There were simply too many permutations to allow easy communication. ![]() While instruments could be connected, there was no guarantee that they would respond the same way. There was little agreement as to how the interface worked. Each manufacturer implemented their own variant of the analog interface, tailored to their specific needs. The voltage compatibility didn't always translate to other vendors. Within the system, the signaling between the modules was standardized, so all of the modules were intercompatible. One voltage might control the pitch, another the timbre, and a third the amplitude. The signals between the modules were all analog, using voltages to represent musical parameters. Even today, the configuration for a sound on a synthesizer is called a patch, though it might not involve any cables or plugs. On these systems, the configuration of the patch cables, knobs, and switches determined what sort of sound was created. The Moog System 35 Modular Synthesizer (Photo Courtesy Moog Music) Or you implement some MIDI to I2C ports and multiplexes them:Įdit: and another one: - I think this one is worth to be examined. I think this way would let explode your budget. And using multiple Teensys makes no sense - you will need at least nine boards - eight to handle the IO and one for controlling purposes. As MIDI is very slow, the processing power may be sufficent, put the port adaption also fulfilling the MIDI specs, will be the biggest effort. īut if you want more like channel filtering, merging, control changing etc, you will need 16 full defined serial ports, perhaps via a multiplexer solution, and then the teensy has to route and examine the data which passes through. And if you set two inputs on the same output, it didn't work. sliders/switches which electrically closed the circuit to the appropriate 4 outputs. I had such a solution in a plain mechanical way - 8 inputs, 8 mech. Perhaps you need some drivers and optocouplers for the MIDI port spec, but thats all. if fast enough, you may do this on a low, pure electrical level (the Teensy don't care about the signals passing through). The question is: do you need a real patchpanel, meaning you have 8x inputs and you may assign every input to every output? This could be easyly done, and the Teensy only routes the data from one digital pin to another. ![]() ![]() Hmm I am guessing a hardware only switching type solution might be better (more like the schem you linked too) but maybe getting deeper into the teensy you could find a quick and efficient central processing method to take the data and bus it back. I suppose you could buss the data in from your 8 spi teensys, process centrally and then buss back to the relevant teensy. what about something for $200 US like the motu midi express 128? Am I being defeatist? receiving 8 channels of data and piping them to the relevant teensy / uart (via spi?) would probably involve some more thought and parts. ? Maybe 3 or 4 teensys on the output side to get the required uart count (assuming you can use two uarts on each teensy). what you seem to be proposing on the output side is a central teensy bussing data (via spi?) to other teensy's (one per channel?) and those teensy's then outputting midi on their independent serial ports. The teensy has 3 serial ports, but only one with a large FIFO, I think. it definitely uses 1 very capable serial port per channel.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |