c0nsumer Posted September 29, 2006 Report Share Posted September 29, 2006 I'm looking forward to the new rev chips. If I have time this winter (or whenever after the MIDIbox SID v2 stuff is released) i'm hoping to squeeze a four (or eight?) SID device into the same 6x6x2 enclosure I previously used for my single SID one.Should be possible on a single 100mm x 160mm board with a better designed power supply, mostly SMT components, tighter design, and (possibly) four-layer boards.-Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLP Posted September 29, 2006 Report Share Posted September 29, 2006 SMT components, tighter design, and (possibly) four-layer boards. :o :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c0nsumer Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 :o :oI figure, why not? I've got the software to do it, and I can solder SMT by hand... Once the basic design is available I should be able to put something together. The hardest part will be the power supply design, because I want it to be both very efficient (read: dissipate as little heat as possible) and yet still provide clean power for analog audio stuffs.I think a four-SID board would be pretty easy, so I can't see why an eight should be too much harder.-Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewMartens Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 I think a four-SID board would be pretty easy, so I can't see why an eight should be too much harder.If you're low on space, just design the four-SID section so that you could create a daughtercard variant of it, and just make a small stackable header that connects to it. Make sure the tall caps are in a different part of the board, and you're good to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLP Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 I figure, why not? I've got the software to do it, and I can solder SMT by hand... I know that SMD soldering isn't that hard (I'm doing it myself, too) but how do you create a 4-layer-board ?SMT components...isn't it called smD ? (Surface Mounted Devices...)matthias Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 SMT = Surface mount technology... Same dog, different leg action ;)There are people with preliminary designs for 8x SID boards already, it's certainly doable. Hence those tubes of SIDs in the corner of my lab over there hehehehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c0nsumer Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 I know that SMD soldering isn't that hard (I'm doing it myself, too) but how do you create a 4-layer-board ?Draw it out in Eagle then have a board house make it. Advanced Circuits will do four-layer prototypes for something like $66/each in quantities of three. (See here.)...isn't it called smD ? (Surface Mounted Devices...)SMT == <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology">surface mount technology</a>. Both are really correct, though.-Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted September 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 Hi,But, the revision-id was 0C04... >:( so i think it tooks 1-2 months more before we getting the new chips w/o the EUSART bug...It's a B4 (due to a bug in the application the wrong letter will be displayed)And here the bad news: I also got a B4 from Microchip some weeks ago, it turned out that the EUSART bug still exists. Microchip has released an incomplete errata sheet!I reported this mistake and only got this "typical" answer from the support guys:Below is a response from Microchip Engineering Support Team for your submitted ticket #: 1-57449A description of the problem and our proposed resolution is contained below.Area: PICmicro ProductsProduct Group: PIC18FXX20Product: PIC18F4620Problem Description:I've evaluated the new Rev.B4 Steo of PIC18F4620, and noticed, that the EUSART bug, which I've reported in Ticket 1-36482, 1-19597 and 1-16900, and which has been documented in the RevA3 errata sheet Rev C (4/2006) as #33, still exists.It's not documented in RevB4 errata sheet RevA from 07/2006In general I would like to know: - are you aware that the errata sheet is not complete? - can we expect a new silicon version with fixed EUSART bugs (especially the zero frame one) in the next months?Best Regards, Thorsten Klose.Problem Resolution:Hi Thorsten,Thanks for pointing this out.We would try to fix this in the later version.Thanks once again.Regards.My hope was, that they update the errata sheet quickly, so that I can take it as a reference - but nothing happened yet!However, I haven't found the time to update all the relevant webpages at ucapps.de and in the wiki again - but the consequence is, that the MBHP_IIC_MIDI workaround will be required for the next years!Best Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c0nsumer Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 My hope was, that they update the errata sheet quickly, so that I can take it as a reference - but nothing happened yet!However, I haven't found the time to update all the relevant webpages at ucapps.de and in the wiki again - but the consequence is, that the MBHP_IIC_MIDI workaround will be required for the next years!Darn. Well, there goes the idea mentioned in the previous replies. Ah well.-Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLP Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 But the SID V1.xx and V2 does/will work with it ?matthias Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattias Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 So we all have to build the IIC midi mod. For V 2.0. Just wondering ?? Do we need one for every SLAVE or just one for the CORE on the MB SID?? ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted October 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 The questions are repeating, I've answered them several times... therefore I've started a FAQ:http://www.midibox.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=mios_pic18f4620Best Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixox Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 Thanks Thorsten for the FAQ which is very usefull... and clear.But i was surprised to read MIDIbox SID used as master only, no slaves connected: no MBHP_IIC_MIDI module required, as the MBSID mostly only receives MIDI data. The MIDI Out is only used to transfer SysEx dumps, but in this case it normaly doesn’t receive MIDI data at the same time (or you can prevent this easily).I haven't tried yet the CC button (step B) with my mono SID but i have the feeling it will make the bug appear... Can you tell me if the followin is true ?You play a midi track routed to the SID box with a sequencer... and then use the CC stuff to record with the same sequencer some sound modifications while it plays. The bug may occure (??)Regards,Xavier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted October 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 Hi Xavier,if you would have quoted the paragraph below this one, you would find the answerIf you’ve built the Control Surface, and want to use the CC Sending function for recording parameter sweeps, a MBHP_IIC_MIDI module is recommented, because here it can happen that the PIC18F4620 receives MIDI Notes and sends MIDI CCs at the same time.Yes, this can happen when MIDI events are received from a sequencer and CC data is sent out at the same time...Best Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixox Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 I think you wrote this FAQ to avoid that kind of question...Sorry... And thanks for the answer.Xavier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosone Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 hi!finally i got my PIC 16F88 programmed, so i can build the midi_IIC module.just one (dumb!?) question...i understood that the IIC module has to be connected to the core PIN J4... is it right?? because in that pin there is already the bankstick... do i miss something? in this case, should a "bridge" be built so that to the J4 PIC there are either the bansktick and the midi_IIC ? or i misunderstood how to connect midi_iic and the sequencer core??? (or remeber wrong something?!)and, another question: the new PIC18F4620 witht the seq V3 snapshot you send me is already "ready" to use the MIDI_IIC module... i suppose... (since you ARE using the midi_iic for debugging seq V3, right?) is this correct? ??? ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c0nsumer Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 i understood that the IIC module has to be connected to the core PIN J4... is it right?? because in that pin there is already the bankstick... do i miss something?IIC is a bus which can be shared amongst a few devices. So, yes, the IIC_MIDI module is connected to the same pin(s) as the BankStick module. To see a schematic of a full MIDIbox SID implementation which includes both BankStick and IIC_MIDI modules, take a look here: PNG, PDF.Also, I think this is the wrong area for this kind of question. It's not related to the topic at hand.-Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted October 5, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 I've added the question to the FAQ.Bosone: please let me know once you have your PIC18F4620 based MBSEQ up&running (via email), so that I can send you the latest snapshot with improved live record functionBut as Steve said: this is a different topic and should not discussed in this threadBest Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havensole Posted October 22, 2006 Report Share Posted October 22, 2006 well, i just ordered my samples (and how much i love fedex for smashing the box, crushing the plastic tubes, and snapping one of them in half) and the prod. date is 0633, so i imagine ordering now is ok.-haven sole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcer10 Posted October 22, 2006 Report Share Posted October 22, 2006 Has there been any updates on this? Is the V3 sequencer going to happen still with the current hardware or will people need to build the IIC board? Im very keen to update my V2 to V3 when its possible. The converstations so far looked like it was going to happen, then that there was a bug, then it was worked around with the use of the IIC board, then the bug on the pic was gone, now it isnt, does that mean you just need an IIC board? Its all a bit confusing! Im in no rush for it, still working some bugs out of the seq v2 ive built, Im keen to start getting parts for the V3, can someone give a clear upgrade path requirements list?Thanks in advance,John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted October 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2006 I thought that the informations in the FAQ are sufficient for deciding, if a MBHP_IIC_MIDI module is required or not.If you want to have an easy answer: yes, under normal circumstances it's required for MBSEQ V3 - and since MBSEQ V3 supports up to 4 IIC_MIDI modules for 4 seperate MIDI outs, this approach also brings some advantages.Best Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rad Posted February 13, 2007 Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 Hi TX. When you finish mbhp_usb_pic18f4550.pdf module? It is very nice and powerful construction. Thanks a lot for your work.Radek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted February 13, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 Hi Radek,it's already finished, but not available for public.Best Regards, Thorsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts