Fozzy The Bear

Sorry I'm afraid not at the moment..... The project is still in progress, but I've had quite a few problems to deal with in real life. Not been able to get back onto this project fully just yet. I promise to update you guys on this soon! I'm still planning to get this finished completely before the end of the year. Or at least I hope I can. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

WOW..... Just realised that it was last May, that I last updated the progress on this one. Lots of things have been happening in life as well as with synths.... First of all I've been very unwell and been in hospital twice. Which kind of completely halted the progress. But it has given me time to think about how to best achieve the results I need from this project. In synths... I've acquired a few new (well second hand ones anyway) since last May. A Novation "Supernova 2" rack, Which is possibly (IMHO) the best VA synth on the planet (except of course the Access Virus TI, which I still want)... Mind you that said, it's taken Access 10 years to get round to copying the modulation capabilities of the Supernova. I also acquired an EMU ESI4000 sampler, which is like rocket science compared to my old Casio FZ1. Very nice sounding filters on it. The other new bit of kit I acquired is a Novation KS Rack, which while it's based on the Supernova architecture is not great, and to my ears sounds a bit dull and lifeless. I've only had it two weeks and already I'm seriously thinking about selling it to fund something else instead. It's not a bad synth... Just that it's not one that suits me personally. I know a lot of people love them. On the Prophet 5 replica front, I'm now ready to push on with it, and try and get it completed before the end of the year, if I can. So sorry for the delay and the lack of updates. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

You can buy the PCB's and Kits you don't need to print them. Try reading all the Midibox documentation http://www.ucapps.de/index.htm and doing a search on the forum for any answers you need. before asking questions .... That would be a good start. It's also considered to be good manners not to hijack somebody elses thread with noob questions, especially when they've been answered so many times before and could have been answered for you by a search or by doing that old fashioned reading thing!. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

E-Bay from Hong Kong is the cheapest place for LCD's...... Ebay Vendor Link ... For LCD Modules. The dimensions are also shown on that auction. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

Yeah!! all 64 inputs on one board wouldn't be a bad idea at all. and again people could then stuff as many chips on it as they actually need. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

Do you not think that it would be a good idea to look at doing them as a DINx8 design, given the much smaller footprint?? Then people could just stuff the components they need. Meaning that you could just have 2 boards for 64 inputs?? Wouldn't this be better than ending up with 4 very small boards that have to be linked up? Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

I don't think it's unrealistic nILS....... Look at it this way, if he makes them DINX8 boards for example, then the cost of 2 smash DINX4 boards is over $14 USD + shipping. I'm pretty certain that a single DINX8 board for SMD's would come out at less than $14 USD per board, we are only talking about the etched board here not the components. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

WOHHHHH!!!! AWESOME WOODWORK!!! I do have a CNC Router, that I built myself (see the timber on the prophet 5 project) ... To be honest you wouldn't get your woodwork any cleaner looking than you do by hand. You still have to hand finish it. The only advantage the CNC Router gives you is mm accurate repeatability. So if you were to want to build 50 cases, and have them all the same, then you could set up the machine and feed it the raw material. But the finished result isn't going to look any better than your hand work... That is beautiful. In some ways CNC would detract from that, because it's not then a totally hand made item of unique quality. Nice work, really nice work, I love it! It just doesn't get any better than that, no matter how you make it. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

YES!! You got my vote for those..... As long as the board price is the same or lower than the current boards available, then I'd say go for it! SMD components are way cheaper than the through hole variety. I'd also like to see them available as a DIN X8 module AIN X8 module and Dout X8 module as this seems to me to make much more sense than just having DIN X4's etc etc like we do now. I also add my voice to the cry for all components to go SMD on them. No point in doing half a job on it. If you're going SMD then do it all. And I have to agree with nILS that you should look at 1206 or 0805 for the resistors, because it makes them easier to handle. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

OK, but you may not need to re-write the app to support what you want to do.... It may actually support it natively. Not spent enough time pushing the limits of what it can handle to be 100% sure either way here. Persoannly I suspect it might well fall over trying to do it but, we really need TK to answer this one and tell us if it's actually possible to do what you want with the 64E App as it is. There's not a lot of point in re-writing it if can already cope with the demand as it stands. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

It might need TK to clarify this for us..... But from what I understand of the system, On Midibox64E Pots and faders are mapped to the "encoder" entries 64-128. Which then limits the available DIN inputs. This appears to be a software limitation in 64E rather than a hardware one. It looks like it was implemented as a compatibility measure. You could however be right as I also read: "optionally up to 64 pots or up to 8 motorfaders can be connected in addition to the rotary encoders" The FAQ is also a little unclear on the limits of what can be connected and work simultaneously. TK.... If you're reading this could you clarify this for us please?? Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

As I understand it, you can't do that on one core.... You'd need to use two separate 8 bit cores, and link them to get that many inputs working with Midibox 64E. CORE 1 (using Midibox 64E) With 2 DINX4 Boards 22 encoders (would use up 44 Digital Inputs) Leaving 20 Digital inputs For 20 Switches CORE 2 (using Midibox 64) With 2 DINX4 Boards And 2 AINX4 Boards 64 switches (uses up the 64 Digital Inputs) (total switches now at 84) 64 pots (uses up the 64 analog inputs) The two cores linked by enabling the midibox link in the software, to the end user it would behave as a single system. I'm sure somebody else can give you more detail on that. But I recommend that you go read and digest the documentation. It will answer 99% of your questions. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

The answer is yes it is possible..... BUT! USB-MIDI converters don't all work the same way and some of the cheap ones off ebay have problems with lag and loss of data with bi-directional communication. Personally I think this has a lot to do with the original Microsoft Driver that they tend to use. I know that the GM5 works because it works fine with my core. So the E-mu one should also work fine... As long as you're using the E-MU Xmidi driver for it and NOT the generic Microsoft driver. The E-MU Xmidi driver is available from: http://www.emu.com/support/files/download2.asp?Centric=1026&Legacy=0&Platform=1 E-mu say "While the Xmidi 1x1, Xmidi 1x1 Tab and Xmidi 2x2 are true plug and play and will function as a MIDI device using the included generic Microsoft MIDI drivers, installing and using the E-Mu Xmidi driver will provide improved MIDI latency, reduced MIDI jitter and multi client MIDI application operation. Tested to work in Windows XP, Windows Vista x32 & x64, Windows 7 x32 & x64" Simultaneous MIDI in and out are used by the core for a couple of things. Not least of which is to keep track of the position of rotary controls and pots and switches in the software running on the computer and keep the true (virtual) position of those updated in the midibox software... thus keeping your virtual and hardware interface controls in sync with each other. Although this is not actually essential in some applications. It really depends what you're doing with it. It's certainly essential to have fully working Bi-Directional communication for programming MIDIBOX or it'll lose some of the data. It could easily be Latency and Jitter causing the problem. Hope that helps! Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear)

I have to agree with Shuriken here.... You need to get the basic box working first. When you've done that you can look at the further development of your other ideas. This is a huge project for someone who has not built a Midibox at all, yet. It's an ambitious project. But at the moment it doesn't even have the basic control software in place. Do that first and you stand a good chance of achieving the rest of it afterwards. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The bear)