daemons_ca

The real reason why they make it possible, and dont protest is the competition they're getting from Atmel these days. They want to encourrage people to use PICs... giving a bunch away over all is promotion to them. If Atmel was not as strong, they'd impose strict limits to their sample program. I'm not saying this out of thin air either... My buddy who has been dealing with them for the past 10 years is well placed to understand how they work. He's the one that told me Atmel was eating up their market share. Marc

The real reason why they make it possible, and dont protest is the competition they're getting from Atmel these days. They want to encourrage people to use PICs... giving a bunch away over all is promotion to them. If Atmel was not as strong, they'd impose strict limits to their sample program. I'm not saying this out of thin air either... My buddy who has been dealing with them for the past 10 years is well placed to understand how they work. He's the one that told me Atmel was eating up their market share. Marc

Thats just the thing... :) There is. ..or it might be a filter effect.. what do I know. :-/ But it was originally supposed to have like the D-beam. Btw.. I am working on a design of a MidiBox D-beam and my concept will work! (dammit!) Marc

I know this is an old thread but.. I just needed to comment. JMJ's lazer harp didnt work. I know from a very reputable source... my brother has worked with him on his Lyon concert (Houston/Lyon album). The main problem was crosstalk between each receiver... It was fixed to get it working for note triggering, but the velocity never worked. It looked damn good though. And the gloves were for better reflexion of the lazer.. not to protect his hands since the lazer was not strong enough for that. The beams were wide, and therefore not as powerful. Marc

I did mention that in my original post... I can't reinvent Midi. Of course there will be latentcies... I'm going from 8 x 31250bps to 1 x 31250bps I'd have the same problem as everyone using an 8 to 1 Merger has. I asked a friend who does pic programming and he suggested I make a dedicated program for it instead, and I would have less chances of errors. ...and since I have a 16F877 here I guess I'll start with understanding the MIDImerger code first. :) The circuit is already designed. I'll try to make it into a gif or jpg and post it here. Marc

very funny. Thats a waste of PICs. Plus the nightmare of getting 8 pics to talk to each other is not worth the effort. Marc

Hi, I searched the forum but didn't find anything specific. What I need is an 8 (or 9) to 1 midi merger. I'm pretty sure the 16F877 is fast enough for it, but my question is this... can MIOS do this, with some modifications? My circuit design would be pretty much what MIDImerger is, except I would use all the Port A inputs. It would have NO LCD... or any need for controls. It would do one job, and one job only: Merge Midi data to one output. Even the input/output MIDI status leds would be handled in hardware using hex buffers/inverters. If MIOS can't handle it I'll have to write my own code, which will take well.. alot longer :( Since thats all the PIC would be doing running at full speed, I'm wondering if it would be possible to use more inputs (yes, being greedy, I know). If ram buffers would be a good idea, I was thinking of using an external 8kx8 ram module but that would limit the midi inputs since I would need the PIC I/Os to interface with the ram module. I know I could use serial ram, but that would mean more processing and possibly reducing the efficiency with more midi inputs, so why bother. I've been gathering parts to make a Midibox64 and I have almost everything to make one (except the time and work area.. Lol ) but with the new gear I recently aquired, a Midi merger is very much of a need at the moment. Before someone brings up the latentcy issue, this merger would be used mostly for Midi outs of rack modules and non-controller devices. All 9 inputs are not expected to be used at the _exact_ same time. If it can handle any two Midi INs at once, it would already be doing a great job in my mind since the output is limited to a single MIDI bandwith (31250bps). Also, if someone would like to work on this project with me I'd welcome the help. Marc Newbie to this forum.