MOTM

I don't yet have a 730 but am interested in one when economics allow. 
 From a purely theoretical standpoint this sounds like very valuable set 
of changes to make.

Dave



Paul Schreiber wrote:
>  
> 
> 
> 
>  > My earlier comment was unclear. The MOTM-730 in fact synchronizes the
>  > TRAILING edges of output pulses rather than the LEADING edges. 
> Therefore,
>  > if multiple outputs are simultaneously used to trigger notes, the
>  > beginning of notes will not be synchronized. For example, if I input 48
>  > clocks per measure into the '730, and look at the the /6 and /3 
> outputs to
>  > get eighth notes and sixteenth notes, the leading edges of the outputs
>  > will be offset from each other (as per the signal output jpg 
> available on
>  > the MOTM website). As synchronizing the "start" of notes rather than the
>  > "end" of notes was important to me, I found this to be a problem. Others
>  > may not. This problem is entirely independent of the setting of the 
> clock
>  > polarity switch. And yes, inverting all 16 outputs would solve that
>  > problem, but then, how to synchronize the "start"? There's no reset to
>  > zero function that would allow the first output pulse from every output
>  > jack to come out in synchronization with the first input pulse.
> 
> a) I had 3 beta testers. No said anything but "It's great!"
> 
> b) the code is contained in a socketed PIC processor. This *might* be able
> to be changed to count 'the other way' and to convert run/stop to run/reset
> to zero.
> 
> Would this help matters any?
> 
> If you had a small flat-bladed screwdriver the upgrade takes 20 seconds. 
> The
> cost would be around $25.
> 
> Paul S.
> 
>