Re: Parameter group duplicating

hmm, I'm not sure what you mean here. I'm assuming you mean the sequencer has a fixed reference to a parameter and that adding more parameters runtime might mess 
things up? I'm not much of a programmer and haven't looked properly at the octal api, but I'd imagine the only trouble might be something like adding 3 lfo's and 
removing the second one, although I'd only allow adding/removal from the end (like buzz tracks)

>I hadn't thought of this. I'm not sure how straightforward it would be
>to alter the number of parameters at run time. However, I suspect there
>could be an elegant solution where we allow some machines to interpret
>the sequencer channel number differently. That is, instead of
>interpreting it like a MIDI channel, allow the channel number to index
>the "new" oscillators.
>
>I'll keep this in mind, doesn't sound terribly hard to implement on the
>host end. 
>
>
>On Fri, 2002-09-13 at 00:13, Vectrex wrote:
>> Just like to mention an idea for putting in a provision for machines to be able to duplicate groups of parameters. What I mean would be similar to what some 
buzz 
>> machines do now by putting some things like the lfo in the track section so the user can add more tracks to get more lfo's. This is really a hack so it'd be 
nice 
>> to have this done properly for octal. I heard that the machines will probably be able to group parameters into windows explorer style groups so (if the machine 
>> allows it) it'd be nice to right click on the group name and add a duplicate. This adds a nice amount of flexibility in what machines can do without going too 
nuts 
>> with modular stuff. If you have no idea what I'm talking about fire up buzz and add tracks to the ld0d jacinth. It's great because it starts nice and simple 
with 
>> just one lfo/env section, but you can add upto 16 in the track section! But this gets REAL messy in buzz
>> 
>> Cameron Bonde
>> www.imaginemysurprise.net
>