Accumulate adds or subtracts one or more semitones. You also give upper and lower limits and it acts like a ring, e.g. let's assume you add 1 semitone per round and give a range of -5 to +5 (11 different values in total). You essentially apply 0, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5, -5, -4, -3, -2, -1 to the note and then it starts again. That can be easily achieved by a table with said values in the transposition column and a HP 00 in the 12th row.
With Metropolix you have this on each of the 8 stages and you can choose a different increment and different ranges. In the end it is nothing but a transposition sequence which tables do just nicely and IMO much better because you're not limited to a certain rising or falling sequence but can use an arbitrary pattern/sequence.
But I'm not here to copy Accumulate (I still think "Note Arpeggio" is a much better name as it describes what it is musically and not algorithmically/programmatically) or Metropolix. As wrote earlier I don't think I would want that module as my approach to patterns different.
The different speed requirement/wish has nothing to do with Metropolix whatsoever. It comes from the idea of mixing polyrythms and generative techniques. To some extend the Subharmonicon is doing that to create interesting rythmic patterns.
The idea is to have a sequence of e.g. 7 steps played in a loop. Then you have another sequence of 6/7/8 steps (whatever seems fine) running at e.g. clock/7 (basically 1 clock per full round of the other sequence) that you use to transpose the fast sequence. And this can be cascaded. Some use this in their techno and whatever sets to have a patterns that returns and provides some basic structure but that changes over time so that it is not too boring. There are variations to that theme (replacing notes over time etc.) but that's the basic idea.
The two fundamental building blocks are sequencer running at different but related speeds and have varying period length. A lot of people seem to be obsessed with prime numbers as the lengths and speed ratios but IMO the main thing is having a small common denominator.
Anyway: That's where I come from or am I heading to. The NerdSEQ offers a rich set of functions to create evolving patterns. I think the ability to have separately clocked sequences of varying lengths (which is what I wish to get from tables with individual position pointer and something like SPFX 011 but with a specific table attached to it) would be a nice and fitting addition.
I hope I have been able to explain what I mean. I sometimes do more abstraction than is good for understanding by others
Kind regards,
Michael
