Yamaha DTXpress/DTXplorer/DTXtreme

Personally, I find it hard to believe that when challenged to put up 
or shut up, we've all decided to shut up. As Brian LaRue jokingly 
remarked today in reaction to the resounding indifference shown thus 
far to his call for ideas, "Everyone must be completely happy about 
everyhing that e-drum companies produce." I humbly submit instead 
that although we're happy that e-drum manufacturers are making 
products, we aren't necessarily content with all of their choices or 
with all of their methods of implementing them. No one's promising 
that Pintech is going to make whatever we want. But if a particular 
suggestion happens to strike a chord with consumers, as well as with 
Brian and his team, it could very well see the light of day. You 
don't have to be a technician to come up with a viable idea. You only 
have to be able to take stock of those moments behind the kit when 
something does not seem to be as easy, as accurate, or as imaginative 
as it could be (not to mention as inexpensive as it could be). 

The machine-gun effect has recently come under fire on this board, 
and for good reason. How hard would it be to create a module that 
reduces it without costing (or offering) as much as the Roland TD-20? 
Are module ergonomics as good as they could be? Personally, I find 
the DTXpress module a little hard to operate. The discontinued 
DTXv2.0 and DTXtreme were a lot easier. Granted, they were more 
expensive, but what would we sacrifice inside the module to get a 
better display to read and program (the DTXpress text editor will 
alleviate some of the problem, but not everybody always, if ever, has 
a PC nearby). While we're on that subject, what about leaving out 
some of the user songs and other extras on a module to create more 
memory for samples? What about a new trigger-to-MIDI interface with 
more inputs than the TMC-6, at a cost below that of a second new 
module or a set of features more current than an older module?

I'll let Brian make the offer again personally, which he said that 
he'd like to do, but I hope that we can generate some discussion on 
the board about this subject, because people actually do have a lot 
of ideas, complaints, and suggestions. Let's put them in one place.

Ed

I would also like to add to Ed plea's for input. I know I have alot of
idea's but I have taken the attitude that my suggests, if incorporated,
would price the module out of the ball park for most people. And perhaps
this was the wrong path to go down, because some of my ideas my not be that
expensive to incorporate. So why not face this challenge as a "the sky is
the limit" proposition and then let the chips fall where they may. Keep in
mind that even if Brian can't incorporate some of these features into a
module, that Yamaha still has the potential for bringing a high end kit to
market, and they do have the ability finiancially to address this wish list.


(And yes, I think a small refrigeration unit attached to the side of the
module for holding a can of bear is a perfectly acceptable accessary. LOL.) 

OGD  

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	emf [SMTP:liberatusvirus@...]
> Sent:	Wednesday, March 17, 2004 4:33 PM
> To:	DTXpress@yahoogroups.com
> Subject:	[DTXpress] Edrummers' Wish List
> 
> Personally, I find it hard to believe that when challenged to put up 
> or shut up, we've all decided to shut up. As Brian LaRue jokingly 
> remarked today in reaction to the resounding indifference shown thus 
> far to his call for ideas, "Everyone must be completely happy about 
> everyhing that e-drum companies produce." I humbly submit instead 
> that although we're happy that e-drum manufacturers are making 
> products, we aren't necessarily content with all of their choices or 
> with all of their methods of implementing them. No one's promising 
> that Pintech is going to make whatever we want. But if a particular 
> suggestion happens to strike a chord with consumers, as well as with 
> Brian and his team, it could very well see the light of day. You 
> don't have to be a technician to come up with a viable idea. You only 
> have to be able to take stock of those moments behind the kit when 
> something does not seem to be as easy, as accurate, or as imaginative 
> as it could be (not to mention as inexpensive as it could be). 
> 
> The machine-gun effect has recently come under fire on this board, 
> and for good reason. How hard would it be to create a module that 
> reduces it without costing (or offering) as much as the Roland TD-20? 
> Are module ergonomics as good as they could be? Personally, I find 
> the DTXpress module a little hard to operate. The discontinued 
> DTXv2.0 and DTXtreme were a lot easier. Granted, they were more 
> expensive, but what would we sacrifice inside the module to get a 
> better display to read and program (the DTXpress text editor will 
> alleviate some of the problem, but not everybody always, if ever, has 
> a PC nearby). While we're on that subject, what about leaving out 
> some of the user songs and other extras on a module to create more 
> memory for samples? What about a new trigger-to-MIDI interface with 
> more inputs than the TMC-6, at a cost below that of a second new 
> module or a set of features more current than an older module?
> 
> I'll let Brian make the offer again personally, which he said that 
> he'd like to do, but I hope that we can generate some discussion on 
> the board about this subject, because people actually do have a lot 
> of ideas, complaints, and suggestions. Let's put them in one place.
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Community email addresses:
>    Post message: DTXpress@yahoogroups.com
>    Subscribe:     DTXpress-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>    Unsubscribe:   DTXpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>    List owner:    DTXpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Shortcut URL to this page:
>    <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DTXpress>
> 
> Alternate DTXpress site:
>    <http://www.dtxpressions.com> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cns3qa4/M=268585.4521611.5694062.1261774/D=egro
> upweb/S=1705031972:HM/EXP=1079645597/A=1950450/R=0/SIG=124efgk3i/*http://a
> shnin.com/clk/muryutaitakenattogyo?YH=4521611&yhad=1950450>	
>  
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=268585.4521611.5694062.1261774/D=egroupw
> eb/S=:HM/A=1950450/rand=662692348>	
> 
>   _____  
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> *	To visit your group on the web, go to:
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DTXpress/>
>    
> *	To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DTXpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:DTXpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>    
> *	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
 
**************************************************************************
The information transmitted herewith is sensitive information intended only
for use to the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other
use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

--- Ed wrote:
> Personally, I find it hard to believe that when
> challenged to put up or shut up, we've all decided
> to shut up. As Brian LaRue jokingly remarked today
> in reaction to the resounding indifference shown...

I think you are being perhaps the merest tadlet harsh.

I'm a software engineer for my sins. Any such animal will tell you 
the hardest thing in the trade is not designing the software, not 
finding innovative patterns, not writing the code, not testing, and 
not supporting it. It's finding out what the bloody user wanted in 
the first place. I have a running motto: "users ... can't live 
with 'em, can't kill 'em."

Why is it hard? Partially because people often don't know what they 
want, they just know what they *don't* want. And when they *do* know 
what they want, they can't articulate it. Another problem is (as Rob 
has admitted) users tend to self-gate ... the subconsciously decide 
that something might be too hard, or too expensive. And it's 
demoralising when you make requests that don't have a chance of 
being implemented, because they're too wild, or lack universal 
applicability (no use producing something without a big enough 
market), or are too darn expensive, or would be too difficult to use.

What's even worse than requirements from single users is those from 
a committee. And what we have here is a big, geographically 
distributed committee of people for most of whom e-drumming is a 
hobby not a career.

A long time ago (in a galaxy far, far away) I decided to adopt 
an "assertive requirements gathering" approach, and I'm still doing 
it. Why? How does it work? I spend a little time talking to people, 
then I tell people what they'll get, then I wait to see how many 
scream, and how loud. Then I filter my assertions based on that, and 
iterate until the screaming becomes muttering under the breath.

Formulating requirements is hard, and it's not usually due to apathy.

Stewart

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "moosetication" <moosetication@y...> 
wrote:
> A long time ago (in a galaxy far, far away) I decided to adopt 
> an "assertive requirements gathering" approach, and I'm still doing 
> it. Why? How does it work? I spend a little time talking to people, 
> then I tell people what they'll get, then I wait to see how many 
> scream, and how loud. Then I filter my assertions based on that, 
and 
> iterate until the screaming becomes muttering under the breath.
> 
> Formulating requirements is hard, and it's not usually due to 
apathy.

Stewart,

Points well taken. Didn't mean to be harsh, just hortatory. What if 
we adopt an assertive requirements gathering approach? In a way, we 
could look at the board that way. If it's hard to formulate what we 
may want and easier to pinpoint what we don't want, let's start with 
the negative and hopefully move to the positive. No one should feel 
like s/he is on the spot, but when the spirit moves, it would be nice 
for it to land here. We can start with the DTXP module (or any other 
product) as the first assertion. We can add to it or subtract from it 
in our unavoidably chaotic and leisurely way until the screaming 
turns to muttering and maybe end up with something; it won't please 
everyone, and won't come from everyone, but that's that. We don't 
have a time limit. We can just keep it in the back of our minds. For 
examplem when someone posts a question that turns on a light, we can 
jot the idea down. You're right that it should be pressure-free, and 
reflect the hobby status that this game is for many. But hobbies are 
also enthusiams, and we can accommodate a bit of heavy interest when 
it arises.

Ed

The most desirable feature i can currently think of is the ability to 
upload smaples. I dont mean midi samples (which i still think is 
fantastic (although old)) but im talking about going to your 
acoustic, micing up a drum/cymbal and transfer that sound to you kit. 
The possibilities are endless. Anyone fancy a floor tom with a human 
voice?

I've heard some of the more expensive DDrum modules have such 
features.


I've been thinking about the cymbal rolls and I dont pretend to know 
how the module's work in great detail but im assuming that one way to 
correct this issue is to have a sensor built into the cymbal. This 
will probably be a motion sensor (maybe a rotation (attatched between 
the arm and the cymbal) or maybe a compass). This can simply say, if 
the cymbal is in motion (or in motion past past a certain velocity) 
then trigger a different sound. This 'new' sound can be one that is 
sampled 0.25 or 0.5 seconds or whatever after the initial strike of 
the sampled cymbal. It wouldn't be the cheapest way to do it but it 
could work. 

I plan to get inside the module at some point and see what i can do 
in there. 


Phil

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "emf" <liberatusvirus@y...> wrote:
> --- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "moosetication" 
<moosetication@y...> 
> wrote:
> > A long time ago (in a galaxy far, far away) I decided to adopt 
> > an "assertive requirements gathering" approach, and I'm still 
doing 
> > it. Why? How does it work? I spend a little time talking to 
people, 
> > then I tell people what they'll get, then I wait to see how many 
> > scream, and how loud. Then I filter my assertions based on that, 
> and 
> > iterate until the screaming becomes muttering under the breath.
> > 
> > Formulating requirements is hard, and it's not usually due to 
> apathy.
> 
> Stewart,
> 
> Points well taken. Didn't mean to be harsh, just hortatory. What if 
> we adopt an assertive requirements gathering approach? In a way, we 
> could look at the board that way. If it's hard to formulate what we 
> may want and easier to pinpoint what we don't want, let's start 
with 
> the negative and hopefully move to the positive. No one should feel 
> like s/he is on the spot, but when the spirit moves, it would be 
nice 
> for it to land here. We can start with the DTXP module (or any 
other 
> product) as the first assertion. We can add to it or subtract from 
it 
> in our unavoidably chaotic and leisurely way until the screaming 
> turns to muttering and maybe end up with something; it won't please 
> everyone, and won't come from everyone, but that's that. We don't 
> have a time limit. We can just keep it in the back of our minds. 
For 
> examplem when someone posts a question that turns on a light, we 
can 
> jot the idea down. You're right that it should be pressure-free, 
and 
> reflect the hobby status that this game is for many. But hobbies 
are 
> also enthusiams, and we can accommodate a bit of heavy interest 
when 

> it arises.
> 
> Ed

--- philsiu02 wrote:
> ... cymbal rolls ... im assuming that one way to 
> correct this issue is to have a sensor built into
> the cymbal. This will probably be a motion sensor...
> This can simply say, if the cymbal is in motion
> (or in motion past past a certain velocity) 
> then trigger a different sound. This 'new' sound
> can be one that is sampled 0.25 or 0.5 seconds
> or whatever after the initial strike of the sampled
> cymbal.

You don't need the physical element, just the second part you 
mention. When a pad is hit while the last sound is still playing, it 
should restart the sample further into the envelope, not from the 
start. A software solution would work just fine, and would be 
applicable to all existing pads not just those with the "extra" 
sensor.

Stewart

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "moosetication" <moosetication@y...> 
wrote:
> You don't need the physical element, just the second part you 
> mention. When a pad is hit while the last sound is still playing, 
it 
> should restart the sample further into the envelope, not from the 
> start. A software solution would work just fine, and would be 
> applicable to all existing pads not just those with the "extra" 
> sensor.

The ddrum method really is elegant and economical, not in the cymbal 
and not in the module, really, but in the sample(s). I wouldn't want 
an extra tiddlywink stuck into the cymbal in harm's way. But, as 
Roland has proved with the TD-20, it can be done in the module even 
if the commitment is to COSM or other such modeling.

Ed

Here's one I could throw into the pot... :)

How about a "learning" mode of the module that learns the dynamics of
your playing style and then adjusts the pad settings to match? In effect,
have the module "listen" to the dynamics of your playing for a
predetermined time and then auto-adjust gain, pedal position, cross talk,
rejection etc to match *your* style?

Maybe have the module "play" a basic "prompt" rhythm and have the user
then repeat the pattern while the module metronomes the tempo. You play,
it "listens", it adjusts. Similar to the way the "Dragon Dictate"
software works. You "train it" to more accurately recognize your distinct
playing style.

I envision a module that prompts you for a few bars of a 8 beat pattern,
then displays "Working..." on it's LCD followed by a perfectly
"zeroed-in" kit...

But then again, I'm just thinking out loud... er typing out.. well, not
really out loud but.. well u know what I mean! ;)

Vern

--
Vern Graner CNE/CNA/SSE    | "If the network is down, then you're
Senior Systems Engineer    | obviously incompetent so why are we
Texas Information Services | paying you? Of course, if the network
http://www.txis.com        | is up, then we obviously don't need
Austin Office 512 328-8947 | you, so why are we paying you?" \ufffdVLG




moosetication said:

> --- philsiu02 wrote:
>> ... cymbal rolls ... im assuming that one way to
>> correct this issue is to have a sensor built into
>> the cymbal. This will probably be a motion sensor...
>> This can simply say, if the cymbal is in motion
>> (or in motion past past a certain velocity)
>> then trigger a different sound. This 'new' sound
>> can be one that is sampled 0.25 or 0.5 seconds
>> or whatever after the initial strike of the sampled
>> cymbal.
>
> You don't need the physical element, just the second part you
> mention. When a pad is hit while the last sound is still playing, it
> should restart the sample further into the envelope, not from the
> start. A software solution would work just fine, and would be
> applicable to all existing pads not just those with the "extra"
> sensor.
>
> Stewart
>
>
>
> Community email addresses:
>   Post message: DTXpress@yahoogroups.com
>   Subscribe:    DTXpress-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   Unsubscribe:  DTXpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   List owner:   DTXpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
>   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DTXpress
>
> Alternate DTXpress site:
>   http://www.dtxpressions.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "Vernon Graner" <vern@t...> wrote:
> Here's one I could throw into the pot... :)
> 
> How about a "learning" mode of the module that learns the dynamics 
of
> your playing style and then adjusts the pad settings to match? In 
effect,
> have the module "listen" to the dynamics of your playing for a
> predetermined time and then auto-adjust gain, pedal position, cross 
talk,
> rejection etc to match *your* style?
> 
> Maybe have the module "play" a basic "prompt" rhythm and have the 
user
> then repeat the pattern while the module metronomes the tempo. You 
play,
> it "listens", it adjusts. Similar to the way the "Dragon Dictate"
> software works. You "train it" to more accurately recognize your 
distinct
> playing style.
> 
> I envision a module that prompts you for a few bars of a 8 beat 
pattern,
> then displays "Working..." on it's LCD followed by a perfectly
> "zeroed-in" kit...
> 
> But then again, I'm just thinking out loud... er typing out.. well, 
not
> really out loud but.. well u know what I mean! ;)

Vern,

Kat (now Alternate Mode) actually created such an animal, or 
something close to it. You hit a pad twice, once hard and once soft. 
The module registered the range and created a personalized trigger 
envelope for you. It didn't incorporate a crosstalk functionality, 
but Kat eventually went to a separate programming mode like the 
prevailing system now. If I remember correctly, the Kat system was 
actually called training. Your idea is much more elaborate and 
probably more feasible now than it was then. Another way to eliminate 
crosstalk is to go back to Kat's FSRs on pads instead of piezos; they 
did not suffer from any crosstalk because you actually had to exert 
force on them to make them fire. But then again, piezos are the 
industry standard, and even Kat converted to them.

Ed

If our friend from Pintech is still wanting Ideas. I would like to 
see avery tidy easy to use Cable system. The reason I say this is 
every photo shot you see of a ekit has no cables attached. The 
DTXpressIII looks lovly in the Yamaha pictures, add the cables and 
it looks awful. it cannot be that hard to sort something out. I have 
been looking into this on my kit and have come up with a reasonable 
solution, its not perfect but it is better than all the cables 
hanging around.

I like to transport my Rack with the Cables attached, maybe this 
will help in the ideas for new products.

You did ask :-))

Gunny




--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "emf" <liberatusvirus@y...> wrote:
> Personally, I find it hard to believe that when challenged to put 
up 
> or shut up, we've all decided to shut up. As Brian LaRue jokingly 
> remarked today in reaction to the resounding indifference shown 
thus 
> far to his call for ideas, "Everyone must be completely happy 
about 
> everyhing that e-drum companies produce." I humbly submit instead 
> that although we're happy that e-drum manufacturers are making 
> products, we aren't necessarily content with all of their choices 
or 
> with all of their methods of implementing them. No one's promising 
> that Pintech is going to make whatever we want. But if a 
particular 
> suggestion happens to strike a chord with consumers, as well as 
with 
> Brian and his team, it could very well see the light of day. You 
> don't have to be a technician to come up with a viable idea. You 
only 
> have to be able to take stock of those moments behind the kit when 
> something does not seem to be as easy, as accurate, or as 
imaginative 
> as it could be (not to mention as inexpensive as it could be). 
> 
> The machine-gun effect has recently come under fire on this board, 
> and for good reason. How hard would it be to create a module that 
> reduces it without costing (or offering) as much as the Roland TD-
20? 
> Are module ergonomics as good as they could be? Personally, I find 
> the DTXpress module a little hard to operate. The discontinued 
> DTXv2.0 and DTXtreme were a lot easier. Granted, they were more 
> expensive, but what would we sacrifice inside the module to get a 
> better display to read and program (the DTXpress text editor will 
> alleviate some of the problem, but not everybody always, if ever, 
has 
> a PC nearby). While we're on that subject, what about leaving out 
> some of the user songs and other extras on a module to create more 
> memory for samples? What about a new trigger-to-MIDI interface 
with 
> more inputs than the TMC-6, at a cost below that of a second new 
> module or a set of features more current than an older module?
> 
> I'll let Brian make the offer again personally, which he said that 
> he'd like to do, but I hope that we can generate some discussion 
on 
> the board about this subject, because people actually do have a 
lot 

> of ideas, complaints, and suggestions. Let's put them in one place.
> 
> Ed

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "n999gun" <nicholas.gunn@b...> wrote:
> If our friend from Pintech is still wanting Ideas. I would like to 
> see avery tidy easy to use Cable system. The reason I say this is 
> every photo shot you see of a ekit has no cables attached. The 
> DTXpressIII looks lovly in the Yamaha pictures, add the cables and 
> it looks awful. it cannot be that hard to sort something out. I 
have 
> been looking into this on my kit and have come up with a reasonable 
> solution, its not perfect but it is better than all the cables 
> hanging around.
> 
> I like to transport my Rack with the Cables attached, maybe this 
> will help in the ideas for new products.

Gunny,

Everything is fair game. I'm going to collect all the ideas and rants 
and run them through the mill. People have come up with various 
solutions on their own (OGD's being the most elaborate that I know), 
but it would be nice for the consumer not to have to solve it. Last 
night's module software/hardware discussion was also an eye opener.

Ed

emf wrote:

>Personally, I find it hard to believe that when challenged to put up 
>or shut up, we've all decided to shut up. As Brian LaRue jokingly 
>remarked today in reaction to the resounding indifference shown thus 
>far to his call for ideas, "Everyone must be completely happy about 
>everyhing that e-drum companies produce." I humbly submit instead 
>that although we're happy that e-drum manufacturers are making 
>products, we aren't necessarily content with all of their choices or 
>with all of their methods of implementing them. No one's promising 
>that Pintech is going to make whatever we want. But if a particular 
>suggestion happens to strike a chord with consumers, as well as with 
>Brian and his team, it could very well see the light of day. You 
>don't have to be a technician to come up with a viable idea. You only 
>have to be able to take stock of those moments behind the kit when 
>something does not seem to be as easy, as accurate, or as imaginative 
>as it could be (not to mention as inexpensive as it could be). 
>
>The machine-gun effect has recently come under fire on this board, 
>and for good reason. How hard would it be to create a module that 
>reduces it without costing (or offering) as much as the Roland TD-20? 
>Are module ergonomics as good as they could be? Personally, I find 
>the DTXpress module a little hard to operate. The discontinued 
>DTXv2.0 and DTXtreme were a lot easier. Granted, they were more 
>expensive, but what would we sacrifice inside the module to get a 
>better display to read and program (the DTXpress text editor will 
>alleviate some of the problem, but not everybody always, if ever, has 
>a PC nearby). While we're on that subject, what about leaving out 
>some of the user songs and other extras on a module to create more 
>memory for samples? What about a new trigger-to-MIDI interface with 
>more inputs than the TMC-6, at a cost below that of a second new 
>module or a set of features more current than an older module?
>
>I'll let Brian make the offer again personally, which he said that 
>he'd like to do, but I hope that we can generate some discussion on 
>the board about this subject, because people actually do have a lot 
>of ideas, complaints, and suggestions. Let's put them in one place.
>
>Ed
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Community email addresses:
>  Post message: DTXpress@yahoogroups.com
>  Subscribe:    DTXpress-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>  Unsubscribe:  DTXpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>  List owner:   DTXpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
>Shortcut URL to this page:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DTXpress
>
>Alternate DTXpress site:
>  http://www.dtxpressions.com 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>.
>
>  
>
I agree that we (I) tend to passively accept what we get once we buy 
into a system. I have long been convinced that there must be a market 
for products that address the ergonomic needs of the mass of aging 
boomers as we begin our gradual and dignified decline. I find it 
interesting how many of us are older people returning to the love of our 
youth (drums in this case- the other love of my youth is kind of old). 
In addition to despising the KP60 and hating the HH60 (see earlier 
posts), I have disdain for the DTX module. The interface is pathetic, 
especially the size and closeness of the buttons. For those of us who 
are constantly grasping  for our reading glasses to see close things, 
then  removing them to see the  rest of the band, this is more than 
annoying. I suspect the cheapest part of the module is the case. I 
accept that for small dollars I am getting a small display, but 
goshdarnit, it would be nice to be able to make analog tweaks while 
playing without starting one of the built-in songs. OK- that only 
happened once; it totally disrupted the baptism that was taking place.
My bad for thinking that because I have a tiny budget for music that I 
must tolerate these problems. Yamaha's bad for not catering to their 
market when they brought out the new DTX. I have no interest in the new 
module because the panel has not improved. So Brian- skip the cymbals 
and just give me a clip-on magnifier for the unit.