Okay, so it appears safe to assume that most people think that
a "Preset Compare" function and/or a temp patch location is a
desireable feature of any synth. (I do!).
I have it from on high that such requests have greater likelihood of
implementation if some basic guidelines are adhered to:
1) the change should not affect previous Programs.
2) the change must be implemented with the current
switches/displays, without too much confusion.
3) the new feature should be in addition to current operation, as
opposed to replacement.
4) the feature suggestion should be accompanied by a description of
how it actually will be implemented and operate.
So, for this "compare feature" how exactly will it function on the
evolver--what is the best way? (i.e., hold something down? double
click? etc.) and consider all the consequences.
Let's discuss and see if we can nail it down (and then we might see
it!).
I will start. Here are my thoughts on Compare/edit buffer:
First, in regard to "Compare" and edited patches, I suggest a single
edit buffer. Some synths have one temp location and as a soon as you
tweak another (not merely switch patches) you lose it. The Pulse is
like this. One edit buffer: you can change to another patch, but if
you tweak another, then the newly tweaked patch loads into the edit
buffer and the former patch's edits are lost. On the other hand, the
Waldorf microQ has 16 edit buffers that allow up to 16 patches to be
in an edited state--first in, first out. More appears better, but at
least in the mQ such are justified by the fact that that unit is
multitimbral and multiple edit buffers allows full editing a multi-
patch. I think therefore that the Evolver can live with one patch at
a time, and certainly that is more simple to implement according to
the guidelines above, and simple to use.
Second, I believe that the edited patch should be indicated by the
appearance of one of the decimal points so far unused on the display.
(another alternative is to flash the display--but then how do you
show compare mode--add dots too?)
Third, Such dot could then flash to indicate "compare." Compare mode
would disallow tweaks. Like the uQ, attempted tweaks while in
compare mode should flash CMP or something like that on the screen
to alert you that your attempted tweaks are futile (I like this
about the uQ--conversely in the Pulse, while in compare mode, if you
forgetfully tweak, you see the numbers in the dispay changing but
nothing really is happening--lulling you into a belief that you are
doing something--until you realize you are in compare mode and those
last twently subtle tweaks were indeed subtle). :)
Fourth, in order to toggle in and out of compare mode, one will
press shift and main buttons simultaneously. Switching to another
patch location while in compare mode would take you out of it (such
would still mainain the edit of the original patch but when you
return to the last edited patch it will not be in compare mode
anymore).
Fifth, in order to "restore" the original patch (i.e ditch the
edits) without editing another patch (which will do it too) one
presses shift and reset. I don't like the idea with a shift-main and
hold/wait solution (sort of like on the Pulse) because holding the
main button down already has a special function to write a patch and
even with the shift button in play, presents possible mis-presses
and potential patch data loss. On the other hand, "shift-reset"
seems to make sense. (I think a shift-main and hold should do
nothing-leave you in the mode that it took you. Only holding the
main button alone should put you into patch-write mode as currently
implememented).
Sixth, speaking of Patch-write mode. When in such mode, (i.e.
flashing light next to main button) when you scroll to any new patch
location, you should be able to play and hear patch that you will be
replacing. This allows for meaningful placement and less mistaken
loss of patch data.
Seventh, any recieved single patch sysex data will place the new
patch into the edit buffer and can be signified by "TMP" which
location should preceed bank 1, patch 1. (incedentally this TMP
buffer would always be the actual location of an edited patch--upon
editing location 12 for example, location 12 would show a decimal
place indicating that really you are observing the TMP location--
i.e. you could scroll to the TMP location and hear the same edit
version as what appears to be in location 12, either way). The user
will have to then execute a patch-save to place the new patch in a
desired location. A big benefit of using this TMP location for newly
recieved patches is that it will allow a midi sequence to include
embedded actual patches to be loaded and played on the Evolver
during the sequence. (not just patch changes)! Good right?
Eighth, I think that is it.
Comments please! What did I forget? What is better?
Ravi
