Parts: transition question

i just made three parts from a sequence, part one consists of pattern one of all four tracks. part two of all steps of pattern two and part three of all steps of pattern three. all reset, start and end points are correctly set to their corresponding steps, quite a simple setup. however when i transition from part one to part three part two (consisting of all steps from pattern two) is played once until the correct steps of pattern three are reached and looped. that confuses me, isn´t it possible to jump directly to steps way ahead of the currently played…it certainly must be possible…
or is this is a config setting which i didn´t find?
so question short: i want to transition from part one to part three without hearing part two in between. how?

I am looking at the code for USER transition and there is something definitely weird here…

In the meantime, is it possible for you to use the FIRST or LAST transition type instead of USER?

thanks brian,
yes, i use first transition now. it would be good to have a transition type that is really immediate, synced on the nearest clock pulse when transition is pressed. right now, the user transition doesn’t do this.

Nearest clock pulse and not nearest step?

i would prefer nearest clock pulse if that’s possible since i work with polyrhythmic sequences and nearest step isn’t that practical in this situation. so by pressing transition i have control over the perception of the beat…i hope you understand what i mean. or maybe it would be possible to select a division of the clock pulse for the transition. by that the sequencer wouldn’t look at steps but only at the underlying clock or a division of it.

so in fact the transition button would act like the reset button but synced to a chosen pulse division.

just to explain my situation a bit more. i work with a drummer and we play polyrhythmic structures.
quite often the er101 plays rhythmic structures along with the drummer but never on the actual beat, that’s what the drummer plays. so the perception of the beat is really different as long as the drummer doesn’t play. so by giving him the oppurtunity to transition to a part with a contact mic it would be very helpful to have it synced to the clock pulse and not the steps since the steps could be quintuplets (from the actual beat which the drummer will play) or something like that, misleading in a way…
haha, it’s hard to explain but i hope you get what i mean.
thanks brian!

It sounds like you want the drummer to syncopate against the sequencer? How about putting a silent (grace?) step at the beginning of each part?

Actually, I take that back because it would still not let the drummer decide where in the beat to trigger the part.

Let me see what I can do as an alternate USER transition mode (configurable from the CONFIG.INI).

i tried with silent steps, but it’s still problematic and he’s still bound to the part lengths.
anyway, i’m thankful to any improvement of the user transition!

Quick question about the “quantized to next clock pulse” part transition. Since each track could potentially have its own clock there is some ambiguity about which clock should be used for the part transition quantization. I’m leaning towards quantizing to the raw (unmultiplied/undivided) input clock. Another possibility is to transition on the next clock event that occurs in any track.


In the meantime, here is a pre-release candidate of v2.14 the next ER-102 firmware for you to test. It fixes the USER(immediate) part transition mode so that the sequencer resets on a part transition. Also, a new transition type is introduced USER(clock) which is the same as USER(immediate) but quantized to the next raw clock pulse.

You would activate this new mode by setting the user_transition variable in the CONFIG.INI file:

; Select the USER transition type.
; immediate - The next part starts playing immediately.
; focus - The next part plays when the focused track, pattern, or step is finished.
; clock - The next part plays on the next clock pulse.
user_transition = clock```

<a class="attachment" href="//"></a> (120.6 KB)
(f9_XX.bin firmware are always just for testing purposes.)

thanks very much brian!
i will try the firmware and report back.
about what clock to choose when divided and or multiplied clocks are in use…
i thought about having the option to set the quantization with a user defined number.
so for example i work with the fastest clock output from a multiclock by e-rm, that’s 96th.
so if i could just set for example 6 on the ini file, it would quantize to 16th (not looking at possible multiplications or divisions of clock or several clocks, just a division of the raw incoming clock).
12 would be 8th’s and so on…

cheers, benjamin

just tested, thanks for the fix and i really like the clock transition! however, as described above, a user defined division would be great since it´s easy to miss the right moment if a fast clock is used. other than that it´s wonderful, now suddenly new ideas about sequencing the parts come to mind! i also have to mention again my admiration for your work and your incredible support, second to none!

1 Like

revive this topic with another request for the user transition types. i’m happy with the clock transition, but with fast clocks which i use it’s still quite difficult to press on time. however i just had the idea what if we could decide which track the transition listenes to rather than listening to all four tracks and deciding either first or last, it would be nice if i could just write track 1 in the .ini file and the transition then only happens after track 1’s part is finished…that way i could set up my “main” melody on track 1 and the other tracks could shift around and polyrhythmicly spice up but transition still only happens on the beat of track 1…i hope it’s understandable what i mean?

1 Like

Hm, isn’t this what user type focus means?

focus - The next part plays when the focused track, pattern, or step is finished.

Maybe I don’t understand it right because mine has yet to be built (but is already payed for:) or is it just that you want to be independent from focussing a track and therefore would like to have it generally configurable?

that’s right, i should have mentioned this, i would like to have it independent from the focused track.

1 Like

I understand that desire - It brings up the concept of some kind of a global track which would be very handy, doesn’t it. Or at least it would be a work around for something like that.

+1 for this one :slight_smile: nice idea :wink:

Wow. Has it really been 6 months since we last talked about this? Scary. :astonished:

Certainly. This shouldn’t be hard to do at all, so I’ll put it on the list for the next (unstable) release.