| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1332.1 | Need more datums.... | JAWS::COTE | Is the last peeping frog embarrassed? | Tue Apr 26 1988 13:11 | 14 |
| hmmmm.... no THRU on the ESQ-1??? Seems odd. Does it have a "merge"
capability where the THRU and OUT data appear atthe same port?
For such a hot machine that seems like quite an oversight....
Does the Atari have the capability of echoing the data present
at the IN port to the OUT port?
Will The Octopad merge IN and THRU data to the OUT port? If not,
you'll need a merging device in order to take advantage of 2
controllers.
Edd
|
| 1332.2 | I have the same problem | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Tue Apr 26 1988 13:43 | 72 |
| Actually, we have discussed this (remember Edd?). Can't remember
the exact note but it's fairly recent.
You are sorta outa luck. If you have two pieces of equipment that
must go into the sequence (controller) and receive output
from the sequencer, there's no way you can arrange the MIDI cables
that doesn't create a MIDI loop (which I believe is why everything
got merged (the HR-16 probably did that).
You will have to switch the MIDI cable going into ATARI OUT whenever
you want to switch between programming drums and programming keys.
I think this is your best bet:
Playback network
----------------
Atari OUT --> in EPS thru --> in MIDIbass --> in HR-16
Recording network
-----------------
Octapad out --> in Atari
EPS out --> in Atari
Note you need at least one switch in this for Atari IN.
I am also presuming that your Atari can pass things through for
programming the drums. If not it gets much worse:
Octapad out --> in HR-16 --> IN Atari
Note that you now need another switch for the HR-16 IN.
A few suggestions:
1) Very low cost - just switch the plugs when you go from sequencing
drums to sequencing keys.
2) Very low cost - I'm presuming that you are recording your
drums into the Atari, rather than using the HR's sequencer
by itself. If you used the HR's sequencer, you wouldn't
have to do any of this.
3) Low cost - Daddy's junky music is selling a 2 input 4 (?) output
for something like $79. 4 outputs is lpenty, 2 inputs may not
be enough.
2 inputs may not be.
4) Higher cost, but very elegant solution - Someone (Digital Music
Systems??) is selling an all electronic MIDI patch panel called the
MX-8 which can be had for about $325 (I found this out from
Wockin Juan).
This thing has 6 inputs, 8 outputs and has almost every frill
imaginable including merge, filtering, MIDI echo, keyboard split,
almost anything that CAN be done via software is there.
Most important, it remembers something like 50 configurations.
If your planning on growing your system much more, you might as
well bite the bullet and get one of these soon. There's a full
page ad for it in a recent issue of Keyboard magazine (I think
the Thomas Dolby issue had it).
Oh, and by the way, YES, it is a rack mounted unit.
Hope this was understandable. I've had to type it in a tremendous
hurry.
db
|
| 1332.3 | This is really a pervasive problem with MIDI | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Tue Apr 26 1988 13:49 | 19 |
| > hmmmm.... no THRU on the ESQ-1??? Seems odd. Does it have a "merge"
> capability where the THRU and OUT data appear atthe same port?
> For such a hot machine that seems like quite an oversight....
Agreed (in spades).
Also, y'know that long section in the back of the manual about using
the ESQ-1 as a system controller? Sounds wonderful right?
Well, they conveniently chose to ignore one not-so-minor gotcha:
You can't do that unless you solve this problem, OR are willing
to use the ESQ-1 as the sole keyboard controlller.
Oh yeah, the MX-8 *seems* to be able to do the same kind of system
configuration controller stuff that the KX-88 and the ESQ does.
(A configuration can be programmed to send program changes).
Sounds like a pretty hot box. Wish Wockin' Wuan would weview it.
db
|
| 1332.4 | I 'member... | JAWS::COTE | Is the last peeping frog embarrassed? | Tue Apr 26 1988 13:50 | 9 |
| Agreed.
Bite the bullet and buy the box.
In order to have constant use of two controllers (EPS and 8pad)
you'll need a merging device.
Edd (who_with_7_MIDI_devices_operating_11_channels_is_AMAZED_at
the_simplicity_of_his_network)
|
| 1332.5 | Edd, what do you do? | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Tue Apr 26 1988 13:56 | 4 |
| Y'know this is really a pervasive problem with MIDI and I was somewhat
astonished that it hadn't been brought up until now.
db
|
| 1332.6 | I play!! | JAWS::COTE | Is the last peeping frog embarrassed? | Tue Apr 26 1988 14:19 | 47 |
|
What I do...
Mirage Out (master, local OFF)
|
V
HR-16 IN (master clock, NO transmitting
HR-16 OUT MIDI notes, merge OUT and
| THRU)
V
QX-21 IN (slave, echo IN to OUT)
QX-21 OUT
|
V
RX-21 IN (slave, merge THRU to OUT)
RX-21 OUT
|
V
MKS-30 IN
MKS-30 THRU
|
V
TX81Z IN
TX81Z THRU
|
V
DX21 IN
DX21 THRU
|
V
Mirage IN
To play ANY instrument on the network, I simply set the Mirage to
transmit on the appropriate MIDI channel. (I never waste memory
by putting drum data in the sequencer, though I could. I simply
program the drums on their internal sequencers. Since everything
is listening to the same clock.... no biggie).
Playing the Mirage causes quite the trip. Since it is set to LOCAL
OFF, data leaves the MIDI OUT port, takes a journey through the
entire network and then comes back via MIDI IN where it finally
gets to produce a sound.
...is all quite simple, really!
Edd
|
| 1332.7 | Well that's a start | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | The personal 8800 | Tue Apr 26 1988 15:11 | 21 |
|
re: .2
As I suspected. can be cured with my tax refund when it comes
in, or maybe sooner if the EPS memory upgrade is delayed longer.
Re: Edd
Looks rather simple. However, the Atari has about 1 meg memory
and decent-sized sequences take next to nothing so I'll try keeping
the drums in the sequencer for now... but your configuration looks
pretty simple.
Re: Dave
So what's your configuration? Somewhat like Edd's? Is it
relatively simple?
/pjh
|
| 1332.8 | Low Tech solution | AKOV88::EATOND | Where is he when the music stops? | Tue Apr 26 1988 15:12 | 20 |
| Not that anybody asked, but...
What I do to solve this problem is I made a coupla midi switching boxes
using DPDT toggle switches. MIDI only uses pins 4 and 5 (pin 2 for ground, but
doesn't require connection in spec). Works wunnufully.
|
|
+---------------+
| |
--------| (2)< o >(3) |--------
| (switch) |
+---------------+
It can be used either to send data from one of two controllers to a
single slave, or it can split data from one controller to either of two slaves.
Cost: about $7.00 for three midi jacks, DPDT switch, project box, wire and
solder.
Dan
|
| 1332.9 | My system is simple cause there ain't much | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Tue Apr 26 1988 16:49 | 52 |
| Edd's network is simple. That's because only the Mirage is the only
OUT that has to go into the IN of the sequencer. In effect, he
doesn't have the problem that you and I have because of the way
he does things (intelligently ;-))
I think I may stop storing the drum patterns in the ESQ-1 sequencer.
The more and more I think about it the less benefit it seems to
offer.
My network has several configurations: mainly "sequencing" and
"performing". In the sequencing network, the ESQ-1 must be able
to record from the keyboard and drums, and play all the instruments.
In the performing configuration, the RD-300 controls everything.
SEQUENCING
HR-16 OUT ---->
IN ESQ-1 OUT ---> MT-32 --> Reverb --> RD-300 --> HR
RD-300 OUT --->
The HR is set to "no merge"
PERFORMING
RD-300 OUT --> MT-32 --> ESQ-1
However if I was to get an MX-8, I'd probably have something like
this for performing:
MX PERFORMING
RD-300 OUT ----+
\ merged
>----------> MT-32 ---> etc.
/
ESQ-1 OUT ----+
The main point of this is that I could use the ESQ-1 as a system
controller, while still using the RD's keyboard.
Right now, as you can see, I don't have very many MIDI things and
so an MX-8 seems like overkill, especially since I don't use the
MT-32 much. But:
1) I'm planning to get more (who isn't)
2) Having the MX-8 will take me closer to the "unified box"
design that I envision where my rack has only about 3
cords going in or out.
db
|
| 1332.10 | Intelligensia??? Moi??? | JAWS::COTE | Is the last peeping frog embarrassed? | Tue Apr 26 1988 17:14 | 16 |
| The only change I'd make to my network is the addition of a merge
box between the Mirage and the HR-16. This would allow me to also
use the DX as a master.
The topology stays the same whether I'm sequencing or performing.
In a performance situation I'd either (a) not start the clock
or better yet (b) not even include any clock devices (drums, QX).
Storing drum patterns in a sequencer is a good idea if (a) you
have full event editing capabilities (I don't) and you have the
memory to support TONS of events. I can fit Mozart's K.303 (a
pretty long sonata) in my QX, but I can't fit a 3.5 minute pop
song with len_fehskens_programmed drums. Too many notes!!
A *simple* 4/4 pattern will eat up 14 notes per measure.
Edd
|
| 1332.11 | cost/wire cutting ... | MIZZOU::SHERMAN | Baron of Graymatter | Tue Apr 26 1988 17:35 | 34 |
|
I got around having to buy another box by changing the THRU to an OUT on
my QX5. Means I had to get into the box, but it was no big deal (detailed
in another note somewhere). My set-up is:
Right now, I'm using the S-10
S-10 as the main controller. I
can use the CZ-101 with a
| cable swap. And, I use the
v 505 with a cable swap.
Although the 505 is great for
QX5 --------+ working out drum parts, I
| usually dump it to the sequencer
| | so I can add more velocity
v V info. Since the QX5 supports
macros, there's usually no
TX81Z TR-505 problem with memory.
|
v
MV2
|
v
S-10
|
v
CZ-101
Steve
|
| 1332.12 | Ultra simple | IOENG::JWILLIAMS | Zeitgeist Zoology | Tue Apr 26 1988 18:14 | 16 |
| My setup is ultra simple:
MKB-200
|
V
Atari ST
|
V
MT-32
The only thing I can think of that I would want to add is an Octapad,
at which time I will be faced with the same dilemma. I think the
switch is a neat solution, which I'll probably opt for since I don't
play more than one instrument at any given time.
John.
|
| 1332.13 | Not Complex here either | TYFYS::MOLLER | Vegetation: A way of life | Tue Apr 26 1988 18:35 | 36 |
| Mines not to difficult either:
CZ-101 (out)------+
|
Switch --->(in) MMT-8 Sequencer (out)---+
| Midi THRU ON |
MIDI filer (out)--+ |
(in) |
^ |
| |
+-----------(thru) MT-32 (in)<----------------------+
I'm thinking of adding another switch set up to put the CZ-101
in the loop also (I could just go from the Yamaha MIDI filer's
THRU to the CZ-101's IN, but, I'd rather have it selectable,
since I haven't used the CZ-101's sound banks just yet - but plan
to).
I have noticed that it seems to take me quite a while to get
organized these days. All this extra stuff takes some getting used
to & I've been spending more time putzing than I used to. Once
I get a handle on the magic aspects, Things should get more lively.
This set up was arrived at after playing out with my equipment for
2 weeks & it seems to be reliable. I do suggest that anyone that
sets up a network should mark the cords at each end (so you can
tell what you are connecting to what). I use colored tape (available
at Radio Shack) & put 2 colors on each end (like RED/YELLOW on
both ends, then RED/GREEN on the next set & so on) - I do this with
all my other cords too, so as to hold down the confusion level when
setting up quickly & swapping stuff around.
Jens
|
| 1332.15 | Labelling cords is a good idea | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Tue Apr 26 1988 19:16 | 20 |
|
I just fold a piece of packing tape around the cord and give it
a color-neutral label like "MT-32 IN" or "HR-16 OUT".
All my stuff (power cords, audio cables, MIDI cables) are so labelled
and my setup is such that I always use the same cords for the same
purpose each time I setup and break down. In fact, for the vast
majority of cords, I leave one end plugged in when I break the setup
down.
I've found this has saved me a lot of time figuring out where
"this" cord is going or coming from.
It also makes setting up easier because you don't have to figure out
what length cord you need, etc. Also, I believe that nearly anyone
with a basic understanding of MIDI and audio could set my rig up
for me with hardly any instruction.
easier,
db
|
| 1332.16 | There should be a "registry of cord-colors" | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | The personal 8800 | Tue Apr 26 1988 20:41 | 18 |
|
re: .13, .15
Long ago I marked my cables. I always likened it to whoever thinks
up those colors for lobster bouys, you know they all have unique
colors and can tell each other's apart...
As for harnessing, I thought of that, but my setup is so fluid
right now I seem to use everything everywhere. I think what I really
need is a patch bay since I seem to be spending more time behind
the backs of the racks than in front of the keyboards.
Dave, you mentioned "HR-16 MERGE OFF"...I suspect that might be
my original problem...I totally forgot about that.
Ah well.
/pjh
|
| 1332.17 | Not Even Close to a WAN | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | | Tue Apr 26 1988 20:47 | 61 |
| Geez, Edd, how didja know?
Look, fellow MIDIots, when things get hairy you need a MIDI switch.
I get by real fine with an "obsolete" JLCooper MSB-1. It's 8 in
10 out, just has a rotary switch for each output that selects one
of the 8 inputs. That way you can't get two inputs to the same
device at the same time. It has no merge capability. I have so
far found no need for a merge capability. I also use a Roland
MPU-104 (5 in 1 out switch) and MPU-105 (1 in 5 out switchable
thru box).
Anyway, my setup looks like (this is not the exact configuration,
with respect to which synths go to which specific ins and outs of
the switches, but it's "conceptually" accurate):
Sources: Switch Destinations
+----+
| |
MKS-80 out ------->A 1>--------> MKS-80 in
JX-10 out ------->B 2>--------> JX-10 in
J-106 out ------->C 3>--------> J-106 in
CZ-101 out ------->D 4>--------> CZ-101 in
MC-500 out1 ------>E 5>--------> MC-500 in
MPU-104 out ------->F 6>--------> MPU-105 in
MC-500 out2------->G 7>--------> MIDIBass in
spare ------->H 8>--------> spare
| 9>--------> spare
| 10>--------> spare
| |
+----+
MPU-104
+----+
TR-707 out ------->1 |
TR-727 out ------->2 |
TR-909 out ------->3 >--------> Switch In F
Octapad out ------>4 |
spare ------->5 |
+----+
MPU-105
+----+
| 1>--------> TR-707 in
| 2>--------> TR-727 in
Switch out 6 -----> 3>--------> TR-909 in
| 4>--------> SRV-2000.1 in
| 5>--------> SRV-2000.2 in
+----+
Normally, the JX-10 sources the MC-500; the MC-500's "soft thru"
is enabled, and the MC-500 out1 sources all the synths. MC-500
out2 sources the MPU-105. (Out1 sends MIDI channels 1-9; out2 sends
channels 10-16.) I almost never change these switch settings.
Warning to Octapad users - the Octapad "MIDI IN" is *NOT* a MIDI
IN!! It is used *ONLY* to chain two Octapads together.
len.
|
| 1332.19 | Thank you Roland | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Tue Apr 26 1988 20:56 | 7 |
|
re: Len
??????? what the &#$*&#^ do they call it a MIDI in for? It seems
to work for me. I'll play more tonight.
/pjh
|
| 1332.20 | stable for awhile | MDATA::MIYATA | Gaylord K. Miyata | Wed Apr 27 1988 07:50 | 37 |
| Make the investment in a midi switcher now. I don't like mucking with plugs
(like working w/o a patch bay when you have a reasonable multi-track and
board); labelling and/or color coding cords helps, but the midi switcher is
optimum for whatever mode you're working in (sequencing, playback, overdubbing,
performance, etc.).
My configuration is rather complicated; if anyone is interested I can draw it
out sometime. I use 2 switchers, a 360 Systems Midi Patcher (4 in, 8 out)
and a JL Cooper MSB+ (8 in, 8 out). Both are reliable. I started with the
Midi Patcher but had to add the MSB+ primarily because I had more than 8 outs
and (sometimes) more than 4 ins and I did not want to cascade the sound sources
or FXs.
I use a Roland MC-500 sequencer. MC500 MIDI out A goes into the MSB+; MC500
MIDI out B goes into the Midi Patcher. The MC500 is set up to transmit midi
channels 1-8 on MIDI out A and 9-16 on MIDI out B. I wish could arbitrarily
assign MIDI channels to the MIDI outs instead. Does the new MC500 software
do this? Anyone have it or upgrade their MC500? The MC500 is in soft-thru
mode when I'm not playing the controller to sound source paths exclusively.
I also cascade a MSB+ output to a MIDI Patcher input.
My 2 keyboard controllers (MIDIboard, Roland D50) go into the switches (not
directly into the sequencer). The controllers are routed to the sequencer
via the switcher.
The switcher output ports go to sound sources, MIDI FXs, and a JL Cooper
PPS-1 (tape synch). Some of the sound source MIDI outs return to the
switchers for subsequent routing to the sequencer (eg, recording drum machine
parts on the sequencer). Somewhere in there, I'm using the MSB+'s merge.
This mess is facilitated by the "programs" or bindings that the switchers
support. I have separate programs for playing (standalone),
sequencing/MIDI-overdubbing, recording drum machine parts, synching to tape
and overdubbing a sequenced part to tape, etc.
It took awhile to figure out; I started by thinking about the "operational
modes" I needed, then the cabling/routing.
|
| 1332.21 | I suspect that is the case | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Wed Apr 27 1988 12:14 | 31 |
|
re: .-1
There is obviously more to it than I originally suspected.
re: .*
Well I tried two more configurations last night... I guess there
is no way I can get around not having a MIDI switcher. Sure would
beat futzing around with my cables all night. The best I could do
was to essentially set up the EPS as a master controller, but due
to cabling limitations (read: lack of sufficient-length cables)
and hardware limitations (like the ESQ-1's lack of a MIDI THRU and
the Octapad's strange treatment of incoming MIDI data on it's alleged
5-pin IN jack) I guess I'll just bite the big one and get a switcher.
It appears that there are at least three configurations that
make sense for me. Those are: Recording, EPS as master, all other
devices slaved; Recording, Octapad master, key info to HR-16 but
not to anyone else (simple with MIDi channels), and all others slaved
from the Atari (but that requires a merge of MIDI data into the
HR-16), and general performance (both EPS and ESQ available, the
MIDIbass on the ESQ-1's lower split using a mute voice). This doesn't
count playback, either, although I think I could get away with the
first recording configuration for playback. Definitely this would
be easier and more value-added work would be accomplished if I had
a more automatic MIDI patching ability (how's that for DECspeak?).
Ah well, the music store beckons...
/pjh
|
| 1332.22 | retrospect | MDATA::MIYATA | Gaylord K. Miyata | Wed Apr 27 1988 17:46 | 56 |
| Switches and mergers are cheap compared to sound sources, sequencers, etc.
And it really is the backbone and nervous system of your network.The MIDI
accessories may be around longer than some of the more expensive toys you
have. Purchase something that will accomodate your system's growth. Obvious
stuff; it increases productivity. I'd like to know what products you look
into, especially some of the newer products that has been introduced within
the last 2 NAMMs.
Thinking back, I wish I had gotten a larger switch - something of the order
of JL Cooper's 16x16 or whatever it is. Not knowing what new toys (like
switchers, mergers, as well as sound sources, etc) will be available
results in my thinking in terms of M x N solutions, where M=N=16 may be a
safe assumption for now. Only on occasion do I have multiple sources
listening to the same MIDI channel.
This is what I have learned about my usage: I want all of my MIDI equipment
to be accessible through the switch(es); the routing and bindings of switch
ins to outs should also be controlled by the switch. I use more switcher
input ports than outputs - in addition to dedicated controller's MIDI out
and sequencer MIDI outs, I also want the MIDI outs of my sound sources and
effects returning to the switch (via the switch's inputs) for routing to
sequencer, librarian, disk, whatever; and all MIDI synchronizer-type
devices are also coming in and going out of the switch.
There are some limitations with the MSB+ and switches in general (360 Midi
Patcher just does switching - no frills). For example, w.r.t. merging: the
number of channels that can be merged at once and the number of merges that
can be supported simultaneously. This has not been a problem for me, but it
may be a dependency for you. In the longer run, I suspect I may encounter
problems because I run one tree or network with 2 separate switches. 2
separate switches would be ideal for, for example, MIDI load-balancing by
partitioning into two disjoint subnetworks, still controlled by the same
controller(s) and sequencer (assuming the sequencer can xmit all the info
you need for all 16 channels over all MIDI outs or using two sequencers
synched by MIDI). I have seriously considered doing this and would have if
my MC500 had been more cooperative (if I recall, the problem was not having
MIDI clock on both MIDI outs). Since it would have taken awhile to
experiment with such a configuration and since my current configuration
"worked", I punted the effort. I'll probably look into it again when I
design (specify the functional requirements for) my patch bay, which must
provide access to most patchable points on a 20x16x8x2 mixing board,
multitrack, sound sources, FXs, and whatever else I want to be accessible
via the patch bay.
I bring this up because configurations are in forever flux, with momentary
periods of stability. To optimize the maximize the time of stability is
nice.
Keyboard magazine had a good article about MIDI configurations 2+ years
ago. It described a handful of representative configurations from simple to
complex. The complex example integrated stuff that one would probably find
in a well-equipped MIDI-oriented multi-track studio. It could give you a
migration path and model to plan with. I'll look up the issue. If anyone
recalls, the cover was strewn with MIDI cables.
Gaylord
|
| 1332.23 | Good thing I have good credit. | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Wed Apr 27 1988 19:19 | 50 |
| 1332.24 | I gots credit! | JAWS::COTE | Is the last peeping frog embarrassed? | Wed Apr 27 1988 19:32 | 8 |
| >Velocity Cross Swith... looks neat
I guess it does! I just had a bazillion uses for such a whatsis
go through mine head.
You forgot a very imp:}#((}}{{{ortant spec. How many moneys???
Edd
|
| 1332.25 | But I got 20% off on the MIDI cables... | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Wed Apr 27 1988 19:38 | 6 |
|
You're right. I did. I paid $369. which is damn close to list, but
I got it today 'cause I'm probably gonna need it tonight. Someone
could probably do somewhat better down South.
/pjh
|
| 1332.26 | keyboard mag ref | MDATA::MIYATA | Gaylord K. Miyata | Thu Apr 28 1988 05:25 | 9 |
| re: .23
Please do look up that article if you have a chance. Your system
sounds _large_.
Keyboard, Jan. '86, "SYSTEMS planning an integrated setup: you don't alwyas
need what you want", pp. 84 - 94.
Yes, my system needs a patch bay.
|
| 1332.27 | All better now, thank you | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Thu Apr 28 1988 12:39 | 18 |
|
re: .-1 thankyew.
Well. I feel kind of like I died and went to heaven or something.
I *can* make music, I *can* spend more time playing and sequencing
than fiddling around with cords, and I *just might* get a tape into
Commusic V since it seems that a MIDI patcher was exactly the proper
piece of equipment to have.
For the first time in two weeks I actually got something significant
accomplished. I'll review the MX-8 separately from this topic, but,
suffice it to say, putting it in the middle of everything, storing
a general "performance" patch, a "record EPS to Atari" patch, a
"record drums from Octapad" patch, a "play Atari to everybody" patch,
and just *playing* for a change sure makes things easier. And I
still have ports left in the rackmount.
/pjh
|
| 1332.28 | Where? | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | The height of MIDIocrity | Thu Apr 28 1988 12:59 | 6 |
| Glad it worked out.
Could you also tell us WHERE you got it. I was somewhat surprised that
any of the local music stores stock this.
db
|
| 1332.29 | Local to me, I dunno about you | PAULJ::HARRIMAN | That's me | Thu Apr 28 1988 14:21 | 8 |
|
re: db
Advance Music, Burlington VT. Hardly local to you! DMC is an American
company, I don't know who-all down there carries it, it seems pretty
new to the market. If you find a dealer down there let it be known?
/pjh
|