Advice on making MIDI Editor for MBSID

[toneburst]

Hi again folks,

I'm trying to setup the controls on my Novation X-Station so that I can use it to edit the sounds on my single MBSID, but am having problems with some of the parameters. All the ones that go from 0-127 are fine, but many, like the waveform selectors, LFO mode selectors, filter mode controls and a few others are giving me a headache.

The problem is, if I just assign a controller sending out values from 0-127 to any of these parameters, I get very unpredictable results. Unfortunately, while you can set minimum and maximum values for the control and a step size, the X-Station doesn't give you the option to only send specific numbers when a control is operated. For it to make sense it would need to pick specific numbers from a list of those values that actually do something. Does anyone know if there is there any way of getting around this, so that these controls are a bit more intuitive? Maybe the controller assignments can be edited in some way to make them work more easily with a MIDI controller like mine....

Anyway, if anyone is interested, I will make the the X-Station template available. It currently controls filter cutoff and res (also mapped to the X-Y pad), LFOs 1, 2, and 3 rate, voice 1, 2 and 3 wave (though weirdly, for the reasons noted above), semitone, detune and pulsewidth, the amp envelope for the 3 combined voices and env.1. Obviously, it's not really useful for sound-creation, but offers a useful amount of 'tweakability'.

I'm also considering making some sort of Reaktor ensemble to control the SID, or maybe just as a frontend to edit all the sound parameters. I'll make that available to anyone who wants it too. Unless S.M. fancies porting his VST editor to the Mac, of course....

Alex

http://www.toneburst.net

[ilmenator]

Hi Alex,

you could try the MIDIfilter / processor project to modify the data in such a way that it fits the SID's expectations.  ;D

Best regards, ilmenator

[audiocommander]

or maybe just as a frontend to edit all the sound parameters

Not sure if I understand you right, but if you're interested in a software-based HUI, you could check out MiniAudicle: http://chuck.cs.princeton.edu/

Although it's Mac OS X native, it's platform independent and if you're not afraid of typing some chars, you can quickly setup a windowed interface with default controls like knobs, sliders, buttons...

But I have to mention, that this is only an option when using 3-byte-Midi-messages; chuck has some probs with 1 and 2-byte-midi-messages...

Best regards,

Michael

[toneburst]

Hi ilmenator,

good point- hadn't thought of that. It just occured to me that the proposed next generation of the MIDIBox SID firmware may use NRPNs rather than CCs. I remember seeing this on the SID v.2 wishlist ( http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_sid_v2_wishlist.html ), so maybe then it won't be such an issue, as there presumably will be more dedicated controllers available, so this potentially won't be such an issue.

Cheers,

Alex

http://www.toneburst.net

[audiocommander]

NRPNs are also CCs ;)

[a7thson]

unfortunately the X-Station cannot transmit NRPN fine data, only course (Novation has confirmed this and has no plans to alter it).  Among other things this has resulted in ALesis (Micron, Ion) and some other synths being very limited in terms of controllability from an X-Station.  I've not built a MIDIbox SID yet, but may have to stick with the older firmware depending on how control is implemented, or may have to give up the idea of using X-Station with it.  High resolution / fine-grained control through NRPNs will require some kind of intermediary 'mapper' that does the translation layer for us.  I'm not enough of a MIDI maven to know of such a product; perhaps it will have to be coded from scratch.  I haven't yet dived into my X-Station enough to give a more-informed opinion of its capabilities.

Hi ilmenator,

good point- hadn't thought of that. It just occured to me that the proposed next generation of the MIDIBox SID firmware may use NRPNs rather than CCs. I remember seeing this on the SID v.2 wishlist ( http://www.ucapps.de/midibox_sid_v2_wishlist.html ), so maybe then it won't be such an issue, as there presumably will be more dedicated controllers available, so this potentially won't be such an issue.

Cheers,

Alex

http://www.toneburst.net

[toneburst]

Hi a7thson,

I wonder if this is also the case with the newer Remote SL too...

I guess I have 2 ways to go on this then- I either down the route of contructing some kind of Reaktor-based frontend to mediate between the SID and the XStation, or I stick with what I have. In the end, in a live performance setting, the main parameters I'd like to be able to tweak can be controlled satisfactorily from the XStation, and I'm planning to build a full control-surface at some point anyway, time and money-permitting.

I suppose the advantage of going to Reaktor way is I can save settings as Reaktor snapshots and have instant access to a load of different sounds from within my sequencer, without having to do sysex dumps. I wonder how the MBHPSID would cope with having settings for all its parameters send at the same time though...

Hmm...

Thanks for all your suggestions guys,

Alex

http://www.toneburst.net

[a7thson]

I wonder if this is also the case with the newer Remote SL too...

unfortunately yes.  I dug around a bit for the old discussion where I read this, (http://createdigitalnoise.com/viewtopic.php?t=139&sid=a55c1fd340a6a0759c23365923b8e1b4) and found the actual quote:

"In bad news, I learned recently (from Novation) that the X-Station does not send NRPN fine data and the SL series only sends it with the 8 endless rotaries. This probably affects very few people, but it does seem to rule out using them to edit Alesis Micron patches directly."  So there is some support over X-Station, at least, but it's still not full operation.

I guess I have 2 ways to go on this then- I either down the route of contructing some kind of Reaktor-based frontend to mediate between the SID and the XStation, or I stick with what I have. In the end, in a live performance setting, the main parameters I'd like to be able to tweak can be controlled satisfactorily from the XStation, and I'm planning to build a full control-surface at some point anyway, time and money-permitting.

The thing I liked most about the X-Station over competing products was the layout of the buttons, I figure there won't be much reason to tweak i.e. the modulation matrix live - 3 osc, a filter, and 3 LFO controllers and possibly the filter and volume envelopes, should be sufficient for most anyone, I'd think - I for one wouldn't be brave enough to start re-patching on a live set anyway.

I suppose the advantage of going to Reaktor way is I can save settings as Reaktor snapshots and have instant access to a load of different sounds from within my sequencer, without having to do sysex dumps. I wonder how the MBHPSID would cope with having settings for all its parameters send at the same time though...

I'm thinking that something already exists out there that works (commercial) or could be adapted (FOSS) and would be a lighter-weight solution than breaking out Reaktor's erector set, but it's definitely an option.  I saw the product "Forte" by "Brainspawn" mentioned on an X-Station enthusiast group for a somewhat similar application.  It is apparently a very programmable translation layer for MIDI controllers (www.brainspawn.com $129+$69 plugin... expensive) but I've never used the product; just passing along the information - there is a free demo available but it would be useless to me since I don't have a MIDIbox SID yet.

Either way, though, this would be a great application for the X-Station or similar MIDI controller, with decent live-editing abilities on that, the MIDIbox-SID could be a very compact or racked design without having to tradeoff so much in terms of usability.  As a side note, has anyone ever considered doing a MIDIbox-SID with just a patch matrix and set of encoders, like the Dave Smith Evolver?

[toneburst]

Hi again a7thson,

I figure there won't be much reason to tweak i.e. the modulation matrix live - 3 osc, a filter, and 3 LFO controllers and possibly the filter and volume envelopes, should be sufficient for most anyone, I'd think - I for one wouldn't be brave enough to start re-patching on a live set anyway.

Agreed. Just assigning the filter res. and cutoff to the touchpad is fun, especially with a nice bass fat patch! I'm becoming a big fan of the Wave Bass patch in the presets library, and the high-pass filter mode. Very fat! It's just a shame that the filter mode and osc. waveform are so difficult to control from the XStation though. I mean, it IS possible to access all the options, just not in a way that makes much sense.

Incidentally, the XStation synth can make some pretty cool sounds too. I've yet to use it in a track, but it sounds good to me. I have a Nova too (the desktop one), which I'm also a big fan of.

As a side note, has anyone ever considered doing a MIDIbox-SID with just a patch matrix and set of encoders, like the Dave Smith Evolver?

I'm thinking that something already exists out there that works (commercial) or could be adapted (FOSS) and would be a lighter-weight solution than breaking out Reaktor's erector set, but it's definitely an option.  I saw the product "Forte" by "Brainspawn" mentioned on an X-Station enthusiast group for a somewhat similar application.  It is apparently a very programmable translation layer for MIDI controllers (www.brainspawn.com $129+$69 plugin... expensive) but I've never used the product; just passing along the information - there is a free demo available but it would be useless to me since I don't have a MIDIbox SID yet.

It's just I'm comfortable using Reaktor. I also have the NI Kore controller, so I could potentially use that also to control the SID via Reaktor. Kore has high-resolution encoders, and I could also use it as a librarian of sorts for SID patches. I imagine using Reaktor purely to send out MIDI controller data shouldn't be too processor-crippling, though obviously just running the plugin involves some CPU hit.

Incidentally, there's no obvious mention of Mac support on the Brainspawn site, so I'm assuming their stuff is Windows-only. Think it's probably a bit OTT for my simple needs too ;)

Have you seen this thread?

http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=7569.0

I thought of the Evolver as soon as I read it!

Alex

http://www.toneburst.net

[ilmenator]

Alex,

you might also want to look at this thread: http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php?topic=7724.0

Of course, it does not help with your Novation issue, but might help in deciding to drop that thing  ;D.

Best regards, ilmenator

[a7thson]

It's just a shame that the filter mode and osc. waveform are so difficult to control from the XStation though. I mean, it IS possible to access all the options, just not in a way that makes much sense.

I don't mind the filter control so much (the waveform is annoying) - actually I was sold on this model due to the functional versus "here's a bunch of knobs and sliders, you figure it out" interface design, but it's a shame there were not a few "user-defined" encoders put in (my Virus C has two, and they're fully usable as input sources to the mod matrix, a feature I really like about it).

Incidentally, the XStation synth can make some pretty cool sounds too. I've yet to use it in a track, but it sounds good to me. I have a Nova too (the desktop one), which I'm also a big fan of.

I wouldn't have a use for more than a dozen or so of the factory patches but the KS synth engine inside it is pretty powerful so I'm looking forward to some knob tweaking; the inboard effects are quite nice and I like having a compressor right inside for a little bass/percussion postproduction done onboard :-)  I would ask your opinion of the Nova but this is probably too far off-topic for getting too far into specifics, the polyphony of that or a KS4 or 5 might be a nice option to have.

It's just I'm comfortable using Reaktor. I also have the NI Kore controller, so I could potentially use that also to control the SID via Reaktor. Kore has high-resolution encoders, and I could also use it as a librarian of sorts for SID patches. I imagine using Reaktor purely to send out MIDI controller data shouldn't be too processor-crippling, though obviously just running the plugin involves some CPU hit.

Reaktor might not be so bad for this actually.  With Reaktor core you could probably do something fairly minimal, though it's still going to be a performance hit etc.  Do keep me/us posted on this!  Starting with JSynthLib and its MB-SID interface as a base may be an option too.  But strangely though, I thought the original take on this was that the MIDIbox would stay away from NRPNs altogether so I'm a bit confused here -- quoting from the FAQ:

"Oh, now you possibly come with the suggestion that NRPN should be used instead of CC --- no chance! One of my focus was always the capability to control all parameters via external sequencers/MIDI controllers (most of them cannot handle correctly with NRPN), and via Velocity/Aftertouch/Modulation Wheel/Wavetable. The assigned parameter numbers are stored in 7-bit registers, this limits the maximum number of parameters to 128"... so maybe this is really a non-problem from the developer's standpoint?? :-)

Incidentally, there's no obvious mention of Mac support on the Brainspawn site, so I'm assuming their stuff is Windows-only. Think it's probably a bit OTT for my simple needs too ;)

Overkill, yes.  It's use would be more along the lines of creating a "universal" layer with which to control several synths, yet without the inconvenience/clumsiness of having to manually switch X-Station templates etc.  Probably some clever manipulation in the sequencer (sending the SysEx commands to switch templates at appropriate times) can accomplish this and more, so I'm not really excited about it for the price, any more than I was about "Hybrid Mode" on the XioSynth was a selling factor (oh, Hybrid Mode, looks like 'Local Control=off' does 90% of the same thing).

Have you seen this thread?

I have now :-)  Yes, the resemblance is definitely there but Evolver has a more compact design with more parameters and does it in a smaller space... I don't own an Evolver so I can't speak in terms of usability for programming the beast however.  That said, I really like some of the ideas in this design, thanks for letting me know it's out there.