Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

I think that in the xl the midi priority starts from track one and 
moves down the line.  At least that is what i rember reading.  

Am i to take it the Midi B outs are way down the line then? or as 
least come in sequence after the A outs?

Trying to keep midi timing as tight as possable is all.

Please give a shout if ya know the answer to this one.  And just a 
general question, how do you all find the timing on this box?  I feel 
that at times it gets kinda sloppy when i have arps going and what 
not.

Mike G.

To me it feels just fine, way tighter then rm1x that I use to have.All the sequencers have timing issues when a lot of stuff is going on, thats why there is swing.I only use esi2000 as sound module and its not a problem when you nudge the notes with swing and that feature is mainly used for opening up the space.Theoreticaly, two midi outs are as double as better then one becouse one out can only send one note at the time.Sometimes people blame sloppiness on timing of the sequencer, but its 98% of time doe to the composition.Also if you use a lot of control change and pich shift in the recording, that will effect it in a way becouse those kinds od messages contain more data then note on and off.

mike <curiousproductions@...> wrote:
I think that in the xl the midi priority starts from track one and 
moves down the line.  At least that is what i rember reading.  

Am i to take it the Midi B outs are way down the line then? or as 
least come in sequence after the A outs?

Trying to keep midi timing as tight as possable is all.

Please give a shout if ya know the answer to this one.  And just a 
general question, how do you all find the timing on this box?  I feel 
that at times it gets kinda sloppy when i have arps going and what 
not.

Mike G.



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xl7/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think the two outputs def. gives you an edge, it certainly would seem that it doubles the total bytes that can flow out at once.  After that, a MIDI interface does wonders, as opposed to daisy chaining or other weird setups....
Worst case scenario you can take apart a MIDI cable and I believe it's pins 4 and 5 that are 0 & 1 (on and off) and you can solder 'two' jumpers to each one, thereby doubling the output capacity of that cable.  

Also, if you're doing filter sweeps and tons of realtime CC messages, perhaps try using a sampler for those riffs.  You can always look at your event list, compare it to the time in seconds and mathmatically figure out if you're trying to put too much MIDI down the MIDI hole, but that's a pain in the arse.  if you're getting flamming and things of that nature, you most likely need to bounce some stuff to audio, or have fewer events.
 
I used to be in a Live PA and we struggled with this all the time, esp. the syncing of audio loops together with MIDI, this is a wonderful topic, because as tight as you can get, most people I've seen still have a little flam going on, mostly when using several sequencers together.
 
Peace,
 
Wesley


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

thanks for the feedback.  I was kinda wondering if it is in my head 
or not.  So in theory the a outs and the B outs should be able so 
send twice as much info at the same time.  Interesting.  I was kinda 
hoping that was the case.


take it easy 

Mike G.


--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, khjkkkkk khjkhjk <extra_mayo79@y...> 
wrote:
> To me it feels just fine, way tighter then rm1x that I use to 
have.All the sequencers have timing issues when a lot of stuff is 
going on, thats why there is swing.I only use esi2000 as sound module 
and its not a problem when you nudge the notes with swing and that 
feature is mainly used for opening up the space.Theoreticaly, two 
midi outs are as double as better then one becouse one out can only 
send one note at the time.Sometimes people blame sloppiness on timing 
of the sequencer, but its 98% of time doe to the composition.Also if 
you use a lot of control change and pich shift in the recording, that 
will effect it in a way becouse those kinds od messages contain more 
data then note on and off.
> 
> mike <curiousproductions@r...> wrote:
> I think that in the xl the midi priority starts from track one and 
> moves down the line.  At least that is what i rember reading.  
> 
> Am i to take it the Midi B outs are way down the line then? or as 
> least come in sequence after the A outs?
> 
> Trying to keep midi timing as tight as possable is all.
> 
> Please give a shout if ya know the answer to this one.  And just a 
> general question, how do you all find the timing on this box?  I 
feel 
> that at times it gets kinda sloppy when i have arps going and what 
> not.
> 
> Mike G.
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
>    To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xl7/
>   
>    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   
>    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service. 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

|Worst case scenario you can take apart a MIDI cable and I believe 
|it's pins 4 and 5 that are 0 & 1 (on and off) and you can solder 
|'two' jumpers to each one, thereby doubling the output capacity of 
|that cable.  

Have you ever actually done this?

i find myself having difficulties to get my head
around multisetups, particularly as to whether
choosing a different multisetup overrides the pattern
settings it. 

also: if you reselect the pattern, does it jump back
to 'normal settings' (i.e. the settings you saved your
pattern with) when you reselect it? if so, which
changes are retained from the multisetup?

is it possible to use the programmable knobs to
control external gear in that you can switch between
different multisetups, each of which is controlling 16
control numbers in 1 particular synth? i mean: first
of all, for each multisetup, you assign the 16 knobs
to control functions in one particular synth, or even
2 or more multisetups for 1 synth with a lot of
parametres you want to change. you give the multisetup
the name of the synth its programmable knobs control.
then, while playing/sequencing, you switch between
multisetups depending on the synth you want to control
with the knobs. if i get it right, there's too many
settings changing then, unless you set volume, pan etc
to the same amounts in every multisetup... both with
the pattern as with the multisetup settings are saved
that control the FX, the volume, the pan, the mix
outputs and the arp. 

are the pattern settings 'stronger' and overrule the
multisetup? meaning: if i change patterns, do they
sound different because another multisetup is
selected?

thanks for your enlightenments

hans



=====
http://www.electrobel.be/muzik.php?action=list&type=id&data=245
                             http://www.spectre.be
                          http://www.etherialdawn.be
                        http://www.isabellableeds.com
                     -|[ G E R \ufffd U S C H D I C H T E ]|-

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingelt\ufffdne f\ufffdrs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de

Yes I am also curious about that one.  That would be kinda cool and 
like hell why not?  My other question is what exactly do you meen by 
jumper?

Mike G.


--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "Stu" <routerman@z...> wrote:
> |Worst case scenario you can take apart a MIDI cable and I believe 
> |it's pins 4 and 5 that are 0 & 1 (on and off) and you can solder 
> |'two' jumpers to each one, thereby doubling the output capacity of 
> |that cable.  
> 
> Have you ever actually done this?

i find myself having difficulties to get my head around multisetups, 
particularly as to whether choosing a different multisetup overrides the 
pattern settings it. 

>>>Recalling a Multisetup will always overwrite all settings in the XX-7. 
Pattern data, MIDI, Controller, and Global Settings. <<<

also: if you reselect the pattern, does it jump back to 'normal settings' 
(i.e. the settings you saved your
pattern with) when you reselect it? if so, which changes are retained from 
the multisetup?

>>>Yes and yes.  If I restore a Multi and want to get my current Pattern 
settings back, I just do a Revert To Saved.  You can also move to a new 
Pattern, and then back to the one you were working on to do this. <<<

Is it possible to use the programmable knobs to control external gear in 
that you can switch between different multisetups, each of which is 
controlling 16 control numbers in 1 particular synth? 

>>>Yes, you'll find a bunch of these I've made already (mostly Reason 
stuff) in the Files section of this group. <<<

i mean: first of all, for each multisetup, you assign the 16 knobs to 
control functions in one particular synth, or even 2 or more multisetups 
for 1 synth with a lot of parametres you want to change. you give the 
multisetup
the name of the synth its programmable knobs control.

>>>Yes, sounds good so far... <<

then, while playing/sequencing, you switch between multisetups depending 
on the synth you want to control
with the knobs. 

>>>Yes, sounds good again, provided you aren't using the sequencer in the 
XX-7 while you Restore the Multi, as that will stop the sequencer, and 
could possible make your pattern sound different too. <<<

if i get it right, there's too many settings changing then, unless you set 
volume, pan etc to the same amounts in every multisetup... both with the 
pattern as with the multisetup settings are saved that control the FX, the 
volume, the pan, the mix outputs and the arp.

>>>Yeah, this is where the flexibility that Multisetups offer, also means 
more set up time.  The easiest way to copy all of the Volume, Pan and 
effects to multiple Multi's, is to make those settings as you want them, 
and then save the current Pattern.  Next, Restore the Multi you want to 
apply those settings, and then Revert To Saved the Pattern you had just 
saved, then resave the Multi.  This will override the settings stored in 
the Multi with those of the Pattern. <<<

are the pattern settings 'stronger' and overrule the multisetup? meaning: 
if i change patterns, do they
sound different because another multisetup is selected?

>>>Think of it this way, Patterns and Multi's can store the exact same 
type of data:

- effects settings (type, amount, sends).
- Preset/track assignments (Patterns do not store the Preset if a track 
has no data!).
- soem more I'm sure I'm forgetting

Which of these settings is use for playback depends on only ONE thing, 
which was selected/restored last.  If the Multi was the last thing you Restored, then the Multi data gets 
used.  If you Revert To Saved, or select another Pattern, then the data 
stored with the Pattern will be used. <<<

rEalm











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

rEalm

that clears up quite some things already, thanks!


 --- erik_magrini@... schrieb: > i find myself
having difficulties to get my head
> around multisetups, 
> particularly as to whether choosing a different
> multisetup overrides the 
> pattern settings it. 
> 
> >>>Recalling a Multisetup will always overwrite all
> settings in the XX-7. 
> Pattern data, MIDI, Controller, and Global Settings.
> <<<
> 
> also: if you reselect the pattern, does it jump back
> to 'normal settings' 
> (i.e. the settings you saved your
> pattern with) when you reselect it? if so, which
> changes are retained from 
> the multisetup?
> 
> >>>Yes and yes.  If I restore a Multi and want to
> get my current Pattern 
> settings back, I just do a Revert To Saved.  You can
> also move to a new 
> Pattern, and then back to the one you were working
> on to do this. <<<
> 
> Is it possible to use the programmable knobs to
> control external gear in 
> that you can switch between different multisetups,
> each of which is 
> controlling 16 control numbers in 1 particular
> synth? 
> 
> >>>Yes, you'll find a bunch of these I've made
> already (mostly Reason 
> stuff) in the Files section of this group. <<<
> 
> i mean: first of all, for each multisetup, you
> assign the 16 knobs to 
> control functions in one particular synth, or even 2
> or more multisetups 
> for 1 synth with a lot of parametres you want to
> change. you give the 
> multisetup
> the name of the synth its programmable knobs
> control.
> 
> >>>Yes, sounds good so far... <<
> 
> then, while playing/sequencing, you switch between
> multisetups depending 
> on the synth you want to control
> with the knobs. 
> 
> >>>Yes, sounds good again, provided you aren't using
> the sequencer in the 
> XX-7 while you Restore the Multi, as that will stop
> the sequencer, and 
> could possible make your pattern sound different
> too. <<<
> 
> if i get it right, there's too many settings
> changing then, unless you set 
> volume, pan etc to the same amounts in every
> multisetup... both with the 
> pattern as with the multisetup settings are saved
> that control the FX, the 
> volume, the pan, the mix outputs and the arp.
> 
> >>>Yeah, this is where the flexibility that
> Multisetups offer, also means 
> more set up time.  The easiest way to copy all of
> the Volume, Pan and 
> effects to multiple Multi's, is to make those
> settings as you want them, 
> and then save the current Pattern.  Next, Restore
> the Multi you want to 
> apply those settings, and then Revert To Saved the
> Pattern you had just 
> saved, then resave the Multi.  This will override
> the settings stored in 
> the Multi with those of the Pattern. <<<
> 
> are the pattern settings 'stronger' and overrule the
> multisetup? meaning: 
> if i change patterns, do they
> sound different because another multisetup is
> selected?
> 
> >>>Think of it this way, Patterns and Multi's can
> store the exact same 
> type of data:
> 
> - effects settings (type, amount, sends).
> - Preset/track assignments (Patterns do not store
> the Preset if a track 
> has no data!).
> - soem more I'm sure I'm forgetting
> 
> Which of these settings is use for playback depends
> on only ONE thing, 
> which was selected/restored last.  If the Multi was
> the last thing you Restored, then the Multi data
> gets 
> used.  If you Revert To Saved, or select another
> Pattern, then the data 
> stored with the Pattern will be used. <<<
> 
> rEalm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xl7/
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>  

=====
http://www.electrobel.be/muzik.php?action=list&type=id&data=245
                             http://www.spectre.be
                          http://www.etherialdawn.be
                        http://www.isabellableeds.com
                     -|[ G E R \ufffd U S C H D I C H T E ]|-

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingelt\ufffdne f\ufffdrs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de

No but I took an audiotronics course at Full Sail and my teacher told me it was possible.  The application he used it for was a MIDI rig containing five pieces of gear in a chain.  So they put three on one split of the cable, and two on the other, and the latency problem was solved.  I have a MOTU 8X8 interface, which rocks btw, but if you think this quick fix might be helpful, it's not very expensive to try out.  You just need three MIDI cables, a soldering iron, some solder, and some jumpers.  If it doesn't work, you could always solder them back the way they were.

Sorry I can't be more of assistance, but in theory it should work.
 
Peace,
 
Wesley


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Clarification:  Jumper = just an electronic cable.  basically a rubber casing with some wire inside it.  I say jumper because it's used to 'jump' the flow of electricity from one place to another, most cables have hot and ground, etc., jumper just diverts flow of one path.  you might say a typical MIDI cable has five jumpers running through it (three if it's cheap)
 
Hoping that makes sense.
 
-Wesley


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It will also put your xx-7 out of warranty tho. I can't see the point
either, unless you *really* need to reduce the number of cables in your rig.
Even then a decent midi patchbay (such as the MOTU boxes) is a much more
sensible option. I must add that this mod doesn't increase the amount of
data that can be sent down a midi cable, it just allows 2 midi cables to be
combined into one cable.

Regards,

Stu


|-----Original Message-----
|From: Wesley D [mailto:Serfiss@...]
|Sent: 23 December 2003 01:40
|To: xl7@yahoogroups.com
|Subject: RE: [xl7] Keeping midi tight
|
|
|No but I took an audiotronics course at Full Sail and my teacher
|told me it was possible.  The application he used it for was a
|MIDI rig containing five pieces of gear in a chain.  So they put
|three on one split of the cable, and two on the other, and the
|latency problem was solved.  I have a MOTU 8X8 interface, which
|rocks btw, but if you think this quick fix might be helpful, it's
|not very expensive to try out.  You just need three MIDI cables, a
|soldering iron, some solder, and some jumpers.  If it doesn't
|work, you could always solder them back the way they were.
|
|Sorry I can't be more of assistance, but in theory it should work.
|
|Peace,
|
|Wesley
|
|
|---------------------------------
|Do you Yahoo!?
|Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square
|
|[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
|
|
|Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|To visit your group on the web, go to:
| http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xl7/
|
|To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
| xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
|
|Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
| http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|

I wasn't talking about an actual mod to the xx7, a mod to a cable coming out of it.  Electronically speaking, if x amount of bytes are trying to get out of the cable, having two different paths to flow through seems like would work.  Like I said, it's a unique fix for a unique problem, and yes an interface is certainly the way to go,(but they run around $300).
 
If you just have the xx7 sequencing several external mods and boards this trick could give you four cables.  My understanding of this is that it's a sort of dynamic allocation.  The sequences can spit out whatever you put into it, it just might not fit down the cable as fast as you'd like.  So splitting the cable into two should open up some room.
 
-Wesley


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

You realize that midi is a digital protocol, right?
No matter how many wires you connect, the same number of bits are going 
to go through!
The transmission bandwidth is not limited by the wire, it is determined 
by the transmitter.
And since it is specified in the midi standard, even if you could speed 
it up, it would then be incompatible with any receiving device.

What was the original problem?

Wesley D wrote:

>I wasn't talking about an actual mod to the xx7, a mod to a cable coming out of it.  Electronically speaking, if x amount of bytes are trying to get out of the cable, having two different paths to flow through seems like would work.  Like I said, it's a unique fix for a unique problem, and yes an interface is certainly the way to go,(but they run around $300).
> 
>If you just have the xx7 sequencing several external mods and boards this trick could give you four cables.  My understanding of this is that it's a sort of dynamic allocation.  The sequences can spit out whatever you put into it, it just might not fit down the cable as fast as you'd like.  So splitting the cable into two should open up some room.
> 
>-Wesley
>  
>

> The sequences can spit out whatever you put into 
> it, it just might not fit down the cable as fast as you'd 
> like. So splitting the cable into two should open up some room.

I certainly DON'T want to interpool the signals sent between midi
devices with a simple solder job. It's not smart at all. 

Secondly, the logic here is all wrong. You're just cramming the same
data into 1 1/2 cables. All you're avoiding is the delay caused by midi
thru. 

A midi splitter is a much smarter choice here. $35 or less on ebay.


-m@

Thanks

Mike G.



--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, Wesley D <Serfiss@y...> wrote:
> Clarification:  Jumper = just an electronic cable.  basically a 
rubber casing with some wire inside it.  I say jumper because it's 
used to 'jump' the flow of electricity from one place to another, 
most cables have hot and ground, etc., jumper just diverts flow of 
one path.  you might say a typical MIDI cable has five jumpers 
running through it (three if it's cheap)
>  
> Hoping that makes sense.
>  
> -Wesley
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Matt is correct. Splitting the signal from a single Midi output by
adding a second pair 
of cables seems suspicious to me. First, your cutting the signal
strength in half which 
could add problems all it's own. Second, your allowing no more
information down the 
sum of these now "TWO" Midi cables then you originaly had. And,unless
your feeding 
to two seperate destinations and avoiding a through at some point,
there is no 
advantage that I can think of.

psychogroove1

--- In xl7@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Picone" <matman@m...> wrote:
> > The sequences can spit out whatever you put into 
> > it, it just might not fit down the cable as fast as you'd 
> > like. So splitting the cable into two should open up some room.
> 
> I certainly DON'T want to interpool the signals sent between midi
> devices with a simple solder job. It's not smart at all. 
> 
> Secondly, the logic here is all wrong. You're just cramming the same
> data into 1 1/2 cables. All you're avoiding is the delay caused by
midi
> thru. 
> 
> A midi splitter is a much smarter choice here. $35 or less on ebay.
> 
> 
> -m@

you're exactly right.  It's a quick fix for a setup involving problems with using thru.
 
however, it could in theory save your ass or make you look like a hero some day.
 
-Wesley


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Output of the sequencer is bounded by the latency of the synthesiser. 
Tracks are processed in numeric order, from 1 to 16 for all events up
till the current tick.  Firing complex synth notes can take a while
(relatively speaking) as opposed to sending MIDI notes which takes
really no time at all (from the sequencer's point of view).

Moral of the story?  Put your external tracks first if you can, cause
they won't affect timing at all.  After that, put the most important
timing critical tracks next (like drums, especially since they're
usually simpler patches).  Next put important melodic stuff, and
finally put fluffy stuff like pads last.

-Aaron

PS.  tons of controller data can chew up MIDI bandwidth, but internally
takes very little processor power.

PPS.  arps unfortunately have a lower priority than ALL of the
sequencer, so those'll get sloppy first.  You can record them with a
loopback cable if you want...  (yeah, I know it's a kludge)

PPPS.  MIDI A vs B out makes no difference.  (bonus trivia: on a
Proteus2000, the A *input* has a higher priority than the B input.)

--- mike <curiousproductions@...> wrote:
> I think that in the xl the midi priority starts from track one and 
> moves down the line.  At least that is what i rember reading.  
> 
> Am i to take it the Midi B outs are way down the line then? or as 
> least come in sequence after the A outs?
> 
> Trying to keep midi timing as tight as possable is all.
> 
> Please give a shout if ya know the answer to this one.  And just a 
> general question, how do you all find the timing on this box?  I feel
> that at times it gets kinda sloppy when i have arps going and what 
> not.
> 
> Mike G.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

Hey Aaron, two questions:

1. Can you explain how YOU would do the midi loopback recording of arps? I 
had thought this would be a relatively simple thing to do, but after a 
list member contacted me off list about this, we discovered we could only 
get it to work via a pretty convoluted method.  I'll refrain from posting 
it until I make sure I'm not missing something, but it's not as easy as I 
had thought it would be.

2. What priority do the bts have?  The same as arps?

rEalm





PPS.  arps unfortunately have a lower priority than ALL of the
sequencer, so those'll get sloppy first.  You can record them with a
loopback cable if you want...  (yeah, I know it's a kludge)









The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s)or entity 
to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or legally 
privileged material. Delivery of this message to any person other than 
the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive privilege 
or confidentiality. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other 
use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
receive this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.

For Translation:

http://www.baxter.com/email_disclaimer


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]