MOTM

Hi all,

I have been off all week, so I'm trying to catch up with all of this. It
may be a good ide to read this before you vote...

Mark >... midi clock output for synchronization with an analog sequencer
or old drum machine.

The present CC output could be configured to do this, but there are no
plans to do this as yet. John Blacet makes a little PIC that does just
this job though.

JH >A switch for Low note priority would be a good addition as well.

No plans for this either, sorry. This would require another port on the
midiDAC PIC and one isn't available as it stands. Juergen, could you
tell me why you would like this? For years I struggled with low note
priority on my old synths and I just love new note priority. Remember
the midiDAC has a note stack so it will return to the previous note(s)
if you take of the new low or high note(s). Velocity data is not
remembered in the note stack as I feel this is more intuitive.

>Would you like a dedicated switch to control GLIDE, or is turning the
pot to 0 sufficient for you?

The (optional) switch on the midiDAC2 is designed to turn the glide ON
all the time irrespective of legato playing. Only by turning the glide
time to zero, or by playing non legato, will you be able to turn the
glide off. An OFF switch could be added but it would have to be cludged
on.

I have never used my glide CV output on my prototype... and it works
opposite/differently to the MOTM-820's bypass S-trig input. You could
loose that jack and replace it with a switch if you need panel space.

Moe>Add a front panel switch for  multi/single trigger modes.

Yes, this really should be added. This was not incorporated on the
original and I miss it. But it is fully implemented on the midiDAC2. A
simple SPST switch is needed.

Panel layouts: Be aware that the midiDAC2 PCB is the same size as four
pot Oakley module, ie. same height as a MOTM one. In the mididac2alt.gif
design, the placement of the midi sockets may foul the PCB.

The two LEDS were designed to be board mounted, although they do not
have to be. Lumex types should be able to be soldered directly into the
board if you follow the Schaeffer plan.

OK thats probably put the proverbial spanner in the works. Sorry...

Cheers for now,

Tony

Hi Tony,

> JH >A switch for Low note priority would be a good 
> addition as well. 
> 
> No plans for this either, sorry. This would require 
> another port on the 
> midiDAC PIC and one isn't available as it stands. 
> Juergen, could you 
> tell me why you would like this? For years I struggled 
> with low note 
> priority on my old synths and I just love new note 
> priority. Remember 
> the midiDAC has a note stack so it will return to the 
> previous note(s) 
> if you take of the new low or high note(s). Velocity data 
> is not 
> remembered in the note stack as I feel this is more 
> intuitive. 

I'm used to having 3 options, low, high and last note priority,
from the Kenton Pro-2. In practice, I'm using low note
priority to 70%, high note priority to 29.5% and last
note priority to 0.5%. I'm aware that I could use last note
more often and high note less often, but nothing can replace
low note priority for me.
Why ? Because the low note is the bass note, and at least for
my playing style, this mostly defines the key in which I'm playing,
and I like to use this for transposing a modular + sequencer
setup while playing along on a polysynth.
In practice, it's a little more complicated, and works even better:
With the low note, I'm transposing both, the analoge sequencer / 
modular setup, and the arpeggio on latched chords of the OB-8,
while playing freely along on the same OB-8, without even using
any split mode. This is absolutely crucial for my playing style.
I already have this for the JH-3 + OB-8 setup, but I plan to install
a second such setup with MOTM, a Frostwave FAT controller and
the VL1 for the keyboard. So I'm looking around which affordable 
Midi-CV interface would fit the need. (I'm also thinking about 
alternatives: 
Building a keyboard controler from scratch, with a lot of pots
and sliders that send CVs to the modular. But in that case I would 
loose 
the Midi control to polyphonic synths.)
Another favorite setup of mine for the Pro-2 is using low note
and high note priority at the same time. Send the 2 channels to
different VCOs (or groups of VCOs) and you can do increadible
things with ringmodulators and other nonlinear modulations by
just hitting two keys - learned this on the SH-7.
High note is nice for doubling the top note of polyphonic
playing with solo voice from the modular. With a careful blend
of the polyphonic and the monophonic sound, this doesn't sound
like a different voice, but rather enriches the top note of
the poly sound. OTOH, with a little panorama modulation on
the solo voice, this gets a quite independent character even
though it's just th etop note doubled. 
But really, the part about the bottom note and sequencer control
is the most important for me.

BTW, I have a few more modes, discovered by accident when I
built the CV interface for the CS-50. A top note which
will *not* jump to lower values unless all keys are released
can be very useful for certain things.

What I really don't understand about you guys that are skilled
in uC programming (and this includes all commercial manufacturers
of Midi/CV devices): Once you have a good core to process Midi
and a good circuit with DAC and MUXes, you could build the world's
greatest controller by just adding a number of switches (use another
MUX if you don't have enough ports) for some extra key assign
modes and options, but nobody does it. You all stop at more or less
standard stuff, and different manufacturers have a different set
of standard functions. Why does nobody take a all-in-one approach ?
Where is the "Mother Of All Midi Interfaces" ??

JH.

You mentioned the high note priority of the Pro2 but then follow up with
your special modes. If it was actually high note priority, why would it jump
to lower values? How do they differ? Maybe I'm not reading you correctly.
You are talking about a mono channel right? (not a polyphonic group of CVs?)


The world's greatest MIDI->CV would probably be the world's most expensive.
Very few people are willing to pay for that. Compromise is something that
needs to be assessed all along the product path but most importantly in the
product definition stage. Who says key assign modes are the most useful
parameter to attach to switches? That may be the best use for you, but what
about hundreds of other uses? Why not use patch programs to store little
configuration changes like that, and simply change patches? Many of our
(Encore, Kenton, JKJ, Doepfer,  etc) CV boxes have that. You can then
configure things anyway you want to and change them with a panel operation
or from MIDI.

We all contribute to the "cause" with this little feature or that little
feature, but it takes time. Think about MY competition at the time the
Expressionist was released. What MIDI-CV boxes were all 16bits? How about
FLASHROM upgradeable through MIDI? Shoot, how many synthesizers were FLASH
upgradeable?? Not many. Now it's common, but when I did it, there were few
examples in our industry.

Things get better...look at computers, cell phones, etc. Keep asking for
feature and eventually you might see them.

Tony Karavidas
Encore Electronics

http://www.EncoreElectronics.com

Designers of "The best MIDI to CV converter on the planet." -Keyboard Oct.
1997

> BTW, I have a few more modes, discovered by accident when I
> built the CV interface for the CS-50. A top note which
> will *not* jump to lower values unless all keys are released
> can be very useful for certain things.
>
> What I really don't understand about you guys that are skilled
> in uC programming (and this includes all commercial manufacturers
> of Midi/CV devices): Once you have a good core to process Midi
> and a good circuit with DAC and MUXes, you could build the world's
> greatest controller by just adding a number of switches (use another
> MUX if you don't have enough ports) for some extra key assign
> modes and options, but nobody does it. You all stop at more or less
> standard stuff, and different manufacturers have a different set
> of standard functions. Why does nobody take a all-in-one approach ?
> Where is the "Mother Of All Midi Interfaces" ??
>
> JH.

JH said:
>>>
BTW, I have a few more modes, discovered by accident when I
built the CV interface for the CS-50. A top note which
will *not* jump to lower values unless all keys are released
can be very useful for certain things.
>>>

Then Tony said: 
>>> 
You mentioned the high note priority of the Pro2 but then follow up 
with your special modes. If it was actually high note priority, why 
would it jump to lower values? How do they differ? Maybe I'm not 
reading you correctly.
<<<

Wasn't JH talking about the ability to run mono synth lines on top of 
poly synth lines from the same kbd?

If you are playing a top line melody and holding chords lower, you 
would not want the mono high note priority to jump to the previous 
note in the stack when you release it, as long as you have those left 
hand chord notes still down.

On the other hand, true classic low note priority ALWAYS plays the 
lowest note held down on the keyboard at any time. This seems to act 
differently than last note priority in some cases. I notice the 
difference most often when I am playing fast lines, and I nudge the 
wrong key slightly. I end up with no note playing. Seems like the 
last note played/revert to note stack algo can get confused more 
easily than the play-lowest-no-matter-what algo.

I'm not necessarily speaking specifically about the Expressionist, 
BTW. I notice this problem the worst on my Chroma's mono keyboard 
modes. Even supposedly High or Low priority algos can  get fooled 
into playing nothing, even when keys are held down.

But since I have your ear Tony, and we are talking about key assign 
modes <insert big grin>, how's my circular assign and other key 
assign modes coming on the new Expressionist update?

LOL!

Moe

A blasphemous idea that I want to report it here as well:
Why don't we use regular 1/4 stereo jacks for the midi connections?
We just need to connect three wires for each plug and making and using custom cables wouldn't be too much a problem I think.
Enrico Italy

In a message dated 10/29/01 6:08:33 PM, endiendi@... writes:

<< Why don't we use regular 1/4 stereo jacks for the midi connections? >>

Some professional equipment uses 3-pin XLR connectors for MIDI.  I wish 
everything did!

Ivan

Well, if you drill your own panel, you can install any connecter you 
like.

Moe

>>>>
<< Why don't we use regular 1/4 stereo jacks for the midi 
connections? >>

Some professional equipment uses 3-pin XLR connectors for MIDI.  I 
wish 
everything did!
<<<<

Hi Tony, and Tony, and MOTM list,

I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes here. I think I've posted more
than once that I really like my Kenton Pro-2, and I got excellent
troubleshooting by email from Kenton as well. So, don't take it
as complaint. (The only Midi interfaces I ever complained about
come from a company that starts with "D" and ends with "öpfer".)
I haven't any experience with an Encore interface yet.

> You mentioned the high note priority of the Pro2 but then follow up 
with 
> your special modes. If it was actually high note priority, why would 
it 
jump
> to lower values? How do they differ? Maybe I'm not reading you 
correctly. 
> You are talking about a mono channel right? (not a polyphonic group 
of 
CVs?)

This was only an example that there are other useful monophonic modes,
as an addition to the necessary standard high/low/last priority modes.
This example I mentioned came from an attempt to get ordinary high
and low note priority monophonic CVs out of the 4 polyphonic CVs
of a Yamaha CS-50. For those who are interested, the circuits for
this are online at

http://home.debitel.net/user/jhaible/jh_pm_interface_part1.ps
and
http://home.debitel.net/user/jhaible/jh_pm_interface_part2.ps
and
http://home.debitel.net/user/jhaible/jh_pm_interface_part3.ps
and
http://home.debitel.net/user/jhaible/jh_pm_interface_part4.ps

Don't be frightened - this should be easy in software, when your
input is a Midi stream. With the four linear V/Hz CVs of a
CS-50 it needs some tweaking to get V/Oct, and a gate retrigger
option derived from CV steps.

What I found is that it didn't exactly work as I intended.
When I play a 4-voice-chord on the CS-50, the High Note CV
will also go to the high note. But if I release the top
note of the chord, the Voice isn's assigned on the CS-50
anymore, but the CV for this voice is still valid (no new
value assigned), so my High Note CV still holds the previous
value. 
While this is not what I *always* want, I found that it can be quite
usefull as an option. Ordinary Hing Note Priority would
jump back to the highes remaining note - even if this is 
a bass note I'm just holding to control another synthesizer
(over the Low Note CV output, of course.) So with ordinary
High Note Priority I have to play strictly legato if I want to
prevent my melody line from temporarily glitching down to
another held note. With the "sustained High Note Mode" which
I created by accident, this problem does not occur.
(Of course *now* I must temporarily release *all* keys when
I want the melody to step down again - there is no free lunch
here.)

Please understand that this is just one other option I find usefull,
to show that the three standard modes are not all there is.

And here we are at my next argument: As each of these modes has
its own drawbacks, I want to switch between them on the fly.
No menues here - either you have switches, or it's next to useless.
As every uses will have other priorities, your idea of software
defined switch functions makes sense. As long as there are 
enough of them. Ideally, each switch should also have a jack for a
remote footswitch. 

> The world's greatest MIDI->CV would probably be the world's most
expensive.

I see that providing a lot of switches and jacks is more of a problem
for the manufacturer of a complete product with enclosure and all the
mechanical hardware. I guess one switch + jack combination + pcb space
+ MUX channel + front panel space adds 3 Dollars costs if its minijacks
and quite a bit more if its MOTM grade 1/4" jacks - take this x4 for
additional cost for the end user. This *does* sum up to a certain
amount when you add 10 such switch / jack channels, no doubt.
BUT my initial mail was directed at "the other" Tony who is basically
offering a pcb and firmware and not a self contained box. (Apart
from the current activities to integrate it to MOTM.)
And *here*, the additional costs should really be low. A mux and a
multipin connector and 5cm**2 increased pcb space doesn't cost that
much (oh, and pull up resistors (;->) ), and the end user could
decide how many switches he wants to connect.

I'm aware that we're talking about two very different products
here. In case of the MidiDac, my whish was for the standard
low priority mode, and my whish for *all* manufacturers was to
think bigger than they did so far - there such a lot of usefull
functions, and (even with the valid cost argument), forgive me,
but Midi Controllers still look more like a part of a DX-7
than like part of a Modular system from their user interfaces.
The Modular user expects switches and jacks, not menues.


> Very few people are willing to pay for that. Compromise is something 
that 
> needs to be assessed all along the product path but most importantly 
in 
the
> product definition stage. Who says key assign modes are the most 
useful 
> parameter to attach to switches? That may be the best use for you, 
but 
what
> about hundreds of other uses? 

Very true. For polyphony, I favor the Oberheim FVS key assigner (I 
think 
the Kenton Pro-4 comes close to that, but has it really all of the
Oberheim's possibilities? And can I switch them on the fly ?). But
I would wholehartedly encourage a manufacturer to also include the
nice Unison/Share Modes from the Korg Mono/Poly and the Roland JP-6.
I think the polyphonic models are already in a price range where
you think twice before you buy them, so a product with more features
will have a certain advantage on the market.
I have the impression that today's Midi Interfaces are just that:
*interfaces* - you set them up and hopefully forget them when they
do their job - but they *could* be a human interface to interact
during the performance as well. I don't have a specific manufacturer
in mind, but you see things like this: Interfaces where certain
outputs can be used *either* for controllers *or* for polyphonic
CVs. This looks quite flexible on first sight, but if you want to
play in polyphonic mode and then switch to monophonic or duophonic
mode for solo playing, the now disabled extra outputs are not free
for modulations - you would have to change connections on a patchbay
- hardly possible in the midst of a performance.


> Why not use patch programs to store little
> configuration changes like that, and simply change patches? Many of 
our 
> (Encore, Kenton, JKJ, Doepfer,  etc) CV boxes have that. You can then
> configure things anyway you want to and change them with a panel 
operation 
> or from MIDI.

I have no experience with the newer and bigger boxes. So far, the Pro-2
is what I have. I've only checked specs of the polyphonic boxes, not
actuall yplayed them. So be patient with me if the following is 
implemented 
already. This switching of patches requires the following:

(1) All the desired modes must be implemented of course - I can
    onl yswitch between what is already there.
(2) Switching from one patch to another must work seamlessly, in
    the midst of playing, while notes are being held. I play a chord,
    and while I'm holding it, I decide that for the next keystroke
    I'll split the polyphony into a duophonic upper / lower group,
    or into an usison/share mode, or from Emu's reassign mode
    mode to a cycle mode, and so on. 

This has become a long mail, especially as it started from a simple
question about adding a low note priority mode to a monophonic 
little interface. I hope it gives some food for thought. I'm not
qualified to help define new Midi/CV interfaces. Just spoilt from
the possibilities of modular synths, and dreaming of a Interface
that comes with a similar "parallel options - immediate access"
spirit. (So far, I'm also doing some key assign stuff with the
modular in combination with my Kenton Pro-2: Keyboard splits
done with Comparators and Sample&Hold's, or with the Serge-inspired
Analogue Shift Register that helps to create polyphonic chords
from a stream of monophonic notes.)

JH.

Sure you're qualified to help define new Midi/CV interfaces! Everyone on
this list is qualified!!! It's all of you that offer suggestions for
improvements or new features that drive the process. "We" filter them and
make them into a manageable set of features, but you're definately part of
the process.

I have a list of things to do on the Expressionist which will make it an
even better product. Some of them were thought up by me, and others by
current customers. (Yes Dave, I know you're still waiting!) :)

Unfortunately, these little companies of ours don't always have the benefit
of multiple engineers, so it's very difficult to multitask old product
support with new product development. That is why the JP8MK and
Expressionist updates have been basically shelved. I started work on a set
of Expressionist features several months ago and I can tell you it's going
to be even cooler with more LFO and waveshapes and more fun stuff. (One guy
has some of this update already)

Keep the suggestions coming. You might see your feature in there. Do it with
all manufacturers. They do listen. I was complaining to Tivo about some
feature that was missing and they added it last year. I'm sure it wasn't
because I was the only one complaining, but I participated in a group that
was vocal enough for them to consider the possibility.

Tony



> -----Original Message-----
> From: jhaible@... [mailto:jhaible@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 2:55 AM
> To: tony@...
> Cc: oakley@...; motm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [motm] mididac 2 panel

clip...

> This has become a long mail, especially as it started from a simple
> question about adding a low note priority mode to a monophonic
> little interface. I hope it gives some food for thought. I'm not
> qualified to help define new Midi/CV interfaces. Just spoilt from
> the possibilities of modular synths, and dreaming of a Interface
> that comes with a similar "parallel options - immediate access"
> spirit. (So far, I'm also doing some key assign stuff with the
> modular in combination with my Kenton Pro-2: Keyboard splits
> done with Comparators and Sample&Hold's, or with the Serge-inspired
> Analogue Shift Register that helps to create polyphonic chords
> from a stream of monophonic notes.)
>
> JH.

>I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes here.

Not at all Juergen. What you say makes perfect sense and its always
useful to have other people's opinions on this. You are using the
midi-CV convertor as musical instrument in itself. For me its merely a
link between the keyboard and synth. Much of the clever stuff I'll do in
Cubase's own logic editor.

I'm relatively new to this midi-cv lark, heck, I don't even write the
code. But I just wanted something to replace the appalling Paia midi2cv8
that I had. Maybe I'll get some of things implemented if Trevor and I
decide to do a midiDAC3.

The original midiDAC and midiDAC2 are basically the same, it just the
PCB issue was different. But the original one offered so many different
options of this and that it got people confused. So I removed virtually
all the mode switches on the issue 2. Sometimes simpler is best. The
tbDAC is a simpler version still, but all use the same PIC.

All the best,

Tony