Phyto

Thanks, I know all these for a while and saved some more as historical pipescales too. :smile:

Is there a limit of pipes that can be controlled for a single yappi board? Otherway, one may consider several physical ranks as a single 'set' of pipes: like a normal rank with different borrowings. Of course it would need a lot of wiring on this single board... but for a very small organ...may it be giant board, but very practical ?

Is there a solution for this, like using an extra YAPPI-type board for all the new ranks resulting from combination of different physical ranks? For a (very) small organ I think it has some interest. Thanks Jim for the explanation about repeating notes in theatre organs (I've never seen one, very very rare by us!). I'm not an extremist so I consider this as a minor disagreement as much as good registration can help a little. But if it can be solved...

For the pdf of this patent, see here http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20080022838.pdf For "borrowing holes" I have to precise what I mean : it is the use of the same pipe by to simultaneous commands. For example if you are playing on two keyboards, it may be possible that each hand requires the same pipe since transposition i hear exploited to the maximum. So when two musical voices meet eachother, what happen ? Normally the pipe note is repeated, of course, but if the pipe is already speaking...

John, I dare ask you some more information about such a YAPPI system since you probably control it well. I would like to know whether this system can manage borrowing holes. In my data researchs I found a patent solving this problem: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2008/0022838.html But this begins to be very complicated to me. If such boards are not available or clearly published, I will follow Jim's advice and solve the problem of the MIDI transmission in a simple and classic way I can find. The only thing I really wish is coupling possibility, so if you know what particular hard- and software it requires, many thanks.

Yes it's really a nice project. I don't know how it is at your place but it is possible to build DIY woodpipes. Especially for the big ones since they are very cheap and easier to voice, so a very supple solution. For the wood you need to know sawmills in your area, that's the best plan to have exactly what you want in terms of choice and quality. To begin with, the only bourdon is perfect. As for the rest, you are totally true in your reflexion about my choice of ranks. But you probably know how the resulting sound can change under a generic name. It depends on the instrument's period and builder. My "flute" shouldn't be a tiny flute but something louder with some harmonics, intermediate between principal and string. A sort of salicional, but the baroque type and not the very thin one like romantic gambas if you see what I mean. A sort of quiet diapason. It can be considered as a string tone, even it is not really true to type. But I think you're right in definitive, it's above all a problem of vocabulary for me.

This forum is really great! Jim, all pipes have to be acquired and probably not at once. Used for some and home made for the others especially the biggest wood ones. As for the rest you are entirely right in your thought. The project is simply a kind of “unit†organ. I didn’t use the term…since we are on a MIDI forum. Of course my number of 400 pipes was round off but it’s not so far from reality and it constitutes a good upper limit. My ranks are extended to 100 pipes, maybe you will laugh when I will tell you why: it is to allow real transposition, especially in the low pitch. So you can have A=440, A=415, A=392 and A=466 what requires at least 97 + 2 = 99 pipes since one can consider there is no pipe problem for higher pitch. The rank composition should be very simple: Bourdon 16’ to 2’ Flute 8’ to 1’ Principal 8’ to 1’ Reed 16’ to 2’ Don’t jump to the ceiling; I know I don’t need complete ranks and all pipes for the last octave of higher pitch. And so for the reed that is no more a reed at so higher pitch. So there will probably be 2x12=24 pipes less from flute and principal and something like (99x4) – (12x2) = 372 pipes. Maybe there will be little less, but only little since these high pitch pipes are very useful to compose different mutations and mixtures. That’s for the ideal project. I don’t know anything about theatre organs except what one can find on the Internet. The use of ‘cheats’ (extensions) should be the same, but the sound quite different. But I digress from the original subject! For me, a unit Bourdon in MIDI will be great enough to begin with and for perfect comprehension of the system. I now try to use jOrgan but unfortunately it is still not running on my single PC. I have to work a little for this, but it seems to be the very appropriate tool.

Thank you so much John, I now see how YAPPI is a great job even if I don't fully realize all possibilities : you need one YAPPI card for each rank or unit rank of pipe ? Ideally, I need 100 outpouts for each 4 ranks. For some practical reasons I'd like to have all keyboards and pedalboard with the same stops, and such a system is probably the best to create complex mutations ! So if all keyboards are identical (except coupling) maybe the solution is very easy and very economic in material ? For example, a list of 40 stops that are the same for each keyboard and pedalboard. The only difference between them would be the coupling if it is use. Is this imaginable? If yes, it is a very flexible instrument I dream, with maximum possibilities.

How interesting... Just a thing, I don't understand what you mean by "*if* the coupling/unification happens at the chamber end and not at the console end". If you can reformulate it and what it supposes in terms of network, many thanks.

Wireless, maybe not indispensable but so convenient... What do you mean by MIDI or faster, MIDI over ethernet ?

OK, I will tell you some more. Even if I don't know the precise technical terms, I hope you will understand. The pipe part is very classical and can be comparate to an old mechanical instrument. So you are entirely right when you think about "classical organ with direct electric valves under the pipes". The solenoid with pallets are under electric command, but the transmission is not so direct from keyboards to the valves to avoid use of high voltage and the subsequent problems you can meet in such all electric instruments. I would say only the transmission is electronic, using MIDI from console to the basement of the organ case where "power relays" are set. From these starts the effective electric transmission. Each pipe has an independant magnet inside him (in the chest) and can be controlled individually. But this is the very simple part, only wire. To say little more about the project, it is not so huge since I plan 400 pipes, constituting about 4 pipe types of 100 notes each, that is to say something like a stopped diapason, a flute, a principal and a reed (if my terms are correct). Of course there will be multiple "extensions" and "transpositions" since each stop is playable in 8' 4' 2' 1' with all mutations (theorically, if it makes sense). Musically speaking, the real difficult part concerns harmonization that must be very clever to provide good effet.

Yes you understood what I meant by replay. However the organ will be real and not virtual so the sequencer is the solution. What do you mean by less convenient : more expensive ? Sorry for the "partition editing" but I don't know the exact english term for this. A sort of score writer = music notes writer, a program that converts what you play into a score...if you understand this ! For the rest, I wish to avoid cables in the room since the instrument will be done of 3 parts : - the instrumental one, containing pipes and electrical traction system (solenoids) - the console containing the motherboard - computer part for working on a desk. At least wifi between console and organ would be great !

Many thanks Tom and Jim for your explanations ! Last, what are the main hardware difficulties if I think about replay, partition editing, wifi console ? For the swell pedal I can take it in consideration even if it'll be one of the last thing to construct. But you're right to make me think about before shuting up the pipes.

That's why I asked the question. Not only for the only notes, but I thought the refresh of all the configuration every x ms does take part to the flux. For a pipe organ, one can really imagine 30 stops playing together with 10 notes per second, refresh at least every 20 ms, that is to say a total of 3 x 30 x 10 x 50 = 45 000 bytes per second. + extra like couplings or transposition...it's easy to think about saturation. That's of course for the active part of the instrument but I suppose the inactive one is under continuous survey and refresh too !

Is there a preferential hardware to enhance and overcome the 31250 bauds limit ? Do you ever had some problem of saturation or do you know people who had problem with ? Is there a good solution ? Maybe this could be a problem for some litterature.