Hi Scott,
no disagreements at all here. I am not defending anything, never even mentioned Technics equipment, just pointing out that you cannot define different equipment with different qualities and operating systems by a simple figure of ppq without investigating all the underlying differences that also contribute to a subjective result.

Maybe an analogy would be the difference between a 128 poly and 64 poly instrument. Everybody assumes that the 128 must be better from a paper spec, to then find that the voices are made up of twice as many partials, and the dropout algorithms are worse, so in real life use may cop out subjectively more noticibly earlier.

As for me being biased for Technics, I could equally accuse you of puffing this psr2000 ppq thing, when since the psr2000 was launched, and before you highlighted the issue I can't remember anyone spontaneously and without forewarning remarking Wow! the sequencer on this machine sounds much superior to anything that has gone before...

I doubt that we will see much hard research on what ppq is neccessary because technology has overtaken the subject and the high ppqs will become a norm in keyboards just because cheap micros make it easy and possible. If so that is great!
However every feature is a cost/quality compromise, and I doubt if many people will notice the difference spending money on the sequencer ppq, whereas I'm pretty sure that everyone would notice the difference if the money was spent on wave rom, for instance.

But I still feel the pc case is quite different to the keyboard case, since have seen much comment on pc sequencer 'solidity' over the years but very few complaints about keyboard sequencers. Thus I feel these 2 cases have different sets of criteria, that a simple ppq cannot explain.

all the best