Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2012-03-07 by c_janot
Hello, I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-) So If someone cand help me... Thank you, Christophe
2012-03-07 by PeWe
\ufffdHello,
I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-)
So If someone cand help me...
Thank you,
Christophe
2012-03-07 by Do It Yourself Synth
Good idea ;-) The only problem is I do not own an XPander myself. I'm just planning to create a new DIY synth project. The synth for this project will be one of : - Emulator II (but I can't find some PROMs) - Synthex (Maybe the 'simplest' to do) - XPander So, I need these pictures to validate the schematics and some components values. You know everything now. Christophe
2012-03-07 by Do It Yourself Synth
Which SDIY list do you have in mind ? About MatrixSynth, this is a bit too early for the details ;-)
2012-03-07 by matrix
Which SDIY list do you have in mind ?
About MatrixSynth, this is a bit too early for the details ;-)
2012-04-02 by tyrosine
Please tell me you're making a 24-voice clone. --- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "c_janot" <cjanot@...> wrote:
> > Hello, > > I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-) > > So If someone cand help me... > > Thank you, > > Christophe >
2012-04-02 by Omar
Please tell me you're making a 24-voice clone.
--- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "c_janot" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-)
>
> So If someone cand help me...
>
> Thank you,
>
> Christophe
>
2012-04-02 by Do It Yourself Synth
My first goal is to build a 'basic' 6 voices clone. Theorically, after studying the schematic, it seems that hardware support up to 24 voices (4 voices boards) is here. But I don't know if the firmware would support this. The second problem with a 24 voices system is the cost and the availability for 24 CEM3372 & CEM3374 ! There is still a lot of job to do. I almost finished to reproduce the schematics I found in the service manual. But there is a lot of debug to do on them and I need photos since there is some strange things on the service manual drawings. And finally, I will support more recent VFD displays. One more thing, the six voices won't be soldered on the voices board but they will be individually plugged into the voices board. So if CEM chips becomes too hard to find, it will be possible to replace these boards with new one with different filters and/or oscillators.
2012-04-02 by Do It Yourself Synth
please tell me you're trying to re-write the OS as well!
I'm adding my wish list again:
* VCO 2 -> VCO1 sync (white noise is only available on VCO2. So being able to use VCO2 as the sync master and use white noise as the sync master lends to some amazing tone and timbre coloration of the slave oscillator. the ESQ is amazing at this)
* Edit Recall!!!! (for the love of god please!!!)
* Individual volume control of waveforms on each VCO (I know, it's probably a stretch)
* Increased patch memory
* Modulation Routing page :):)
Those are my top wishesOn Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:17 PM, tyrosine <nocontext@...> wrote:Please tell me you're making a 24-voice clone.
--- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "c_janot" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-)
>
> So If someone cand help me...
>
> Thank you,
>
> Christophe
>
2012-04-02 by Tony Cappellini
Nothing about the OS for now since I do not have an Xpander/Matrix for now ;-) So : I had to build my own toy first ;-)Edit/Recall : Pure OS functionnality, but pfuuhh ;-)Individual volume control for each waveform : It may require a LOT OF mods on the voice schematics. And in the OS…Increased patch memory : I do not precisely analyze how are done the addresses allocation, but I suspect it will be very hard to do since the first half of the addresses space is shared with 24Kb of RAM and multiple devices (display, less, I/O, …)Modulation Routing Page : …So you will have to be very, very, very, very, very …. patient ;-)
2012-04-02 by Omar Torres
ah ok, I didn't realize noise was just a separate sound source being mixed with VCO1/2. So yea, adding VCO2 -> VCO1 sync would not have the results I'm looking for without the modifications you mentioned. -omar --- sent from iPhone
On Apr 2, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Do It Yourself Synth <cjanot@...> wrote: > Nothing about the OS for now since I do not have an Xpander/Matrix for now ;-) So : I had to build my own toy first ;-) > > > About VCO and noise, I do not understand. When I'm looking at schematics, the noise is just mixed with VCO1 and VCO2 just before the VCF. There is no direct link between the noise generator and VCO2. In order to use the white noise as a sync input, a few modifications are necessaries on each voices. But the OS had to be modified too. > > Edit/Recall : Pure OS functionnality, but pfuuhh ;-) > > Individual volume control for each waveform : It may require a LOT OF mods on the voice schematics. And in the OS… > > Increased patch memory : I do not precisely analyze how are done the addresses allocation, but I suspect it will be very hard to do since the first half of the addresses space is shared with 24Kb of RAM and multiple devices (display, less, I/O, …) > > Modulation Routing Page : … > > So you will have to be very, very, very, very, very …. patient ;-) > > Kris > > Le 3 avr. 2012 à 00:11, Omar a écrit : > >> >> please tell me you're trying to re-write the OS as well! >> >> I'm adding my wish list again: >> >> * VCO 2 -> VCO1 sync (white noise is only available on VCO2. So being able to use VCO2 as the sync master and use white noise as the sync master lends to some amazing tone and timbre coloration of the slave oscillator. the ESQ is amazing at this) >> >> * Edit Recall!!!! (for the love of god please!!!) >> >> * Individual volume control of waveforms on each VCO (I know, it's probably a stretch) >> >> * Increased patch memory >> >> * Modulation Routing page :):) >> >> >> Those are my top wishes >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:17 PM, tyrosine <nocontext@...> wrote: >> >> Please tell me you're making a 24-voice clone. >> >> >> >> --- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "c_janot" <cjanot@...> wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > I'm looking for very large pictures of the processor board and the voice board of an XPander. I found a lots of pictures on the web and in this group, but I need very detailled images of XPander's boards. I only need pictures on the components side, but solder side will be great too ;-) >> > >> > So If someone cand help me... >> > >> > Thank you, >> > >> > Christophe >> > >> >> >> >> > >
2012-04-03 by Jeremy Smith
Tony Cappellini wrote:
>
>
>
> If any of you are **really serious** about re-writing the Xpander OS,
> I think I know someone who has the original source code (you really
> gotta luv 6809 assembly)
> and would probably be interested in contacting someone who is
> committed to the cause and has lots of time on their hands.
Hi,
I run a decompiler company and my software can reverse-engineer any
assembly code into C.
http://www.decompiler.org/
I could put your friend's comments into defined labels, then run the
Xpander ROM through it,. The result is C code with variable and function
names.
Of course I'll do this for free as I love my Xpander. :-)
Cheers,
Jeremy.2012-04-03 by Do It Yourself Synth
Hi, I just go to your website, but unfortunately, you do not seem to support 6809 processors right ? Kris Le 3 avr. 2012 à 03:10, Jeremy Smith a écrit :
> Tony Cappellini wrote: > >> >> >> >> If any of you are **really serious** about re-writing the Xpander OS, >> I think I know someone who has the original source code (you really >> gotta luv 6809 assembly) >> and would probably be interested in contacting someone who is >> committed to the cause and has lots of time on their hands. > > Hi, > > I run a decompiler company and my software can reverse-engineer any > assembly code into C. > > http://www.decompiler.org/ > > I could put your friend's comments into defined labels, then run the > Xpander ROM through it,. The result is C code with variable and function > names. > > Of course I'll do this for free as I love my Xpander. :-) > > Cheers, > > Jeremy. > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
2012-04-03 by John Pallister
@Kris, If he already supports the 6502 then the 6809 won't take him long to implement (if he hasn't already). @Jeremy, If Tony's friend could be persuaded to divulge the source code, we wouldn't need to decompile it; it has to be hand-coded assembly language, so turning it into C code is unlikely to help, I would've thought… I suppose you'd get "structured" assembly language, but then you'd have to feed any modifications back through a C compiler, which would be unlikely to produce machine code of the same density. But I'm just guessing here, so I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Personally, I think re-implementing it in a 6809 Forth would be the best basis for future work. Or replacing the entire CPU with a Raspberry Pi (http://www.raspberrypi.org/). ;) I have looked at 6809 emulators and suchlike in the past in order to start reverse-engineering the Xpander OS, but the day job has kept me too busy to make much progress. Now my Xpander is on a ship heading towards me here in Blighty and my day job project is nearly done, so I'm hoping to get into this again later this year. @Tony, You've mentioned your friend before, although I can't find the reference. By "committed to the cause", do you mean "prepared to spend money"? How might we demonstrate our commitment to his satisfaction? Cheers, John :^P-- John Pallister john@... john@...
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 08:58, Do It Yourself Synth wrote: > Hi, > > I just go to your website, but unfortunately, you do not seem to support 6809 processors right ? > > Kris > > Le 3 avr. 2012 à 03:10, Jeremy Smith a écrit : > > > Tony Cappellini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If any of you are **really serious** about re-writing the Xpander OS, > > > I think I know someone who has the original source code (you really > > > gotta luv 6809 assembly) > > > and would probably be interested in contacting someone who is > > > committed to the cause and has lots of time on their hands. > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I run a decompiler company and my software can reverse-engineer any > > assembly code into C. > > > > http://www.decompiler.org/ > > > > I could put your friend's comments into defined labels, then run the > > Xpander ROM through it,. The result is C code with variable and function > > names. > > > > Of course I'll do this for free as I love my Xpander. :-) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Jeremy. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
2012-04-03 by Tony Cappellini
2012-04-03 by Jeremy Smith
>@Jeremy, > >If Tony's friend could be persuaded to divulge the source code, we wouldn't need to decompile it; it has to be hand-coded assembly language, so turning it into C code is unlikely to help, I would've thought\u2026 I suppose you'd get "structured" assembly language, but then you'd have to feed any modifications back through a C compiler, which would be unlikely to produce machine code of the same density. But I'm just guessing here, so I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. > > The decompiler is just for figuring out how code works, rather than recompilable C. Yes, it is 'structured' with loops, and no registers, etc. The whole point is to see the program at a higher level, but with far less effort than doing it by hand. Say, 2 weeks instead of 2 months. Cheers, Jeremy.
2012-04-03 by John Pallister
Hi Tony, Nobody's saying it would be easy to develop a new version of the Xpander OS, but it would certainly be much easier if there was a version of the source code to start with. Is your friend looking to form a small team to develop a new Xpander OS as a commercial product, like the Europa upgrade (which had a hardware and software component, and therefore would be a much bigger deal than a straight OS update)? If not, could he be persuaded to donate the source code to the Xpander user community (i.e. this mailing list)? Your allusions to the Xpander source code are very tantalising. There are people who would be interested in working with the source code if it became available; what exactly are your friend's criteria for releasing it? Cheers, John :^P
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:07, Tony Cappellini wrote: > > > > You've mentioned your friend before, although I can't find the reference. By >>"committed to the cause", do you mean "prepared to spend money"? > > A project like this is easily going to take 1 person more than a year, even if > they know 6809 assembly very well. > > For those who know the Jupiter-6, the Europa upgrade took something like 3-5 years before it was finished. Two people worked on the project initially, but I believe it was eventually finished by 1 guy. > > Finding the right people to see this project to its completion isn't going to be easy.
2012-04-03 by John Pallister
Hi Jeremy, Sorry, I may have jumped to the wrong conclusion there. Thanks for the clarification. Structured assembly language would be very useful. Does your decompiler handle 6809 already? It would be fun to run it against the OS binaries we already have, and start with the I/O addresses to get an initial idea of the complexity of the firmware. Cheers, John :^P
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:26, Jeremy Smith wrote: > > > > @Jeremy, > > > > If Tony's friend could be persuaded to divulge the source code, we wouldn't need to decompile it; it has to be hand-coded assembly language, so turning it into C code is unlikely to help, I would've thought… I suppose you'd get "structured" assembly language, but then you'd have to feed any modifications back through a C compiler, which would be unlikely to produce machine code of the same density. But I'm just guessing here, so I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. > The decompiler is just for figuring out how code works, rather than > recompilable C. > > Yes, it is 'structured' with loops, and no registers, etc. > > The whole point is to see the program at a higher level, but with far > less effort than doing it by hand. Say, 2 weeks instead of 2 months. > > Cheers, > > Jeremy. > >
2012-04-03 by Tobbe Bergman
Hi Tony,
Nobody's saying it would be easy to develop a new version of the Xpander OS, but it would certainly be much easier if there was a version of the source code to start with.
Is your friend looking to form a small team to develop a new Xpander OS as a commercial product, like the Europa upgrade (which had a hardware and software component, and therefore would be a much bigger deal than a straight OS update)? If not, could he be persuaded to donate the source code to the Xpander user community (i.e. this mailing list)?
Your allusions to the Xpander source code are very tantalising. There are people who would be interested in working with the source code if it became available; what exactly are your friend's criteria for releasing it?
Cheers,
John :^P
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:07, Tony Cappellini wrote:
>
> > > You've mentioned your friend before, although I can't find the reference. By >>"committed to the cause", do you mean "prepared to spend money"?
>
> A project like this is easily going to take 1 person more than a year, even if
> they know 6809 assembly very well.
>
> For those who know the Jupiter-6, the Europa upgrade took something like 3-5 years before it was finished. Two people worked on the project initially, but I believe it was eventually finished by 1 guy.
>
> Finding the right people to see this project to its completion isn't going to be easy.
2012-04-03 by John Pallister
Hi Tobbe, The Europa upgrade is for your Roland Jupiter 6: http://www.synthcom.com/Europa/europaFaq.html As for your strange (but cool) tuning sounds, I'd call that a feature rather than a bug. ;) I don't know why it started doing that, but it does raise the issue of OS versions matching/requiring specific circuit board revisions. Perhaps you have a particularly early/late board version? Other than that, some slight corruption of the EPROM containing the firmware is the only other possibility I can think of offhand. Cheers, John :^P
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:47, Tobbe Bergman wrote: > > > Sorry for intruding but I was wondering what the Europa Upgrade was ? > > Ever since I upgrade to the latest software ( Which I Found here http://www.synthi.se/oberheim ) I have been having strange sounds when I am tuning the VCF's > > http://youtu.be/Q1U4FTyNTlI > > Cheers / Tobbe > > 2012/4/3 John Pallister <john@... (mailto:john@synchromesh.com)> > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > Nobody's saying it would be easy to develop a new version of the Xpander OS, but it would certainly be much easier if there was a version of the source code to start with. > > > > Is your friend looking to form a small team to develop a new Xpander OS as a commercial product, like the Europa upgrade (which had a hardware and software component, and therefore would be a much bigger deal than a straight OS update)? If not, could he be persuaded to donate the source code to the Xpander user community (i.e. this mailing list)? > > > > Your allusions to the Xpander source code are very tantalising. There are people who would be interested in working with the source code if it became available; what exactly are your friend's criteria for releasing it? > > > > Cheers, > > > > John :^P > > > > On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:07, Tony Cappellini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You've mentioned your friend before, although I can't find the reference. By >>"committed to the cause", do you mean "prepared to spend money"? > > > > > > A project like this is easily going to take 1 person more than a year, even if > > > they know 6809 assembly very well. > > > > > > For those who know the Jupiter-6, the Europa upgrade took something like 3-5 years before it was finished. Two people worked on the project initially, but I believe it was eventually finished by 1 guy. > > > > > > Finding the right people to see this project to its completion isn't going to be easy. > >
2012-04-03 by Tobbe Bergman
Hi Tobbe,
The Europa upgrade is for your Roland Jupiter 6: http://www.synthcom.com/Europa/europaFaq.html
As for your strange (but cool) tuning sounds, I'd call that a feature rather than a bug. ;) I don't know why it started doing that, but it does raise the issue of OS versions matching/requiring specific circuit board revisions. Perhaps you have a particularly early/late board version? Other than that, some slight corruption of the EPROM containing the firmware is the only other possibility I can think of offhand.
Cheers,
John :^P> 2012/4/3 John Pallister <john@... (mailto:john@...)>
On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:47, Tobbe Bergman wrote:
>
>
> Sorry for intruding but I was wondering what the Europa Upgrade was ?
>
> Ever since I upgrade to the latest software ( Which I Found here http://www.synthi.se/oberheim ) I have been having strange sounds when I am tuning the VCF's
>;
> http://youtu.be/Q1U4FTyNTlI
>
> Cheers / Tobbe
>
> >
> > Hi Tony,
> >
> > Nobody's saying it would be easy to develop a new version of the Xpander OS, but it would certainly be much easier if there was a version of the source code to start with.
> >
> > Is your friend looking to form a small team to develop a new Xpander OS as a commercial product, like the Europa upgrade (which had a hardware and software component, and therefore would be a much bigger deal than a straight OS update)? If not, could he be persuaded to donate the source code to the Xpander user community (i.e. this mailing list)?
> >
> > Your allusions to the Xpander source code are very tantalising. There are people who would be interested in working with the source code if it became available; what exactly are your friend's criteria for releasing it?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John :^P
> >
> > On Tuesday, 3 April 2012 at 15:07, Tony Cappellini wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > > You've mentioned your friend before, although I can't find the reference. By >>"committed to the cause", do you mean "prepared to spend money"?
> > >
> > > A project like this is easily going to take 1 person more than a year, even if
> > > they know 6809 assembly very well.
> > >
> > > For those who know the Jupiter-6, the Europa upgrade took something like 3-5 years before it was finished. Two people worked on the project initially, but I believe it was eventually finished by 1 guy.
> > >
> > > Finding the right people to see this project to its completion isn't going to be easy.
>
>