Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
you are correct, dont know why I remembered 1MHz clock. MIDI is incredibly slow and thus the thru cannot be below 2ms… anyway, we defined final dimensions yesterday and the thru is present :-) On 13.Apr, 2014, at 5:50 PM, cpr@musetrap.com wrote: > Matthias, > > Regarding the numbers you mentioned about midi timing, if I recall > correctly, it takes 1ms to read a midi message (at 31.250 baud), and > another ms to send. Am I misunderstanding what you've written? > > -cpr > > Quoting Matthias Grob <matilists@gmail.com>: > >> you are right Andy, I did not sell the without version at all :-) >> >> sure I will merge the input to the output just like the EDP >> I must that this ads a delay, which is small compared to laptops and >> older gear with slow processor or new gear that often runs with Linux >> because we have a 500MHz ARM processor without OS (they call bare metal >> programming now what we naturally did in the past, the EDP was even >> bare assembler :-), >> [ I hope we can treat everything within 8 audio samples = 180us (the >> EDP used 32, the laptops usually 64 or more) >> still, we need to let the 3 bytes come in to analyse and then send out >> again. MIDI is 1MHz: 1us/bit, 24us/message >> so its 24us to read, 180us to treat and 24us to write and we should >> stay below 0.25ms right? ] >> >> but tradition says that in to out adds delay and it will be difficult >> to convince everyone with such calculations :-) >> >> another good argument for the thru might be that the out is ocupied >> for example: >> in - the pedal >> thru - to another unit that is controlled by the same pedal >> out - sync to some drum machine >> >> the cost is not shocking. parts with drilling, soldering, testing >> probably adds less than 5$ to the end price >> its a rather big connector, I asked because I wanted to save space. >> but it looks like the lack of the connector hurts more people than a >> 15mm longer box :-) >> >> thank you! >> Matthias >> >> On 12.Apr, 2014, at 10:06 AM, andy butler <akbutler@tiscali.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> well, >>> there *will* be a bunch of yes answers for a question put like this. >>> >>> Lets remember that every feature has a cost, either $$$ >>> or in terms of *other features*. >>> >>> Question:- >>> >>> For Evoloop, is there good reason why the midi Thru function. >>> can't be handled by merging the input to midi Out? >>> >>> Is there a real need for a *dedicated* Midi Thru socket? >>> >>> >>> andy >>> >>> On 11/04/2014 23:17, Louie Angulo wrote: >>>> Yes yes yes midi thru! >>>> >>> > >