I think the SL & original have the same engine onboard... it still doesn't
work is the bottomline :(
<rant>
it's funny.. I got soo excited by the SL. But trying to EQ or manipulating
mixes (which was my original intention) just made me hate midi for it's
coarse resolution. SL is a great product but it's build on top of an arcane
shitty protocol synth manufacturer should have dumped/upgraded years ago. I
don't call that 'control'
So... I won't buy any 'controller' until something new comes out me think.
</rant>
-----Original Message-----
From: DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of James Elliott
Sent: vendredi 2 novembre 2007 17:43
To: DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Evolver]
Yea, it sux. I'm suprised that the SL has that problem as well. I
complained about the lack of sysex flexibility to novation regarding their
controllers. They said they would fix it for the SL's.....
For what it's worth, here's the email I sent to novation that describes
the problem in detail.
Dear Novation,
I would like to start off saying that I love your products - high quality
craftsmanship and great features!
Now on to my complaint....
I just purchased a Remote 25 (over the edirol pcr 30) to control my Dave
Smith Evolver (desktop) and several other synths - vintage and rack mount.
As I was programming it last night I came to the SAD conclusion that your
SYSEX implementation is very limited when it comes to control assignments!
There are a handful of synth manufactures that implement SYSEX as a way to
transmit granular MIDI messages within and BEYOND values of 0:127
and -64:63 - your implementation handicaps those efforts by allowing only
ONE variable within a SYSEX message. For example several synths that I own
use at least two variable positions for each control, similar to NRPN's MSB
and LSB. Because you only use one variable those controllers become LESS
granular then they already are. For example because I have to pick either
the "LSB" or "MSB" to assign to a variable on my Evolver, I am chained to a
fixed range of numbers between 0 through 15 (LSB) or 16 through 224 (MSB)
with 14 steps each - there is absolutely NO granularity!!!!
>LS can represent 0,1,2,3,4,5, 6,7,8,9,10, 11,12,13, 14, or 15
>MS can represent 16,32,48,64, 80,96,112, 128,144,160, 176,192,208, or 224
I can understand the need to create a maximum message length (like the 20
bytes that you specify), but only ONE variable???? Your NRPN and RPN
implementations uses two variables, a LSB and MSB, can't you implement
something similar for SYSEX???
I've met other individuals on various internet forums that share the same
frustrations as I do - specifically with the Novation controllers. If I am
wrong in what I described above please correct me. If I am not wrong PLEASE
PLEASE PLEASE allow at least TWO variables in a SYSEX string (like LSB and
MSB - the cheaper edirol pcr 30 does)!!! It can't be that time consuming to
change a few lines of code - I bet you could even use the same variables and
functions as you do for SYSEX as you do for NRPN/RPN's - If not I bet it
would be a QUICK code change! Please release a new OS update / editor that
implements this request before you shove this keyboard off to the side in
favor of the SL!
A good solution would be a minimum of 2 variables that can be CONFIGURED
as one or two bytes each and that can either operate as two separate
variables (not tied together) or operate like NRPN's LSB and MSB. At a
minimum you should have two 1 byte variables that operate like LSB/MSB.....
The BEST solution would be to have 4 variables that are one byte each and
can operate individually, or operate in pairs, or all together....
The reason I mention this is because - as I'm sure you are well aware -
SYSEX messages are not standardized across different companies. If you
allowed that kind of flexibility I'm pretty positive you could satiate most
needs. For example the Dave Smith Evolver uses a crazy implementation like
<snip> 0000 "LSB (one byte)" 0000 "MSB (one byte)" </snip> for most of
their controls - if you had two variables, one byte each, that operated like
NRPN's MSB/LSB they could be placed anywhere in the SYSEX string....
I love the features this keyboard provides (the joystick and the x/y
controller BUT SPECIFICALLY programmable SYSEX messages), however because of
this limitation I am better off using any cheap $50 - $99 keyboard
controller over this one - the reason being - I am better off with a
keyboard that costs THREE times less that does not use this feature at all
then a keyboard that "has" this feature but is poorly implemented. Your
SYSEX implementation is one of the few things that makes this keyboard
unique - everyone else has knobs, buttons, and faders!
I am going to share your response to various message boards / forums that
I am a member of as I'm sure other members will be interested as well.
If I have not contacted the correct people to ponder upon and make a
decision on this request then PLEASE forward this request to an audience who
can!
Best Regards,
Jim Elliott
----- Original Message ----
From: M-.-n <nostromo@...>
To: DSI_Evolver@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2007 8:36:03 AM
Subject: RE: [Evolver]
You might be desapointed by SYSEX external control tho, for example my
remoteSL allows it but changes on value in the sysex string while most
parameters in the evolver combine two nibbles (for more resolution I guess)
makng it unusable. For the stream definition, my manual didn't actually
include the midi map but the one available for download is.
Hope this helps
Marc.
-----Original Message-----
From: DSI_Evolver@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:DSI_ Evolver@yahoogro
ups.com]On Behalf Of Lin
Sent: jeudi 25 octobre 2007 20:25
To: DSI_Evolver@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [Evolver]
Hi,
I got my Evolver recently. Try to use it together with a Edirol PCR
300, which can assigning sysex. Also my evolver desktop is on version
2, not support MIDI CC.
Could anyone give me a clue how to check the sysex value for each
parameters? Any advice to do this.
Cheers,
Lin
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.comMessage
RE: [Evolver]
2007-11-02 by M-.-n