Razmo

Hi again... everyone :) Thorsten have uploaded the MP#s now, so they can be found here: http://www.midibox.org/users/razmo/SID_KICK_DEMO.mp3 http://www.midibox.org/users/razmo/SID_SNARE_DEMO.mp3 http://www.midibox.org/users/razmo/SID_SNARE_DEMO2.mp3 Remember that the snares use 3 oscillators, and the bassdrums 1. All use the filter. Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! The files have been sent now... hope you recieved them :) Regards, Jess.

Hey Thorsten!? :) Have you ever thought about making a drum-engine solely for the MBFM!? ... Making drums with FM is really awesome!... In fact I would say that it's better than normal subtractive synthesis methods. Amp envelopes of Yamaha's FM chips are logarithmic in nature, and the amount of possible metallic timbres possible makes FM very cool for drumsounds if you just know how to make them... just a thought... I'm not aware of what parameters on an Yamaha FM chip that is actually modifiable using PIC envelopes anf LFOs and what is just internal hardware that cannot be changed... do you have any spec-datasheets on your FM chip? ... I could use A dedicated drum-box, and I think that maybe a dedicated one for your MBFM could make something really cool... if not an interest of yours, I might take up the coding of it myself. Regards, Jess.

To Stryd: Yeah! The Rack Attack is a wonderful machine... I know that now! :'( I sold mine some time ago, because it works in a KIT fashion... I've always been used to selecting between an arsenal of sampled drumsounds... always finding KITs to be limmiting. What I really need is a machine that will be more easy to program, and more taylored agains specific drums... in other words: a drumkit that will allow quick parameter changing in an easy engine... much like what Thorsten want with his SID drumkit. The Rack Attack is MUCH more flexible, but when you choose a kit, there is not much to tweak unless you dive into the grand arsenal of parameters... which is not very musically creative for me. fast and intuitive... that's me :) In fact I like the aproach of the Novation Drumstation, Elektron Machine-drum or the Jomox Airbase 99... All of these are specificly geared towards tweaking the drumsounds fast, and adjusting them on the fly... if I had the money, I'd go for the Machine drum, and for cheap, the Drumstation... But I think I'll eventually get an Airbase since it has REAL analogue sounds on it. So... my view on the one-osc. version of the SID drum engine is, that if only ONE oscillator becomes available for a sound, then I'll most probably not use the engine at all, because it's too limitting. If the 3osc theroy is used, I'd be willingly creating a lot of kits for it for everyone here at the forum ;D Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten... I will mail you the mp3's then... email addy? :) Please note that the MP3's are first-time quick makes... they could be made much better by using more time on them, but they give a good view of the possibilities of SID in drumsounds, when you use more than one oscillator :) And about my generalisation of drumtracks... well... you're right ;D .. I'm a typpical boom-tchh-boom-tchh kind of musician... surely overlapping drums are necessary... it will just be up to the programmer to time it.... When I mentioned two tracks, i'm refering to the fact that Thorsten wrote that one core can hold one engine, but control two SID modules... which mean that you'd have two SIDs with Drum engines... that's two tracks if 3oscs is used per SID. 6 if used with single osc. Regards, Jess.

Alrighty then! :o ... I just took a three oscillator snare with SID, and I'm amazed! :D ... It just sound awesome compared to one oscillator! ... I've made two MP3's now ; one with bassdrums and one with snaredrums... If anyone are interrested in listening, just say so... I'm certain, that if I was doing the engine, I'd make it a two-track/2 SID solution... the sound quality is just much much better this way... I found that one oscillator doing noise, and two doing a triangle detuned one semitone (to give it a more unpitched quality) gives a rather good snaresound... I also applied a fast envelope to the triangles pitch (like the bassdrum, with fast curve), and that certainly give a lot of extra punch! ... also, no envelopes of the SID were used, so it's dead-on punchy and timing is rock solid. 8) Also, I used the filter with both BP and HP enabled, doing a sweep to thin out the noise with time... very useable! Regards, Jess.

Well... I'm still fiddling with the Snaredrum sound... It's really a pain in the ... I do not believe that there is any way around it without the use of the wavetable... In fact I believe that a Clap sound is rather easy to do with the wavetable, just doing a rapid change between noise and triangle... in fact this is also the bestway to make a 1osc snaredrum, and after listening to a few SID tunes, I can hear that this is also the common way to do snaredrums. Nothing more than Noise/triangle alternation fast, and with a decay on the amp envelope. The sound could though get better by the use of the filter. I tried the filter a bit, and if both BP and HP are enabled I found to get the best results. A little bit of pitch bend in the beginning also adds to the realism, just not too much or it'll start sopunding more like a tom. I'm beginning to get the feeling, that maybe it would be a good idear to implement a feature where you can choose if the drum-engine should use 1osc per drumsoundm, or if people like it; three per drumsound. This will leave us with just two tracks per drumtrack, but it will give much better sounds (more oscillators, and the crucial use of the ring modulation and syncronization !!!)... als, the filter can then be on every drumsound playing, as drumsounds rarely overlap. Think about a typpical drumtrak: Bassdrum and open hihats are almost always playing at different times (offbeat hihats). so these could go on the same channel, and also a few closed hihats... nothing needs to be overlapped here. Then all we need more to get the general dance type rythm is the snaredrum wich could be on the other channel, as this should sound at the same time as the bassdrum. There would be plenty of free space when the snaredrum is not playing more other drumsound/efects to accompany the groove. Personally I think I would go for the two-track solution in all situations. Better (way better!) sounds... also, if the filter can be used on all sounds, then perhaps you could do without using the SID envelopes which will result in much punchier sounds and better timing. Also the new ENV2->volume reg could be used on a sound, and still get a good AMP decay. Ring modulation would come in handy when creating gongs, and cymbals also. I just think that the drumsounds in general would get much more varied with this approach. Regards, Jess.

AARGH Thorsten! :o don't start talking about V3... makes me feel bad! ;D ... well, as long as good, long evolving FX can be done with the LEAD module... fine with me :D... And Jaicen; about the snaredrum; I can see that doing this with one osc. SID is difficult. Now I asume you are talking about a REAL snaredrum... yes, that's a hard one to crack, but to some degree it has to be done anyways... with one osc... Also, other snares that are more analogue in nature are different from a REAL snaredrum... just have to do the best with what is available I guess... I'm thinking about messing about a bit with the band pass filter to see what I can come up with.. Regards, Jess.

Hi Stryd :) Well... the problem is, that I've not researched snaredrums that much yet ;D ... I've messed a bit around with the SID to make one snaredrum, but I tried to do it without using the filter as the filter is global for all three oscillators of each SID, so the less drums that can be done without the filter, the better. It's just VERY disappointing without filter and wavetable use. useless I'd say... The question is if it's possible to make some of the drumsounds without the filter... a drumsound must be able to use the filter or not, and if not, leave the filter alone for another drumsound to use... the less drumsounds that do NOT use a filter, the less likely any "filter stealing" will occur. Careful programming of the drumtrack and selection of filtered/non-filtered drumsounds is what will make the day, and in drumtracks with careful programming you could easily make a decent rythm with even just two tracks, and rarely does these sounds in one track overlap, so in general a two-track drumgroove could have all drumsounds utilize the filter! The rest of the four channels (unfiltered) could easily do noises, snaps, zaps and FX without the need for any filter at all. I also agree that you do not need to go for the old style sound, but nonetheless, it should be there!... it's SID nostalgica! ... and it's nothing more than adding a wavetable to every drumsound... that is all there is to it ... instant hubbard drums! ;) ... also, wavetables with the other features included could make some totally new style of drums not even possible with any other drum-machine! All this has led me to think about the four subsystems that Thorsten want to include in the new design. I'm thinking that maybe one more subsystem would be approprite, namely one that deals with Effects... and here I mean really long and evolving effects with lots of LFOs with feedback and other wondrous features. One thing I relly need in my studio is a machine dedicated to synthesizing real-time effects like these, instead of relying on static samples as i most often do. With all the Pitch, Pulsewidth, cutoff, resonance modulations possible, one could do some rather impressive effects... I'm thinking wild and crazy effects like in the Paradroid game from the C64... just a thought. Regards, Jess.

Hi Stryd... No... there is no SID sound at all in this remix... all done with synthesizers. The robotic noises are samples. Actually I thinl that it would be cool to have real SID sounds in a remix, which is one of the main reasons I did this MB SID hardware :) The thought of doing a whole remix with just SID has crosed my mind lots of times, and it's certainly possible to do it so that people would not believe it's the real SID ;D Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! I'd be glad to help... I've already started researching how to do drumsounds the smartest way using SID... Snares are bugging me a bit, but I'll get there :) I'll try and come up with a minimum parameter list of the various types of drumsounds... then you can try and see if you agree with me on them :) I can start out with the bassdrum very easily: 1. Pitch (fundamental pitch the sound is modulated on) 2. EG Pitch modulation (amount of EG pitch modulation) 3. Cutoff (fundamental cutoff the sound is modulated on) 4. EG Cutoff modulation (amount of EG cutoff modulation) 5. EG Decay Rate (decay rate of the EG) 6. EG Decay Curve (curve of the EG) 7. EG Velocity Sensitivity (EG intensity) 8. Oscillator Control Select TRI/SAW/REC/NOI/PHASE/FILTER 9. Pulsewidth 10. Filter Resonance These parameters is all necessary to make cool bassdrum sounds of "real analog" feel. I've not included wavetables in the parameter section... The only MIDI parameter that can directly influence individual drums is velocity, so it's important to have this included to modulate the EG, so that the bassdrums can be dynamic. The filter only need to know if it's on or off because the type used will always be the lowpass type, and the rest of the control of the filter is dynamically allocated according to the voice used. This is the least amount of paramters I can come up with to keep it both flexible and easy to use. Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten :) Yes, I've tried a few other types of caps, but I found no other that does the job better... in fact it sounded horrible when I tried it... Hmm... I gave it great thoughts if I should use the oscillator crystal, or the PIC itself... and of course I chose the crystal ::) ... I'm of to solder a bit again I think :-\ ... but what the heck... He he!... my first preset bank? ;D ... well... When it's done I guess. I'm playing around with the engine at the moment, and as I do patches I find good, I save them, and I've done about 3 now, so I WILL get there... in time... And You will be recieving it as soon as I'm through... also, I'm about to order 8 pieces of 24LC256 to fill up... it'll take some time though, but my intention is to fill it up totaly 8). One thing I'd like to do is to make at least ONE bank with recreation of some of the most famous patches from the C64 era (hubbard, daglish, david, daglish etc.)... they should be as close as possible, but when you then move the mod wheel, two extra oscillators should step in and make the patch FAT LIKE HELL!... that would be a cool thing to have when remixing for the RKO scene ;) ... you know... start out cheesy C64 style, and then KAPOW!... rock'in'an'a'rollin'! ;D Thank you for the hardware info btw. :) Regards, Jess.

Update! ;D ... I've testet the SID for bassdrums now with the current engine... I've come to the conclusion that really good drums is best created with the filter in addition to what I said before, mainly because the SID does not have a SINE waveform, and the filter helps out on this greatly! I tested a simple setup with just ONE oscillator (different waveforms), ONE envelope (SIDs envelopes NOT used) and this envelope was routed to both cutoff and pitch. Oscillator phase reset was ON. and the CURVE parameter was used on the decay. I then recorded several bassdrums using this basic setup tweaking only WAVEFORM, CURVE, ENV DEPTH and RESONANCE. The result was rather astonnishing... much better than I had anticipated!... in fact I've not heard anything close to this in a SID tune before... the major reason for the sound is with the CURVE parameter. I've got a sample for listening, if you guys have anywhere I can upload it. I Used a 8580 SID... ofcourse ;D

You also wrote something about the delay time needed to properly make the SIDs own envelope work correctly could be calculated based on the ADSR values right?... This means that the delay would difer between drumsounds with misc release rates which is not a good thing as drums should be dead-on tight! ... Have you tried to write 0s into all ADSR regs before retriggering to achieve the least amount of delay? If this works, then GREAT! if not, then maybe eliminating the attack and release parameter totally would cure the problem by always writing 0s to these regs. I don't think that the volume envelope would ever need to have either attack or release setting necessary... only the decay I'd say. Also remember that drumsounds (especially bassdrums) benefit very much from the osc phase reset feature... this is obligatoric for good bassdrum sounds... other perc sounds as well... Regards, Jess.

Hi (Thorsten)... I'm not aware of any thread about discussion on the V2 project in particular?... something passed my nose here? :D Well, I've read about the drum-part on the wishlist you wrote Thorsten and have a few questions: You write that there will be allocated a special number of "slots" for specific drum-sounds, and I'm wondering if these drumsounds will be controlled using dedicated engines for every type of drum sound (Kick, Snare, Hihats etc.)? ... or will all drumsounds use the same engine? I believe that every type of drumsound could benefit from dedicated engines tailored specificly for that particular drumsound... in fact I believe that the only thing that would be nice to have on all drumsounds would be a wavetable player and a volume envelope... the different drumsounds (at least for real drumsynths) use widely different approaches to creating a particular drumsound. One could also figure out exactly what mechanisms are needed for all types of sounds and then make one universal drum-engine... that would certainly make it much more flexible. If you want to find some good info on pro-drummachine sound-creation, then find the manual for Waldorf's RackAttack (which I've had), it's got a good deal of information on the subject including how the famous 808 and 909 was made. I can though give a few VERY important things to do, to synthesize drumsounds if any help: Bassdrum: Almost no bassdrums use a filter, and in fact really cool bassdrum sounds can be created by only very few components, namely an oscillator (dooh!) and a single VERY specialized pitch envelope. The Envelope modulating the oscillators pitch MUST... and I repeat: MUST!!!! have a logarithmic curve to it!... yes! the curve parameter is VERY important here! ... the pitch start out very high, and then drop down very fast, and then gradualy slows down (because of the curve parameter) until it reach it's base which should be in the bass-frequency area (about 80 to 200 Hz). The logarithmic "punch" is responsible for the "click" on a bassdrum, and thus this envelope must be FAST!!! and with great resolution. The best oscillator waveform for the bassdrum is the sinewave... but since this is not achievable with SID, you'd have to go for the next best: Triangle... The others will work too, but will sound like distorted rave drums... a filter is not at all needed for kick-drums... not even wavetables :o ... it's true! Claps: A clap is made from noise... and here the SID is marvelous since it give you many tonal variations elliminating the use for a filter here also.. The tricky part of this sound is, that it's created by applying a very fast LFO to the noise that last for a defined cycle length... the waveshape of this LFO must be a SAWTOOTH with an up-going ramp, so that when the last cyckle has passed, the volume of the noise is at max. (yes... the LFO should modulate the amplitude, which poses a great problem here because of the SIDs envelope bug etc.). The number of LFO cycles and their speed should be adjustable... The problem is with modulating the volume, it have to be done in another way, and maybe by modulating the filter instead a similar result can be achieved, but that would make use of the filter which should be avoidable since other sounds need it more. I think that maybe a wavetable would do this much better by changing perhaps between a noise waveform and another waveform for some set duration... worth checking out. Snaredrums: Snaredrums are nothing more than noise with a volume envelope on it... that is, with analogue snaredrums though. The volume envelope should be logarithmic to get snappy sounds from it, but this is only achievable using the SIDs own envelope. usually such a snaredrum sound is kind of thin and uninterresting, but played on top of a bassdrum make it sound much much better (something rarely done in SID tunes). A wavetable would still do wonders as an extra feature on this sound to simulate a bit of "snare rattle" and could be done just like the clap sound... in fact maybe clap and snare could be done using the same engine here... normally a highpass filter would be indispensable on clap and snare to ive tonal variations (band pass also), but since the noise waveform is pitchable, it's not that crucial. Hihats: Hihats are easily done using noise also, and the volume envelope must be short and snappy for the closed version, and logarithmic responsecurve is again a must. Luckily the decay part of SIDs own amp envelopes ARE logarithmic in nature, so that's not a problem. Noise colour is also easy here due to the pitchable noise in SID. The open and closed version should be easy to make as they are basically the same noise sound... only the decay of the amp envelopes differ. it is crucial though, that these two sound cancel each other out, since these cannot sound at the same time. Cymbals: AAARGH! ... impossible to synthesize really... even Waldorf have sampled cymbals in their RackAttack drummachine ;) ... you CAN do some decent ones nontheless though I'd have to experiment on these... maybe ringmod is the key to this, but that will eat up TWO oscillators... guess there is no way around using the filter on this one to be realistic! ::) From all this you can see, that the filter do not play that big a role in drum programming... in fact it's more usable as an "insert" effect to filter a drumsound in particular with static settings.. e.g. thinning a snare or highhat with a hipass filter, or "muffling" a bassdrum with a lowpass filter or maybe band pass a hihat etc. So if your V2 model will use one core with two sids I asume that you would have six voices available at a time, and two filters right? or will they be stereo too?.. so in general all drumsounds could have it's own filtersettings and if the drumsound is marked as using the filter it could use it, and if not, it could leave the filter registers alone for another drumsound to use. people would then just have to remember that no more than two filtered drumsounds can play at once. The rest of teh drumtypes I'll have a look at and let you know when I come up with something ;) Hope you can use this info for something Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! I'm testing your new build now... and occationally while playing, some of the oscillators drop out, and then later drop in again... I'm wondering why this is, but maybe you have a few places in your code where the gate bits are still cleared that you've missed? ;) Otherwise it works rather ok... of course it's not the perfect way to get the envelope bug fixed, and still a hardware sulution would be better, but it opens up a lot of new potential in patch creation, and anyways; SID is about lo-fi sounds and nostalgica, so this feature just put a little extra on top... in fact the curve parameters work really nice on the volume register as well... nice and punchy sound... just try a patch with all oscillators set to SAW... now detune two SAWs by +10/-10 and transpose the last SAW down by 1 octave. now crank the curve of ENV2 all the way left and set the decay to 127 and the sustain to 18. no filter used and no phase sync used, but it's still fat, punchy and nice! this sound was not possible without this feature :) Regards, Jess.

Hi again Thorsten :) I'm about to check out the new build right now! ... And about the time between gating the oscillators; I think it is very good already... I ONLY wrote you about it, to make sure that you would optimize this delay to be as good as at all possible because the less delay; the greater distortion ;D ... and we like that!... don't we!? ;D ... but I think you are right... with this small delay you mention, it's not bound to be a big problem... in theory it should be possible to trigger all three gate bits from just three writes to the SID control registers should it not? ... of course , as I can see you have a delay value on all oscillator envelopes, and with this delay taken into account, surely you can not be triggering the three oscillators in just three consecutive writes to the control registers eh? ... well... don't worry too much about this... it's working well, just wanted you to go for optimum optimization within limits of this 8) Now that you mention the old 6581... there is some significant difference in the design I've noticed with respect to filter input from the oscillators with respect to the 8580... if all oscillators are on and 8580 is cranked all the way up (full volume and syncronised phases), and then routed through the filter, it will distort wildly, but if you then turn down the volume register, you will notice that the distortion disappears!... this gives a great effect when routing the ENV2 into the volume register since it starts out really saturated, but gradually become smooth in the release tail of the sound... makes bass patches rather ok! ... with the 6581 I once noticed, that turning down the volume like this had no effect on the distortion!?!?... I'm almost confident I noticed this many months ago on my own system... I wonder why this is so... to me this hints at the fact, that the volume knob is "located" AFTER the filter section on 6581, and BEFORE the filter section on the 8580!!! this is pure speculation though... don't hang me up on it! ;D but if true, then a drawn block diagram of the synth architecture will be different between 6581 and 8580. (actually I've got an 6582A SID here also... to me it sounds like a 8580 SID, but I'm going to dive in further, and test it someday, to see if any major differences is present). My cannibalized rack will NOT include either pots, buttons or LCD at any time... I rarely use the front panels of my synths and prefer to remote control them, so therefore I'm running the absolute minimum of the MBSID... I'm strongly thinking about making a full featured version of your next V2, with full 8 SID modules in it... hope it will deal with that! :D .. my major concern with my rack here was, that I was unsure about the "0volts" line... well, I measured the lines to 17volts, so I thought it might work, and to be honest... IT DID! ... in fact I'm rather proud because, I had absolutely zero problems making this synth... all was working from first try... lucky me 8) I've got ONE hardware question more though: I'd like to have two LEDs on my synth... one for "POWER ON" and one more for "MIDI ACTIVITY"... now; the power LED is no problem since that's just a resistor and a 5v source, but what about the MIDI gate LED? ... any idears on this one without having to build a dout module or something? Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten... I was thinking about something... I would like to ask you something about the MB SID that I made myself: As I told you, I cannibalized a Control Synthesis Deep Bass Nine analog synth and made it's housing the home of the MB SID. I did this because the housing is a one unit high rack thing, and that's exactly what I want, and it has the necessary holes drilled already, and the TRS plugs was easily unsoldered and reused... also the power switch has been reused... and it's internal powersuply also, since this gives me no wallwart suply, 8) and now the question: The power supply that is within the housing is split into two coils (I believe that is the name), one with two lines running from it, and the other with three lines. The first one I measured, and it shows to deliver 10 volts AC... so I connected these lines to the core module for the 5 volt DC supply (the rectifier deals with the AC->DC I remember). The second one had markings saying that one cord is +17 volts, the other -17 volts and the last one 0 volts (also AC). I use the +17 volts and the 0 volts lines, and have connected these to the SID modules 12volt input (I know that using the two -+17volts give more than 35 volts, so I'm not connecting those together ... don't worry! ;D). Everything works flawlessly, and I get a very clean and crisp sound from this setup... I'm just wondering, if I'm doing this right... don't want to put any pressure on the boards. The regulator of the 5volt gets hot, but not overly much, and I assume that doing 10->5 volts is no big deal? The 9 volt regulator does not get warm at all, or if it does it's not very much at all!... this puzzles me, since it is doing 17v -> 9v!!!... how can that be? not that it's a bad thing it does not get hot, but I just wonder... Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten. It should absolutely be an option to turn this on or off, you are absolutely right on this one :) You wrote something about not worrying about the test flag, and that it would only be taken into account using the phase sync option. Are you triggering the gate bits if phase sync is on to reset the phases? ... If I recall right, it is not nessesary to toggle the gate bits to reset the phase using the test flag ... is it? In fact, I hope not because the resetting of the phases is important also when routing the ENV2 to the volume register. Also I've been thinking about something; in your code, when you trigger the gate bits, and reset the phases, how fast are your routine at doing this on all three oscillators? ... If I did the code, I would make sure that the three oscillators would perform the triggering with THE LEAST AMOUNT OF TIME in between the three oscillators... in fact I would do the triggering on all oscillators at once with just ONE write to the SID flags to make all oscillators set off at exactly the same time... the reason for this is, that if the oscillators are phase synced, and all play the same waveform and pitch, then the closer the triggerings is to each other, the more gain you will get from the oscillators... in essence it's like mixing the same waveform with itself three times... doing this will increase volume by approx. 3db for every oscillator playing this way... The nice thing about this is, that it will GREATLY overdrive the filter doing this, making squelchy acid basslines easier to create. Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! Unfortunately I cannot test the 6581 code, since I've build a 8580 version, and caps + regulator has been soldered onto the board (don't want to unsolder). I'll have to test this later on. The ENV2 -> volume register feature I have testet though. It works well if programmed correctly I feel... on some patches you can hear faint clicks and stepping, but considdering this, if you program carefully, you can make some patches that are unique, so I think it's worth keeping. The idear could be improved though to minimize some of the faint clicks: When a key is released, the SIDs oscillator envelopes cut out emmidiately because of their release settings of 0, making a DRASTIC envelope volume change from max to min. We need a bit of ENV2 release time on the volume register, but this is impossible due to the SIDs oscillator envelope settings which MUST be 0,0,15,0 for things to work. The solution is that when this new ENV2->Volume feature is ON, there is no need to trigger the gate bits more than once! ... The gate bits just need to be set and the volume register set to zero when this routing is switched on... then everytime a new note is triggered, you just trigger the ENV2 again automatically and with it the "fake AMP envelope"... this will also allow the routing of ENV2 to work with it's release setting, which would not normally be possible because of the gate bits... Regards, Jess.

WOW!... seems the new updates will make a lot of improvements then!... I'll be looking forward to seing this in the future no doubt! :) Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! :) Yes! I noticed my name while browsing the pages ;D 8)... I can understand the reasons for the few enhancements we will see for the MBSID... one being the upcomming V2 :P... in fact I'd also rather see work on a new thing, than the old one... I believe in progress and backward compatibility, but backward compatibility should NEVER interfere with new inovations! ... my point of view! 8) Definitely seems that I'm arriving at the right time here!... and I'm full of idears ;D ... I'll keep them comming! ... and I'll gladly be of as much help as i can, so if you want anything of me... just write me! ;) ... I'm not the biggest of hardware magician, and probably not even as adept in PIC programming as you, but my knowledge of different synthesizers and their strengths and weaknesses are my force, and I've seen quite a few in my time! (tell me if you're currious of which... it's a loooong list ! ;D) I know that the volume issue I wanted has to be fixed in hardware to be fully realised... and I could easily route the output into one of my synths to trigger their amp envelope on it, but the point is to make it part of the patch in the MB SID, and this is only possible with the first suggestion... I'm just tired of not being able to have a little release on a patch without the attack of the sound getting irregularly muffled! ... I want PAAAOUOOUW!!! when i do those leads! ;D a thing that the SID does VERY VERY well in combination with it's oscillator phase reset function! Another thing that I'd like to see, is the ability to tune the filter cutoff in semitone steps!... just like the frequency! ... when the filter is tracked like this, and the frequency cutoff and pitch lies in the same spot, then the resonance will do wonders!! (think aciiiid!), and the effect will follow with the keys! ... very ellementary dear watson! ;D One thing I like about you Thorsten, is your dedication! :) ... I give idears today, and you are trying them out before the night is over! ... oh dear how i wish other manufacturers had that spirit! :D ... Yes, I tried the volume routing from an envelope myself once, and it's astonnishing how good it sounds compared to the low number of bits... just do not try it with a 6581... it will "click" horribly if I recall right :-\ (another reason to choose 8580!) The filter scaling would make many SIDs much more useable I think... in fact I've heard revision 1 and 2 SIDs that I find VERY fat sounding... only drawback is the dead ranges in the filter values making it hard to sculpt bass sounds just right.. and sharing the patch makes it horribly "mutated" on other chips. Now... I only just started messing about with the MBSID within the last days, so all of these issues and ideas are my first notes about the engine... I'll keep you posted as I get new adears. :) Anyways; DAMNED GOOD ENINGE!... really really good synth, and even if no changes would be made, I'd still rate it VERY high!... it had to be good, cause I sacrificed a Deep Bass 9 synth for this work of art you did! ;) Regards, Jess.

Hi again Thorsten! :) Well... sometimes it can be a good idear to properly search a site for info before asking questions :-X... I've found you V2 pages, and have become quite a bit wiser since then ;D I think it's a GREAT idear to control two SID modules from just ONE core... but to understand you correctly, you are NOT making any hardware changes to the current core module exept from exchanging the PIC right? ... does this mean, that the existing core will be functional still? ... also the SID modules? Actually, all I have been wanting from the SID, was to get those nostalgic sounds from it, and thus I would like to be able to use BOTH the 8580 and 6581 versions (independently), so that I can get both advantages... until now, this has only been possible if I had TWO cores and TWO SID modules... am I right in my asumptions, that with the "new" core, I can control TWO SID modules, with e.g. one 6581, and 1 8580 utilizing ONE core and TWO SID modules? that would be great since that means to only get one more SID module in my case ;) I was also wondering, if it's possible to have two different sound engines running for the two connected modules? ... I'm asking, since one of the idears I've been having is to actually connect one output of a MIDIBox FM to the MIDIBox SID audio input, making some really cool analog filtered FM sounds! 8) ... as I recall, the FM module has TWO routable outputs, so one could go out CLEAN, while the other is "SID FILTERED"... just a thought. Another thing that I have tried to duplicate on a lot of synthesizers without any luck is the ability to control oscillators SEPERATLY on their own MID channel!... with this i mean that OSC1 could be controlled using MIDI channel 1, and OSC2 by channel 2 etc... The reason for this is that in many SID tunes (especially Rob Hubbard did this) you play one tune with one oscillator, while another oscillator pleys another... this is not anything special, bu when you then either syncronise og ring modulate those two oscillators, it starts to get VERY interresting! ... no synth I've come acros can do this! not even a Nord modular! :o ... so I would urge you to take this idear into account... it can make some very unpredictable sequences (just take a listen to the ingame tune of Delta or Sanxion and you'll know what i mean) Regards, Jess.

Hi Stryd! ;D ... Well... In fact I was making my own SID synth when Thorsten notified me of the MB SID, and asked me if it was necessary to invent the wheel twice ;D ... and honestly: NO! it was not, so I took on and suggested the Curve parameter since it allows rather snappy bass patches. I've now (finally) build my own MB SID (into the hood of a departed Control Synthesis Deep Bass Nine analog synth, using some of it's interrials), and thus I divin' in this forum rather sharply ;) ... I'll be here from now on to give my idears ond such... I've got quite an amount of synthesizers in my studio, so I know quite a bit about synthesizers in general, and maybe I can help out on stuff... also know quite a bit about the SID ;) ... and I know how to code the 18f452 PIC also as this was also the chosen MCU for my own synth back then... I'll have a look at that MBFX thing.... sounds interesting already :) and about the filter scaling: I tested it thorougly, and found that it's SCALED between those min/max values... or at least it sounds very much like it. of course there are still differences between very early revisions and the later ones, but the worst problem is the filter not opening and closing correctly between revisions. If the cutoff-values used was just scaled between these min/max values, the result would be much more equal and useable between different 6581 revisions, and still (important in my opinion) still be a little different from each other... That is the charm of the SID 6581... 8580 all sound the same (which is also a good thing). The "working range" of the cutoff is not just offset... the "working range" can be different so that one chip works between say; 127 and 10.000 while another works between 234 and 9.000 (these are just fictive numbers... real numbers may be different). so it's not just an offset. 6582A by the way, is nothing more than a 8580 with a different number on it... I've testet it against the 8580 and can hear no sound differences. Regards, Jess.

Hi Thorsten! :) A new MCU... ok!... damn, I'll have to start over again when that's ready then ;D ... Well... my idears are both hard/software, but I'm unsure about what hardware you will be changing?... is it only the core module or alo the SID module? 1. A HARDWARE DCA, controlled by the MB SID OS, so that we can get a WORKING envelope control of the volume of SID... the env. bug is just annoying! (controlling the output volume of SID dynamically via an envelope e.g.) this would be on the SID module of course. 2. As I see it, Velocity, Pressure and Modwheel can only be assigned to ONE destination... this is way too little flexible... more destinations please! Also other sources could be implemented like: Keytracking, Breath Controller, Foot Pedal, Assignable Control (CC16/17/18/19), and if possible, why not let the SIDs own source be there? The SID can be read also to deliver it's oscillator output if I recall right!? even fast pitch modulation using this reading on other oscillators could do some interresting FM perhaps... 3. Typically used modulation routings could be made part of the SIDs parameters like: A dedicated filter envelope, with it's own depth, velocity sensitivity etc. These routings are almost always made anyway, and would free up the current envelopes for other tasks. 4. More envelopes please! ... at least one for the filter, and one for each oscillator, and preferably more... well... maybe even a dedicated LFO/ENV for all paramters (pitch123/pwm123/cutoff). in essence making every oscillator into it's own little powerful synthesizer, only sharing the filter and amp section. the engine could still be backwards compatible anyways. 5. Portamento should be rate locked!... as it is now, the slide rate is constant, ... the other way, where the time it takes to slide from one key to another in the same time is much more versatile, and playable. 6. The arpeggiator should have a mode, where it alternates the pitch between the notes actually pressed!... as it is now, it allocates four notes and sequences between these, which makes it sound wrong when less than four keys are pressed... live-playing with the other method sound way cooler! (two keys pressed should result in alternating between these two notes at a constant rate and so on...) 7. Make Volume and Resonance part of the modulation matrix destinations as well! .. even though they are only 4bit wide, the effect is useable. well... these are just brainstorm idears... some may be appropriate others not... more will possibly come as I mess about with the engine more ;) Regards, Jess D. Skov-Nielsen.