I think the point is very clear. The poly 800 is better due to pricing. Clearly if it was the same price as a Juno things would be different. Joseph Ralston wrote: > No, I don't see what you mean. Please explain what you > think the Poly 800 is better at than a Juno 106, > musically? I've owned them both and the difference is > black and white to me. The poly-800 is fun as hell to > hack with (due to it's low price). But hacking up > keyboards is not the same thing as making music, and > in that area, the JUNO does prevail heavily over the > poly-800. > > lanrosta > > --- Epiik Soul <electrohead2000@... > <mailto:electrohead2000%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > > A Juno 106 for $200- is a bargain and I would snap > > it up. > > However, to say it is better in "every regard" is > > a fallacy. > > The Poly is cheaper. > > See what I mean? > > :) > > > > > > Joseph Ralston <voxdestrukt@... > <mailto:voxdestrukt%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > Shit, if you can find a JUNO 106 for less > > than $200 > > bucks, then I'd recommend getting that instead > > anyways. The JUNO-106 far outweights the Poly800 in > > every regard. Or perhaps you meant some other JUNO? > > > > --- jure zitnik <kokoon@... <mailto:kokoon%40gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > yeah i voted 100$ too. i mean.. i bought the > > > poly-800 for like 70$... in > > > perfect condition that is. with a case. > > > > > > jure > > > > > > On 5/24/06, Tim Bieniosek <tab27@... > <mailto:tab27%40drexel.edu>> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What if you added a DB9 or DB25 port on the back > > > for an external knob box? > > > > > > > > The most I'd pay for a kit is $100. After that > > > you can just buy a Juno. > > > > (sacrilege!) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 24 May 2006, patrioticduo wrote: > > > > > > > > > I did entertain the idea of replacing the > > seven > > > segment displays with > > > > > a 2x24 backlit LCD. But even that is too much > > to > > > spend. > > > > > > > > > > However, I am planning on putting an LCD > > > interface onto the retrofit > > > > > kit so that I can plug a display in and do > > > diagnostics with it. Also, > > > > > I have a funny feeling that I may have to use > > > the LCD to determine the > > > > > exact memory map used for all the parameters > > and > > > patch space use. > > > > > > > > > > But the cost of the LCD would be too high for > > > any retrofit kit. I > > > > > mean, when you can pick up all sorts of much > > > higher powered > > > > > synthesizers for a few hundred bucks what > > would > > > the point of it all be? > > > > > > > > > > This upgrade is 90% ROM and RAM. A few digital > > > pots will allow > > > > > controlling some mod's but I simply refuse to > > > entertain carving up the > > > > > keyboard, drilling holes and messing with the > > > external appearance. > > > > > This mod is going to be an internal upgrade. > > No > > > messing up a great > > > > > looking vintage keyboard. > > > > > > > > > > I want mine to look like a Poly 800 for my > > > grandchildren. > > > > > > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>, Marcus > > Wilson > > > <JB@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking of new features, one thing i was > > > thinking would be uber cool > > > > > > would be to actually display the parameter > > > info in the decal showing > > > > > > the parameters and ranges, and having > > up/down > > > switches under the up/ > > > > > > down parameter switch area. As my own > > > experience is in membrane > > > > > > switches, getting the switch side of things > > is > > > pretty simple, its the > > > > > > control and the multiplex/demultiplex of the > > > parameter info display > > > > > > that got too hard. > > > > > > > > > > > > Imagine seeing all of the parameters on the > > > poly displayed, and being > > > > > > able to tweak each one at will, instead of > > > needing to fumble thru the > > > > > > parameters one at a time > > > > > > > > > > > > JB over > > > > > > > > > > > > On 24/05/2006, at 3:19 PM, jure zitnik > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > if you're planning the digital pot - why > > not > > > replace the awkward up/ > > > > > > > down buttons with a rotary encoder? i > > guess > > > it's an easy job! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > jure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/23/06, patrioticduo > > <patrioticduo@...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm trying to keep the scope within the > > > realms of sanity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I'm placing initial limits on the > > > hardware upgrade. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Required outcome: Upgrade the Poly 800 RAM > > > and ROM to support > > > > > > > additional CPU programming related > > > functions. A board will be > > > > > > > developed as part of a retrofit kit that > > > will plug into the existing > > > > > > > ROM socket. The card will have a 2764 > > EPROM, > > > a 6264 RAM, a 74LS138 > > > > > > > decoder. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Optional outcome: Provide the needed > > > hardware to integrate several > > > > > > > well established mod's (moog slayer, > > 12/24db > > > filter switch, etc) > > > > into > > > > > > > the CPU control and user programming > > system. > > > Thus, add a 74H174 (6 > > > > bit > > > > > > > latch) and a digital potentiometer and > > other > > > chips as needed to > > > > allow > > > > > > > existing and future mod's to be controlled > > > by the CPU. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it very unlikely that we'll run > > out > > > of CPU cycles handling > > > > the > > > > > > > required outcomes. I think it possible > > that > > > we may run into CPU > > > > cycle > > > > > > > restrictions trying to satisfy the > > optional > > > outcomes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we do find that we run out of CPU > > cycles > > > then I'm hoping that > > > > I'll > > > > > > > know so much about the code that I can > > port > > > the whole thing to a PC > > > > > > > and release a virtual Poly 800 that will > > run > > > on your Linux box. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike H. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>, > > > "austeritygirlone" <ziggystar@> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>, > > > "patrioticduo" <patrioticduo@> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep up the good work! After you've > > > figured out how to controll > > > > the > > > > > > > > peripheral synthstuff from the cpu and > > > written a basic OS, that > > > > gets > > > > > > > > somethingn done I'm sure that other > > people > > > will join your efforts > > > > > > > > (like me). But of course doing this is a > > > major obstacle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And have you thought about replacing the > > > === message truncated === > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com> > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006 > >
Message
Re: [korgpolyex] Re: Disassembly update - II
2006-06-18 by archeologist
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.