double speed?
Moderators: Altitude, adafruit_support_bill, adafruit, phono, mome rath

double speed?

by bmot on Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:49 am

i have another idea (whch, as before, I have no way of taking forwards myself so i'm just putting it out there for your views)

I used to have a monotribe, it has an 8 step sequencer, with each note either on or off, as shown by the 8 red lights on the monotribe. On the V2 firmware they introduced a feature to essentially double to number of steps by introducing half steps. this worked by holding down a button (like a kind of "shift" key) which gave another set of 8 steps. this allowed for more complex patterns and also faster patterns at the same tempo

you can see where i'm going here, right? does anyone know if this is possible on the xoxbox, and if so would they like to try it? it woudl be nice to have 32 steps, and sometimes i would like to be able to play faster patterns too (i use my xox as a slave so tempo cannot be whopped up to 260 bpm without everything else sounding too fast)

i would envisage all the usual sequencer options being available, so super-short slides, rests and accented notes would be possible.

as an alternative, and this is likely to be much easier to implement, there is a half speed option in the sokkos firmware, it would be nice also if there was a double speed option too. this would be more useful than the half speed option for me
bmot
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:55 am

Re: double speed?

by antto on Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:40 am

it's all about the sync clock..
running twice slower is easy because you simply throw away half of the information (the clock ticks)
running twice faster is a problem, some might argue but the issue is already there
..as i've said before

dinsync vs midisync
they are both said to be "24ppqn" (aka 24 pulses per quarter note)
but no, midisync actually has half the information of dinsync (specifically when we speak about TB-303)

the dinsync clock is 24 pulses (it's an analog square wave oscillator) while midi only has 24 Ticks
from 1 pulse you have 2 distinctive moments - thus, twice more ticks than midisync

and so, having midisync means that you already have something that runs twice slower, the firmware must convert this to dinsync, and it does it by "generating" the missing ticks, but it does it in a sloppy way - the resulting signal is not square but more like PWM pulse

it's doable, but it's not very nice

as for 32-step patterns.. the TB-303 does this, you can chain up to 4 patterns and edit them as one big pattern (thus giving you a maximum length of 64 steps)
i have this in my softsynth and i wanted to have it in n0nx0x, which *might* happen after all (depends on the cpu mod)
We are here too: irc.freenode.net >>> #x0xb0x
..:: c0nb0x v1.00 ::.. http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29282 (new control app - win/osx)
VCO Tuning: http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=24759 (do it the EASY way)
User avatar
antto
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: double speed?

by mario1089 on Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:59 pm

First, as antto already mentioned, having more steps is brilliantly solved by pattern chaining, can`t see a reason to do anything here.
But then, having double-time steps makes a lot of sense when looking at contemporary music (dub step and dub step influenced stuff) - we`re seeing a lot of 1/32 events now-a-days while basic tempo is somewhere at 80. But personally I think just doubling the overall tempo isn`t quite it. I`m actually thinking about adding extra steps - right in-between the normal steps, and the workflow while editing would be somehow like holding the key of the first step, then by pressing another note-button, slide or accent button one would edit/add the extra-in-between-step. Unfortunately all of this isn`t possible with the current 16k CPU. If it ever comes to the point, that I be part of a team writing a new firmware for the bigger CPU I`ll have fun putting that kinda things in, but I`m not sure at the moment. Relates a lot to whether this forum is able to make up for a team that works together on a powerful new firmware (decide together about things, use SVN or GIT, that way).
mario1089
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:11 am

Re: double speed?

by antto on Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:33 pm

in such situations, i'd double the tempo, because it's easier to slice it in half afterwards
i bet you can make some "dinsync tempo halver" box out of a flip-flop (the same thing they use to make cheap sub-oscillators on synths)

afaik, the cpu mod already has the <ported> stock firmware v1.05 working, plus a new arduino-like bootloader

i don't think that we can team up and make one firmware, because as you can see everyone wants different things
specifically i want to bring back the original TB-303 sequencing, because that's the only thing that the x0xb0x lacks to become the one and only 303 hardware clone
that's what i attempted to do with n0nx0x, but, as you all know, i got stuck half-way because of the lack of space

what we CAN do as a team (and we should do it) is fix some bugs in the stock firmware, and decide the new serial protocol
at first i was going to do these things by myself, due to the lack of any devs here (sokkan has been silent)
but now i see at least 1 more person, so at least i won't be talking to myself ***

btw, while the x0xb0x has chain - you can only play chained patterns.. editing is still one pattern at a time
the TB-303 sequencer is much better, only if it had those additional 16 bank LEDs to make things a bit more visible...

*** there are actually a bunch of people at the #x0xb0x IRC channel, and we discuss these things there, so i'm not always talking to myself
We are here too: irc.freenode.net >>> #x0xb0x
..:: c0nb0x v1.00 ::.. http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29282 (new control app - win/osx)
VCO Tuning: http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=24759 (do it the EASY way)
User avatar
antto
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: double speed?

by mario1089 on Sat Nov 17, 2012 3:45 pm

antto, what I have in mind goes like this (and you may correct me if it`s wrong/imposible/stupid): As far as I understand nonxox is only different in the way editing happens (and maybe how patterns are chained?) So what that means for me, is that we could have one firmware that could be in classic 303 editing mode (nonxox) or in adafruit mode (remembering the last mode on EEprom). Both modes would share all core switch handling, core interrupt handling, core sequencing, sync`s, even my randomizer, automatioc variations, MIDI, a new, 2/3 byte per step pattern format, communication code, eeprom writing and all that kinda things. You know, I hate to be in competition with some else about the firmware...
mario1089
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:11 am

Re: double speed?

by antto on Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:57 pm

there's no competition, it's just completely different sequencers
lemme explain
in n0nx0x i use a different pattern format (21 bytes)
it wasn't finished, but it was supposed to be more or less what i currently have in my soft synth:

- triplet pattern mode
- pattern chaining: up to 4 patterns at once
- playing and editing chained patterns (even when they are of different lengths and triplet or not)
--- Pitch Mode
--- Time Mode
--- Tap-write (realtime input of TimeMode, with metronome)
--- realtime pattern manipulators
- realtime transpose
- MIDI-Trigger mode (i've explained this before)
- some sort of track mode

so that's based on what the TB-303 sequencer can do, with slight improvements and additions, without breaking the important things

you might not agree, but many people want a TB-303 because of the sequencer
it makes a huge difference because of the completely different workflow

what's so special about it is, like in most Roland synths, the magical balance of limitations
this only makes sense if you want the real thing
if you only want the sound - then any x0x firmware would do, or even another (poorer) clone

and yes, there are always gonna be people that would go "meeh" and take the sokkos or your firmware and be happy, nothing wrong with that

there's a myth that the TB-303 sequencer is unusable, and uber-bad, and <insert many other bad words here>
that's the information you can get from all around the web (including the previous wikipedia article) and i was also fooled by that for a long time, rejecting to actually find out for myself what it actually is (the sequencer of the TB-303)
and then i figured "well, it's not bad, it's actually very interesting" and n0nx0x was born
We are here too: irc.freenode.net >>> #x0xb0x
..:: c0nb0x v1.00 ::.. http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29282 (new control app - win/osx)
VCO Tuning: http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=24759 (do it the EASY way)
User avatar
antto
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: double speed?

by mario1089 on Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:44 pm

I have no doubt you have your point about noxox. Actually, reading about a magical balance of limitations sounds very very interesting. It's also what I am interested in, and regularly I find myself fighting for limitations that would not have to be - but make for a nice straight workflow.

So in the end, whatever we do, your noxox/303 approach must be part of any new firmware with a bigger CPU.

But From a technical perspective I can not see any reason, that all sequencing modes would not share most of the code.

Also notice that when using my firmware you'd not find it behaving any different then sokkos, until you'd know how to access the new features.

You see I'm trying to say that it all could be just one firmware with different modes. Makes sense? Or not at all?
mario1089
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:11 am

Re: double speed?

by antto on Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:13 pm

you cannot put different pattern editing modes in the same firmware because they use different pattern format, and you'd be spending lots of time converting back and forward which is gonna waste processing power
stock firmware and sokkos use the same pattern format - 16bytes
n0nx0x uses 21bytes

So in the end, whatever we do, your noxox/303 approach must be part of any new firmware with a bigger CPU.

well, it seems there are many people that do not want to let go the x0x sequencer
those that want the propper 303-style sequencer are usually TB-303 owners, or those that believe when i say that it's a better way to make those true acid patterns

since the 303 sequencer is a different workflow - the patterns you make with it are different compared to another sequencer
that same thing applies to any other sequencer too
the thing is, old acid tracks were made with the real TB-303 and thus, the patterns were programmed on it

the fact that you can program the same pattern from a TB-303 on the x0x sequencer (with some convertion needed) is one thing
but making patterns with the two sequencer - you'll soon see that you tend to make different kinds of patterns on each sequencer, that's all due to the different workflow and it's limitations

i can tell you about that because for about 3 years i've rewritten the sequencer many times
i started out with a clone-style sequencer at first (i didn't had a x0xb0x yet, nor was i familiar with how any of those sequencers work, so i improvised)
it was basically 1 pattern at a time, realtime editing, similar to the x0xb0x - press NEXT every time..
since then, i've exported the patterns which i thought were "okay" or "nice" to files ... they piled up for 3 years now
and then, when i coded n0nx0x - BANG instantly i started making completely different patterns
personally, i prefere the TB-303 sequencer

still, some people will always go with x0x sequencer, that's normal
that's why there is sokkos, and they are happy
that's why there are people wanting actual TB-303s even that their price is insane
that's why i wanted to make n0nx0x

btw, i haven't programmed patterns on the x0x sequencer really (neither stock firmware nor sokkos)
i simply hate the thing with the DONE button, it's very confusing/annoying

Also notice that when using my firmware you'd not find it behaving any different then sokkos, until you'd know how to access the new features.

i don't want to stick to any such features that collide with the TB-303
and given that i've changed the pattern format - most "features" are incompatible anyway

see, it's just different
We are here too: irc.freenode.net >>> #x0xb0x
..:: c0nb0x v1.00 ::.. http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29282 (new control app - win/osx)
VCO Tuning: http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=24759 (do it the EASY way)
User avatar
antto
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: double speed?

by roxxx303 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:15 am

antto wrote:you cannot put different pattern editing modes in the same firmware because they use different pattern format, and you'd be spending lots of time converting back and forward which is gonna waste processing power
stock firmware and sokkos use the same pattern format - 16bytes
n0nx0x uses 21bytes


Hi antto,

I understand that you prefer the tb303-programming style, because I too prefer programming patterns on my tb303 to programming on my x0xb0x!
But you said it is possible to convert tb303-patterns to x0xb0x-patterns, so that they sound exactly the same.
So why can't you use the 16bytes in n0nx0x to store in standard x0xb0x-pattern format?
I would like to test n0nx0x, but the thought that the backuped pattern-data can never be used with a standard x0xb0x,
prevents me from trying it out.

regards
roxxx303
User avatar
roxxx303
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 11:33 am

Re: double speed?

by darffader on Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:55 am

@roxxx303
the idea is that backupped patterns can be converted back and forth between all formats
so i wouldn't worry about that for now :)
User avatar
darffader
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: double speed?

by antto on Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:27 pm

technically, the TB-303 also uses 16 bytes per pattern, BUT it's "lossy"
on every step that is Rest or Tie - you cannot have a note
same goes for EOP and Triplet steps
i exclusively wanted to make patterns "lossless" in n0nx0x and thus, all data has dedicated place, 16 bytes for the notes, 4 bytes for the time info, 1 byte for the pattern header

now, nothing stops you from trying out n0nx0x, but.. it's not finished, and has bugs, and it's old now
just backup your patterns first
We are here too: irc.freenode.net >>> #x0xb0x
..:: c0nb0x v1.00 ::.. http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29282 (new control app - win/osx)
VCO Tuning: http://forums.adafruit.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=24759 (do it the EASY way)
User avatar
antto
 
Posts: 1373
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: double speed?

by am4d on Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:12 am

While were on the subject for TB-303 style xoxbox. have you seen the TT-303? http://www.superiorsoundslondon.co.uk/index.php
I have a feeling this new 303 clone IS a xoxbox at its core, possibly with a bigger CPU. (theres mentions of adafruit and xoxbox in the sites source code)
am4d
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: double speed?

by mario1089 on Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:33 am

I`d say those references you found in the sources are tricks to make google show the page to the right people (guessing, I`m not a specialist regarding this).

Still, it`s very likely they used a lot of the xoxbox design, but maybe replaced rare parts with new ones, and did some fixes to get the sound right? I can`t believe they do an anouncement like that 1) without being sure about getting as many parts as they`d ever want, and 2) without mentioning the "old real" parts..

Then, very very interesting: These guys had the same ideas as me. Randomizer = "Bass Bot TT"; Live Variations = "Mutate Patterns" (?).
But as implementing these things isn`t a thing of more than a couple of hours, I wonder whether they have been been reading this forum:)

Cool thing in any case.
mario1089
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:11 am

Re: double speed?

by darffader on Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:47 am

am4d wrote:While were on the subject for TB-303 style xoxbox. have you seen the TT-303? http://www.superiorsoundslondon.co.uk/index.php
I have a feeling this new 303 clone IS a xoxbox at its core, possibly with a bigger CPU. (theres mentions of adafruit and xoxbox in the sites source code)


I dont think there is anything x0xb0x about this clone.
mentions: thats just a simple S.E.O. (search engine optimization) trick :)

Don't forget the x0x is a clone from the 303
and from what i'm seeing/reading, there's nothing I can see or think that they took from the x0x.
User avatar
darffader
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: double speed?

by Altitude on Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:20 pm

I'm curious what Roland is going to do about that thing, they dont take to that stuff very well. They went after the D16 crowd big time for their softsynths when they copied the 808/303/909
User avatar
Altitude
 
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 5:17 pm