That was a classic Rev2 bug. Got squashed with an update that desensitised the encoders from randomly changing at micro levels or somethun. Though before that all they recommend was twisting all the knobs 100 times 
Also about that database.
Edit, found it as a thread in the Sequential forum as a topic in the Pro3 section. Just users sharing files.
Oh right, yeah that sucks.
Thanks
Hi everyone,
Curious how you capture, and record your Pro 3 (or similar analog gear)?
I ended up adding a dedicated audio interface for it, because I didnāt have a good way to add another stereo input to my setup.
For now I went with an EVO4, thank God for core audio. And yes I have matching audio cables ordered and on the way, for those who noticed 
The other dimension of this is that analog gear produces a āsizzleā and ālivenessā that is difficult to describe. Capturing that properly is a challenge. Iāve experimented with a 96Khz sample rate. but went back to 48Khz as I did not hear a difference in my setup. Bit depth likely makes more of a difference TBH.
Iām very happy with my setup, and Iām getting that āsizzleā and ālivenessā through the EVO4, which was a relief as I didnāt want to spend a lot
Curious if others have dealt with the challenges of capturing the nuances of analog, and how they went about it.
Best regards,
Gino
48khz 24-bit and nice converters (RME) is doinā it for me. Canāt hear much difference between a recording and the real thing.
The advice I was given is to use something that has proven high-end ADACās and preferably (stereo)dual ADACās. My choice, following that advice, has been the TASCAM DR100mkIII for recording and I record at the maximum WAV resolution that my digital music player (A&K AK320) can process, which is dual 24/192 for both.
I canāt even hear the difference between 16/44 and 24/192, but if you got it, wtf.
The higher sample rates and bit rates will mostly come into play when using various plugins on the sound. 24bit 48khz should still be enough to throw at most anything and have it sound great though. Perfectly suitable for mastering imo. If you really wanna try to push to hear a difference maybe try sweeping a very high resonance filter in your daw around the upper frequencies of what you record? Others probably know more than me in this area but I would say if you plan on doing general mastering lower is fine if you plan on doing a ton of stuff to it in the daw go for a higher resolution.
I record at 24/96. It makes a difference in some of the contexts Iām in. Iām scoring a set of short movies now and the audio engineer tells me itās important. So Iām doing what he tells me
my experience in difference is not about the recording itself. ItĀ“s about the mixdown in the DAW. If you have some channels with eqs, maybe compressors, some reverb ā¦ you will hear a difference in definition of the sound between 48 and 96 khz in the mixdown files (at least in Logic)
Regarding the estimate on modulation routes, I updated the diagram (attached).
If this is right, I think Sequential should talk about it more
Pro 3 routings.pdf (43.8 KB)
Best regards,
Gino
this is a combinatorics permutation problem. itās been twenty years since I took a semester of it (oddly, just for fun! and it was!) so Iām not going to try and solve the problem for you. but Iād direct your research there if you want to.
If itās only one Modulation per Slot with 20 Sources and 40 Destinations, then it is what I wrote above.
I think where your math breaks down is each mod slot is essentially the same thing and while they can interact with each other you are also counting repeated possibilites. Letās take a simple patch, mod slot 1 lfo modulating oscillator 2, now this patch canāt be counted as a new possibility if you make that same connection on mod slot 2 instead. Or letās say you you end up doing both mod slot 1 and mod slot 2 as lfo 1 modulating oscillator 2, that is also the same but with a more cumbersome control over the attenuation. On the example you give you are actually just adding attenuation range to the self fm of oscillator 1, try comparing oscillator 1 self fm at 60 and then 2 slots of oscillator 1 self fm at 30 and you should get the same result.
Doing only calculations in most cases higher sample rates bring no benefits. The real benefit from higher sample rates becomes very obvious when you are transposing samples down a lot (thatās like zooming in). For example when you transpose a 96kHz sample down one octave the result is an 48kHz sample.
So a 192kHz sample can be transposed down 2 octaves while still preserving real (not interpolated) 48kHz.
I think youāre overlooking the fact that even if you allow duplications for a given source-destination combo in two different mod slots (since the Pro 3 does), if you have one set up, it doesnāt matter whether itās in mod slot one or two or thirty-two. itās going to make the same sound, right? so youāre considering these as different, when they are not. itās like if you have a modular synth and change from a red cable to a green one when routing your LFO to your VCO frequency; the sound doesnāt change just because the cable you used did.
Thatās an excellent point, and I need to take it into consideration.
Thanks, Iāll check that out. in a few minutes. If all duplicate source and destination pairs do not do add anything unique to the sound, then it will reduce the number of valid routes for sure. (which would make @Tchuās answer the right one).
Edit: Just tested this, and you are correct a single osc-to-osc at 60, gives the same audio result as 2 at 30. And 2 of them at 127 give a different result than a single one at 127, so Iām not sure I understand why. You said itās just attenuation, can you elaborate on that?
Yes - that could be true. Note that the ācableā is representing a mod slot, and each jack does something unique. Iām going to start with the 3x3 with 2 cable example to see if it actually tests out.
It letās you push the depth of modulation further than the level of 127 when you add another mod slot to the same destination, so normally you have an attenuation range of 0 to 127 which lets just say for the sake of ease is 4 octaves of pitch range if you add another 127 you have 8 octaves. So yeah you get access to a greater range and different sound because of it, technically if it were designed with a bigger range from the get go you wouldnāt need to stack them to get to that happening but the range is pretty big, itās not too often you need to use mod slots by stacking. You can also use the DC offset source to the mod slot to extend the range.
Great info, thanks
Just received my Pro 3 and Iāve got really āmixedā feelings.
First disappointment is the build āqualityā. Itās all plastic and really feels so.
I planned mostly to make paraphonic patches. In this context I donāt get the use of a 3rd digital oscillator. It makes practically impossible to make coherent sounds. Donāt get me wrong, I love the round-robin crazy patches (and I abused my Korg Mono/Poly in these areas) but I want to do classic sounds as well. I would need a way to ācopyā one oscillator to another. And then apply modulation separately for each oscillator would be very tedious. Am I missing something here ?
Is there a way to completely clear the sequencer ? Data is saved with the preset and is still here after a āBasic Programā.
I wish I had different length per track in the sequencer.
The sequencer has quircks. I had it skipping notes when changing the rate. Track 1 to 3 are named ātrack 1ā, that confused me a lot. etcā¦
I wish I could use it as a USB/MIDI to CV-Gate interface but it doesnāt seem to.
I donāt get the choice of having some controls with encoders and some with regular knobs.
All in all, very disappointed after the first two hours. Iām very used to the interface since Iām using a REV2 everyday, so I feel at home, but just donāt get the spirit of it, I guess. It feels like having chuncks of different synths gathered in one synth, making it very impersonal in the end.
