A good example of that being saturation!
1 Like
Feedback patching!
That big analog energy.
Alright i think i got some of it. Never had modular, or any analog seq. So i was just wondering. Patching stuff makes lots of sense same work being set up with midi must be a pain in the ass.
2 Likes
If you ever have the chance to use an OCtrl, try it out. Soooo much fun.
exactly. As you stated the resolution of modern digital gear is generally high enough that from a purely analytical point of view its not audible
the fact remains that digital, but its nature is binary everything is 1 and 0. As such when encoding smooth waveforms (ie sine waves, the building blocks of all natural sound) it will always have to round off the calculation in the curved areas since it is an infinitely repeating decimal point. The result is that if you zoomed in close enough on any curved area of the wave you would see it looks like little steps instead of a continuously smooth curve.
This is apperently is why analog has a certain âmagicâ and âwarmthâ compared to digital.
TBH I like both and find they each have their place. At the end of the day its a totally subjective issue.
Yeah apparently, but itâs actually a myth.
The steps disappear in D-A conversion (by way of band-limiting / reconstruction filter).
So thatâs not the real reason for the âmagicâ. 
Edit: also, the stepping doesnât really make any difference if weâre talking about sequencers.
1 Like
that why I said apperently
I totally agree that the with band-limiting/filters/other modern stuff there is effectively little to no different in the waveform.
the only thing that I still consider is that after D/A, you are still outputting a âreconstructedâ signal. As faithful as it may be, I still think that encoding error and micro timing issues and slight loss of resolution all add up to make digital âdifferentâ.
It all subjective tho. What sounds good sounds good. I def dont think that analog is superior or vice versa. It all actuality is probably audio gremlins in the signal that make analog what it is lol.
edit: good point about the sequencers! stepped may actually be desirable in some instances
Following the side-track a bit furtherâŚ
Sampling a sine-wave adds square-ish wave harmonics (high up) on the signal from the aliasing, right? Are you saying that no-matter how course the sample is, when itâs sent back out through D->A, these harmonics get removed? Iâm asking because every time I read someone saying âthe steps disappearâ it reads like you can recreate a perfect rendition of the source assuming you meet the Nyquist frequency of the source. Iâve never felt confident enough with maths to work through the details of this. Is that really enough? If so, why do we bother with anything above CD or DAT quality?
Thatâs how I understand it, yes.
If bandwidth requirements are met.
I was very sceptical the first time someone made that argument, but the sampling theorem is saying exactly that.
Of course youâll have to factor in wordsize, thatâs where it gets over my head as well. This wouldnât apply to a 16bit sample the same way as a 2bit sample⌠Quantisation noise is a thing.
However, @Bilansley also made a very good point about clock accuracy and jitter.
Higher sampling rates offer two advantages.
Firstly, you can have smoother anti-aliasing and reconstruction filters, they can be higher up and donât have to be as steep.
Secondly, average jitter is reduced by higher clock frequency.
Edit: ein wortâŚ
1 Like
This sounds like the bit I most need to read up on to flesh out my understanding and belief in the theory. 
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my probing.
1 Like
Why give up anything? Use them together if you want to.
There are 2 types of analog sequencers, those which ouput analog signals directly, and those which do so under digital control.
Examples of the former: Baby8/10 type sequencers, Korg SQ10, Korg SQ1, Arp 1601, and many other knob per step sequencers, some of them have pitch quantizers.
Examples of the latter: Korg SQ-64, Roland MC-4/8, and many modern CV sequencers with pattern memory.
The first kind allow very quick changing of voltage per step, and at a glance you can see what a step is set to. Dialling in precise values can be tricky, especially if using it to sequence pitch, and if there is no quantizer. Often you can manually step through a sequence with a button and set the values like that, or you can just twiddle knobs until you like it. There are many uses other than pitch, basically anything that can be modulated - great fun to have a few sequencers hooked up to a synth and have them synced but running at different rates and with different step counts.
Some analog sequencers can be run at audio rate, and used to generate crude wave shapes.
The second kind are more often utilised for mainly note sequencing, although some have modulation or auxillary outputs too, you can freely use mod from other tracks though. This kind offer much easier precision of note value, but perhaps not as much spontaneity as the first kind. Technically they are digital sequencers with analog outputs, some have slew/glide options for when you donât want discrete changes.
Over the years I have extensively used both kinds, both have a lot to offer, I like midi stuff too, for me it is mostly the end result that matters and to a lesser extent how you get there.
4 Likes
I have both analog and digital sequencers in my setup. One thing that seems to be a benefit of analog sequencers it that they respond super fast to whatever youâre clocking it with, compared to syncing with MIDI.
To my ears, I hear no latency at all when using my old doepfer step sequencers.
Horses for courses really.
@uNAQ ever ran an analog sequencer at audio rates?
with analog sequencers, and particularly in modular, Iâm seldom using them to sequence an oscillator. itâs usually some other control signal or event within the patch. because you can do anything you want with them.
1 Like
Generally speaking
- microtuning
- timing
- historically informed performance (HIP)
- focus (fewer notes)
- immediate hands on approach
- easy interaction by adding/subtracting/multiplying analog signals
- possibility of complex clock signal logic
- possibility of complex structures by having different rows (with different step numbers, gate lengths etc.) of the sequencer for different parts of the sound (gate, pitch, any CV-controlled sound parameter)
- only possibility to play analog synths without MIDI (or Midi-CV-Interface)
1 Like
I am not hearing anyone mention the DFAM and itâs making me sad 
Love that sequencer/osc pairing