Re: Repeater - "conditional stop"

[Mountain Man <mtman@cloud9.net>]

Well, yeah, but I'd be willing to pay at least $50 for such a feature.
That would keep some starving music gear-hacker off the street long
enough to do this "quick and easy" mod, wouldn't it???  <g>

Speaking of midi loopers, I continue to be amazed that no-one has
created a box that does EDP/Repeater-style looping for Midi.  It seems a
much easier task than looping audio.  Is there a perception that there's
no market for it?  Or is there something out there of which I'm not
aware?  (please, please, please say "yes" !!!!)

Thanks,
Elby


> At 01:20 PM 7/26/2003, Nic Roozeboom wrote:
> >I imagined it would be only a matter of time before someone would
> announce
> >they had hacked OS1.1, and made all sorts of improvements... such as
> being
> >able to configure one track as a MIDI looper...
>
> yes, it's amazing. It can't be that hard. Maybe you could take it on?
> After
> all, the Repeater is only a fully custom piece of hardware with its
> own
> unique system architecture, and code running straight on the silicon
> probably without any commercial OS in between. But that just means
> you
> gotta know how the hardware works to write the code and there's no OS
> there
> to do anything for you. Of course, no documentation is publicly
> available
> on the hardware architecture or the programmable logic parts. But
> heck,
> with a little patience, a multimeter, logic analyzer, scope, and a
> year or
> two of spare time you could probably figure out most of it. Then I
> guess
> you would have to decompile the machine code from the roms into
> undocumented assembler or maybe even C code. I don't know how well
> decompilers work, but probably the result will be messy and difficult
> for
> humans to understand. Hey, but no matter, if you had all the time to
> figure
> out the hardware, you've got time to unravel the code too! I bet it
> would
> be fun. Once you've got that figured out, then you can go about adding
> your
> own features. Careful now! this ain't wimpy windows programming.
> Real-time
> embedded coding without a net! Everything you do has the potential to
> throw
> something else off, so you need to keep an eye on every clock cycle
> and all
> the possible states you could be in. Judging by the kind of bugs they
> had,
> there probably aren't many cycles left to play with, but there must be
> a
> few here and there. The Electrix guys only went a year over schedule
> and
> still had bugs trying to do this, so it can't be that hard really. Oh,
> by
> the way, did you catch the time when Electrix mentioned they were out
> of
> code space? Ah well, there are probably a few features in there you
> don't
> use anyway, so rip 'em out! Assuming you can actually figure out which
> part
> of the code they're in...
>
> Sounds like a great project!
>
> kim
>