On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 20:08, Aaron Trumm wrote: Why not run Cakewalk for DOS under either Wine or DOSEMU in Linux? Would that work? (Question to the group as well as Aaron) Does Rosegarden not do SysEx dumps? I'm surprised. - Mark (doing Reaktor bass lines tonight...)

actually, I forgot to mention, yes one of the things I did today was get dosemu (which is really cool) - so far, cakewalk doesn't quite run. two things are wrong - one is that it is all crooked and screwy on the screen and doesn't quite respond to menu navigation right either (although even if it did, you can't see anything) - the other is the midi interface driver. cakewalk uses a native driver, of which there aren't any for newer interfaces (like my midisport 2x2) - it has a regular mpu401 driver which I figured might work with the HDSP 9652 midi portion, but that hasn't worked - yet. this is actually something I may need help with. it's VERY confusing to me (not that I understood it THAT well to begin with) how to address the midi card under emudos. I barely BARELY have an understanding of it under linux - that it seems to be called midi00 and can be referred to that way. but in cakewalk, you set it up by using it's base address and irq number ? - so I'm all confused as to how to figure out how to get to either the HDSP midi portion or the midisport (since the midisport is usb) - cards like the HDSP and usb midi interfaces didn't exist in the days of the now defunct cakewalk for DOS. so tommorrow, what I'm gonna try is doing it the way I used to with my laptop (before it died) - and that is to use the serial port connected to my Yamaha TG100, using the TG100 as the MIDI interface, because there is a cakewalk driver for that, and that's what I always used. that won't solve the crazy screen problem though. I thought I might drop to run level three and see if I can run dosemu there. that won't be a total solution, though, because eventually I'll want to sync cakewalk to other apps (which actually should be easy - my theory is that I'll send MTC out of the HDSP MIDI or midisport, and to the TG100, and since that's out of the box, it'll be just as if I was still running cakewalk on my laptop. god if only my laptop wasn't dead! :) THIS is one good reason to try out the fluxbox instructions you sent me off list :) I figure MAYBE fluxbox will handle running cakewalk for DOS better. that enough typing for ya? I can't figure out how. it does deal with sysex in some form. the key here is that I have a bunch of files - suchandsuch.SYX - which may not work, for all I know - like I said, I did manage to get one to load using cat, but the synth wouldn't receive midi when the new patches were selected - I don't know why. this won't be a moot exercise though, as sysex dumping back and forth is a key element in my room. it's a key element in general, which is why I'm surpised I'm having such a hard time finding librarians.

Chris Cannam wrote: Whats the difficulty in implementing it in RG? -- Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd. Http://www.boosthardware.com Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide ======================================== Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No! We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything I've ever done. Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002 The Scotsman

Aaron Trumm wrote: Hi Aaron, hi Tim: IIRC Cakewalk was one of the first sequencers to let you try adding sysex messages to the sequence stream. At that time that meant adding only very short messages, because the hardware was so slow. A sysex message of any length would audibly disturb the sequence timing. But I thought that feature was pretty advanced, it would let the user make neat little adjustments to his synths that were beyond the reach of MIDI controllers. Alas, I never really got into Cakewalk, I was (and still am) too happy with Voyetra's Sequencer Plus. The Voyetra programmers wouldn't add the feature precisely because of the timing issue. With CPU speeds being what they are today I'd expect in-stream sysex would be a given for Rosegarden and MusE. Werner ? Chris ? Richard ? Sequencer Plus Gold included a nifty patch librarian that supported quite a variety of machines. I'd love to see something like that in RG or MusE too. Maybe in the future ? Skip glib. The pyramids of Giza are younger... [re: JSynthLib] JS will work for you if it supports your synths. I worked with Torsten on the TX802 stuff, frankly I think he did a terrific job. In Linux MIDI software JS is the closest thing to my old Bacchus and Sideman editors, or to the graphic editors for the Mac and other 68k machines. But JS could certainly use some more developers... :( Cranky me would love to see a MIDI-only sequencer for Linux, i.e., with absolutely no audio support. But I'm not too distressed: I can run Sequencer Plus in DOSemu just fine, and I've recently been playing with Master Tracks Pro in Xsteem (an Atari ST emulator), with pretty good results too... Btw, out of all the links on the MIDI page of the Linux soundapps site here's the Linux MIDI software I actually use : MusE KeyKit JSynthLib I've recently installed PlanetCCRMA's RH9 and will soon get into Rosegarden too. There are some other interesting links I want to check out, I just have to figure how to do without sleep and food... == dp (who just returned from a combined classical/blues gig)

If you are familiar with tracker-style interface, then I suggest you check shaketracker & tutka. http://www.reduz.com.ar/cheesetronic/ -> shaketracker http://www.nongnu.org/tutka/ A new version of Tutka has been just released, I haven't tested it yet, but the old version had sysex in/out, but it lacked the sysex editor - so you were only able to send sysexes that you first received from your synth. I discussed with the developer (back in year 2002) about a sysex editor, don't know if it's implemented yet. Tommi Uimonen

el Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:55:49 -0400 Dave Phillips <dlphilp(a)bright.net> escribió: well, if _i_ recall correctly, i was sending sysex messages with my first midi sequencer, the old kcs (which stood for "keyboard controlled sequencer", i think) for the atari computer, some time around 1988.

eh? all I found was some code... hey by the way, I know this is probably stupid as HELL, but what the #*&%* does IIRC stand for/mean?

venerdì, 10 ottobre 2003 alle 01:42:37, Aaron Trumm ha scritto: Have a look at this article: http://www.linuxfocus.org/English/September2002/article261.shtml "If I Recall Correctly" Bye -- Emiliano Grilli Linux user #209089 http://www.emillo.net

On Thursday 09 October 2003 21:56, Tim Orford wrote: I don't remember which windows app it was, but back in my dark days of doing everything with MIDI synths, I used to be able to have the sequencer send a sysex file containing the appropriate patches for the song to each synth (I had/have a Korg M1 and Yamaha DX7.) It seems to me that an even older piece of software let me do that as well, maybe an Amiga or DOS based sequencer. Of course those boards both predate General MIDI, so you had no way to expect patch 0 to be a grand piano, etc. I'd expect the need for something like that to be rather less nowadays (certainly I do nearly everything with software synths and I can't conceive of a way to set them all up automatically at the beginning of a song without using a fairly rigid framework like Buzz on the PC where you do all your sound generation internally or using plugins, nothing like ALSA or Jack), but there was a time when it was very necessary. Necessary as in "Oh my god, I have 700 banks on this floppy, which one was I using when I wrote this song?!" Rob

On Thursday 09 October 2003 21:56, Tim Orford wrote: Well, if he needs this functionality in a sequencer, then maybe he needs to send sys-ex in real-time, in which it would be mighty convenient to have it in the sequencer. But then of course you need replacable parameters, etc. Or even if it's just downloading in bulk before the sequence starts, I can't see why you _wouldn't_ want this capability in the sequencer. Why make more work for the user? Larry

On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 02:12:54AM -0400, Larry Troxler wrote: that isnt what he was asking about, but i agree, the ability to be able to edit parameters either graphically or in a list is pretty essential. i just think librarian features should be kept separate. yes its a nice feature, but Linux doesnt have enough developers to support everything one might like. I'm anti 'bloated monoliths' for many reasons: 1-developer time is a precious resource. Rosegarden Chris has already been distracted by this thread when he possibly has more useful things to do. 2-development of linux audio is current done in v small teams. I dont see this as a disadvantage as long as it is recognised and strategy planned accordingly. 3-advanced features are useless if the app segfaults at the drop of a hat. This is best acheived by them being small. 4-personally i dont beleive that large apps are good for the user. it makes them lazy. Very high quality low level tools exist already and i think it makes sense to use them. Eg i will always use a text editor to complete a job if possible. Similarly i will always use a filemanager or bash for file operations, possibly with drag n drop, rather than some half baked dialogue box. Its more flexible, encourages skills development, has a longer lifespan, and may even be faster in the shortterm. 5-others :-) "...for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards... Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing. Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain." Sun Tzu. 400BC. But i'm just brainstorming and lacking in sleep. I could be wrong...:-) cheers -- Tim Orford