0
Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:18 pm

i ve a 303.. thats not the point.. question is what to make out of my xoxbox.. i totaly agree with you that a 303 clone needs a 303 sequencer. So your efforts and progress is really great for all the xoxbox users. the only flaw is that you didnt knew very much about the 303 when you ve started.. but you learned about the importance of the tap input from others and i am very sure that you wouldnt want to live without tap input now since you know for waht it is good for. Am i right?

But reality is..the majority out there have´nt used the tap input on theire 303s or know what it is good for..see the TT bassbot..its printed on the housing..TAP..but they have´nt really got it..why? It needs experts to know the benefits of such hidden little functions. Without experianced 303 users telling you about the tap input your nonxox wouldnt have got one either.

And its the same with the syncing..have you ever worked with 3-5 different drum machines and a 303 and a simultaniously? i guess not..otherwise you would know that running a 808 and a es 1 together is a major hazzle and would love to have machines that deal with the problem..

anyway, i see that there is still a way to go for your os and prefer just to sell my xox in favor of a micro brute. good luck with the timing.. you shouldnt trust your ears.. measure it. do you own reaktor? i have the jitter meter ensemble if you need it..
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:34 pm

antto wrote:who said n0nx0x is as late as the ES-1?

if you think it's so easy - why don't you pick the code up and make it properly?
or just buy the 303

do you realize that you're complaining about something you can get for free, and you haven't even tried whether it's late or not

i don't exactly love this ES-1, but that's what i got
if it was open-source - i would surely attempt to fix the things that i hate about it and make it better
and with that i don't mean the latency, because that's probably not doable, but other little things, like the lack of pattern-clear function and so on..
but since that won't happen, i would gladly replace the ES-1 with something better, if i get the chance


i am not complaining.. i am sugesting and wanted to find out which state the syncing is in.... propper syncing is important.. how far you want to go there and if extras like a shift are necessary is another question..

just..the es-1 is not a very good refference here.. its a great little machine..defently not bad.. i like it ..but its hard to integrate with others.. especialy with the 808.. when the machines are a little off it usually dont hurts..but too much effects the feeling ..

when you run a 303 with a 808 you never get theese really driving fast 303 lines propperly because the 808 is earlier than the 303.. so you actually write different lines.. on the 909, which is later than the 808, the 303 appears earlier in relation and a fast 16th line get much more drive..

nothing you necessarily need to deal with..but..since it might be not too difficult to solve this maybe something to keep in mind.. that was the only reason to post this,,not complaining..

Since it needs a 50 euro investion just to test it there is not much to complain but also no easy way to try.
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by antto on Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:37 am

a machine cannot be "early"
nothing can be earlier than the clock it runs at

what you describe is related to the latency (or time of reaction) of each machine

all i'm saying is that a machine should react with as little latency as possible
zero latency is impossible of course, the speed of the current is slower than the speed of light

if a machine reacts slower than another machine, but they have to play together - you can simply fix that after the recording
or if it has to be done in realtime - you could put an audio delay on the one which has less latency
this of course might be inconvenient, but it's still an option

delaying the machine's own response is doable, but my goal is to make it react fast to begin with


the investment for n0nx0x2 is actually the front panel
the cpumod itself is not something that *only* works for n0nx0x2 and for nothing else
the cpumod is a big cpu which runs whatever code you put on it, so that doesn't end with my FW
sokkos2 has been ported to run on the cpumod, thus, you can take it and use/modify it if you like
i'm not going to try to convince you to buy this or that..

there is plenty of information on the n0nx0x2 page i linked a few posts ago, including a documentation (which is not fully complete, but the most important things are there), pictures, videos...


And its the same with the syncing..have you ever worked with 3-5 different drum machines and a 303 and a simultaniously?

no, i don't have any other devices besides the computer, ES-1, two x0xb0xes, and a midi controller (keyboard, with knobs)
i expect whoever uses my firmware to report bugs
i test myself as much as i can, including extreme tests meant to find out where the thing breaks apart
and there is also someone who i ask to perform extreme tests too, who has more toys than me
however, this process is not exactly easy, it's very time consuming (which means it doesn't happen frequently)

you shouldnt trust your ears.. measure it. do you own reaktor? i have the jitter meter ensemble if you need it..

i don't have/need reaktor
the firmware doesn't have jitter, as i already said
the firmware *could* lag if it's too busy doing something critical (like writing to eeprom) and goes late for the interrupts, but this itself doesn't create jitter, only lag

i measure by feeding the audio from the x0x and the dinsync clock into the soundcard, and i record
the latency is visible there

there can't be too much latency either, since i fire the dinsync clock more or less right before i fire the internal notes
latency could be there when the x0x is slaved, but that's harder to measure, especially when the master clock is midisync
slaving to dinsync has a up to 1ms latency due to the polling mechanism, then that plus the latency from the interrupt till the main thread runs the note processing
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)

antto
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Wed Jan 22, 2014 3:36 pm

oh oh anto.. That explains somehow why you missed the timing flaws and glitches in your earlier versions. And it makes it a bit risky to take your "no jitter!" statements for granted. Its easy to measure such things. A coder like you should be able to easily measure the timing under sync.. hint: the distance between the flanks of the gate output..just record the gate output and measure the distance in samples between the positive flancs. its dead easy and accurate enough because jitter in the 1 sample domain is not bothering us very much.. but jitter of 200 samples or more as in your beta versions..thats is pretty shitty and needs to be fixed.

You think its ok to fix any flaws after a recording by edits…but sorry..
Have you ever heard about live on stage performances? There is nothing you can fix there afterwards.

Anyway.. seems to be way more easy to write an os for the xox than i thought.. when i wouldnt sell it i really should give it a shot..
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by antto on Wed Jan 22, 2014 4:50 pm

3phase wrote:oh oh anto.. That explains somehow why you missed the timing flaws and glitches in your earlier versions. And it makes it a bit risky to take your "no jitter!" statements for granted.

why do i have to repeat myself...
there's no jitter there's only latency
if the latency from tick to tick varies <- THAT's jitter but that's not the case, as i said, where would that jitter even come from? huh..

Its easy to measure such things. A coder like you should be able to easily measure the timing under sync.. hint: the distance between the flanks of the gate output..just record the gate output and measure the distance in samples between the positive flancs. its dead easy and accurate enough because jitter in the 1 sample domain is not bothering us very much..

when the x0x is master, the gate-out has about 4.5 to 5.5ms latency compared to the generated dinsync clock
and now before you open your mouth, let me tell you that the gate signal from the cpu passes thru a number of components that in one way or another add delay, till it reaches the gate-out port
so this is beyond the scope of the cpu/firmware


but jitter of 200 samples or more as in your beta versions..thats is pretty shitty and needs to be fixed.

:shock: dafuq? when has n0nx0x beta had jitter? are you throwing random statements here?

Anyway.. seems to be way more easy to write an os for the xox than i thought.. when i wouldnt sell it i really should give it a shot..

be my guest
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)

antto
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: n0nx0x beta

by rv0 on Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:06 pm

@ 3phase
I've been running and betatesting n0nx0x2 for months.
The sync is very good in a way that I don't think about it at all any more.
I have a dinsync setup with 9 slave devices slaved to a tight hardware clock, so I'd notice if something was horribly wrong.

n0nx0x is simply the best you can get, trust me on that ;)
Of course you don't just need a cpu, you also need a new panel, and if you're quick, there's a very limited supply here: http://rv0.be/303/x0xb0x/n0nx0x
I'm quite sure you can get a "not happy => money back" deal ;)

Don't doubt, you can only increase the resale value of your x0x with this + I'd love to hear your comments on it :lol:

rv0
 
Posts: 383
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:36 pm

please guys.
The beta is not workable. opposite to your overly selfconfident statements i dont know what you are doing with it..but on my machine its not syncing to midi. It jitters and glitches.on pannel operations glitches. important things are missing. its no fun.

Sofar the Sokkos OS is the way to go for the xox.
And since i had that bad experience with the anti os, i bought a real 303 again..
As Anto said..the ony way for a propper 303 os on the xox would be to do it myself.

Since this dont costs money there is nothing to complain ..except to myself that i trusted your statements to begin with and ruined the looks of my xox with the new panel layout

To all others that want to try this os i recomend checking it first before you change the panel layout of the machine.

the guys that started the thread are very motivated but not very experienced, this thing needs more betatesters and critical input!
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by antto on Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:41 pm

n0nx0x beta was obviously my first attempt at doing a 303 sequencer on the x0xb0x
it was always "under construction" and i don't think i've ever said that it's complete or fully functional
i've always said that i can't test sync because i really couldn't

the sync is probably very broken, but i can't imagine how it would jitter ... and i don't wanna argue any further about this

n0nx0x beta barely has just the "Pattern-write" mode which itself isn't even complete, there are no chained patterns, and the pattern format turned out to be wrong ... i had to find that out the hard way much later and rewrite things 5 more times, do you think this was fun?

you may have lost one front panel, i lost a few years of my life (which i don't regret, but give me a break here..)


n0nx0x2 - i've tried to explain most things in detail, i've recorded a number of videos showing how the thing works in action and so on
the panel layout can be printed on paper, or whatever
whoever is interested in n0nx0x2 can make his own decision based on the info available, or ask specific questions
i have the feeling that you didn't even check the info, neither are you asking any specific questions, just talking about how broken n0nx0x beta was and about jitter..
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)

antto
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Sat Jan 25, 2014 9:01 pm

problem is that, as you can read earlier in this thread, it was claimed that the beta would sync and run already. just not beeing complete. That was a false info. And up to now, years later, you dont know what clock jitter is and how it can be produced by bad coding inside the machine, even on a steady clock. And that you are not aware about timing offsets and their negative fx.. dont seem to be able to measure such things or in case you do find a value of beeing 5 ms late to be ok..all this gives the strong impression that you know to little and are to close minded yet to get it really good.

Since the statements about nonxox^1 was false there is a good chance that your statements about nonxox2 are false too.
You see the logic in that? So i am out.

However, i wish you success since the project is a good idea, and suggest that you check and measure such sync details.
You could tell how much internal jitter ther is on a steady incoming clock-- or measure the jitter off the incomming clock and the resulting jitter on the cv gate output of the machine.. And you can measure the offset..thats the time inbetween the start bit and the first gate flank on the cvgate output..

terminate a midi cable wit a led..than you can easily record the midi stream as audio, and see the clock bits and start command..just make sure that there is no active sensing on that midi output..just the clock and the start command..

that gives absolute values that prove the performance of your os.
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by rv0 on Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:06 pm

3phase.. I really dont like what I'm reading here.. Accusations of false claims and personal insults about the skills and knowledge of people involved. It's not nice and clearly there's some misunderstandings on your side about n0nx0x2.
Instead of typing a whole page full and wasting hours on something that may go nowhere, I have a better idea:

I'll send you a cpu with n0nx0x2, and a panel.. You try it out. And afterwards you send it back, or buy it if you want. No strings attached. I'll even pay for the shipping if that's what it takes.
Use this contactform and I'll make sure you'll get it asap.
Seriously.. No better way to know than to test by yourself.

rv0
 
Posts: 383
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by antto on Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:15 pm

it's very very hard to communicate with you.

3phase wrote:And up to now, years later, you dont know what clock jitter is and how it can be produced by bad coding inside the machine, even on a steady clock.

you're wrong
i know very well what clock jitter is

3phase wrote:And that you are not aware about timing offsets and their negative fx.. dont seem to be able to measure such things or in case you do find a value of beeing 5 ms late to be ok..

let me quote myself now:
antto wrote:when the x0x is master, the gate-out has about 4.5 to 5.5ms latency compared to the generated dinsync clock
and now before you open your mouth, let me tell you that the gate signal from the cpu passes thru a number of components that in one way or another add delay, till it reaches the gate-out port
so this is beyond the scope of the cpu/firmware


why don't you have a look at the schematic and figure out how exactly the gate retriggers the envelope generators (both the filter and volume envelopes)
run a circuit simulation if you want, and see how much time it takes for the signal to even rise up
then go tell Roland that their circuit is too slow

3phase wrote:Since the statements about nonxox^1 was false there is a good chance that your statements about nonxox2 are false too.
You see the logic in that?

someone sh*ts himself at age of 2, so he will sh*t himself even at age of 10?
great logic.

3phase wrote:You could tell how much internal jitter ther is on a steady incoming clock-- or measure the jitter off the incomming clock and the resulting jitter on the cv gate output of the machine..

when slaved to the ES-1 via midisync, the converted dinsync is a steady square wave
it only aliases because it's generated at a 1kHz sampling rate, if you understand what this means
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)

antto
 
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Sun Jan 26, 2014 3:26 am

darffader wrote:3phase.. I really dont like what I'm reading here.. Accusations of false claims and personal insults about the skills and knowledge of people involved. It's not nice and clearly there's some misunderstandings on your side about n0nx0x2.
Instead of typing a whole page full and wasting hours on something that may go nowhere, I have a better idea:

I'll send you a cpu with n0nx0x2, and a panel.. You try it out. And afterwards you send it back, or buy it if you want. No strings attached. I'll even pay for the shipping if that's what it takes.
Use this contactform and I'll make sure you'll get it asap.
Seriously.. No better way to know than to test by yourself.


Thats a vey generous offer,thanks.. It would be lame to insist on being in a hurry selling my xox and having too much to do.
What is actually the case..but curiosity has priority.

But there was a misunderstanding.. i was talking about the version one that is still installed on my xox and renders it pretty useless. i see that version 2 is further developed but its not only functionality.. it needs to groove.

but anyway.. i accept your offer and will measure the performance and post the results here and either send it afterwards back to you or if it holds up to the promise..buy it..
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by 3phase on Sun Jan 26, 2014 3:51 am

antto wrote:it's very very hard to communicate with you.


i know very well what clock jitter is

when the x0x is master, the gate-out has about 4.5 to 5.5ms latency compared to the generated dinsync clock
and now before you open your mouth, let me tell you that the gate signal from the cpu passes thru a number of components that in one way or another add delay, till it reaches the gate-out port
so this is beyond the scope of the cpu/firmware
]
why don't you have a look at the schematic and figure out how exactly the gate retriggers the envelope generators (both the filter and volume envelopes)
run a circuit simulation if you want, and see how much time it takes for the signal to even rise up
then go tell Roland that their circuit is too slow


someone sh*ts himself at age of 2, so he will sh*t himself even at age of 10?
great logic.

when slaved to the ES-1 via midisync, the converted dinsync is a steady square wave
it only aliases because it's generated at a 1kHz sampling rate, if you understand what this means


its not really difficult… And i measured a lot of 303´s and other gear..its not the fastest machine..and the original 303 is not jitter free.. but it sounds nice and groovy.. I see that it can be called allright if the nonxox is just as good or bad timing wise as the original 303.. ok..when its just that i agree that its good enough.

But this dont devalues my argument that the ideal modern version would sit on the clock as fast as possible and groove adjustment after taste or technical condition of the other involved machines, can be done with a variable offset delay.

That was the main argument and you called that irrelevant.

But truth is..when you sync a 303 and a korg electribe in parallel..with a kenton midi to din sync on the 303.. you need to shift the es-1 about 3 ms earlier.. So there is a chance that your nonxox is a little late.

Its too long ago since i measured the offset of the real 303..but i rmember that it was around 3 ms.. and this actually communicates with your 5,5 ms measurement..since that is roughly the 3ms for the ES-1 plus the internal 303 offset..in case i remember that one right..

But thats all to much speculation.. darffaders challenge will give me the possibility to measure and compare it, and if i was wrong i will admit to that here.
3phase
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: n0nx0x beta

by jimmy303 on Thu Feb 27, 2014 4:09 pm

I just want to say that this is the best thing that happend to x0xb0x it´s freaking awsome sure it might need some more work done there are a few glitches still (2.08) but those are rather minor good work and pls do keep it upp its awsome :)
it sends me right back when i had a tb of my own :D
jimmy303
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 2:50 am

Re: n0nx0x beta

by rv0 on Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:06 am

jimmy303 wrote: there are a few glitches still (2.08)


anything we don't know about yet? Bugs are there to be fixed :D

rv0
 
Posts: 383
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:50 pm

Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.