In the defense of performance art, I don’t take a machine on stage that I don’t know… I have to know it like the back of my hand to feel comfortable using it live.
But everyone is different I guess.
Not to be that guy but the TD-3 has some soul. It’s pretty fun to play with.
Just put a sticker over the logo and be on your way 
5 Likes
Why not just do the mods yourself? Why do they want to make it included from factory? They’ll all be identical and everything will sound the same. The beauty of td3 being so cheap is that we can do our own mods and get a new stock one easily. Actually all of the hard work of figuring out how to do them on the smd for the td3 has already been done. All you have to do is buy the components and solder them in. If you mess it up, they’re not expensive to get a new one. Or find someone who’s competent to do it for you.
1 Like
Random sequence with onboard distortion. I also have all the knobs turned all the way up on my Mackie 1202
3 Likes
Save the cost of the sticker and embrace the maligned and unpopular 
Ps digging that tune.
2 Likes
the random pattern feature. how random is it? seems to always do 12/16 length and follows a process that seems constrained.
anyone else notice?
I don’t just stop at pressing the buttons. I also do some random timing, slides, etc.
Making a random pattern is just the first step
So I don’t know how random, is random
1 Like
oh sorry man, i meant in general on the machine, your track has sweet warehouse 3am vibes
1 Like
So it sounds like Behringer, along with the rainbow of colors is talking about doing their own modded version of the TD-3 as well – for now they call it the “TD-3-XXX”. No reason not to do your own, but it will be interesting to see what Behringer does – plus i’m sure there will be some modding the modded.
1 Like
a wee bit of delay and i think it sounds ok. as is:slightly_smiling_face:
Just bad luck imo, happens with any manufacturer really. I have two of these, no flaws. Send it back, get another one, enjoy the sweet sound
Is there a reason that people want the machine to make random patterns for them? Isn’t the human brain the ultimate random generator? I can make crazy acid lines all day long and I’ve never thought “I wish the synth would do this for me…” I always felt that a huge part of the fun was the satisfaction of knowing that I came up with the cool thing, and then jamming on it. Where’s the fun at if it’s just something that gets generated at random? Really have always been confused by random generation. Same with random patch generators, like what?
2 Likes
I cant speak for all people, but I quite like being able to experiment with randomly generated patterns. They can lead to accidental discoveries and new creative directions. Life can feel very random sometimes. Why should writing patterns be any different?
2 Likes
I understand what you mean in theory but personally the joy of making music for me is making the choices along the way purposefully and with intent. I like the accidental discoveries and new creative directions to come from within myself, or from experiences or conversations or interactions that get filtered through my mind and give me ideas or put me in moods or whatever. To each their own so thanks for the response, I just really don’t understand the appeal at all. Seems like it strips out the most rewarding aspect of the experience. I always figured the random stuff and Euclidean generators and whatever were just for people who weren’t really into making music but who liked synthesizers and sound creation who needed something for their modular system to play back.
1 Like
That’s one way to make music. Another way is to setup an interaction with the gear. You can see it as a conversation between you and the machine, not just you in control. With this mindset, randomization is invaluable. Ideas flow between you and the machine, back and forth.
I always figured the random stuff and Euclidean generators and whatever were just for people who weren’t really into making music but who liked synthesizers and sound creation who needed something for their modular system to play back.
Some would argue using sequencers at all is for people not really into making music but who like synthesizers and sound creation and need something to play back. I’m pretty sure you’d think of them as narrow-minded 
2 Likes
Haha word but I’m not sure who would make this argument as it doesn’t make much sense, you certainly have to make something in the first place for the sequencer to repeat it. You’re right that I would think of them as narrow minded and definitely poorly informed! Maybe that’s me too 
I like the first part of what you said, but I guess what I’m wondering in that case is, if it’s a conversation with the machine, what’s the back and forth aspect? Like if you generate a random pattern, and then start to modify it or something, it’s not really like the machine gave you an idea that you ran with or something like that, in my opinion at least an idea needs to have intent and meaning and the machine doesn’t possess those traits. No different from just hitting record on the sequencer, closing your eyes, and hitting keys with your palms. Obviously there’s no harm to randomization so I’m not slamming it, it’s just not for me. Glad to hear your perspective.
edit: I guess actually now that you’ve got me thinking about it, it could be fun to generate something random on one synth and use another to play counterpoint against that random pattern, and that could generate some interesting musical ideas.
I’m only speaking from the making music point of view and not the listening point of view, I’m sure I’ve listened to maaaaany song with randomized stuff in there that I loved. Can’t tell if man or machine once it’s on the tape!
1 Like
I’m not sure who would make this argument as it doesn’t make much sense
I agree it makes no sense, and yet we hear that all the time… and to be honest, it makes no sense to me why people using euclidian stuff should be considered as “not really into making music”.
Obviously you don’t just stop at what the machine gives you. Also, some sequencers have the ability to mutate your sequences. Plenty of possibilities here.
at least an idea needs to have intent and meaning and the machine doesn’t possess those traits.
Well, we’re into philosophy now I’d argue as a listener you can’t really distinguish between a sequence which is the result of an algorithm and a sequence which is the result of an “intent”. Also, filtering and modifying random output (or let’s say machine output as there are more algos than random) is still “intent and meaning”. And it’s still fun and interesting to do, at least to me and thousands of other people.
Also, not that I like to nitpick, but euclidian stuff is really not random, quite the contrary… it’s all very predictable. A great reminder that while music is certainly about intent, meaning and emotion, it’s also very much about mathematics.
2 Likes
Oh yeah I didn’t mean to say that Euclidean is random, I know it’s not, it’s just generated by not a human. That’s funny that you mentioned the listener aspect, I edited my post to mention that before seeing your latest post. Actually I’ve come around on what I said before, you’ve convinced me! I think you made some great points.
3 Likes
Glad to have such a conversation. In the end all that matters is that the makers enjoy their craft
2 Likes