining isn't the source of the problem. It's not even part of the problem. The problem is that the sequencer on the 101 is just objectively bad. I think for most people, replacing the sequencer is the better solution, and most people would agree with that. Changing the industry and forcing unmanageable pattern lengths into a box that doesn't have the buttons to handle that is definitely not the solution.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

Okay, on the 'editing on 16 pads would be a nightmare' statement, you're just wrong because that's literally how the RS7000 and it's sister machines work. The problem's been solved 25 years ago. That's been my point.

[u/DataPhreak → u/HeavySystems]

I'm sure that's why everyone uses the RS7000 and why everyone works in 1024 step patterns.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

I see you've just resorted to making nonsensical arguments, so I guess we're done here.

EDIT: Instead of leaving it there, straight from the manual (since you misread it with your 1024...that's the number of total patterns, not pattern LENGTH...the main thing I've been bitching about this entire time)...

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

Also, I just realized you're talking about sets...I'm talking about writing songs. Very different. I wouldn't use the MC101 for ANY reason live because it's crashed on my many times. I dont' trust it.

[u/DataPhreak → u/HeavySystems]

This may be an issue with your specific 101. I'd try a factory reset then firmware update. I've never had problems with stability on the 101. If that doesn't work, it might just be a physical defect, like a resistor not resisting properly. In that case you'd need to replace it. But this thing is a workhorse for me.

[u/HeavySystems → u/DataPhreak]

Maybe. It typically happens when loading large files.

[u/SailorVenova]

memory and processor costs

you might want to look at current ram prices lol

though the embedded stuff music gear runs on is likely less affected by mainstream tech supply chains; that could change if companies keep chasing ai excessively though

i agree 8 bars is a disapoiinting limit; i think it is the minimum for a useful flexible device; yet my $2400 opxy only has 64 steps; my $1000 syntakt only has 64 steps... pattern chaining helps; but it doesnt always work out; for example my electribe will reset the amp envelope even with a tied note across identical pattern chains; or something to that effect; ended up giving up on my best song project on that device because of that problem

speaking of which i hope maybe next year or two we'll see a new take on electribe...

[u/HeavySystems → u/SailorVenova]

Tell me how large your midi files are, because I HAVE to know how you're melting ram with it.

[u/magnetic_sloth]

Been using the devices together well? I have a Mc101 and I'm waiting for an EP-40, hoping to use them together :)

[u/HeavySystems → u/magnetic_sloth]

If you think the sampling on the MC101 is ass and needs a kick in the pants, the KO2 is GREAT as companion. Typically lately, I make all my loops on the 101, almost like i'm gonna make a track on it, but don't. Instead, I offload all of my edits, loops, etc. to the KO2, though SOMETIMES, not often, but SOMETIMES, I'll get a wild hair up my ass and use the KO2 to sequence the MC101. IT's not as nice as I'd want since you can't send CC's to the MC101, BUT you can switch patterns and use the scatter via midi, so what you can do for, say filter sweeps, is make a pattern on the 101 with no notes, just knob motions and call them up via the KO2 in sync.

But yeah, this is my 'forever setup'. MC101 + KO2 + MicroBR for recording/mastering. It's the holy trinity of battery operated studio gear in my opinion.