stryd_one

True, Razmo is well knowledged up on these things too. Let's say the three of you make one hell of a team :D

Oh cool I thought I'd missed something hehehe Yeh I'm using ADAT for the extra channels and aux send/returns, and for output of the submix buses to a Gina24 for recording to the PC... I'd be screwed if not for b*hringer, I think the next desk up that handles all that with all of the ddx's features costs like 5 times as much :/ Gutted that they've been discontinued... I really wonder why...

??? Maybe if you're not using external ADDA?

Ohhh OK! *light goes on* Wow that's one ugly MF midi implementation! I'm sorry man I've been assuming that the sysex thing you mentioned in that other thread was separate to this and you were just sending CC's here. I've been giving you some bad advice. I have to admit that I was really starting to wonder why you were making things so complex, I'm glad that I assumed I was confused ;) I'll give it some more thought.... I think you're on the right track mate. It would be cool if I could get a copy of that XLS... Have you looked at the Midibox UC?

How'd you go with this? did you get to swap the hardware and see if it replicates the fault?

Translation: Blah blah blah I'm a freakin genius ;) I mean, when you look at it, it's sooo simple - but the fact is, that in 20+ years, nobody else thought of doing it. Yay Wilba!

Hmm not necessarily... Let me demonstrate the difference: Scaling: Min = 0, max = 16 for example In=0 Out=0 In=1 Out=0 In=2 Out=0 ... In=8 Out=1 In=9 Out=1 ... In=16 Out=2 In=17 Out=2 ... In=24 Out=3 ... In=32 Out=4 ... In=127 Out=16 Limiting: Min = 0, max = 16 for example In=0 Out=0 In=1 Out=1 In=2 Out=2 ... In=8 Out=8 In=9 Out=9 ... In=16 Out=16 In=17 Out=16 ... In=24 Out=16 ... In=32 Out=16 ... In=127 Out=16 Whether the 'In' value comes from a variable which is altered by an encoder, or is the direct result of ADC from a pot, makes no difference. Whether you're limiting or scaling has a great deal of difference with respect to the application though...I think that maybe you should take a step back, and figure out what you're trying to do exactly.. My method would still work. Is there supposed to be a pattern there or is it just arbitrary? Sounds like bankstick territory...

Sorry bud I have been meaning to reply to this... Life is hectic in strydland right now. First off, I should clarify... That's limiting, not scaling... Is that what you want to do? Or did you want to stick with the original idea of having a min and max? Anyway... As with most things, there's more than one way to do this... Personally, I would do something like this: You use three pairs of variables. These would be K1min, K1max, K2min, K2max, K3min, K3max. When you move K1, it should set these variables as required. When you move K2,3 or 4, it always does the same thing: calls a function which scales the value according to the preloaded min and max, and sends it. Nice and simple :)

Et voila MC Protocol Mappings ;) I had to change your ** to !! because the asterisks are used as the bold tag in the wiki... BTW, that Oo converter already exists! My apologies for forgetting it, I linked to it in my page but I forgot that I'd done that... Iannz DokuWiki macro a review here.

If you could save it as a word doc and attach it to a PM I'll take care of the rest... I'm sure that I could make a script for Oo if there are enough people here using it... Would be much more appropriate to use OSS. Anyone want me to take a go at this?

Everyone is always a newbie compared to somebody :D

LMAO! Oh my signature :) Hehehe yeh he's classic! When I heard that "we're eating noise" and saw him acting it out, I just lost the plot man, that whole skit had me in stitches :D (I get the feeling you might know this already but it's from the 2003 Melbourne Comedy Fest video... pretty funny stuff!!)

LOL Yeh a friend of mine who is a fashion designer and I were having a chat a few weeks back about the inherent beauty that seems to spring from designs where you take a blindly pragmatic stance... It's as though ignoring form and considering only function, breeds form of it's own... Very zen ;) Ahh space... Where low visibility means no light at all and everything else would boil your bones faster than you can send a status byte :o They don't bother with low light on those things, it's all built for being lit up bright as heck... I see it's in blue and yellow which confirms my memory :) Yeh that was an accident for me too, mobile artillery is not my strong point. I came across a declassified order form for the knobs I got, which are from the B-52, and it referenced another which was for the abrams... I never did find the related switch MS number >:( Anyway here's a pic of my muse. It's too big to post here so it's a URL: http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/060821-f-2907c-272.jpg Again, beauty springing from practicality. It looks like the bridge of the freakin death star :D Hahaha I own a copy of that movie... Too much nostalgia, I couldn't help myself! "Fully automatic... Colt 45.... PLAY DOUGH!" I was thinking about the reg/green thing for you, and had a quick read up on the photoreceptors, and in short: Use red if you don't have to compete with brighter lights nearby, and green if you do.

Only if your SID looks like this: MMMM..... Resonance... ;D

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fleety That one?

You got it dude. I did a double take at that too heheheh It's called a one-wire wired-AND CAN bus... google has the goss, but this is a pretty good summary IMO http://www.dcd.pl/ashow.php?page=can-protocol says: You can probably see how this is done with the diodes and the line attached to 5V...

Ahh lots of stuff there to chat about :) Before I get stuck into it, do you know more about the cause of your colour blindness? The best solution will depend on which type you got... Who'd have thought that DIY audio would involve such things as adaptations accounting for colourblindness in low light situations ;D BTW... I think the M1 Abrams would probably be a good thing to model from... I'll grab some pics for ya.. Edit: I think this pic says it all:

Thanks for compiling that info man :) You can use my VBScript to convert your doc tables into doku tables: http://www.midibox.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=stryd_one_word2doku Basically, just take a copy of your finished word doc, copy the script code into a new macro, run it, and your word doc will become text that you can copy and paste into the wiki. If you need a hand let me know, or you can attach the word doc to a PM and I'll take care of it for you :)

See that's just like you Wilba... The most powerful analog synth ever isn't enough, you had to make it so damn sexy too. ;D It was so hard not to tell people stuff about this thing as you built it... I just wanted to post pics and go "Holy cow look at that thing!!!!" It's just so impressive!

Yep!! Hahaha how the hell did you spot that?! I think you might have spent too much time with that thing man ;D

Thanks Toby :) Do you mind if I put a copy on the wiki?

That's awesome, thanks TK! I must admit that I was a little disappointed that the scale was global, I figured it might have been some restriction of the PICs performance, but if not, I'd love to see per-pattern scales!

Give it a try mate... See if you get an upload request at power-on...

No! *Pulls out the light sabre*

OK now we're in my field - military aircraft ;D If you want the juice on this stuff, there are communities online who do DIY cockpits for flight sims and they're the mega gurus... But I'll do what I can... I'll try to keep it brief for now cause I could go on for ages... First: A question - Define Low Light Visibility :) Tell me a bit about the application, the layout of this instruments, other instruments you might want to work with, etc... Unless you're in bright white light, the best visibility is always a f'n bright white light ;D See how his smile stands out? Now: a ramble.... As for fatigue you can break it down pretty easy: Blue/Yellow is bad, Red/Green is good. Bright blue is most fatiguing and f*@$ your night vision, so if you look at your blue P3 you might have trouble looking at the green LCD on your MBSID or whatever afterwards... Anyone who's ever stared into an HR824's power LED knows what I mean. Ouch. Blind. Yellow is similar, but not to such an extent. Really old aircraft had a dim yellowy-orange or red filtered light on nearly everything, but then they were the only thing available ;) Yellow is in a safe area of the spectrum, but it's also a very small area of the spectrum, so you need a lot of it, and our eyes are sensitive to it.. Red and to a lesser extent green won't screw your night vision, and IIRC green is less visible from a distance at night or something (irrelevant) and I think it gives better depth perception and edge recognition and is less fatiguing than red... Green is not all that friendly to your night vision... if it is very dim it's not bad, but at medium to high brightness it is not so hot. In a club or something or if a PC video monitor is there, there's little point in this, of course. As far as keeping it visible, contrast is gonna be the trick. Current mil and commercial stuff is all luminescent which might be the 'white' lettering on grey you've seen... it's actually that creamy 'glow in the dark' colour :) The end result at night is that the panel is just 'not there', and all the important stuff glows. (That 'important stuff' always feels like 'not enough stuff' when you're on instruments at night...it's like...WTF did everything go? hehehe) But it costs a freaking bomb of course. Just a sideline note, actual panel labelling has been pretty much phased out in all new designs, everything goes on backlit switches and LCD/touchscreens now. $40 a switch, not likely for me ;) As for the blue panelled MiGs, I have no idea what those crazy ruskies are up to, but I suspect (due to the bright blue colour) that it's a contrast thing again, designed to help you single out the instruments in daylight, and then disappear in the dark. Some older western aircraft have had relatively bright colours inbetween the instruments as well.. I've been in a caribou with sky blue like that... But the instruments in that panel are still black with luminescent labeling. As far as older designs go, naval greenrooms use a white/cream/light grey panel with black lettering, and aircraft use black with white; the areas are lit in green and red respectively. As well as colour, texture is pretty important. I'm all about a matte finish, especially on the panel itself, because it stops reflections blinding you. It's a bitch to find in switches and knobs of course ;) So yeh... You have to think about the colour of the environmental lighting, colours and textures of other gear, how much lighting is on your gear, if the CS lighting/control position is advantageous (IE LED's behind the line of sight to the knob will highlight the knob), is there a big shiny bright blue LED lit synth next to it, is there a PC screen there, ... blah blah blah... I'll see what you have to say and then give you some more direct advice (as opposed to random info) if you like... Meantime you might like to visit http://www.dscc.dla.mil/ it's a milspec library. Not light reading, it's downright unpleasant, but informative This graph of our colour sensitivity gives a hint of why all the night vis stuff is like it is: The dashed line is our monochrome night vis. Wikipedia has some goods on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_light#Spectral_colors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purkinje_effect <--- I didn't know it had a name! hehehehe Recommended reading! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_(vision) I think I might have to split this topic too hahahaha