Step Sequencing in "number view"

Sorry to come with requests so soon after the update! I was hoping this might have found it’s way into this one, but since it hasn’t I’m going to have to continue to beg you, so apologies in advance :rofl: This is by FAR my main request for the machine.

-Please, please, please implement the ability to step through every step in the sequence/pattern, at the selected quantize setting, without the step needing to be populated, in “number view”.

-The perfect 2 buttons are even available, with F7 and F9 currently still being free, and would make 100% sense to use for this, since you then have, prev/ next event, prev/ next 4 track and prev/ next step all nicely laid out under each other.

-And obviously you need to be able to input notes in this mode too.

I can’t stress enough how much I’m begging for this lol. :pray: :joy:

And since me asking for this feels like it’s becoming a meme here’s the TL;DR in meme format haha:



Sorry to tag you in @Mickey but I’m not sure if you have seen my requests for this, as most if not all have just been in vaguely related threads. So want to make sure you actually definitely see it this time heh. Cheers! :slight_smile:

I have no idea what number view is. Or what any other part of this is. And I’m 12. :sweat_smile:

1 Like

OK I’ll try and explain it a bit better in case others don’t get it either.

-So, when you enter “step program” you will see your pattern:

-Now press enter/encoder and you will most likely see “graph view”:

If you then press F2 you will be in “number view” (F2 switches back and forth between these modes):

Here is a list view of every possible parameter for each step in the pattern, and makes it an incredibly quick and efficient way to edit and input information.

-Now when you press “help” you will see the following:

You can move forwards and backwards steps, but only steps that already exist, you cannot enter note information, or move to a step where there is nothing.

So what I would like to be able to do with F7 and F9, is move forward and backward by whatever I have the quantize setting at, so 8th/16th/32nd/64th notes etc. As well as the ability to select banks/pads/multis and input notes.

Hope that explains it better? It’s how the step sequencer in, for example, the MPC 2000 works, which this list view is virtually identical to, other than the fact the step has to have a sound already on it to be able to move to it on the 2400.


ohhhh I don’t even know if I have used that before at all. I completely get the request now too. You could make like 303 basslines or whatever you wanted that way. Thank you.

Yes, nice request. And thankyou for spelling that out cos I had thought something similar but hadn’t taken the time to define it to myself clearly enough yet.

And because I’m feeling lazy can you tell me if editing the envelope attack etc and its amount depth (pitch or filter) is possible in this view?

Is it even legal for under 16s to own and use an S2400?!

Yep! Anything that you can edit per step can be done from here in one nice concise menu :slight_smile: And it shows you exact values which makes being precise a thing.

That’s why being able to select pads/ banks/ multis and insert notes from here would be so good. So you can insert a note, change whatever you want, filter, pitch etc etc all in the same window, move forward to the next step you want, and so on. For someone like me who makes most music by manual edits, this is the ideal way. Quick, efficient and precise. :slight_smile:

Just for the sake of people understanding why I’m always talking about manual edits, here’s one of my tunes. Probably won’t be most people’s thing by any means, but should explain why I’m not tapping this stuff in on pads, and why I find sequencing on the 2400 frustrating, and slow.


Great stuff! I also produced D n B back in the early 2000’s but never released anything and started on a mac performer, early version of Cubase, plus an EMU E4X so I’m more than familiar with editing the hell out of tracks.

Ah nice nice :slight_smile:

Yeah I’ve used Cubase 3 on the Atari a few times. As stable as that actually is, I prefer the MPC2k and Amiga/ Octamed etc for sequencing tbh, since I’m not a huge fan of piano roll style editing. It’s fine for pads etc, but can’t stand looking at piano rolls for too long and really don’t like doing drums in them. I find the less I can see the music and the edits etc and the more I rely on just my ears, the more fun I have and the better/ more interesting results I get. And the current step editing in the 2400 is basically a piano roll heh.

Got an EMU e6400 recently-ish myself but it needs fixing, so haven’t got to use it yet. So still have yet to actually try an EMU.

Is it even legal for under 16s to own and use an S2400?!

judging by the amount of kidz in this thread I would saaayy…

maybe. but I hope not because breakin’ rulez is kool

1 Like

Imo, while in step-seq, I think it’s not that important to see/have things like env, slice, filter, res, filter mode, cutoff, etc. …since (at least for me), those params are usually edited/modified one (or few) times, and then locked into place. Rarely, or never, will I ever change them, nor double-check, esp. on a step-by-step basis.

What I Do find waay more important and what I miss a lot in step-by-step editing (like my ex Mpc60), is being able to see and double check my work and my playing (esp midi keyboard playing and chords) things like:
Notes (missed or accidentally hit midi keys/notes)
Volume (too weak or too strong midi keys/notes or pads)
Velocity (too weak or too strong midi keys/notes or pads)
Length (too short or too long midi keys/notes or pads)

This is where the Mpc Classics excel over the S2400’s step-sequencer (and also midi sequencer) and keeps things steam-lined, super simple, easy & intuitive, yet super effective.

S2400’s step-seq is “hard to look at" imo…I find myself exiting that mode super quick and dislike it greatly.


Well, they are all things I automate/change per step, hundreds of times per tune, can see some examples of this in the link I posted.

Like I’ve said before, it’s fine for a lot of genres, but trying to sequence complex Jungle edits on this thing makes me want to throw it out the window, and then go set it on fire.

And this is the reason I will continue to ignore this box even HAS a sequencer AT ALL until this gets added, and stick to sequencing it from the Amiga, MPC or whatever else, and basically treat it like I would my s950 or whatever. Which is a shame.


Are u going from graphical step edit default view to the list step edit? I.e Shift+step navigates to step edit screen. But u then press F2 to get to the list edit.

All the core editable functions are there, editing filter and envelopes are listed below the more important stuff like volume and tune. Make sure u are in lost edit. I love the step edit list screen, actually wish this was default step edit screen when pressing shift+step.


I get it, and I don’t even own a 2400! Lol! (This all brings me back to my old Yamaha QX7 days of editing MIDI)

I didn’t even realize this screen existed, thanks!

I haven’t tried this but it seems a workaround would be to first enter the events in the step program view so that you can use the encoder to advance at the specified quantization and tap a pad at each step, then go into the “graph view” and edit the events you just laid down

1 Like

Yeah that’s the problem, everything is a workaround. I’m not a fan of inputting notes in the current “step program” as is, and then going back and forth between pages 100’s of times per tune is enough to drive me insane. So it just doesn’t make sense to use the sequencer, when I have at least 5 options in the room that can sequence the 2400 better than the 2400 currently can :person_shrugging:

Never said it was impossible, just incredibly tedious. Couple that with the bugs and it can make for a pretty brutal experience at times haha.


Bump +1

Looks like F9 is now populated with “Lock All Faders”.

Another logical way of inputting a new event at the next step (in relation to the current quantization level) could be [REC] + [>>>], but I’m not sure what that would imply for the functionality of [REC] + [<<<] (if anything)