Well, how about parameter control via the joystick?
Left right motion would scroll through the parameters and up down
motion would increase or decrease the parameter value.
It's true that many Poly 800 owners are not going to own a hardware
MIDI controller. But many will own a PC with an editor of some sort.
So although I understand your desire to drill holes, I am not the one
that will be enabling this addiction of yours this time. :-)
Mike
--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> i know one of the motivating factors (or selling points?) of the
hawk-800,
> and more-so the aTomaHawk, is that people won't have to drill holes in
> their 800s. i guess that's a concern for some, but not me...
>
> in fact, i just realized the opposite concern; i want to drill ∗more∗
> holes in my 800! but not just for fun... here's my latest
wish-list-item
> for the aTomaHawk: input for 6+ voltage dividers, which can be
assigned to
> any destination per patch.
>
> for some, that would mean 2 pedal inputs! for some, that would mean a
> bunch of front-panel ∗KNOBS∗! for some, knobs & pedals! maybe even some
> DIY d-beam or theremin controllers?!?! or virtual-reality gloves!?!?
> or....? more ideas here - http://music.columbia.edu/~douglas/pc1600mod/
> and here -
> http://music.columbia.edu/~douglas/pc1600mod/pc1600mod.sensors.html
>
> the 800 remains a budget synth, and most 800 owners aren't going to
buy a
> hardware midi knob-box after upgrading. aTomaHawk support for knobs
would
> give tremendous hands-on control, starting at about $2-5 per knob (for
> those inclined to do the extra work).
>
> if this happens, i'd like to see support for 6-8 knobs (nothing
wrong with
> more!). by support, i mean having a regulated +/- for the voltage
> dividers, and one input per linear pot. then leave it up to the
end-user
> to decide if/how they want to install knobs, motion sensors,
flex-sensors,
> light sensors, etc.
>
> for sanity, the output from the knobs will have to have a buffer that
> dumps excess data. for bonus points, the knobs should send CCs to midi
> out... but that might be asking too much.
>
> implementation-wise... if all of the parameters of the synth can
respond
> to midi CC, then each patch would only have to add what CC each of the
> knobs is interpreted as. ie, if EG1 attack is tied to CC-73 then the
user
> would select the menu for knob "A" and select "73" to control EG1
attack.
> or are we using N/RPNs for midi control? that can still be made to work.
>
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "Government is not the solution to our problem,
> government is the problem."
> -- Ronald Reagan
> Inaugural Address, 20 Jan 1981
>