Bc2000 (for the BCF2000 & BCR2000)

--- In bc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Ceedjay chez Free" <cubaseisbest@...>
wrote:
> Just discovered the group and I saw that there are drivers available
in the 
> files area of the group. These drivers were obviously programmed by
someone 
> from here because the version is 1.2.xx and the "official" drivers from 
> Behringer are 1.1.1.1.

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that 1.2.1.3 was indeed 
programmed by Behringer themselves. My guess is that the reason why they 
haven't published it on their website is that 1.2.1.3 is even more buggy 
than 1.1.1.1: at least I ALWAYS have to rerun 1.2.1.3's 
bcr2000-driver-setup.exe after switching on my BCR via the USB 
connection. (Do other people have the same problem?)

> Is there really any point in onstalling them as long as my system is 
> perfectly running with version 1.1.1.1 ?

Well, there might be, because 1.1.1.1 has at least one bug: in U-4 MIDI 
mode it assigns the wrong name ("OUT A") to the MIDI output device that 
actually goes to the MIDI OUT B socket. In 1.2.1.3 this bug is fixed: 
the same MIDI output device is correctly named "OUT B".

However, in the end I personally switched back to 1.1.1.1 because of the 
connection problem with 1.2.1.3 mentioned above, which is simply more 
severe than 1.1.1.1's naming bug.

> Also, is there anyone here that would be able to modify the BCF2000
firmware 
> according to suggestions ? I guess this would need
reverse-engineering, but, 
> some time ago, I used to be in close touch with Behringer dev
depatment. I 
> sent them numerous improvement suggestions that were never implemented 
> (especially into the Mackie for Cubase emulation).

As Royce has pointed out in this group, the BC firmware is buggy in that 
it sends a few BCL messages (embedded in SysEx messages) back 
incorrectly (concerning the ".tx" statements). And while developing my 
upcoming BC editor, I've found a few more bugs in the same vein. It 
would be great if these bugs could be fixed.

So, on the assumption (alas a pretty safe one...) that Behringer are 
unwilling to upgrade the firmware, I've been trying to decrypt the 
firmware (i.e. the SysEx messages for vs. 1.07 and 1.10 for both the BCF 
and the BCR). I've come a long way in that, but I haven't cracked it 
completely yet, though. But of course after decryption of the data, we'd 
face the probably even more daunting task of the actual reverse
engineering.

I don't know, but maybe there are some parallels between the codes used 
in the FCB1010 and the BCs? (Royce mentions that Behringer "leaked" 
certain hardware details of the FCB1010, so it might help if we could 
lay our hands on that information, and on the reverse engineering done 
by the people who wrote the alternative firmware for the FCB1010.)

In any case: given time and interest, I might indeed be willing to 
contribute to a reverse-engineering effort.

Mark.