Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

Here's someone selling the service manual:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082

Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.

Gordon MM0YEQ

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:
>
> Here's someone selling the service manual:
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> 
> Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> 
 
Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the Poly800, but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker.  So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay (and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit margin on the venture.

How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?


Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
different programs.

Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?

Tiny, I would say. I get ideas like this pitched to me quite regularly. But the 
problem is the amount of time and money required to develop them and then the 
completely unproven market. If there's one thing that developing the HAWK kits 
taught me, it's that it is very hard to make money in the arts! 


Mike




________________________________

From: zoinky420 <zoinky420@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, December 27, 2010 1:13:50 AM
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator

  


--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:
>
> Here's someone selling the service manual:
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> 
> Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> 

Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, 
and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like 
the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the 
Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the 
people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the 
unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the Poly800, 
but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, 
people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, 
driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker.  
So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai 
arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit 
rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay 
(and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit margin 
on the venture.

i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
self build thing. the akai arp IS not the ultimate arp, and 
yes, the oberheim thing crashed, which was heartbreaking when you 
spent so much time programming it/remebering how to program 
it. arps are about knocking up ideas quickly, and it defeated 
that objective completely, lol.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

>
> How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?
> 
> 
> Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
> different programs.
> 
> Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?
> 
> Tiny, I would say. I get ideas like this pitched to me quite regularly. But the 
> problem is the amount of time and money required to develop them and then the 
> completely unproven market. If there's one thing that developing the HAWK kits 
> taught me, it's that it is very hard to make money in the arts! 
> 
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: zoinky420 <zoinky420@...>
> To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, December 27, 2010 1:13:50 AM
> Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator
> 
>   
> 
> 
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@> wrote:
> >
> > Here's someone selling the service manual:
> > 
> > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> > 
> > Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> > 
> 
> Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, 
> and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like 
> the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the 
> Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the 
> people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the 
> unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the Poly800, 
> but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, 
> people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, 
> driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker.  
> So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai 
> arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit 
> rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay 
> (and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit margin 
> on the venture.
>

Don't get me wrong, I am quite interested in bringing out Arpeggiator.

I just think we need to be realistic when talking about the market.

I intend to start work on the arp for the HAWK and have it ready for HAWK 
customers no later than March.

After that, I will probably declare the HAWK project open source and will put 
all of my work up on the hawk800 sourceforge site. Then, it will be up to some 
of the more passionate customers to take my work so far and decide if they want 
to take it any further.

Perhaps then, I will be able to create an arp. And it may look like a real time 
arranger arp. Although I like working on PC related software, I also like 
working with "instruments" and I would love to create an arranger, arpeggiator, 
sequencer that brought electronic expression back into real time so that some of 
the music resembled adlib creation rather than the increasingly mechanised 
product that we see and hear today. Although I very much a lot of that computer 
created/edited stuff, I still like the immediacy of a "musician" making music. 


Mike




________________________________
From: k9k9dog <domgoold@...>
To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, December 28, 2010 4:22:40 PM
Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator

  
i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
self build thing. the akai arp IS not the ultimate arp, and 
yes, the oberheim thing crashed, which was heartbreaking when you 
spent so much time programming it/remebering how to program 
it. arps are about knocking up ideas quickly, and it defeated 
that objective completely, lol.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

>
> How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?
> 
> 
> Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
> different programs.
> 
> Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?
> 
> Tiny, I would say. I get ideas like this pitched to me quite regularly. But the 
>
> problem is the amount of time and money required to develop them and then the 
> completely unproven market. If there's one thing that developing the HAWK kits 

> taught me, it's that it is very hard to make money in the arts! 
> 
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: zoinky420 <zoinky420@...>
> To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, December 27, 2010 1:13:50 AM
> Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@> wrote:
> >
> > Here's someone selling the service manual:
> > 
> > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> > 
> > Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> > 
> 
> Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, 
> and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like 
>
> the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the 
> Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the 
>
> people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the 
> unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the 
>Poly800, 
>
> but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, 
> people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, 
> driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker. 

> So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai 
> arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit 
> rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay 
>
> (and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit 
>margin 
>
> on the venture.
>

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:
>
> How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?
> 
> 
> Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
> different programs.

Yeah and we can get more powerful software synths than the Hawk, too, but people still buy it don't they...

> 
> Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?
> 
> Tiny, I would say. 

Then why are there always scads of bids on Oberheim Cyclones on ebay, and they go for around $300?

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "k9k9dog" <domgoold@...> wrote:
>
> i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
> self build thing. 

there are already suffient software arps, and I think a couple of them are free.  It might be better to build a hardware arp from scratch than try to add a clock circuit to the Akai, but the reason for hacking an existing machine is because it would be way cheaper.  Probably more difficult, but cheaper...  Why didn't Mike just make a new synth rather than the Hawk kit for the Poly?  The answers to that question are the same as they would be for hacking the Akai arp...

MIDIbox SEQ is already out there, being open hardware/firmware:

http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_seq.html


--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@...> wrote:

>
> How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?
> 
> 
> Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
> different programs.
> 
> Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?
> 
> Tiny, I would say. I get ideas like this pitched to me quite regularly. But the 
> problem is the amount of time and money required to develop them and then the 
> completely unproven market. If there's one thing that developing the HAWK kits 
> taught me, it's that it is very hard to make money in the arts! 
> 
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: zoinky420 <zoinky420@...>
> To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, December 27, 2010 1:13:50 AM
> Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator
> 
>   
> 
> 
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@> wrote:
> >
> > Here's someone selling the service manual:
> > 
> > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> > 
> > Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> > 
> 
> Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, 
> and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like 
> the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the 
> Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the 
> people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the 
> unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the Poly800, 
> but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, 
> people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, 
> driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker.  
> So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai 
> arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit 
> rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay 
> (and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit margin 
> on the venture.
>

could get over to the adafruit forums, and fit the hawk 
with a x0xbox sequencer, rewrite the firmware(as a poly-
phonic chord-er, etc etc ;)  )

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "tim.tashpulatov" <tim.tashpulatov@...> wrote:

>
> MIDIbox SEQ is already out there, being open hardware/firmware:
> 
> http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_seq.html
> 
> 
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Michael Hawkins <korgpolyex800@> wrote:
> >
> > How about I just design/build/manufacture a new 1RU arpeggiator?
> > 
> > 
> > Oh hang on, I can do a gazillion things arp-wise on a PC with any number of 
> > different programs.
> > 
> > Or, how big is the market for this 1RU ARP?
> > 
> > Tiny, I would say. I get ideas like this pitched to me quite regularly. But the 
> > problem is the amount of time and money required to develop them and then the 
> > completely unproven market. If there's one thing that developing the HAWK kits 
> > taught me, it's that it is very hard to make money in the arts! 
> > 
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: zoinky420 <zoinky420@>
> > To: korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, December 27, 2010 1:13:50 AM
> > Subject: [korgpolyex] Re: OT: Akai arpeggiator
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here's someone selling the service manual:
> > > 
> > > http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&&item=360298820082
> > > 
> > > Maybe that's got some clues to how it can be adapted.
> > > 
> > 
> > Well I know a lot of people have checked the service manual for an easy hack, 
> > and there isn't any.  It would have to be a major firmware rewrite project like 
> > the Hawk.  And if acheived, it would have to be marketed differently than the 
> > Hawk.  People who buy the Hawk kits are already owners of Poly800s, whereas the 
> > people wanting to buy the clockable Akai Arp would mostly not already own the 
> > unit.  And as far as I can tell the Hawk has not driven up costs of the Poly800, 
> > but if the clock-kit for the Akai arp were sold the same way the Hawk kit is, 
> > people would suddenly flock to ebay to buy the previously obscure Akai Arp, 
> > driving up the price, and that's profit that should be going to the kit maker.  
> > So the thing for the kit designer to do would be to buy up as many cheap Akai 
> > arps as he can and install the kit into them, selling it as an upgraded unit 
> > rather than a kit.  Considering the price the Oberheim Cyclone goes for on ebay 
> > (and it apparently crashes frequently), there would be pretty high profit margin 
> > on the venture.
> >
>

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "tim.tashpulatov" <tim.tashpulatov@...> wrote:
>
> MIDIbox SEQ is already out there, being open hardware/firmware:
> 
> http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_seq.html
>

yeah well all things MIDIbox are awesome

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "zoinky420" <zoinky420@...> wrote:
>
> 
>  add a clock circuit to the Akai,

BTW, does anyone know if any device that will take a sequence fed into its MIDI-In, and spit it back out its MIDI-Out with a MIDI clock signal added to it?  If such a device exists I'd like to get one, and if not I'd encourage someone to design one, as it would be more flexible than adding clock circuits to hardware that don't output clock signals.  I don't know anything about the technical challenges, but maybe it would be easiest if the device had you dial in the tempo and time signature of the sequence you're feeding it?

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, zoinky420 wrote:

> BTW, does anyone know if any device that will take a sequence fed into 
> its MIDI-In, and spit it back out its MIDI-Out with a MIDI clock signal 
> added to it?  If such a device exists I'd like to get one, and if not 
> I'd encourage someone to design one, as it would be more flexible than 
> adding clock circuits to hardware that don't output clock signals.  I 
> don't know anything about the technical challenges, but maybe it would 
> be easiest if the device had you dial in the tempo and time signature of 
> the sequence you're feeding it?
================

i think you're describing a MIDI-merger... two (or more) inputs merged 
into one output. just make sure one of the inputs is a clock.

some sequencers merge a MIDI input with internal clock.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"I made a pilgrimage to save this human race
 	 Never comprehending the race that's long gone by"
 		-- Modern English

On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 21:22 +0000, k9k9dog wrote:
> i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
> self build thing. the akai arp IS not the ultimate arp, and 

That wouldn't be hard to do, really.  I've got a couple of other AVR
projects on the bench at the moment, but maybe by 2011 I'll have time to
look at an arpeggiator.  Or maybe 2012...

I know I asked this before but I can't remember if anyone replied - can
someone give me a good functional description of the Akai arpeggiator?
Does it work - as I suspect - a bit like the normal arpeggiators, with a
transposable sequencer similar to the Poly-800 thrown in as well?

Gordon MM0YEQ

AVR and MIDI go along very well, the TZ81 project is a nice example. In fact, I have hacked mine own gadget in a week, to help me control HAWKed Poly:

http://images57.fotki.com/v283/photos/1/1349988/6744268/176-vi.jpg

Not seen on the photo are couple of rotary encoders, and a pot connected to the board. Turning pot controls VCF Resonance, and one of encoders sets VCF Cutoff when dialed. That's pretty much all its functionality to date; need to reinvent some LCD menus now.

PS/2 connector is for the touchpad salvaged from an old notebook; and there's already support for it in the code, allowing to control any two parameters across X and Y axes... some day.



--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:

>
> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 21:22 +0000, k9k9dog wrote:
> > i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
> > self build thing. the akai arp IS not the ultimate arp, and 
> 
> That wouldn't be hard to do, really.  I've got a couple of other AVR
> projects on the bench at the moment, but maybe by 2011 I'll have time to
> look at an arpeggiator.  Or maybe 2012...

well, it isn't like a keyboard arp, like on a juno.
I REMEMBER(...correct if wrong please), you bash in 
your notes in a step-rest fashion, like on the ex800, 
and then you have a arp speed knob, and a velocity amount 
knob...so it'd be quite similar to what already on the 
korg if you had ...i wrote some notes/wishlist this morning:
(sorry about this folks, bit long, just the once...

EX800 DEC31 2010

hold on a minute...sorry, mind has been on other things, 
and i get the usergroup digest in my mail so...

here are the infos i have about those arpeggiators:
<link>(another time...)
manuals in there, plus photos, etc.

sequencer:i can't remember if it sends out MIDI, 
and i think it programs 
in a note-rest,etc. fashion, ?

so, if it could be MIDI-sync/unsync, and have a velocity 
amount analog pot, well, there you have a akai me20a, 
i think. it just needs to be key-transposable, is all that 
is lacking. (this last must be quite simple to implement?)

now, if you consider note input to this, and remember 
the roland 'note-stack' sequencers, where you enter 
notes in a serial/sequential manner, and can then enter 
the timing values (eg: when gates and rests occur, and 
length of the note), with a ppqn of around 96, should do
(same as a MC202?), then you have quite an interesting 
single memory arpeggiator.

you could really imitate 303/202 features, with a portamento 
on/off, octave jumping, and also velocity levels.

all of this might be possible with existing hawk eeprom...

what you could then do, is have a memory chip, for different 
arp/seq patterns, with a switch somewhere. this would give 
you something approximating a cyclone.

(can't belive a cyclone fetches that much...they were going for 
complete peanuts (like 40quid) a few years ago. like i said, a pain 
to program, but sat very nicely between keyboard and atari, 
and would crash just at the point the atari might, so you could 
recover sometimes when it locked up (true). but then i realised 
how much easier the interactive phrase synthesiser was (IPS), 
in cubase, so i let it go. no regrets.(except i didn't get 300bucks)

so, to sum up, making the most of the sequencer (even having a 
polyphonic mode for it), and with this idiosyncratic note entry 
method (dual mode, eg: one 'as is', and one where you stack notes, 
and then enter gates/rests/etc.   :)     ) should be a priority. 
---------
in my view, the main interest in modding the poly is to get easy 
realtime access to sound parameters, and to have a nice compact 
vintage analog that does most things the synths of that era do, 
so you have a nice vintage sound and action(and the screaming 
atomahawk mod too). oh, so i suppose an increase in memory 
locations/extra banks would eventually be good too (16,000, lol)

if some translation from midi cc to sysex/rpn-nrpn could come into 
play-and if the hardware can handle it-then it could use any usb-midi 
prog'ger to control it.

is there still plenty of room on the eeprom for further developments?



--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Gordon JC Pearce <gordon@...> wrote:

>
> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 21:22 +0000, k9k9dog wrote:
> > i agree..better to devise some software for an arduino MIDI 
> > self build thing. the akai arp IS not the ultimate arp, and 
> 
> That wouldn't be hard to do, really.  I've got a couple of other AVR
> projects on the bench at the moment, but maybe by 2011 I'll have time to
> look at an arpeggiator.  Or maybe 2012...
> 
> I know I asked this before but I can't remember if anyone replied - can
> someone give me a good functional description of the Akai arpeggiator?
> Does it work - as I suspect - a bit like the normal arpeggiators, with a
> transposable sequencer similar to the Poly-800 thrown in as well?
> 
> Gordon MM0YEQ
>

Atom,
I'm pretty sure my MOTU MTP/AV can do that.   


This message sent from an iPhone 2G running Linux, Android and iPhone OS4. 
Bluetooth file transfer, internet tethering and wireless stereo. Full MMS, video camera, MS Office, voice recognition, remote file system access, custom ringtones and audio alerts.
Plus, everything else that Apple refuses to enable so that you'll buy a new (crippled) iPhone.     
Refuse to accept artificial technological limits imposed by corporations for the sole purpose of generating revenue.  
Don't let anyone tell you what you can listen to, or watch, or read, or do with your device. After all, it's YOUR device.  


On Dec 30, 2010, at 11:15 PM, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, zoinky420 wrote:

> BTW, does anyone know if any device that will take a sequence fed into 
> its MIDI-In, and spit it back out its MIDI-Out with a MIDI clock signal 
> added to it? If such a device exists I'd like to get one, and if not 
> I'd encourage someone to design one, as it would be more flexible than 
> adding clock circuits to hardware that don't output clock signals. I 
> don't know anything about the technical challenges, but maybe it would 
> be easiest if the device had you dial in the tempo and time signature of 
> the sequence you're feeding it?
================

i think you're describing a MIDI-merger... two (or more) inputs merged 
into one output. just make sure one of the inputs is a clock.

some sequencers merge a MIDI input with internal clock.

-- 
...atom

________________________
http://atom.smasher.org/
762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
-------------------------------------------------

"I made a pilgrimage to save this human race
Never comprehending the race that's long gone by"
-- Modern English

hmm I have several mergers but never thought of using them that way.  Theoretically it should work but I've never seen it mentioned in any manuals as an option.  I've got a three-processor merger with midi filtering, so I could conceivably merge two different sequences at any tempo to one MIDI out, and control the tempo to both of them by merging a third channel of nothing but clock data?

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, zoinky420 wrote:
> 
> > BTW, does anyone know if any device that will take a sequence fed into 
> > its MIDI-In, and spit it back out its MIDI-Out with a MIDI clock signal 
> > added to it?  If such a device exists I'd like to get one, and if not 
> > I'd encourage someone to design one, as it would be more flexible than 
> > adding clock circuits to hardware that don't output clock signals.  I 
> > don't know anything about the technical challenges, but maybe it would 
> > be easiest if the device had you dial in the tempo and time signature of 
> > the sequence you're feeding it?
> ================
> 
> i think you're describing a MIDI-merger... two (or more) inputs merged 
> into one output. just make sure one of the inputs is a clock.
> 
> some sequencers merge a MIDI input with internal clock.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	"I made a pilgrimage to save this human race
>  	 Never comprehending the race that's long gone by"
>  		-- Modern English
>

On Sun, 2 Jan 2011, zoinky420 wrote:

> hmm I have several mergers but never thought of using them that way. 
> Theoretically it should work but I've never seen it mentioned in any 
> manuals as an option.  I've got a three-processor merger with midi 
> filtering, so I could conceivably merge two different sequences at any 
> tempo to one MIDI out, and control the tempo to both of them by merging 
> a third channel of nothing but clock data?
===============

let us know how it works.

just make sure that one input has a clock that's not filtered, and that 
clock is filtered on any other input(s) that may have clock.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"They have computers, and they may have
 	 other weapons of mass destruction."
 		-- Janet Reno, US Attorney General,
 		27 Feb 1998

On Sunday 02 January 2011, zoinky420 wrote:
> hmm I have several mergers but never thought of using them that way.

Most mergers don't handle real-time data well.  Some do a reasonably good 
job, but you may have to use a designated input (often port 1) for the clock 
source to get a stable timing.

> Theoretically it should work but I've never seen it mentioned in any
> manuals as an option.  I've got a three-processor merger with midi
> filtering, so I could conceivably merge two different sequences at any
> tempo to one MIDI out, and control the tempo to both of them by merging
> a third channel of nothing but clock data?

No, that's not how MIDI clock works.  You'd get the two sequences at their 
original tempo plus an unrelated MIDI clock that is only seen downstream of 
the merger.


Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf rackAttack:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, ASSI <Stromeko@...> wrote:
>
> On Sunday 02 January 2011, zoinky420 wrote:
> > hmm I have several mergers but never thought of using them that way.
> 
> Most mergers don't handle real-time data well.  Some do a reasonably good 
> job, but you may have to use a designated input (often port 1) for the clock 
> source to get a stable timing.

The manual doesn't say anything about having to use a specific input for clock sources, but it does say that if you go overboard with midi data you can get buffer underruns.  

> 
> > Theoretically it should work but I've never seen it mentioned in any
> > manuals as an option.  I've got a three-processor merger with midi
> > filtering, so I could conceivably merge two different sequences at any
> > tempo to one MIDI out, and control the tempo to both of them by merging
> > a third channel of nothing but clock data?
> 
> No, that's not how MIDI clock works.  You'd get the two sequences at their 
> original tempo plus an unrelated MIDI clock that is only seen downstream of 
> the merger.
> 
> 

MIDI clock does control tempo, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

There can be only one MIDI clock stream on one MIDI circuit, it's not  
possible to mix two.

Of course it's possible to mix outputs of musical (e.g. channel) data  
from two sequencers or MIDI players running at two different tempos.  
It has sense in the case when each sequence uses different MIDI  
channels as then there can't be any data confict (like Note On/Off,  
controllers, PB, AT and so). Rather experimental attitudes, those  
polytempi...

I got the same result - polytempi - when I multiplied or divided  
position of notes by some constant different from 1 in old good  
Notator on Atari (= time compression or expansion with MIDI data).  
Then each track got different tempo despite the fact there only one  
clock with main tempo.

Daniel Forro

On 4 Jan 2011, at 3:23 AM, ASSI wrote:

> On Sunday 02 January 2011, zoinky420 wrote:
>> hmm I have several mergers but never thought of using them that way.
>
> Most mergers don't handle real-time data well.  Some do a  
> reasonably good
> job, but you may have to use a designated input (often port 1) for  
> the clock
> source to get a stable timing.
>
>> Theoretically it should work but I've never seen it mentioned in any
>> manuals as an option.  I've got a three-processor merger with midi
>> filtering, so I could conceivably merge two different sequences at  
>> any
>> tempo to one MIDI out, and control the tempo to both of them by  
>> merging
>> a third channel of nothing but clock data?
>
> No, that's not how MIDI clock works.  You'd get the two sequences  
> at their
> original tempo plus an unrelated MIDI clock that is only seen  
> downstream of
> the merger.
>
>
> Achim.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...> wrote:
>
> There can be only one MIDI clock stream on one MIDI circuit, it's not  
> possible to mix two.

Of course, who said anything about mixing clocks?

> 
> Of course it's possible to mix outputs of musical (e.g. channel) data  
> from two sequencers or MIDI players running at two different tempos.  
> It has sense in the case when each sequence uses different MIDI  
> channels as then there can't be any data confict (like Note On/Off,  
> controllers, PB, AT and so). Rather experimental attitudes, those  
> polytempi...
> 
> I got the same result - polytempi - when I multiplied or divided  
> position of notes by some constant different from 1 in old good  
> Notator on Atari (= time compression or expansion with MIDI data).  
> Then each track got different tempo despite the fact there only one  
> clock with main tempo.
> 

So you were not mixing clocks and it didn't work, and therefore Atom Smasher is wrong?

??? No idea what are you talking about.

Looks like some problem in communication. Maybe my wrong non native  
English :-) Sorry to bother, next time I will keep silence.

Daniel Forro

On 4 Jan 2011, at 8:59 PM, zoinky420 wrote:

>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...> wrote:
>>
>> There can be only one MIDI clock stream on one MIDI circuit, it's not
>> possible to mix two.
>
> Of course, who said anything about mixing clocks?
>
>>
>> Of course it's possible to mix outputs of musical (e.g. channel) data
>> from two sequencers or MIDI players running at two different tempos.
>> It has sense in the case when each sequence uses different MIDI
>> channels as then there can't be any data confict (like Note On/Off,
>> controllers, PB, AT and so). Rather experimental attitudes, those
>> polytempi...
>>
>> I got the same result - polytempi - when I multiplied or divided
>> position of notes by some constant different from 1 in old good
>> Notator on Atari (= time compression or expansion with MIDI data).
>> Then each track got different tempo despite the fact there only one
>> clock with main tempo.
>>
>
> So you were not mixing clocks and it didn't work, and therefore  
> Atom Smasher is wrong?

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...> wrote:
>
> ??? No idea what are you talking about.
> 
> Looks like some problem in communication. Maybe my wrong non native  
> English :-) Sorry to bother, next time I will keep silence.
>  

Yeah I think somehow we got our wires crossed.. when they should have been merged.  Or something.  Anyway, I will try to simplify once just in case it helps.  I have a rackmount merger/patchbay that has three processors in it, therefore it can merge three inputs to one output, so what I'd like to do, would be for example to send a sequence on channel 5 to one input, and another sequence to channel 6 to another input, and neither of those sequences would contain a clock signal, so I want to send a third sequence WITH a clock signal to a third input, but on that input I filter out all but the MIDI clock signal, and I use the channel bump function to send the clock to both channels 5 and 6, and merge that input to the same output I'm merging the other two sequences on the other two inputs to.  Then I send that output to a multi-timbral MIDI tone generator/synth to see what it all sounds like.  
 
Again, I don't know if this would work but I don't see why not, and Atom Smasher seemed to think it should work.  Unfortunately my patchbays aren't wired up right now otherwise I would find out if it works rather than just philosophizing about it here...

No problem :-) But still I don't understand what you want to get.

MIDI clock stream is just a part of complex MIDI data on MIDI output  
(containing System and Channel data), and it has nothing to do with  
channels - MIDI clock doesn't include any information about MIDI  
channels. Of course you can mix those three signals as you plan, and  
when both sequences will play from two different sequencers, they can  
even have different tempos. That MIDI clock from the third input will  
become part of mixed MIDI signal on output and can't have any  
influence on channel data - they both will be controlled by their  
respective tempo setting in their respective sequencers from which  
they are transmitted.

So this new added MIDI clock will do nothing in receiving  
multitimbral instrument, but when this instrument has internal  
sequencer, and it will have loaded some music data, you can control  
its tempo (and Start/Stop/Continue) when you set it for receiving  
external MIDI clock. That's all.

At least how I understand it now after your second explanation.... My  
answer is in full agreement with Achim, he wrote the same. You will  
get two sequences in their own tempos, plus unrelated new MIDI clock  
stream. What this MIDI clock stream will do, depends only on the MIDI  
implementation and setting of the receiving unit.

Daniel Forro

On 6 Jan 2011, at 2:56 PM, zoinky420 wrote:

>
>
> --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Forró <dan.for@...> wrote:
>>
>> ??? No idea what are you talking about.
>>
>> Looks like some problem in communication. Maybe my wrong non native
>> English :-) Sorry to bother, next time I will keep silence.
>>
>
> Yeah I think somehow we got our wires crossed.. when they should  
> have been merged.  Or something.  Anyway, I will try to simplify  
> once just in case it helps.  I have a rackmount merger/patchbay  
> that has three processors in it, therefore it can merge three  
> inputs to one output, so what I'd like to do, would be for example  
> to send a sequence on channel 5 to one input, and another sequence  
> to channel 6 to another input, and neither of those sequences would  
> contain a clock signal, so I want to send a third sequence WITH a  
> clock signal to a third input, but on that input I filter out all  
> but the MIDI clock signal, and I use the channel bump function to  
> send the clock to both channels 5 and 6, and merge that input to  
> the same output I'm merging the other two sequences on the other  
> two inputs to.  Then I send that output to a multi-timbral MIDI  
> tone generator/synth to see what it all sounds like.
>
> Again, I don't know if this would work but I don't see why not, and  
> Atom Smasher seemed to think it should work.  Unfortunately my  
> patchbays aren't wired up right now otherwise I would find out if  
> it works rather than just philosophizing about it here...

On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 15:49 +0900, Daniel Forró wrote:

> 
> So this new added MIDI clock will do nothing in receiving  
> multitimbral instrument, but when this instrument has internal  
> sequencer, and it will have loaded some music data, you can control  
> its tempo (and Start/Stop/Continue) when you set it for receiving  
> external MIDI clock. That's all.

Actually, one other thing it would do is control clock-synced LFOs
according to the MIDI clock tempo.

It won't pull the sequences into time with each other, if that's what
the idea is.

Gordon MM0YEQ