EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 64, Issue 03 This issue's topics: Cakewalk + MPU + SB MIDI Cakewalk Pro for DOS? (2 messages) Deck II & Metro (mac) question IBM PC Midi shareware MIDI Sequencing Software (16 messages) Sequencers (10 messages) StudioVision and incoming MIDI (3 messages) Vision Tutorials? (2 messages) WinJammer (2 messages) WinJammer FTP site Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 08:42:48 +0100 From: "Steven D. Bramson" Subject: Re: Cakewalk + MPU + SB MIDI Cakewalk is one of the better Win MIDI applications in that it knows that you can have multiple devices installed, although I havn't go it to use two output devices at once yet. Make sure you install the Windows MPU 401 driver Control Panel Drivers Add MPU 401 Install (Insert Win 3.1 floppies) The set ADDR, IRQ (defaults are 330, 2) Then restart windows to register the new driver Now run CakeWalk and select your MPU401 as input and output. You might like to remove one complication and not have a MIDI loop network at first. So have MPU to D50 or D50 to MPU but not both (at first while you are testing). Once you get things going, re-install the MIDI loop and check settings for D50 local control off => hit a key and MIDI goes out but D50 does not play CakeWalk MIDI Thru on => MIDI in messages are passed direct to MIDI out I find with my MPU 401 clone that as soon as I switch my PC on just sitting there with a DOS command prompt, you get MIDI thru automatically on. Once you run Win, Win takes over the MPU and disables it until you run a music program. Steven Bramson sdb@jet.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 17:16:21 -0500 From: Siberian Khatru Subject: Cakewalk Pro for DOS? This may be a stupid question, but, is Cakewalk Pro available for DOS? The only versions I ever see are for Windows. It's not that I'm scared of Windows (believe me, I LOVE the Windows Version) but my 386 just runs too slow for a Windows based sequencer (this holds true whether I'm trying the Cubase demo, Winjammer, or Cakewalk Pro demo). Is my search in vain? Let me know. Thanks in advance. Jon Southwood ****************************************************************************** "I once played poker with a deck of tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died."-Steven Wright "If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith."-Albert Einstein "Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence." -Henrik Tikkanen ****************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 00:32:43 +0200 From: Tommy Anderberg Subject: Re: Cakewalk Pro for DOS? Yours is NOT a stupid question! I've experienced your problem (can it be found for DOS) myself. Windows-mania is good for manifacturers I guess; for each new version you need more hardware to inch back to the performance of plain DOS and an ancient 286... anyway, according to USENET's lowest-price list Cakewalk Pro 4.0 for DOS was sold for 80 USD by ComputAbility, Milwaukee, WI (800-554-9950) in February. Good luck. Tommy Anderberg ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 May 1994 17:59:13 -0500 From: Jonathan Bauer Subject: Deck II & Metro (mac) question Does anyone have a contact e-mail address or telephone # for OSC, the publisher of this software? Does anyone know if Deck II will address two or more (old) Audiomedia cards (StudioVision used to, but they've "upgraded" so it will no longer) Does anyone know if Deck II and/or Metro are apple event aware, scriptable (AppleScript)? Thanks ... if replies (if anyone replys) are sent directly to me I will summarize back to the list. /Jonathan (jhbauer@panix.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 09:51:50 CDT From: Joseph Fosco Subject: IBM PC Midi shareware Hello all, In the June issue of Electronic Musician there is an article on INM Midi shareware. Three programs seemed particularly interesting: WinSysEx, MIDIBARS, and MIDIMUX. Does anyone know if these are available on the Internet. I did an archie search using the names listed in the article but came up blank. I also checked out some of the more popular midi ftp sites but still couldn't find anything. Any help would be appreciated. Joe ------------------------------------------ Joseph Fosco fosco@ils.nwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 10:13:41 -0500 From: G-Man Subject: MIDI Sequencing Software Hello! I'm new to the list and hope that someone will be around for the summer! Q. Any reccommendations for a DOS or WINDOWS based sequencing program that I can use to write arrangements of songs for an album project that I'm working on? I am a guitar player by trade, but would like to expand my horizons a bit in this project. If you can give two recommendations on for commmercial software and one for shareware. Thanks, --Garret T Hansen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:35:24 +0200 From: Tommy Anderberg Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Here in Sweden the standard choice for Windows 3.1, and also the piece of software which keeps getting the best reviews, is Steinberg's Cubase. Apparently there is also a DOS version in the US, but I know nothing about it. As for shareware, there is something called QSEQ (available from most FTP sites with MIDI stuff, for instance IRCAM in France) which I have not tried but which has an impressive list of features. However, it appears to require a Soundblaster compatible card; you could try getting in touch with the author (name and address are in{the .DOC file) and ask him which MIDI interfaces it will run with. - Tommy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:26:16 -0500 From: Siberian Khatru Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Shareware: WinJammer is one that I recently found on internet...unforutnately I can't quite remember where I got it from. Check one of the midi ftp-sites. Regular: Cakewalk! (what ever version is currently out there) I've been using cakewalk for some time (DOS version) and have had few or no complaints. A wonderful program. If your computer is fast enough (faster 386 or a 486) with enough memory (for the 386, i'd recommend AT LEAST 4meg probably 8) I'd say go with Cakewalk Pro for Windows. Cubase, I guess, has a Windows based sequencer now. I have the demo, but my computer is far too slow to really show it off. I'll say one thing though, looking through the different menus, this thing is full of features. I hope this helps. Jon Southwood ****************************************************************************** "I once played poker with a deck of tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died."-Steven Wright "If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith."-Albert Einstein "Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence." -Henrik Tikkanen ****************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:18:58 -0500 From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software >If you can give two recommendations on for commmercial >software and one for shareware. Cakewalk for Windows (commercial) and WinJammer (shareware) get consistently good recommendations from folks here on the list. The DOS version of Cakewalk isn't bad either (I attended a demo/seminar on it and was favorably impressed). Don't remember anyone mentioning any good shareware sequencers under DOS. --- Joe M. -- "...you will love radar; give yourselves to it freely..." (MST3K) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 21:14:32 -0600 From: "ROY E. BREILING" Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Any suggestions on MIDI Sequencing Software for a MAC . Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 23:34:55 -0500 From: Kenneth Wayne Goodson Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software I have only used Cakewalk Pro for Windows but I recommend it highly. It is relatively user-friendly while still a fairly powerful sequencing platform. Hope this helps! kgoodson@tenet.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 00:59:48 -0400 From: James Brody Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software > > Any suggestions on MIDI Sequencing Software for a MAC . Thank you. > I have been using Opcode's Vision for many years and find it powerful and satisfactory. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 01:04:13 -0400 From: James Brody Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Where does one find WinJammer? Brody ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 01:11:48 -0500 From: "B.J. Leiderman" Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software I've been using Opcode's StudioVision, and I love it. New version 1.5 gives me 4 tracks of digital recording (mixed through 2 outputs on my old Sound Accelerato 1 card!) synced to the MIDI tracks. Audio scrubbing, the works. I think it's a great bang for the buck. (Yes, THE) BJ Leiderman On Fri, 20 May 1994, James Brody wrote: > > > > Any suggestions on MIDI Sequencing Software for a MAC . Thank you. > > > I have been using Opcode's Vision for many years and find it powerful and > satisfactory. > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:57:51 -0400 From: "Keith C. Perry" Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software >Any suggestions on MIDI Sequencing Software for a MAC . Thank you. I've been using Master Track Prov v5.0. Very nice... makes well behave standard midi files too so that I can score my composition after production in other programs (just in case you need to do that). Hope that helps Keith C. Perry - (800)-836-4599 ************************************************************************** *Floor Supervisor / Senior Consultant - Drexel University CRG, OCS Group* *Owner / Studio K Productions * ************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:53:17 -0300 From: "ANDREW G. YOUNGER" Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software >Here in Sweden the standard choice for Windows 3.1, and also the piece of >software which keeps getting the best reviews, is Steinberg's Cubase. >Apparently there is also a DOS version in the US, but I know nothing The Canadian Progressive Rock Band RUSH uses this program for all their sequencing. In fact a good portion of their last album was recorded using this program. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:34:24 EDT From: HeavyM@AOL.COM Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Vision is the way!!!!!!!!!!!! A voice from a above once said. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:52:06 -0500 From: John Perser Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Performer 5.0 EMAGIC - Logic Audio ----------------------------------------------------------------- John Perser Manager/Audio Products Paradigm Simulation, Inc. email: jperser@paradigmsim.com PHONE: 214-960-2301 FAX: 214-960-2303 AudioWorks: Hear what you are missing ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 16:47:26 EDT From: Jody Mayfield Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Hey Guy, does your MIDI Software do scoring? I've heard good things about Opcode's StudioVision. How well does it do scoring. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:39:22 -800 From: Mark Hartshorn Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software Studio Vision Pro and Vision 2.0 do have notation capabilities, but that is not the piont of the program and therefor does not work to use souly for that purpose. I hear good things about Logic and they're scooring capabilities. Maybe the best intergration as far as sequencing/notation is concerned, can't speak from personal experience, though. Good Luck Mark On Fri, 20 May 1994, Jody Mayfield wrote: > Hey Guy, does your MIDI Software do scoring? I've heard good things about > Opcode's StudioVision. How well does it do scoring. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 22:54:47 -0500 From: "J. Michael Roach" Subject: Re: MIDI Sequencing Software > Any suggestions on MIDI Sequencing Software for a MAC . Thank you. Try Performer from Mark of the Unicorn. I know this software has been around a while, so if there's something better on the market these days, somebody let me know! j. michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:46:13 GMT From: SCOTT MORSCHHAUSER Subject: Regarding Sequencers Although I've been a musician for twenty years, I am new to the world of digital music. I have recently purchased a Yamaha PSR510 keyboard and Midisoft Studio for Windows sequencer. I read the discussion of Cakewalk and Trax, and was wondering if anyone out there has the experience and expertise to discuss the differences/commonalities and pros/cons of the various sequencers on the market. Scott Morschhauser ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 08:33:56 -0600 From: "MICHAEL J. AMES" Subject: Sequencers I've noticed that there seems to be a lot of people here pushing Cakewalk. I'm wondering... have any of you tried either of the Trax programs? I demo'd at least six different sequencers, and have extensively used Cakewalk, Cubase and Master Trax Pro. MTP, I have to say, is the best. Here's my reasoning: I rate MTP's interface to be the absolute simplest of any that I've used. My 50 year old computer-illiterate mother picked it up in a day. It takes virtually no time to learn, and you can get recording right away. Via this interface is accessable a plethora of features, including graphical editing of MIDI controllers, SysEx stuff, SMPTE, Multimedia links, (MTP comes with multimedia sound and animation players), and a ton of others. It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) or run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. It was great for me for my first two years of sequencing. Then, when I bought MTP, I found it had the exact same interface and I could use virtually the same procedures to do the same things that I had in Trax. So there wasn't any time lost learning a new program. The sequencer files are interchangeable without conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. Anyway, there's my four bits. I really really like Trax. Someone ought to give it a try so we can have a second opinion... Thanks! Mike sl4hq@cc.usu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 12:21:23 -0500 From: Siberian Khatru Subject: Re: Sequencers On Fri, 20 May 1994, MICHAEL J. AMES wrote: > I've noticed that there seems to be a lot of people here pushing Cakewalk. I'm > wondering... have any of you tried either of the Trax programs? I demo'd at The first sequencer I was exposed to was Trax, on the Mac. I do agree that it is very easy to use and relatively powerful. However, when I was looking for a sequencer for my PC, Cakewalk for DOS won out (Master Tracks Pro was also in the running). The main reason for my choice was that I din't have the memory or speed to run a sequencer under Windows. I will not dispute that Master Tracks Pro is a great program--my experience however is that Cakewalk does everrything I really want it to do and does it quickly (since it's run through DOS). Jon Southwood > > I rate MTP's interface to be the absolute simplest of any that I've used. My > 50 year old computer-illiterate mother picked it up in a day. It takes > virtually no time to learn, and you can get recording right away. > > Via this interface is accessable a plethora of features, including graphical > editing of MIDI controllers, SysEx stuff, SMPTE, Multimedia links, (MTP comes > with multimedia sound and animation players), and a ton of others. > > It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) or > run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. > > Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 > tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. It was > great for me for my first two years of sequencing. Then, when I bought MTP, I > found it had the exact same interface and I could use virtually the same > procedures to do the same things that I had in Trax. So there wasn't any time > lost learning a new program. The sequencer files are interchangeable without > conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the > Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. > > Anyway, there's my four bits. I really really like Trax. Someone ought to > give it a try so we can have a second opinion... > > Thanks! > > Mike > > sl4hq@cc.usu.edu > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 17:26:40 CDT From: FA19000 Subject: Re: Sequencers >I've noticed that there seems to be a lot of people here pushing Cakewalk. I'm >wondering... have any of you tried either of the Trax programs? I demo'd at >least six different sequencers, and have extensively used Cakewalk, Cubase and >Master Trax Pro. MTP, I have to say, is the best. Here's my reasoning: > >I rate MTP's interface to be the absolute simplest of any that I've used. My >50 year old computer-illiterate mother picked it up in a day. It takes >virtually no time to learn, and you can get recording right away. > >Via this interface is accessable a plethora of features, including graphical >editing of MIDI controllers, SysEx stuff, SMPTE, Multimedia links, (MTP comes >with multimedia sound and animation players), and a ton of others. > >It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) or >run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. > >Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 >tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. It was >great for me for my first two years of sequencing. Then, when I bought MTP, I >found it had the exact same interface and I could use virtually the same >procedures to do the same things that I had in Trax. So there wasn't any time >lost learning a new program. The sequencer files are interchangeable without >conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the >Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. > >Anyway, there's my four bits. I really really like Trax. Someone ought to >give it a try so we can have a second opinion... > >Thanks! > >Mike > >sl4hq@cc.usu.edu I've used MasterTracks Pro5 for Mac. The comments I have heard comparing it to other sequencers is that it is 'not as flexible' but I don't know what that means. I do a lot of editing of velocity and tempo and would like to know if a different program would have an easier way to edit tempo. MTP has a graph with a horizontal line that is rather clumsy to edit. Janice Saffir ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 23:09:07 -0500 From: "J. Michael Roach" Subject: Re: Sequencers > Master Trax Pro, I have to say, is the best. Here's my reasoning: > > I rate MTP's interface to be the absolute simplest of any that I've used. My > 50 year old computer-illiterate mother picked it up in a day. It takes > virtually no time to learn, and you can get recording right away. You have a good point here. I've used AND sold this software and this point is right on. > Via this interface is accessable a plethora of features, including graphical > editing of MIDI controllers, SysEx stuff, SMPTE, Multimedia links, (MTP comes > with multimedia sound and animation players), and a ton of others. Virtually everything an electronic musician could wish for. Well, almost. > It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) or > run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. This is a good point. Perhaps because it is so fast, we think it can't possibly be thinking as hard as Cakewalk, and therefore not as powerful as Cakewalk. Psychologists? > Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 > tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. > The sequencer files are interchangeable without > conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the > Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. Another good point. But why would you want to buy two sequencers? These packages are definitely worth taking a look. Trax is especially awesome if you don't plan to get too technical because you're not paying for a whole bunch of features you'll never use. j. michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 23:31:05 -0600 From: "MICHAEL J. AMES" Subject: Re: Sequencers [Deep and intellectual discussion of Master Trax Pro follows:] > > It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) > or > > run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. > > This is a good point. Perhaps because it is so fast, we think it can't > possibly be thinking as hard as Cakewalk, and therefore not as powerful > as Cakewalk. Psychologists? I know a bit of psychology. I think that's got something to do with it. Does anyone have an Alesis ADAT? It's the single most high-tech thing I've got in my studio (except for maybe the Proteus...) but it is by far the simplest to use and operate. A BIG plus... > > Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 > > tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. > > The sequencer files are interchangeable without > > conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the > > Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. > > Another good point. But why would you want to buy two sequencers? Nah, you wouldn't. I'm talking about _upgrading_. Of course, then you can install Trax onto your slow laptop and use it for mobile performance operations. Hmmmm. Just an idea. > These packages are definitely worth taking a look. Trax is especially > awesome if you don't plan to get too technical because you're not paying > for a whole bunch of features you'll never use. You're talking about Trax as compare to MTP, right? 'Cause Master Trax Pro has got enough features to keep me busy with the ol' manual for a long time! :) Ed n' I thank you for your support! Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 01:26:21 -0500 From: "J. Michael Roach" Subject: Re: Sequencers > Master Trax Pro, I have to say, is the best. Here's my reasoning: > > I rate MTP's interface to be the absolute simplest of any that I've used. M y > 50 year old computer-illiterate mother picked it up in a day. It takes > virtually no time to learn, and you can get recording right away. You have a good point here. I've used AND sold this software and this point is right on. > Via this interface is accessable a plethora of features, including graphical > editing of MIDI controllers, SysEx stuff, SMPTE, Multimedia links, (MTP come s > with multimedia sound and animation players), and a ton of others. Virtually everything an electronic musician could wish for. Well, almost. > It is very, very fast. No waiting around for it to load up (on my 486/25sx) or > run. I found the other programs to be quite slow. This is a good point. Perhaps because it is so fast, we think it can't possibly be thinking as hard as Cakewalk, and therefore not as powerful as Cakewalk. Psychologists? > Another thing: There are two programs, Trax and Master Trax Pro. Trax has 64 > tracks and all of the features you need for good practical sequencing. > The sequencer files are interchangeable without > conversion, also. (Except of course going from MTP to Trax loses the > Multimedia stuff...) It's also available for Mac. Another good point. But why would you want to buy two sequencers? These packages are definitely worth taking a look. Trax is especially awesome if you don't plan to get too technical because you're not paying for a whole bunch of features you'll never use. j. michael ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 18:45:53 -0500 From: "Diane Y. Hennessy" Subject: Re: Sequencers I agree. Trax and MTpro are really easy yet very powerful programs. Try them, you'll like them! Diane Y. Hennessy Hennessy Music 1729 W. Broadway 65203 dhenness@bigcat.missouri.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 08:18:43 +0100 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Sequencers >You have a good point here. I've used AND sold this software and this >point is right on. Uh-uh, yup, we all believe salespersons, right? Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 12:19:35 -0500 From: "J. Michael Roach" Subject: Re: Sequencer > >You have a good point here. I've used AND sold this software and this > >point is right on. > > Uh-uh, yup, we all believe salespersons, right? > > Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com If you want to use that to help form an opinion of my opinion, go right ahead. I don't sell it anymore, and I'm not a salesperson anymore. I work somewhere totally separate from this industry (except that I do work with computers). So pardon my use of that example. I'm not plugging the damn thing, just trying to help someone. Anybody else have a problem with that? Perhaps I don't understand the purpose of this list. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 10:38:40 -0500 From: Jonathan Bauer Subject: StudioVision and incoming MIDI Does anyone know how (and if) StudioVision handles incoming MIDI? For example, can I send MIDI data to StudioVision to trigger a sequence (audio)? Thanks, /jonathan ---------------------------------- Jonathan Bauer 440 W. 41st St. #202 N.Y. N.Y. 10036 +1 212-239-5158 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 16:18:45 BST From: Stephen Deutsch Subject: Re: StudioVision and incoming MIDI Studio Vision responds to external midi in the same way that Vision does. Sequences are triggered from external sources such as SMPTE or any other time code.It is best used, however, with OMS systems, such as studio 4/5 or similar. You might wish to ask whether it might not be better to use Studio Vision to control all your MIDI devices rather than the other way around(your question is rather confusing to these British ears. What do you mean by -handles incoming midi-?) The bit in the manual about **players** is very helpful in discussing this. Good Luck > > Does anyone know how (and if) StudioVision handles incoming MIDI? For > example, can I send MIDI data to StudioVision to trigger a sequence > (audio)? > Prof Stephen Deutsch # # BOURNEMOUTH The Digital Music Studio # UNIVERSITY ----------------------------------------------------------------------- JANET: sdeutsch@uk.ac.bournemouth Talbot Campus World: sdeutsch@bournemouth.ac.uk Fern Barrow, Poole Voice: +44 (202) 595102 Fax: 595530 Dorset, BH12 5BB, UK ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 17:39:15 EDT From: JRONA@AOL.COM Subject: Re: StudioVision and incoming MIDI > Does anyone know how (and if) StudioVision handles incoming MIDI? For > example, can I send MIDI data to StudioVision to trigger a sequence > (audio)? You can create what are called "MIDIKeys", which assign any Mac keyboard command to any incoming MIDI event, including firing off sequences. I've never tried it with audio-based sequences, and there might be some additional problems with that. Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 02:34:20 EDT From: Chris Anthes Subject: Vision Tutorials? I wound up buying Vision 2.0 after Opcode impressed me with their demo at MacWorld SF this year. Anyways, I think it's a great sequencer, but I work too damn much and haven't found the time I'd like to really just sit down and figure out *everything* it can do. I read the _tutorial_ that came with Vision, but it's pretty thin and I really want something more substantial. I've been thinking of buying Opcode's video tutorial, but I don't want to get a POS. Is this thing any good? Also, are there any other books, or other media out there that is a good learning source for Vision 2.0? Please let me know because I am anxious to utilize this expensive piece of software that I have so loyally devoted hard-earned paychecks to. Thanks, Chris Anthes ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 21:27:38 PDT From: Gary Seto Subject: Re: Vision Tutorials? Chris, I own Vision, and it's the best sequencer I've seen so far. It has loads of features, so many that many users, like you, don't know all it can do. It's the kind of program that the more you use it, the more you learn about it. If you have access to a library with an extensive periodicals section, perhaps at a university or something, go see if they subscribe to Keyboard Magazine. They have done several how-to articles about Vision features, and I've learned a lot from them. Also, check out the sample sequences and play around with them. I had to learn how to use Vision without a manual, and I found the sample sequences to be very helpful. Good Luck... -Gary ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 19:32:00 PDT From: Craig Subject: WinJammer What is WinJammer? Is it for Mac or IBM? I'd appreciate any info you can share re: the program. Thanks - Craig ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 12:48:58 EDT From: Marc Cowgill Subject: Re: WinJammer WinJammer is a shareware IBM sequencer program, with fair number of features. I have looked only at the documentation, but it appears worth a try. Marc Cowgill MCOWGILL@vtvm1.cc.vt.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 20:07:06 EDT From: Marc Cowgill Subject: WinJammer FTP site Here is an anonymous ftp site for the shareware sequencer WinJammer: Host ftp.uwasa.fi (128.214.87.1) Location: /windows/sound FILE -rw-rw-r-- 201218 bytes 01:00 21 Sep 1992 winjam22.zip Marc Cowgill MCowgill@vtvm1.cc.vt.edu ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************