Opcode Vision

This is an article culled from archive material, circa 1997.

MOTU Performer was first off the block as a professional-level sequencing package for the Macintosh, leaving Opcode behind with the original <MIDIMAC sequencer. Opcode's answer, some years later, was Vision. In terms of features, Performer and Vision are largely equivalent, and the rivalry between Mark of the Unicorn and Opcode will keep them that way. By the same token, users tend to be locked into one or other set of products and upgrades, so choice of sequencer is only part of the equation.

Vision is slightly more semantically elegant than Performer, since it integrates the two levels of track data and subsequence into one. Hence, subsequences can be cut, pasted, shifted and looped (and even transposed) just like MIDI data. In addition, Vision is more flexible when it comes to algorithmic/generated sequences and live triggering. On the other hand, Performer is more pleasing on the eye, and has more powerful editing and looping facilities.

If I were building a system from scratch and needed a good set of sequencing facilities, I probably would go for Vision, OMS and Galaxy together with something like a Studio 4 interface. Vision is also cleaner semantically and more flexible, despite some bugs in the subsequence mechanism. However, Performer still has the edge in some respects (for example, beat clock and timecode synchronisation via MIDI Manager works well; Vision just crashes on me). And I've used Performer for eight or nine years, so it's second nature to me. And since I do so much work with MAX, I don't need a sequencer with too many smarts, just one with the right basic functionality.

Vision is available as Studio Vision Pro. I have no particular intention of upgrading; version 2 offers me all the features I need, and software bloat leaves a bad taste in my mouth.