stryd_one

Yeh why not both ;) Thanks Pilo, I will almost certainly give that a shot soon ;D If I can help with testing or whatever just let me know.

Yep those two are going to the wiki very shortly :)

Just a thought... If you don't want a menu etc, why not use a skeleton C app and try this code

Sounds like a good design to me... You'd want to decide before you even start about faders vs motorfaders, as the design will be very different depending on which you go with. You might need a little programming skill to get some of the customisations done too...

Ahhh, wise words! :) The best thing to do would be to read here and the wiki (don't forget the wiki!) and put your ideas forward. Lots of people will give you lots of different advice and then you can decide which is best for you....

Thanks for the inside information ;) I can see you've made an effort to fold those ribbon cables nicely... Are you a desktop technician or a case modder? ;)

Yeh, a very helpful demonstration of CS coding, thanks TK!

FWIW, SMD doesn't bother me much either... Anyone else got 2 cents on that? I know TK prefers MBHP modules to be DIP for ease of use, but it sounds like this package is not too bad... An ADAT IO would be awesome for me too, I don't suppose you'd be interested in sharing those goodies Pilo? :)

Nicely spotted man! I've been looking for something just like that!

Sure, you can get resistive X-Y controls that work just like a pair of pots. http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=5023.0 :)

I'd be interested to find out about those input caps too, that's a good point...

LOL ;D

hehehe I know what you mean mate, I was thinking that to myself too :) I think we spent a great deal of time and effort in attempting to reverse-engineer the working of your existing drivers, instead of just reading the datasheet and making it work like the timing diagrams. The lesson I learned here is that your existing code will help us, but we should get the basic idea in our head first, so that we don't get distracted by the reverse engineering process, and miss the point entirely... IE: Read the datasheet, then write the code....not....Write the code, and then consult TK's code to find out why our code doesnt work, and then check the datasheet, then write some more code ;)

Heya guys, there's been a lot of talk of this lately, if you're interested, there's now a thread at http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=7280.0 dedicated to this topic :)

What're you after mate?

Another thought - the SPI buss could also be cascaded to control switching circuitry and digipots (eg AD5204) for other, related modules like routing and control.

Some other conceptual modules that have been mentioned: optical IO, balanced IO, matrix switching, summing, PSU. A few thoughts off the top of my head to get the ball rolling: I think the 4311 is not really a good idea as it is only available in SMD packaging, for the DIY crowd it's not worth it for the price of extra space on a PCB :) I should note that there is a compatible IC - the Cirrus CS3310-KP, but the 3310 is no longer produced in PDIP, so the -KS variant will not work, it is SOIC. :) Pins can be swapped by changing defines, it's very simple, so that shouldn't be a concern. We would need to decide how many pins we need, which is a matter of whether we need core module to control the hardware mute or the ZCEN pin Personally, I'd say pins and jumpers to hardwire them. That way, it's easy to connect a wire to the pin for hardware control if it is required, but if it's not needed you can solder a bridge in there or just jumper it. I think a dedicated PSU might be a good call here... Noise will be a touchy issue. There are some designs around but they are untested at the moment, although I would imagine that our brethren in Synth DIY would have that taken care of ;) Definitely separate supplies for the sake of noise.

http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=7280.0 :)

Bionix keep in mind that going to digital cabling will reduce cabling noise, but not the kind of noise being discussed in this thread... The thing with going from analog to digital and back, is that there is still an analog stage, and that will still be susceptible to power issues distorting audio :(

Man, is it just me or are 10 people doing the same thing at the same time here? ;) Would anyone be interested in starting "the PGA Thread" and getting together on this?

Nice, that's a handy tool! Thx AC. I must admit that I'm not too sure what bitshifting 0 does.... It just seems to be 0 ?

If that's your concern, maybe you'd do well to spend the cash on some breadboard and wire and practice your soldering technique :)

I might let the organ experts field that one, I'm clueless :( Sorry dude!

http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=6981.msg45101#msg45101 :) Good to hear that it's behaving :) Let us know if you need a hand with the values.

Interesting schem... It's obviously a preset organ, I can see that off the page to the right would have all the multipole preset switches which allow you to switch between the drawbars, and the values in the preset... And those values seem to be a resistance to me - keep in mind all those zig-zag lines are a resistance of some sort... Looking at the attached pic, here's what little sense I think I can make of it: C is where the inbuilt preset resistance is switched in B is where the manual preset resistance is switched in A Is where the drawbars lead to the oscillators I reckon if you measure resistance after point A, your drawbars will be working there, so long as none of the presets are switched in... untitled2.JPG