yrn1 wrote: ↑
Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:49 pm
I wonder how it compares to USTA, wrt live sequencing usability.
That was my final cross-shop as well, luckily I had a friend who had sold an Eloquencer for an USTA so I was able to try the USTA out for a bit before going with the Vector. They're both great; both are great because they free you from the "every step has to be the same length" rigidity of most other sequencers. Both are pretty good at generating (and controlling!) randomness and chance elements to breathe life into things; I think the Vector is a bit more powerful here both in terms of breadth as well as granular control, but the USTA is no slouch.
So one advantage the USTA has is if you're using 16 steps you can "see" all 16 at once around the ring, while the Vector can only show 8 at a time. I also found the "stage loop" method of repeating sub-sections of patterns slightly more intuitive than doing the same thing on the Vector.
One huge advantage of the Vector are the two sub-sequencers; they're not just useful for planning stuff out but can be a godsend when doing anything live. The subsequencers don't seem like they'd be that amazing on paper, but they're an absolute gamechanger for workflow and I can't imagine ever going back to a sequencer without them now. It's amazing how you can generate some incredibly complex and evolving melodic sequences (that still sound musical) with a *very* basic sequence, some chance ops, and clever use of the subsequencers.
I also found the amount of inputs & outputs a bit better on the Vector (with the Expander), and the fact that it seamlessly speaks pretty much any sort of MIDI you want in addition to CV means that it's no big hassle to get it talking to synths, keyboards, other gear etc. It can sequence a desktop synth, or drum machine, or whatever, just as easily as a modular rig.