Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Tracker vs. sequencer
From: David Slomin (dgslomin_AT_CS.Princeton.EDU)
Date: la elo 28 1999 - 23:52:02 EDT
On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Jeff Brown wrote:
> I've never heard the term "tracker" before. What's the difference?
> What's are a few examples of both?
A tracker is the type of program used to create MOD files (rather than
MIDI). They started out on the Amiga and later moved to DOS. Like a MIDI
sequencer, a tracker lets you create a song by saying what events happen
when. The difference (at least the one to which I was referring) is that
in a sequencer, a song is made up of events, but in a tracker, a song is
made up of patterns, which in turn are made up of events. A pattern is
basically a phrase, although it could be used to represent a whole verse.
This relatively inflexible, single level of structure is, I believe,
singlehandedly responsible for the fact that 90% of the music created with
trackers falls in the techno genre. The pattern structure just seems best
suited to techno. (I have heard a few very nice non-techno MODs along the
way, but they're a tiny minority.)
The two sequencers with which I've worked most are Cakewalk and Master
Tracks Pro, neither of which is (or at least originally was, in Cakewalk's
case) pattern-based, like a tracker. They do not impose any structure on
the music that isn't inherent in the MIDI standard (like channels and
tracks). However, Cubase, Vision, Logic, and more recent versions of
Cakewalk all do their best to add pattern-based structure on top of the
flat MIDI paradigm.
Take a look at the MOD section under Dave's soundapps page, and especially
the link to SoundTracker for more information about trackers and pattern
sequencing.
Div.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : pe maalis 10 2000 - 07:25:53 EST