MB SID ideas/questions

MIDIbox SID
1

Hey all,

I’ve gotten around the SID a bit and (as usual of myself) instantly thought of a thousand and one ideas to make it better. The question is how hard these would be to implement, and if that’s possible at all :slight_smile: And of course - what you guys think of these.

Okay, here’s the meat, beware:

  1. controlling the filter separately from the OSCs - or is that possible already? Imagine playing on your keyboard on midi chan1 and having the filter controlled by a stepseq (MB SEQ :slight_smile: ) or another keyboard…

  2. using aout to output LFOs, WTs, ENVs, keytracking info: for controlling external filters (MBSID->moog!) and stuff

  3. Thorsten, am I crazy? using multiple SIDs in parallel for one voice (yes, I know you can unison them already, but…) - can it be easy to use one core to control for example 8 SIDs at once, with all of them getting the same modulation info (that’s the tradeoff)? Imagine the evil leads this would create. You would have to be able to turn the extra ones off, of course..

Also, you could reuse the filters in a cool way, just imagine:

SID1 Â  Â  SID2 Â  Â  SID3 Â  Â  SID4
 Â | Â  Â Â  Â Â | Â  Â  Â  Â | Â  Â  Â  Â |
filter1->filter2->filter3->filter4-> out

I know I’ve never seen a setup like this in a synth. Wonder how it’d sound… extremely interesting :slight_smile:

  1. easy one - I know I’m going to do this: take the C64 version C and put a patchbay on the grid in the rear. I mean, isn’t that place just MADE for a patchbay? ;D You could e.g. take SID1’s out and put it through SID2, or an analog filter built into the patchbay. Could 0wn.

  2. more complicated ENVs - look at the Alesis Andromeda A6 for example. Don’t tell me the PIC can’t do a few attacks or decays more! :slight_smile:

  3. more a wish than plan until I learn how to h4x0r MIOS - more WTs. More powerful, much much longer WTs: we all know that updating a SID every 50th of a millisecond is where it’s at. People say that’s one of those cool forgotten tricks from the day back, and judging from what FM does (and that’s real near that) I do believe them :smiley:

Sweepable WTs. For the groove sequencer feel.

I do feel the pain of the PICs here - another core would probably be needed for that WT madness, innit?

You could have some WTs pre-made for getting some more sophisticated OSC waveforms. That could be real cool.

  1. is OSC FM doable with SIDs at all? :-[

  2. LFOs that go only 46 Hz? I need to go up to 500 Hz >: ) Are the LFOs in the SID just software, or do they go analog somewhere along the way? (strong guess: not analog)

  3. LFOs: more, more, more waves! :slight_smile:

  4. Mod matrix: as much a wish as a question. Are the modulations just on/off-able or can you set the depth for each crossing?

  5. Control surface: morphs. But you’ll probably tell me to just use a MB 64 and you’ll be right :slight_smile:

  6. Mod matrix: more sources (keytrack, velocity, aftertouch, crap like that) - I guess the diode matrix isn’t end-all and some (all?) of those are already in. A cool mod source would be an analog input or three - e.g. for doing FM  :):):):slight_smile: or using an external LFO or hooking up to a modular or anything!

  7. Mod matrix: more things to modulate. “Filter” probably means cutoff - I’d love resonance in there as well! Perhaps you could put the aout destinations there as well (see point 2)

  8. Are more SID modules at once possible? 8 cores + modules?

edit: broken ascii ::slight_smile:

moved point 13 to 14, added new point 13.

2
  1. controlling the filter separately from the OSCs - or is that possible already? Imagine playing on your keyboard on midi chan1 and having the filter controlled by a stepseq (MB SEQ :slight_smile: ) or another keyboard…

Ok, I’ll answer #1 - yes it is already possible. Filter cuttoff and resonance are CC’s #46 and 47 see:

http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_sid/sid_cc_implementation_chart.txt

Everything in that table responds to CC’s, so just set the sequecer to output CC messages.

Justin

3

http://www.midibox.org/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=midibox_doc;action=display;num=1101049799

4

Ok, I’ll answer #1 - yes it is already possible. Filter cuttoff and resonance are CC’s #46 and 47 see:

http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_sid/sid_cc_implementation_chart.txt

Everything in that table responds to CC’s, so just set the sequecer to output CC messages.

Justin

Hey Justin,

what I meant was note tracking. Hence the two keyboard idea. The majority of midi controller keyboards can’t translate keypresses to another CC. I guess it would go off-tune anyways.

moebius: you’re right, I’m over-enthusiastic. I tried answering these questions myself, searched the forum etc - I shall try harder and post the answers I find in this topic. Over the weekend.

5

In my oppinion this is a typical article from somebody who has gone through the specs of other synthesizers and thinks that I possibly don’t know about such goodies and now could easily implement a superset of all these features. You don’t know what it technically means. Sorry, no offence, but I think that I have to bring you down to the bottom:

  1. note tracking is a minor feature which I will integrate once I’m very sure that no other even more interesting parameter will be programmed anymore.

Sounds strange? Here the reason why I’m always very carefully with new features: check the CC list of MIDIbox SID and you will notice that most CC parameters are allocated. Check the content of the SysEx dump (e.g. in the JSynthLib driver) and you will notice that also there most of the memory is allocated (and I already did a lot of tricks).

Oh, now you possibly come with the suggestion that NRPN should be used instead of CC — no chance! One of my focus was always the capability to control all parameters via external sequencers/MIDI controllers (most of them cannot handle correctly with NRPN), and via Velocity/Aftertouch/Modulation Wheel/Wavetable. The assigned parameter numbers are stored in 7-bit registers, this limits the maximum number of parameters to 128

Next suggestion from your side could be to remove some uninteresting parameters from the CC list to make some new place free for new ones. But this is also nearly impossible, since the internal parameter handling relies on CC parameters. A different implementation would consume much more memory (which means: some nice new functions would possibly never fit into memory anymore)

  1. see my older postings, an independent mapping function for the AOUTs is planned. Currently the outputs of the modulation targets (O123 Pitch/O123 Pulsewidth/Filter) are directly assigned to the AOUTs, this assignment can only be changed in the source code.

Sooner or later I will integrate a solution which allows a re-configuration in runtime (e.g. via CC on a different channel and from the control surface). But this is no job for one or two hours, I think that it will take at least two days. To give you an impression what this means: normaly I don’t have more than one or two evenings in the week to do anything on my MIDIboxes. And there are still so much things I want to do for myself that I really have to priorize tasks!

I think that the current possibility for the 8 AOUTs are already usable for experiments, everything else is “nice-to-have”

  1. the synth engine is very busy, I did my best to put as much as possible into the update cycle, but it still takes ca. 500 uS in worst case to process all runtime states. The engine is called each 819 uS (see MIDIbox SID mainpage), this means in other words that there is no time for a second engine

Now you could say, that I just should remove some features which take too much time (e.g. 2 instead of 6 LFOs). My answer: no, because this makes the basic sound of the MBSID less interesting and it especially makes the soundpatches incompatible.

Something what is in my ToDo list are “Super-Poly, Super-Arpeggiator, Split, Layer, Unisono” modes for the master SID, which then directly controls the slaves. But the implementation won’t be that easy… in the meantime people are already able to do some nice stereo experiments then they just spent more effort on the sequencer side. The functions mentioned before are just for more comfort.

  1. see 1) — they cost entries in the CC list.

But by the way: MIDIbox FM provides a ALDLDSR envelope (see JSynthLib snapshot on the MIDIbox FM page) — here I spent the parameter RAM since only one software-EG is available

  1. did you ever do any experiments with the existing wavetable implementation? Btw.: the update rate of the MBSID wavetable is 1220 Hz, so you can do even more cool sounds than with the slow 50 Hz solution of old C64 sequencers

There are 128 bytes allocated within the patch for the wavetable, there is no way to handle more in parallel (due to the execution time and the high update cycle)

Everything else won’t be discussed before you don’t deliver the first 128 patches for the community :wink:

  1. no

8 ) it’s software and it’s limited by the (already very very — really — incredible high!!! — update frequency of 1220 Hz. This means that one period of a sine curve has ca. 36 sample points. With less it doesn’t really sound like a sine anymore (also 46 Hz already sounds very… uhm… digital)

  1. 2 slots for additional waveforms are free and will be implemented once I find the time… more are not possible, but can be emulated by controlling the waveform selection from a wavetable

  2. typical question from somebody who things that if other synths have a depth pot for each modulation target, MBSID must have the same. Some technical background: I started MIDIbox SID ca. 3 years ago on a PIC16F877 which doesn’t provide a hardware multiplier. Software multiplication takes so much cycles that I had to search for an adequate solution. And the solution was to spent much more LFOs/EGs than common synths and to forward the output values directly to the targets.

The result is the same.

Not exactly, because common synths mostly don’t provide 6 LFOs and two envelopes for a mono voice, they provide seperate depths instead just as a workaround for this limitation. This means also, that there is more live in the sound of MBSID when you just use the existing the modulation possibilities

  1. morphs require a mirror of all parameters — impossible, not enough RAM anymore (see app_defines.h of the MIDIbox SID package)

  2. modmatrix costs a lot of execution time, therefore Aftertouch/Velocity/Modwheel are only assignable to a single target. Using analog inputs is an interesting idea, but I’m not sure if this feature is important enough to disable other functions (see 1 – CC problem)

Btw.: you are always allowed to change the source code for your needs.

Let’s call it software bending (in distance to circuit bending ;-))

  1. Did you ever sweep the resonance of the SID? You won’t notice such a big difference. Build and play with the MIDIbox SID before thinking about such features :wink:

  2. As always I have to define such specs before beginning with the implementation. First I thought that controlling two SIDs from one control surface is sufficient for stereo effects. Then I was possibly in such a volatile temper that I decided the incredible: controlling 4 SIDs from a single PIC, which is doing the sound engine of one SID in parallel! Hard to believe that this works without affecting the realtime capabilities too much. I’m really proud that it works without trouble.

And now you are speaking about controlling 8 SIDs from one master… people never can get enough. No, not with me :wink:

However, you could build two 4*SID systems… this will possibly cost you 50 EUR more, but what are 50 EUR compared to my unpayable sparetime :wink:

Best Regards, Thorsten.

6

Hey Thorsten!

Thanks for the reply. As always, it’s quality reading :slight_smile:

Sorry, no offence, but I think that I have to bring you down to the bottom

What offense? I’m not the kind of person to take offense when someone answers my question, especially as well as you do it :slight_smile:

Interesting stuff with the AOUT, it sounds like the 8 params won’t get old for a very long time :slight_smile:

The 1220Hz wavetable thing sounds just crazy!

Indeed, after you explained it, the modulation matrix seems much more complex than I thought at first.

No 128 patches yet, but I’ll compose this thread into a FAQ and put it on my webpage for everyone. Definitely never enough FAQs. Will keep dumb people like me from posting :stuck_out_tongue:

A few small questions, though:

Keytracking - what I meant was more about tracking oscillators from midi channel 1 notes, filters from midi channel 2 notes. Is that possible? (as in: will I be able to add it to the code?)

You often mentioned the topic of not enough CC parameters. You probably thought of that, but you haven’t said so yet :wink: - using CCs from two midi channels? The less useful features could be on channel 2, and that could be turned off.. for compatibility or anything.

Regarding the multiple SIDs: is a second engine really necessary? What I was asking was if it was simply possible to make two (or more) SIDs listen to the same control data (coming from the PIC) at once - or am I just too newb (yes) with electronics to know that obviously that’s more complicated than that and that the PIC needs to react to the SIDs in some sophisticated ways? :slight_smile:

LFOs: wouldn’t a saw/PW sound just fine even at low sample frequency?

Sweeping resonance: indeed the SID’s filter is just 12 dB/oct (and a very… subtly sounding one at times if you ask me).. maybe it would work well with the parallel SID idea I had in mind, where you’d sweep 4 or 8 or what-ever filters at once.. but since you say it won’t work, oh well :slight_smile:

7

Hi,

Keytracking - what I meant was more about tracking oscillators from midi channel 1 notes, filters from midi channel 2 notes. Is that possible? (as in: will I be able to add it to the code?)

It’s very unusual to control the filter from another MIDI channel, the common way is the use of CCs (like already mentioned by Justin). This has the advantage that only three bytes have to be sent over the MIDI interface. Every sequencer can do that (also MIDIbox SEQ of course ;-))

If you are using Note On messages instead, you would also have to send a Note Off, everything else could lead to problems when another synth is also listening to the second channel.

However, if you really want to do this, you could add following code to SID_MIDI_NoteOn:

       ;; change filter via Note On @ Channel 2
        movf    MIOS_PARAMETER1, W      ; extract channel
        andlw   0x0f
        xorlw   0x01                    ; compare with 1 (= Channel 2)
        bnz     SID_MIDI_NoteOn_NoFilter
SID_MIDI_NoteOn_Filter
        ;; the note number controls the filter cutoff frequency
        movff   MIOS_PARAMETER2, MIOS_PARAMETER1
        movlw   46
        goto    SID_CCIN_Set
SID_MIDI_NoteOn_NoFilter

You often mentioned the topic of not enough CC parameters. You probably thought of that, but you haven’t said so yet :wink: - using CCs from two midi channels? The less useful features could be on channel 2, and that could be turned off.. for compatibility or anything.

It won’t help, because all parameters have to be stored in the SysEx dump structure, and this is also limited.

Regarding the multiple SIDs: is a second engine really necessary? What I was asking was if it was simply possible to make two (or more) SIDs listen to the same control data (coming from the PIC) at once - or am I just too newb (yes) with electronics to know that obviously that’s more complicated than that and that the PIC needs to react to the SIDs in some sophisticated ways? :slight_smile:

you can connect multiple SID modules to one core module, in this case they always listen to the same control data. But the audible effect isn’t really so interesting. If you are having two identical SIDs, then the volume will just be doubled (the oscillators are digital and therefore always output exactly the same waveform).

This option can make sense if you want to switch between 6581 and 8580 because of the different filter characteristics.

But for really interesting (especially fat) sounds, seperate cores are the best option, so that the SID parameters are modulated independent from each other. The result is much more analog-like(especially when the LFOs are in freerunning mode and the finetune/portamento/ENV parameters are slightly different).

Another, very usual method for having fat sounds is the use of external effects, e.g. chorus — the result is similar, sometimes even better (depends on the sounds you are searching)

LFOs: wouldn’t a saw/PW sound just fine even at low sample frequency?

What do you mean exactly? Saw/Pulse are already available as LFO waveform.

Btw.: it is not possible to control the frequency of the LFOs from Note events so that you could use these oscillators as seperate voice. This requires a completely different implementation (and one or two additional PICs ;-))

Best Regards, Thorsten.

8

Hey Thorsten, thanks for the reply again! Thanks for the code, It’s very much appreciated :slight_smile: I’ll experiment with the parallel SIDs, maybe they could sound nicer after all. Good idea with the two types of SIDs.

Yeah, I know the works of detuning and slight mis-shaping of things in analog synths :slight_smile: Lot of experience with VST instruments… Also, post processing is what lots of people forget about while creating sounds. Sometimes the right sound is done more with the effects than the synth itself…

BTW: have you ever tried any vintage fuzz for leads? A friend of mine is going to build a Big Muff for my Yamaha DX11, that should ownerize a bit :slight_smile:

Good tip for all synth players: since my DX11 has NO way of interfacing external effects in a real way, I’m gonna use the MB SID with AOUT: I’ll make it listen to notes, and then put out the envelope to drive the external fuzz/filter/what ever.

SysEx dump: I thought SysEx didn’t put a lenght restriction on those things? ??? Oh well - I guess you’d have to make a completely new data structure for what I’m talking about. Too much work I guess :slight_smile: But the possibility of another 127 knobs to turn sounds tempting… at least to me :wink:

What do you mean exactly? Saw/Pulse are already available as LFO waveform.

Hey,

What I mean is that the Saw/Pulse waveform is much less detailed, and you could probably make the LFO go to much higher frequencies with it sounding well. Why not make one LFO wave (or mode for all the waves) that’ll go up to the max of 1220 Hz, without minding the quality of the wave? Often it’s cool to just have that thing to AM the sound into a gritty buzz… yeah, you can tell I listen to goa trance :wink: You complain about the oscillators at high frequencies sounding digitally, but I bet many people don’t care about that… or even are looking for that! :slight_smile:

FAQ coming up, but it’s monday 1 AM so not right now ;D

9

Hi,

BTW: have you ever tried any vintage fuzz for leads? A friend of mine is going to build a Big Muff for my Yamaha DX11, that should ownerize a bit :slight_smile:

I’ve tried a lot of things :slight_smile: Mostly I’m using Reaktor for realtime Fx processing, the results are far away from that you know of common Fx gear - the possibilities of this modular environment are incredible.

Good tip for all synth players: since my DX11 has NO way of interfacing external effects in a real way, I’m gonna use the MB SID with AOUT: I’ll make it listen to notes, and then put out the envelope to drive the external fuzz/filter/what ever.

this was also in my intention :slight_smile:

SysEx dump: I thought SysEx didn’t put a lenght restriction on those things? ??? Oh well - I guess you’d have to make a completely new data structure for what I’m talking about. Too much work I guess :slight_smile: But the possibility of another 127 knobs to turn sounds tempting… at least to me :wink:

Sure, you can put as much bytes as you want into a SysEx dump, but you also have to consider that the available infrastructure must be adapted as well. Means: the JSynthLib editor, TL’s patch manager, Serge’s SysEx loader, the slave SIDs, etc… a patch converter would have to be written in order to recalculate the checksum… the documentation would have to be overworked, the support effort would be higher due to frequent requests in the troubleshooting section (“why I’m not able to load this patch into my MIDIbox SID anymore…”, “why can i only store 64 patches in the BankStick anymore…”) and not at least it requires a lot of (small) changes on different places in the firmware.

What you are requesting would lead to a lot of tasks for different people, this process could take months until everything is aligned again.

Btw.: thats also the reason why MIDIbox FM is not available for public use yet. I must be very sure that I have considered everything which is possible with the small PIC before I release a version with which other people are working, because each change after an initial release which makes it incompatible will cost three times (or more) the effort.

Hey, What I mean is that the Saw/Pulse waveform is much less detailed, and you could probably make the LFO go to much higher frequencies with it sounding well. Why not make one LFO wave (or mode for all the waves) that’ll go up to the max of 1220 Hz, without minding the quality of the wave? Often it’s cool to just have that thing to AM the sound into a gritty buzz… yeah, you can tell I listen to goa trance :wink: You complain about the oscillators at high frequencies sounding digitally, but I bet many people don’t care about that… or even are looking for that! :slight_smile:

Remember: the waveform will be updated each 819 uS. If the LFO would generate a sawwave with ca. 1220 Hz, the output value would always be the same. If the saw would be set to 610 Hz, you would only see two different values, etc… thats not a saw anymore

However, if you need trashy waveforms, then just use the wavetable sequencer :wink:

Best Regards, Thorsten.

10

Duh.. what I meant the whole time with “Saw” was “square” :-X I gotta get my synth back together, it’s been definitely too long without it! I guess a saw slowly deteriorating into a square wave would still be something to look at, at least for me :wink: I’ll try to mod the code once I’m ready :slight_smile:

Regarding the SysEx dump: wouldn’t making the synth send two dumps, the old-type one and a new-type one (with new extra parameters), solve the compatibility issue? Also, people could choose to just store the “old” stuff in banksticks if they don’t need the extra features for a certain sound :slight_smile: This could e.g. let you store values for external effects modules in the future - right in the memory - very powerful imo.

Regarding the FM - since it’ll have similar abilities to my synth, I’ll tell you what my pains with it are - or rather, what I’d like to be able to change in real time. The most “realtime” way to change parameters in the DX11 is “from the next note”, and sometimes I can change some stuff in real time… but it works in odd ways. Is that a hardware limitation, or can you do better with the MB FM? Of course, I hate how the prototype has only 4 knobs! Someone make a hands-on DX synth already ffs :wink: My idea would be to have the control surface have a dedicated row of buttons on top (big ones!) for quick algo select, and “hold” (tap on off) to change things and then apply after you tap again, e.g. to make a direct transition to a different wave for an op, without having to sweep when you want a drastic change in a very busy sequence from the MB SID :slight_smile:

under that 3 assignable rows of 5 knobs +1 button each on the left + 1 button on the right in each row.

On the top I’d have a list of buttons dedicated for each feature I’ll list later on, each with 3 leds under it. Press the button on the right of a row and a button in the list and a led lights up and the synth selects that function for the row. Maybe position the rows and the list selection in such a way that you could press both buttons with the fingers of one hand.

Why three rows? That’s simple - you could (and you will!) want to change an op’s frequency while changing its volume, then quickly change an lfo’s speed. Or something else of this kind. No time to surf the menues. Sure, you could do that on the MB 64 - but why have two cumbersome boxes, where one is totally “useless” on your desk and the other is big, cumbersome and not even labeled, bar alone customized for the application? Why have two boxes when you can have one? :slight_smile:

Rant mode off :wink:

The extra button on the left would do something special to do with the function.

The list, for me, would go:

–volume - 4 knobs for 4 operators. fifth one for feedback.

–adsr - 4 knobs for adsr. fifth knob selects which operator.

–waveform - 4 knobs for 4 ops. fifth one for fine or porta, you select.

–lfo1 - phase, rate, pitch mod (i guess that’s what pitch d. is? d. for “drive” perhaps?), lfo2 mod, waveform, extra button for sync

–lfo2 - same

–multiplier (is that operator mixing level?) - fifth one does transpose. Transposing the whole voice during a sequence is great!

–osc freq - in my DX 11 you can set the freq of an op to a set value or to keytrack. A set freq is useful as modulation, for growling basses (try 4->3->2->1 4,3,2 set very low on sine).

–osc freq fine - for that great great unison feel :slight_smile:

–wt - do what ever you want :slight_smile:

–user1

–user2

–user3

The “hold” button could double as a “shift” button - for easy access to menues, or for using the “list” buttons with shift to e.g. quickly turn on unison or the arpeg:)

Also, I’d make it readily usable with extra aout modulation things in the patch. For people who’d want e.g. a moog filter to be an integral part of their synth, and want their patches to reflect that. Being able to store info on full modulation of two or three external effects would be great. That’s some incompatibility, I know, but to hell with that… :stuck_out_tongue: It’d be much much more betta this way! I’m sure a lot of people would use this feature.

11

Duh.. what I meant the whole time with “Saw” was “square” :-X I gotta get my synth back together, it’s been definitely too long without it! I guess a saw slowly deteriorating into a square wave would still be something to look at, at least for me :wink: I’ll try to mod the code once I’m ready :slight_smile:

it still won’t really help, because you are not able to sweep the pulse frequency smoothly from ca. 50 Hz to 1220 Hz due to the quantisation caused by the update rate.

Regarding the SysEx dump: wouldn’t making the synth send two dumps, the old-type one and a new-type one (with new extra parameters), solve the compatibility issue? Also, people could choose to just store the “old” stuff in banksticks if they don’t need the extra features for a certain sound :slight_smile: This could e.g. let you store values for external effects modules in the future - right in the memory - very powerful imo.

here the memory limitations (RAM/Flash) will also take place. Please understand that the synth specs grew in an organic way and there are many many things which play a role. To completely know what I mean, you’ve possibly to develop an own synth on a microcontroller :wink:

Btw.: did you know that there are only ca. 20k free for the application itself. These are ca. 10000 PIC instructions. If you are still searching for more mighty synths, then it’s either better to wait for some years once I’ve switched to a more modern micro, or build your dream synth on a PC :wink:

Regarding the FM - since it’ll have similar abilities to my synth, I’ll tell you what my pains with it are - or rather, what I’d like to be able to change in real time. The most “realtime” way to change parameters in the DX11 is “from the next note”, and sometimes I can change some stuff in real time… but it works in odd ways. Is that a hardware limitation, or can you do better with the MB FM?

Only limitation are the OP ADSRs and modulator volume (resp. the modulation index), they will only change with the next note, but this is a OPL3 limitation. Everything else (especially the software engine parameters) react like on an analog synth. This means for example: when you modify an envelope rate/level, changes will take place immediately.

Of course, I hate how the prototype has only 4 knobs!

Thats your problem, I won’t change the control surface anymore :wink:

Btw.: these are encoders, the handling is really fast and from my impression absolutely sufficient. Note also that there are 8 soft-buttons below the LCD and a datawheel.

If you would like to have a different user interface, then you have to program it by yourself.

Hint: there is no free memory anymore for a more complex handling. You possibly need a second PIC only for the control surface.

Why three rows? That’s simple - you could (and you will!) want to change an op’s frequency while changing its volume, then quickly change an lfo’s speed.

Select volume, turn on encoder #1, select Instr, change the frequency with encoder #2, select LFO1, change the speed with encoder #3 — it’s not too hard to learn, the LCD gives you the right hints.

Or something else of this kind. No time to surf the menues. Sure, you could do that on the MB 64 - but why have two cumbersome boxes, where one is totally “useless” on your desk and the other is big, cumbersome and not even labeled, bar alone customized for the application? Why have two boxes when you can have one? :slight_smile:

I must say that I cannot follow your problems :wink:

–multiplier (is that operator mixing level?)

for modulator: harmonic level, for carrier: transpose

Best Regards, Thorsten.

12

Hope that you don’t feel frustrated from all my refusing answers, I only wanted to make my point clear - it’s very hard to make a synth which is sufficient for everybody needs, therefore I’ve to priorize my own needs first (also in respect for the time I can spent for this project)

I’ve read your wishlist for MBFM usage again and can only say, that all this is possible, but just sometimes requires one or two button movements to select the right display view for the soft-buttons/datawheel and the four GP encoders.

How is the status of your FAQ? :slight_smile:

Best Regards, Thorsten.

13

Hey Thorsten,

Hope that you don’t feel frustrated from all my refusing answers,

Frustrated? I got over that after my first year of learning mathematics :wink:

I only wanted to make my point clear

That’s exacty what I wanted :slight_smile:

I’ve read your wishlist for MBFM usage again and can only say, that all this is possible, but just sometimes requires one or two button movements to select the right display view for the soft-buttons/datawheel and the four GP encoders.

If you say so… :slight_smile: I still want more knobs :smiley:

We’ll see how it works out when/if I make an MB FM :stuck_out_tongue:

How is the status of your FAQ? :slight_smile:

Placeholder/skeleton done (for now) - sorry for the wait, being dragged around by real-lifeTM

http://www.salsa.pl/~cheater/MB_FAQ/

Coming up next: I’ll distribute this thread around the FAQ.

If someone wishes to contribute: use the info at the top of the page :slight_smile: This FAQ won’t exist without other people’s contributions. I am solely the maintainer, not one of the big heads :wink:

Man, it took me like an hour to do that in wordpad on my mom’s PC (my own is broken) :slight_smile: can’t wait to get my 'puter working again over the weekend…

14

Hi,

there are already some FAQs in the MIDIbox Wiki (-> http://wiki.midibox.org, I strongly suggest to use this platform, because it guarantees that other people can help you to enhance your work

Best Regards, Thorsten.

15

Hey TK,

I’d use the Midibox Wiki… if I knew how to register? o_0

16

Hi,

you don’t need a special account, just press the edit button

Best Regards, Thorsten.

17

http://www.avishowtech.com/midibox/wiki/index.php/MIDIboxSIDFAQ

Hope the last “question” isn’t too off-topic.

I *do* know it’s taken damn long. But when your friends build a recording studio and let you in, what else can you do than to get busy? :stuck_out_tongue:

TK: I still think LFOs sweepable up to the roof would be great. And longer, sweepable WTs (hell, just listen to the Virus TI on the NAMM demo tape :slight_smile: ). I know I’m stubborn :stuck_out_tongue:

18

OK, another one of my bright :wink: ideas

I was thinking, if you could route an analog input around the mod matrix, I could just connect some nasty analog LFO and i’d be satisfied with my LFO frequency problems. But then I thought: what about the WTs?

So here’s the idea: how about hot-patchable digital input, that’d work just like CV input in modular synths… but in digital? The signals run around the MB SID in digital already, so how about just bringing it out?

Also, it’d spare you some DACs + quantization errors + hassle for when you got a digital source and want to connect it to a digital thingie like the MB SID.

You could make simple external toys, modules, with the PIC and make modular DIGITAL synths. That’d be a first :] Imagine: the MIDIBOX Modular Digital Synthesizer! 8)

I can already think of all the craaaaaaaazy digital logic effects you could route the digital CV info through.

Also, that’s pushing it, but how about making “CV” and “audio” digital stuff the same thing? Both are waves… both are cool stuff. You could take an oscillator and FM another one with it, without any conversion needed. That’s just the most basic idea that pops into my mind, out of a gazillion others.

I believe some analog modulars had audio signals instead of CV, for simplicity of use.

Could S/PDIF be used for this? (just an idea)

I’d imagine knowledgable electronics people would think of a much easier thing to use, though :slight_smile:

19

Some weeks ago I built an option into the firmware which routes 6 analog inputs to the LFOs, selectable as 6th waveform and gated with the LFO rate - this was a nice experiment and possibly it makes sense to bring this into the official version, but making it usable for non-programmers will cost me (at least) twice the effort.

To the other suggestions: who should program all this stuff? I don’t feel addressed, I’m not your personal code generator, and if you would read the other posts in the forum, you would know my current focus.

Especially processing digital streams in parallel to the tasks which are already running in the firmware is nonsense, I’m really frustrated that you haven’t got this yet from my previous answers and don’t want to give any additional comments.

Best Regards, Thorsten.

20

Cheater have you actually built a SID yet?  just curious…

Time to end the endless feature requests and start coding if you have a better way. 

This is not a company who’s goal is pacifying people who want feature X, but a talented engineer/programmer sharing his tinkering with us, and probably now having second thoughts about doing that in the future.

It gets tiring watching the endless stream from people who either have not taken the time to soak up all the info available or have not really actually lifted an iron to build…

All of this talk about PIC DACs for audio etc. shows that nobody is doing their homework before bringing these concepts to the forum.

Let’s talk when you have DIY’ed a working low-jitter clock for these miracle designs (Pilo excluded, he did it!)

No trying to discourage new ideas, just trying to discourage the poor ones that seem to show up over and over like clockwork, forcing someone to waste yet more time to explain over and over why a new slant on the same concept won’t work, when a forum+google search will show more than just a guess at the specifics…

“glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity” - Rush

Sorry for the novel length rant!  I’ll shut up now and go grade my SID chips with the new tester app.

:slight_smile:

SmashTV