Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

Atom,

Flashing the display when a CC gets changed sounds like a great idea
but you ask alot man!

I will add this to the feature request list.

The way Korg set up the display in the first place was awful. I can
think of several ways to make it better but at the moment I'm
struggling just to get the CC's implmented. It's summer up here -
remember?(!)

As for the format of the controllers data, yes, the values will be
proportionally spread across 0-127 regardless of whether they are
on/off or 0-99. In most cases, the parameters fall into a factor of
128 so it's easy to just use a binary rotate command to shift the most
significant bits down to the least significant. So for example, all of
the envelope values just need to be shifted right three times to get
127 to be 31. The rest, I'll have to use a lookup table that returns a
proportional value according to the CC data value. How I actually do
this fast enough to fit within the MIDI interrupt service routine is
the tricky bit. But I have a pretty good idea about how to do it. I
may even get a chance to do write this code this weekend.

Mike.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, korgpolyex800 wrote:
> 
> > So I was thinking about assigning controller 22 to be a parameter
bank 
> > select. Controller 22 would use a range of values from 0-16 (anything 
> > above 16 would be ignored). Then Controllers 23 to 31 would be
parameter 
> > controllers for parameter 0 through 7.
> ...
> > What does everyone think of that method?
> ===============
> 
> overall, it sounds great. for people who don't have a PC1600, might
there 
> be a way to use the display to show what group of parameters is 
> selected... "En1", "LFO2", "OSC2", "FILTER", etc? i'm thinking it
would be 
> great if that flashed on the display for 2-3 seconds, or until a
parameter 
> is edited.
> 
> also, for people who don't have a PC1600, maybe CC22 should ignore
the low 
> bits; if i had to use my evolution (MK249c) to select 0-16 with a small 
> knob that has a range of 0-127 it would kinda suck. ignoring the low
bits 
> (and using the high bits) would give better control in that situation. 
> best of all would be adding a second CC to adjust the "edit bank" (or 
> whatever you want to call it); one that works as you described (for 
> software and PC1600's) and one that works as i described, for most 
> hardware controllers.
> 
> i haven't gone over the rest of the math, but that's my biggest concern 
> and it's not that big, since i have a PC1600x.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	"Somebody has to take governments' place, and business
>  	 seems to me to be a logical entity to do it."
>  		-- David Rockefeller
>  		Newsweek International, 1 Feb 1999.
>