Korg Poly800/EX800 Users

Hi HAWK-800 owners,

I've released a new software update that addresses the two main
concerns with the HAWK-800 kit.

First, there is now no need to have a battery installed in the kit and
the original backup battery can also be removed. All patches, extended
parameters, sequencer data and global parameters are now stored in
flash memory.

Second, the sequencer plus MIDI glitch has been fixed and is no longer
a problem at all. All sequencer events are fully buffered if outgoing
MIDI events are already queued.

The next software update will include remapping all of the extended
parameters into more logical groupings. That software update should be
available within the next few weeks.

You can download the latest software from
http://patrioticduo.tripod.com/hawk800/techsupport.html

Mike.

aw shoot, yer boy mike is on point again...

good work man.  hows sales now?

jb


--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "korgpolyex800" <korgpolyex800@...>
wrote:

>
> Hi HAWK-800 owners,
> 
> I've released a new software update that addresses the two main
> concerns with the HAWK-800 kit.
> 
> First, there is now no need to have a battery installed in the kit and
> the original backup battery can also be removed. All patches, extended
> parameters, sequencer data and global parameters are now stored in
> flash memory.
> 
> Second, the sequencer plus MIDI glitch has been fixed and is no longer
> a problem at all. All sequencer events are fully buffered if outgoing
> MIDI events are already queued.
> 
> The next software update will include remapping all of the extended
> parameters into more logical groupings. That software update should be
> available within the next few weeks.
> 
> You can download the latest software from
> http://patrioticduo.tripod.com/hawk800/techsupport.html
> 
> Mike.
>

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:

> I've sold two in three weeks. Not exactly mind blowing results but some 
> of these hold outs have to start ponying up soon.
======================

status report on phase 2? the much rumored Atom-o-Hawk?

anyone else waiting for that before making the plunge?


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"Some folks look for answers
 	 others look for fights,
 	 some folks up in treetops
 	 just looking for their kites"
 		-- Grateful Dead

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:

> The Moog Slayer is still being looked at because from what I can tell 
> the Moog Slayer is basically just extreme resonance with self 
> oscillation. It turns out that Korg really went cheap on the resonance 
> parameter because they use a range of 0-15 but the actual resoluation is 
> 8 bits so it is conceivable to control the thing in a range of 0-255.
=========================

wow! so of my three hardware mods, one of them may wind up a software mod? 
what's the improvement in cost/complexity by moving that into the software 
domain? my only concern would be the zipper effect, which can only be 
~really~ mitigated as a hardware mod. it wouldn't be a big deal on most 
parameters, but on the moog-slayer the zipper may be noticeable. although, 
even if it's controlled by a digital pot, i guess there would still be a 
zipper...? maybe there's some way to get the best of both worlds? a switch 
between hardware/software control? or a software control that feeds the 
high side of the hardware pot?

are there any other parameters that can be easily "expanded" to a higher 
resolution or ceiling?

as soon as that's ready for prime-time, my $$$ will be on the way.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability
 	 to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable
 	 for their apparent disinclination to do so."
 		-- Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:

> The 12/24db filter slope switch works exactly as it should.
===============

can that be a modulation target?

have you experimented with mixing the two slopes? i haven't tried it, but 
i'm not sure if they're out of phase, which would increase the parts count 
if they were to be mixed.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	Where is Lee Harvey Oswald now that we really need him?
 		-- Bumper Sticker

The existing resonance parameter is four bits (0-15) but is stored in
memory as four shifts to the left so that it uses the top four bits of
the eight bit byte.

This means that the low resolution four bits are not used at all.

By changing the resonance to be a 0-99 parameter we use plenty of bits
 for the set point and leave lots of room for modulation and EG
following as well.

The benefit is that it's cheap and flexible.

I just haven't tested it fully yet.

All of the other parameters use their full possible resolution.

The kit will compliment the existing Moog Slayer mod in that you will
still be able to use a pot if you want to.

Mike

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> 
> > The Moog Slayer is still being looked at because from what I can tell 
> > the Moog Slayer is basically just extreme resonance with self 
> > oscillation. It turns out that Korg really went cheap on the
resonance 
> > parameter because they use a range of 0-15 but the actual
resoluation is 
> > 8 bits so it is conceivable to control the thing in a range of 0-255.
> =========================
> 
> wow! so of my three hardware mods, one of them may wind up a
software mod? 
> what's the improvement in cost/complexity by moving that into the
software 
> domain? my only concern would be the zipper effect, which can only be 
> ~really~ mitigated as a hardware mod. it wouldn't be a big deal on most 
> parameters, but on the moog-slayer the zipper may be noticeable.
although, 
> even if it's controlled by a digital pot, i guess there would still
be a 
> zipper...? maybe there's some way to get the best of both worlds? a
switch 
> between hardware/software control? or a software control that feeds the 
> high side of the hardware pot?
> 
> are there any other parameters that can be easily "expanded" to a
higher 

> resolution or ceiling?
> 
> as soon as that's ready for prime-time, my $$$ will be on the way.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability
>  	 to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable
>  	 for their apparent disinclination to do so."
>  		-- Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See
>

Hmmmm, interesting. I didn't think of that. I'll have to have a little
poke around and see what is possible.

--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Michael Hawkins wrote:
> 
> > The 12/24db filter slope switch works exactly as it should.
> ===============
> 
> can that be a modulation target?
> 
> have you experimented with mixing the two slopes? i haven't tried
it, but 
> i'm not sure if they're out of phase, which would increase the parts
count 

> if they were to be mixed.
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	Where is Lee Harvey Oswald now that we really need him?
>  		-- Bumper Sticker
>

on these parameters that are 7-8 bits, could we have an option (for those 
of us that are uber-geeks) to max out the resolution and use hex in the 
display... so the default, suitable for most users, would be:
 	0-99

but with an option to have:
 	0-80, or 0-FF

in either case, i'd *really* like MIDI CCs to be ~interpreted~ 
~internally~ as 7 bits, even of the display only handles 0-99.

another option would be using one of the dots in the display, and then 
using binary digits 0-99, then turn on a dot (to represent hundred) and go 
to 0-27.

if the bits are there, lets use them!


On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, korgpolyex800 wrote:

> The existing resonance parameter is four bits (0-15) but is stored in 
> memory as four shifts to the left so that it uses the top four bits of 
> the eight bit byte.
>
> This means that the low resolution four bits are not used at all.
>
> By changing the resonance to be a 0-99 parameter we use plenty of bits 
> for the set point and leave lots of room for modulation and EG following 
> as well.



-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"The measure of a man's character is what he would
 	 do if he knew he never would be found out."
 		-- Baron Thomas Babington Macauley