randy909

My point was, either use that space or get rid of it. Putting a big blank space up top just to make it look like a real 909 makes no sense if the pcb's don't require the extra space. Just make the box smaller if you don't want to space out the interface. That'll be cool in its own way. I think the knobs are cramped, see Jomox for proper knob spacing. Agree that it looks cool. I think a properly-spaced design could also look cool, depends on the artwork.

Nag

The original 909 had a vast area of wasted space at the top. I would support limiting that space or using it to spread out the pots so you can get your fingers all the way in between the knobs. You could also use bigger knobs. I don't think you'll find many "pro" devices that would make that design mistake these days so why repeat it? Otherwise the large size doesn't bother me.

Jef, Will your sequencer allow the parts to have independent lengths and loop points?

This sounds awesome Jef! Personally, I am certainly not upset that you are building this on a newer version of MBSeq with more features and better support :) My only concern is mainly a selfish one. I'm on the list to get a MB808 kit if/when it finally appears and it would be less brain work for me to have to learn 2 different interfaces for my 808/909 babies. I also thought it might be less work for you to work from the MB808 sequencer codebase since a lot of what you're doing to the MBSeqV4 code is probably similar to what has been done to the MBSeqV3 code for the MB808 project. Or that you could take design decisions from the other project where you see fit. It sounds like you're already past that point though... One thing the MB808 sequencer does that I'm quite fond of is being able to choose arbitrary loop start/stop points for each individual part. For example, the kick might be a loop of 4 16ths (I make techno, that's all it does most of the time ;) ) while the hihat might be looping from note 5 to 12, creating some weird polyrhythm thing. Will this be possible on your sequencer? Clearly the MBSeqV4 is capable of this but will your interface make this accessible, even easy? Thank you for all the time and work you're putting into this. I know it is a labor of love. I hope none of my comments sound demanding or too critical. And I also hope I'm not derailing the intended topic of this thread. Cheers, Randy

This is great news Jef! I just received my 9090 parts but I doubt I'll get it built in time to be in this beta. One question though, how is this sequencer different from the MB808 sequencer? Why a new design?