I want something like this

Primus · March 24, 2006, 09:36:13 AM

http://www.gweep.net/~shifty/death/

The reason I want something like this is because it has easy integration of MIDI, LCD screen, Knobs, buttons etc as well as a decent DSP. I want it for about $75, though. Just scroll down to see the hardware hacks.

John

R.G. · March 24, 2006, 10:03:47 AM

Just curious - why not want it for $10 instead of $75?

Peter Snowberg · March 24, 2006, 11:31:27 AM

I want a pony too!

Primus · March 24, 2006, 02:21:56 PM

Hey, that's my line!

They used to be available for $85, the boards that is. Then the company decided to tack on another $200 or so to the price.

P.S., R.G., I ordered the parts for my Spyder yesterday. Super jiggy excited.

Peter Snowberg · March 24, 2006, 04:03:32 PM

When I saw your pony line I was ROTFLMAO.

Actually, for a DIY project the $75 isn't unrealistic at all, at least for the "core". The cost has come down amazingly but the $75 still involves the user buying the parts and then doing all the building.

After a gazillion variations on a theme I think I have something solid that could be offered but I just don't have the time right now to finish it off. I did start talking about MILAN to see if it's worth spending my free time to make a little DSP box. The largest limitation is usually the user interface in terms of cost and hassle. The more universal the interface, the more cost. Now I think we're on the verge of getting around that hurdle. I'm encouraged by the people who saw the MILAN concept and "get it".

I have another design I want to get out of the way before doing any DSP here but only a couple of people responded to the post about that one.

I don't know what to think about that.

Primus · March 24, 2006, 04:35:43 PM

I also like and get your MILAN project. I think one potential problem with getting people excited is that it requires a paradigm shift in how we think about stompboxes. ie, now we think guitar-->box w/ knobs and a switch-->next box--->amp. When you want to add a new tech like this you have to add it across the whole line and standardize it and right now pedal manufactureres can't even agree on a power plug style. That aside, I think it's a great idea. The thing that's cool about a Miss Parker type device is that you plug it in and it's ready to go like a conventional stomp box, only it's more than conventional since you can have a programming community spring up around that common hardware architecture. You may not even need to have any programming skill if people release their DSP programs and comment them well, others can adjust them to fit their dreams.

Do you know if they are going to have Miss Parkers for sale any time soon? Kind of a cool idea, but kind of a limited DSP if I recall correctl...

TELEFUNKON · March 24, 2006, 04:40:46 PM

maybe you should rename the crossbar to: "Matrix"?

David · March 25, 2006, 09:45:27 AM

Quote from: Primus on March 24, 2006, 04:35:43 PM
When you want to add a new tech like this you have to add it across the whole line and standardize it and right now pedal manufactureres can't even agree on a power plug style.

Well, that's good for us, right? They can't monkey in our forum's business...
Peter, have you checked out what can/should be done to keep some rapacious corporate pig from stealing this protocol/methodology? Wait, who's the patent lawyer? Was it Marty B or Marty Mart? Maybe one of them can be P.M.ed to chime in...

TELEFUNKON · March 25, 2006, 10:00:17 AM

Quote from: David on March 25, 2006, 09:45:27 AM
Quote from: Primus on March 24, 2006, 04:35:43 PM
When you want to add a new tech like this you have to add it across the whole line and standardize it and right now pedal manufactureres can't even agree on a power plug style.

Well, that's good for us, right? They can't monkey in our forum's business...
Peter, have you checked out what can/should be done to keep some rapacious corporate pig from stealing this protocol/methodology? Wait, who's the patent lawyer? Was it Marty B or Marty Mart? Maybe one of them can be P.M.ed to chime in...

forgot to put a smiley in there?

Primus · March 25, 2006, 12:50:22 PM

IANAL, but I think this is now prior art unless someone has already patented the idea. So, someone else couldn't patent it and you'd have a start at getting it patented yourself.

Peter Snowberg · March 25, 2006, 12:53:59 PM

David, my hope is that they steal it for their own so that everything can interoperate.

I just don't want to see it renamed. (that's my ego talking)

I don't have expectations of world-wide adoption but it sure would be nice for us. It's being presented as an open standard so everybody can work together. Making it proprietary would doom it to use by 3 or 4 individuals.

A.S.P. · March 26, 2006, 01:05:54 AM

Maybe you can protect a crucial part of your findings,
and give/sell licenses for that.

Hopefully, these won`t cause you trouble with the name...

DavidS · March 26, 2006, 08:30:18 AM

Actually, my first thought I had upon seeing the first mention of MILAN was "MLAN", the Music Local Area Network that Yamaha came out with a few years ago. I think it was Yamaha, anyway, and it operates over Firewire and incorporates digital audio as well as midi, if I remember right.

R.G. · March 26, 2006, 08:58:00 AM

Once again, at the risk of being repetitive, you cannot own anything that you cannot protect. And protecting a patent is essentially too expensive for a non-Gates individual.

What happens if Yamaha wants the subject of your patent? They simply start selling it. You supply notice of infringement. They send back a note saying "Good news, we have examined your patent and we don't really infringe." You're left with arguing "Do so!" and ultimately either letting it go (i.e. letting them have it) or ponying up the $ubstantial fraction of a million that such a suit costs, whether or not it's successful.

Far better to put it into the public domain to prevent others from preventing YOU from using it.

Peter Snowberg · March 26, 2006, 03:15:50 PM

Quote from: A.S.P. on March 26, 2006, 01:05:54 AM
Maybe you can protect a crucial part of your findings,
and give/sell licenses for that.

Hopefully, these won`t cause you trouble with the name...

Big thanks for that heads up!

I guess the name might be a problem now. I guess I should have trademarked it a decade ago.

The concept is still solid and people obviously have a want or a need to use effects control data in network enabled ways.

Maybe FXLAN?, Nope, that one is also an Ethernet product name. FXNET?, that one looks open surprisingly enough. Maybe it's time for a new network name thread. Anyone got a better name than that?

Primus: Sorry for the thread hijacking. Now can we please go to Cuba?

News:

I want something like this