Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Still looking for Mr. Yasser

Kraig wrote:

"One can have a Bosanquet with this few of notes."

A 19-tone Bosanquet MIDI keyboard? Can you direct me to the
manufacturer?

"Two 19 tone clavichords have been made. They are fun to play."

I imagine so. But of course, the Hackleman-Wilson 19-tone clavichord is
always mentioned in passing, or cited in abstracts of articles which are
unavailable to me -- so I can get no useful info. Back to my search for
a 19-tone MIDI keyboard. :-D

"But one can change the reeds of a reed organ and with another keyboard
you can make your own arrangements of white and black notes. The octaves
become large then."

And after all that hard work, I still won't have a 19-tone MIDI
keyboard. Besides, I refuse to consider the "reed organ" a musical
instrument. :-D

"If you split keys though it remains to be seen just how playable they
are."

Hmm, didn't seem to be a problem for Italian clavecinists --

http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm
<http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm>

-- nor for most organists, apparently.

http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm
<http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm>

"At that point if they are just, make a smaller black and white
keyboard."

Uh -- sure thing, Kraig. I do it all the time. :-D

Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

I believe harvey starr can make a 19 tone midi keyboard. harold fortunin. Possibly Simon Terpsa.
you might consider the values of having more tones on a bonsanquet. for instance if you have more than 38 for instance you can have an upper and lower set with a different timbre right there on one manual.
The practice of split keys has not seem to be preserved for who knows what reason. I suggest try playing in all 19 keys on a mocked up sheet of paper before you finalize it. I can't tell you how many mistakes i used to do with instruments when t first made them . Some times things can not be forseen.
More often than not , it is more expedient to do things your self than to rely on others. a few have made their own midi switched boards. regardless of the outcome, the attempt of say taking two cheap ones and rigging up something yourself will bring you and others closer to solving the problem for every one else.
I am quite pleased with my reed organs although i much prefer to have the 2nd set of reeds at a unison than an octave. I have never heard any negative response to them in the 30 years i have used them.
a likesize model of the layout of the clavichord with various scales can be found here. http://anaphoria.com/xen456.PDF

J.Smith wrote:
>
>
> Kraig wrote:
>
> "One can have a Bosanquet with this few of notes."
>
> A 19-tone Bosanquet MIDI keyboard? Can you direct me to the
> manufacturer?
>
> "Two 19 tone clavichords have been made. They are fun to play."
>
> I imagine so. But of course, the Hackleman-Wilson 19-tone clavichord is
> always mentioned in passing, or cited in abstracts of articles which are
> unavailable to me -- so I can get no useful info. Back to my search for
> a 19-tone MIDI keyboard. :-D
>
> "But one can change the reeds of a reed organ and with another keyboard
> you can make your own arrangements of white and black notes. The octaves
> become large then."
>
> And after all that hard work, I still won't have a 19-tone MIDI
> keyboard. Besides, I refuse to consider the "reed organ" a musical
> instrument. :-D
>
> "If you split keys though it remains to be seen just how playable they
> are."
>
> Hmm, didn't seem to be a problem for Italian clavecinists --
>
> http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm > <http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm>
> <http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm > <http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm>>
>
> -- nor for most organists, apparently.
>
> http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm > <http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm>
> <http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm > <http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm>>
>
> "At that point if they are just, make a smaller black and white
> keyboard."
>
> Uh -- sure thing, Kraig. I do it all the time. :-D
>
> Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
> keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
> no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/index.html>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main/index.asp> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "J.Smith" <jsmith9624@...> wrote:
> Back to my search for a 19-tone MIDI keyboard. :-D

OK, I'll bite. I researched this pretty thoroughly, and
although there may be one or two DIY things out there, to my
knowledge none exist for sale. The reason for this is probably
that such an animal (split-key / subsemitone) would have a
market as large as the number of musicologist performers
who are interested in playing meantone music on a MIDI
keyboard, which I think effectively is Nil. The small number of
performers interested in meantone music are typically
also interested in acoustic instruments exactly like:

> http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm
> <http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm>

Which as far as I can tell would be the best way for you
to get what you want. Have one made without strings
and MIDIfy it with an encoder like the ones we sell from MGB.

> Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe
> that MIDI keyboards must confine themselves to either 12
> keys per octave or 205 -- no middle ground permitted.
> Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D

It's not that. Sure, 19 is altogether seductive. The thing is,
considering that a product has to sell, just what number of
keys, and what tuning, should a design focus on? Since
there are plenty of arguments for this or that number of
keys and this or that tuning, because there are many many
tunings that are all attractive in their own way, there is no
convincing reason to choose one over the other; enter the
generalized hex keyboards.

I can speak from my own experience trying to design a
keyboard with fewer keys, and trying to work with fewer
keys in general, which I found ultimately a dead end. It
seemed to me futile to try to decide what number of keys
to choose for a design, if the number of keys would not
allow all tunings to be available all at once, because with
a small number of keys, the default tuning, whatever it
may be, is unavoidably something of a tyranny not
unlike 12ET. Sure, the tuning can change to whatever,
but this confuses a lot of folks who expect _this_ key to
play _that_ pitch - all the time.

As much as I admire the Fokker organ, for example,
I think the obvious reason that keyboard has not been
reproduced is that it is designed for one tuning only.
The hex grids on the other hand let you do whatever,
but for a general user, these don't have enough
structure related to the traditional keyboard.
(I'm sure to get responses about diatonic scales here).

Anyway, considering these things led me to design
something that solves the problems. The default
tuning of the Tonal Plexus does not represent a new
tyranny because according to the average limits of
human perception it is in a practical sense all tunings
at once. The structure of the keyboard is a cross
between Bosanquet and Halberstadt, similar to the
Fokker but solving the rising octave problem.

And, if you want 17 or 19 keys, just use the 17 or 19
presets, or design your own tuning in TPXE, reorganizing
the layout however you like, using as many duplicate keys
as you like. Plenty of keys to return however you want.

Regards,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

P.S. Actually, the Tonal Plexus has 211 keys per octave
(for 205ET master tuning).

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>"One can have a Bosanquet with this few of notes."
>
>A 19-tone Bosanquet MIDI keyboard? Can you direct me to the
>manufacturer?

JLS - there is and has never been a 19-tone MIDI keyboard
in production.

>"But one can change the reeds of a reed organ and with another keyboard
>you can make your own arrangements of white and black notes. The octaves
>become large then."
>
>And after all that hard work, I still won't have a 19-tone MIDI
>keyboard. Besides, I refuse to consider the "reed organ" a musical
>instrument. :-D

As one who's seen and heard Kraig's modified reed organs, I think
you're way off base. It's MIDI keyboards that aren't musical
instruments.

>"If you split keys though it remains to be seen just how playable they
>are."
>
>Hmm, didn't seem to be a problem for Italian clavecinists --
>
>http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm
><http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm>
>
>-- nor for most organists, apparently.
>
>http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm
><http://www.goart.gu.se/ortgies/Subsemi.htm>

If it wasn't a problem, it would have been more popular.

>Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
>keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
>no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D

You can build a MIDI keyboard fairly easily with off-the-shelf
switches.

But for me, you're right, 19 isn't sexy enough. I've been
experimenting with the tuning recently, and I find it very
limiting. Compared to 12, you loose 9 and don't really gain 7.
22 on the other hand....

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>The small number of
>performers interested in meantone music are typically
>also interested in acoustic instruments exactly like:
>
>> http://www.christopherstembridge.org/cromatico.htm
>
>Which as far as I can tell would be the best way for you
>to get what you want. Have one made without strings
>and MIDIfy it with an encoder like the ones we sell from MGB.

I actually know the builder of these instruments through
a friend -- his shop is near my home town. They aren't
cheap. Harvey Starr (among others, I'm sure) can make
custom MIDI controllers (again, not cheap). If budget is
an issue you could either making a 19-tone halberstadt-like
thing from two cheap Edirol or M-Audio MIDI keyboards.
This is a day or two of work. Steve Rezutek did it for 22,
and some photos of that are in the tuning list photos
section IIRC. Or get some MIDI switches and some buttons
you like the shape of, and a bread board, and make your
own bosanquet.

I really think, though, that you'd appreciate the doubled
keys. Having played Michael Zarkey's 19-tone Wilson-keyboard
harpsichord, I speak from experience. The Janko has 3X
as many keys/octave as the piano, and it works very well
(I've played one of the few surviving Janko uprights).

>As much as I admire the Fokker organ, for example,
>I think the obvious reason that keyboard has not been
>reproduced is that it is designed for one tuning only.

In what sense is the Fokker keyboard designed for
one tuning only?

>Anyway, considering these things led me to design
>something that solves the problems. The default
>tuning of the Tonal Plexus does not represent a new
>tyranny because according to the average limits of
>human perception it is in a practical sense all tunings
>at once.

205-ET, is that?

>The structure of the keyboard is a cross
>between Bosanquet and Halberstadt, similar to the
>Fokker but solving the rising octave problem.

I can never tell anything from the photos. Do you
have a diagram?

-Carl

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
> In what sense is the Fokker keyboard designed for
> one tuning only?

In what sense was the Fokker keyboard designed for anything
other than 31 tones per octave? OK, that may be 31ET or 31-JI
or 31 whatever, but I mean it's 31, and please do correct me if
I am wrong, but I think it's pretty clear that 31ET was the winner
for the Fokker organ and all those who have written for it.

> it is in a practical sense all tunings
> >at once.
>
> 205-ET, is that?

Yes.

> >The structure of the keyboard is a cross
> >between Bosanquet and Halberstadt, similar to the
> >Fokker but solving the rising octave problem.
>
> I can never tell anything from the photos. Do you
> have a diagram?

It's clearly shown right here.

<http://www.h-pi.com/TPX28keyboard.html>

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> In what sense is the Fokker keyboard designed for
>> one tuning only?
>
>In what sense was the Fokker keyboard designed for anything
>other than 31 tones per octave? OK, that may be 31ET or 31-JI
>or 31 whatever, but I mean it's 31, and please do correct me if
>I am wrong, but I think it's pretty clear that 31ET was the winner
>for the Fokker organ and all those who have written for it.

It's an organ. It can be retuned in the same way as any other
organ. If it were a MIDI keyboard, it would be just another
generalized keyboard.

>> >The structure of the keyboard is a cross
>> >between Bosanquet and Halberstadt, similar to the
>> >Fokker but solving the rising octave problem.
>>
>> I can never tell anything from the photos. Do you
>> have a diagram?
>
>It's clearly shown right here.
>
> http://www.h-pi.com/TPX28keyboard.html

That's better. But still not exactly clear (to me). For
starters, there appear to be two sizes of button in the picture,
but it isn't mentioned in the text.

-Carl

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
>> Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
>> keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
>> no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D
>> >
> You can build a MIDI keyboard fairly easily with off-the-shelf
> switches.
>
> Define 'fairly easily' :) (yikes)

> But for me, you're right, 19 isn't sexy enough. I've been
> experimenting with the tuning recently, and I find it very
> limiting. Compared to 12, you loose 9 and don't really gain 7.
> 22 on the other hand...
One gains a 5 in 19-edo, and the 3 is as about as 'bad' in 22-edo as it is in 19-edo just the opposite direction. The 7 in 19-edo is much better than in 12, although no match for 31-edo's 7. I consider it a gain over 12-edo, yessiree. The 9 in 19-edo isn't great, but I find it tolerable, and I use it as a quasi-dissonance. If the tempo is fast, it's hard to notice. I wouldn't write spacious meditative music with quartal harmony in 19-edo anyway---it's for putting the pedal to the medal and sounding quirky and sour with traditional and quasi-traditional progressions in a delicious way.

However, I find 2^(15/19) (the 7) a nice sound which gives the same kind of new sourness that I associate with 7, although in its own unique and likable way. I like it as a 'bad trip dom7th'

22 is fine, but in a way, harder to write for than 19, I find. Less tradition, which is itself a desirable, yet daunting characteristic. Good for the Margo Schulter thing, and beyond.

Cheers,
Aaron.

P.S. I would have liked to see what you would have come up with in 19-edo even though you might not. I can see it being a good tuning for your particular qualities, compositionally speaking. You don't agree?

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
> > http://www.h-pi.com/TPX28keyboard.html
>
> That's better. But still not exactly clear (to me). For
> starters, there appear to be two sizes of button in the picture,
> but it isn't mentioned in the text.

Yes, that info is still lacking. There are actually 3 sizes, and several
elevations for the buttons. It will be explained clearly with pictures
and everything, but for now the gist of it is this...

As you know, 205 is not a single circle-of-fifths tuning; it's fifth is that
of 41ET. And a good thing, too, since note naming can then be based
on a chain of 41 fifths = 41 large commas to the octave, which
are fine-tuned using 5 JNDs per step: 205 = 41 x 5.

Hence, there are 5 chains of fifths which correspond to JND fine tuning
of a 41 chain. The JND fine-tunings are called inflections, and up from
the bottom for each key are called double-flat, flat, natural (on the center
chain of 41) sharp and double-sharp. The natural inflections have large
concave buttons. The single inflections have small raised buttons,
and the double inflections have medium sized slightly raised buttons.
This way you can feel wherever you are on whichever inflection of the
41 chain. This also more easily shows how inflections can be used as
common tones when modulating, such as 11/8, 13/8, and 6/5, all
appearing on the flat chain (assumuing 1/1 on the natural chain).

Hope that helps. The user manual should be available by next week,
which contains all of this as well as all the technical info anybody might
want.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:

> I actually know the builder of these instruments through
> a friend -- his shop is near my home town. They aren't
> cheap. Harvey Starr (among others, I'm sure) can make
> custom MIDI controllers (again, not cheap). If budget is
> an issue you could either making a 19-tone halberstadt-like
> thing from two cheap Edirol or M-Audio MIDI keyboards.
> This is a day or two of work. Steve Rezutek did it for 22,
> and some photos of that are in the tuning list photos
> section IIRC. Or get some MIDI switches and some buttons
> you like the shape of, and a bread board, and make your
> own bosanquet.

Doesn't Steve Rezutek's process entail the octave getting bigger? I thought the spec was for keeping the existing layout with split keys. That means the octave span has to be kept constant. I don't think rebuilding an exsiting keyboard will do it.

I'll welcome articles on DIY with MIDI switches because I don't know the details of that. But it doesn't sound easy to me.

Graham

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <gbreed@...> wrote:
> I'll welcome articles on DIY with MIDI switches because I
> don't know the details of that. But it doesn't sound easy
> to me.

Well, maybe not easy, but not that difficult either.
Take a look at the MGB encoder units mce, mkc and mkcv
series, as well as mscan and others we sell.

<http://www.h-pi.com/MGBencoders.html>

Just add switches. Wiring options, see also:

<http://www.h-pi.com/MGBinterfaces.html>

Plenty of perfectly usable switches are readily available
from many different vendors. We recommend E-switch:

<http://www.e-switch.com/>

In the past, I have also recommended using surplus
switches from places like:

<http://www.allelectronics.com/>

Sometimes there are very good deals there.

The stuff is available and we're here to help. I would like
to see the H-Pi site add several pages on DIY... it's a plan
anyway. For now I hope this helps.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>>> Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
>>> keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
>>> no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D
>>
>> You can build a MIDI keyboard fairly easily with off-the-shelf
>> switches.
>
>Define 'fairly easily' :) (yikes)

Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy. Even
musicians could probably do it.

>> But for me, you're right, 19 isn't sexy enough. I've been
>> experimenting with the tuning recently, and I find it very
>> limiting. Compared to 12, you loose 9 and don't really gain 7.
>> 22 on the other hand...
>
>One gains a 5 in 19-edo, and the 3 is as about as 'bad' in 22-edo as it
>is in 19-edo just the opposite direction.

I think the 22 fifth is slightly better, but only slightly.
Maybe I just like it more.

>The 7 in 19-edo is much better than in 12,

The 4:5:6:7 chord sounds dry and boring to me for some reason.
Actually, I've got an explanation for it:

http://lumma.org/stuff/7entropy.png

The entropy at 1000cents is 4.592108, while at 947 it's 4.595071.
That might look like a small difference, but harmonic entropy
has a very narrow dynamic range. The entropy at 969 is 4.535915.

Fortunately, 3, 5, and 7 are all flat in 19, so the secondary
intervals are pretty decent.

>it's for putting the pedal to the medal and sounding
>quirky and sour with traditional and quasi-traditional progressions in a
>delicious way.

Oh, OK, I suppose you have a point there. Do you recommend
any scales in 19? Have you been approaching it that way? Do you
find you gravitate toward the diatonic scale?

>However, I find 2^(15/19) (the 7) a nice sound which gives the same kind
>of new sourness that I associate with 7, although in its own unique and
>likable way. I like it as a 'bad trip dom7th'

>22 is fine, but in a way, harder to write for than 19, I find. Less
>tradition, which is itself a desirable, yet daunting characteristic.
>Good for the Margo Schulter thing, and beyond.

I always find myself drawn back to the diatonic scale in 19.
Hanson, no matter how good on paper, just winds up sounding like
a bastardized octatonic scale, or subset thereof, to me. There,
I said it.

>P.S. I would have liked to see what you would have come up with in
>19-edo even though you might not. I can see it being a good tuning for
>your particular qualities, compositionally speaking. You don't agree?

I'm working on it. I just bought pianoteq, and I'm working on
getting it working with my score editor in 19. . . in the meantime,
I've been fooling around on the keyboard for ideas.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

At 10:45 AM 9/12/2007, you wrote:
>--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>> > http://www.h-pi.com/TPX28keyboard.html
>>
>> That's better. But still not exactly clear (to me). For
>> starters, there appear to be two sizes of button in the picture,
>> but it isn't mentioned in the text.
>
>Yes, that info is still lacking. There are actually 3 sizes, and several
>elevations for the buttons. It will be explained clearly with pictures
>and everything, but for now the gist of it is this...
>
>As you know, 205 is not a single circle-of-fifths tuning; it's fifth is that
>of 41ET. And a good thing, too, since note naming can then be based
>on a chain of 41 fifths = 41 large commas to the octave, which
>are fine-tuned using 5 JNDs per step: 205 = 41 x 5.

Aha!

>Hence, there are 5 chains of fifths which correspond to JND fine tuning
>of a 41 chain. The JND fine-tunings are called inflections, and up from
>the bottom for each key are called double-flat, flat, natural (on the center
>chain of 41) sharp and double-sharp. The natural inflections have large
>concave buttons. The single inflections have small raised buttons,
>and the double inflections have medium sized slightly raised buttons.
>This way you can feel wherever you are on whichever inflection of the
>41 chain. This also more easily shows how inflections can be used as
>common tones when modulating, such as 11/8, 13/8, and 6/5, all
>appearing on the flat chain (assumuing 1/1 on the natural chain).

I would maybe have been happier with 41 + dupes. Does the thing
have a built-in synth, or does it just send MIDI? How do you get
205 tones out of the MIDI?

>Hope that helps. The user manual should be available by next week,
>which contains all of this as well as all the technical info anybody might
>want.

If you'd rather wait and just point me to that, it's OK by me. On
the other hand, now's your chance to tell your story.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

At 07:43 PM 9/12/2007, you wrote:
>Carl Lumma wrote:
>
>> I actually know the builder of these instruments through
>> a friend -- his shop is near my home town. They aren't
>> cheap. Harvey Starr (among others, I'm sure) can make
>> custom MIDI controllers (again, not cheap). If budget is
>> an issue you could either making a 19-tone halberstadt-like
>> thing from two cheap Edirol or M-Audio MIDI keyboards.
>> This is a day or two of work. Steve Rezutek did it for 22,
>> and some photos of that are in the tuning list photos
>> section IIRC. Or get some MIDI switches and some buttons
>> you like the shape of, and a bread board, and make your
>> own bosanquet.
>
>Doesn't Steve Rezutek's process entail the octave getting
>bigger?

Oh yes. JL doesn't seem to care. Or does he?

>I thought the spec was for keeping the existing
>layout with split keys.

Oops, did I miss that?

>That means the octave span has to
>be kept constant. I don't think rebuilding an exsiting
>keyboard will do it.

Maybe I'm all wet. JL?

>I'll welcome articles on DIY with MIDI switches because I
>don't know the details of that. But it doesn't sound easy
>to me.

Everything's off the shelf (MGB, which somehow H-Pi is hosting
these days). There are a ton of message boards devoted to this
stuff these days (Makers Faire, Create Digital Music, and spin
offs galore). Just google.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
>>>> Color me incredulous, but I just find it very hard to believe that MIDI
>>>> keyboards must confine themselves to either 12 keys per octave or 205 --
>>>> no middle ground permitted. Apparently 19 isn't sexy enough. :-D
>>>> >>> You can build a MIDI keyboard fairly easily with off-the-shelf
>>> switches.
>>> >> >> Define 'fairly easily' :) (yikes)
>> >
> Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy. Even
> musicians could probably do it.
> Why is a comment like that necessary?

>>> But for me, you're right, 19 isn't sexy enough. I've been
>>> experimenting with the tuning recently, and I find it very
>>> limiting. Compared to 12, you loose 9 and don't really gain 7.
>>> 22 on the other hand...
>>> >> One gains a 5 in 19-edo, and the 3 is as about as 'bad' in 22-edo as it >> is in 19-edo just the opposite direction.
>> >
> I think the 22 fifth is slightly better, but only slightly.
> Maybe I just like it more.
> Sounds like you do.

>> The 7 in 19-edo is much better than in 12,
>> >
> The 4:5:6:7 chord sounds dry and boring to me for some reason.
> Actually, I've got an explanation for it:
>
> http://lumma.org/stuff/7entropy.png
>
> The entropy at 1000cents is 4.592108, while at 947 it's 4.595071.
> That might look like a small difference, but harmonic entropy
> has a very narrow dynamic range. The entropy at 969 is 4.535915.
>
> Fortunately, 3, 5, and 7 are all flat in 19, so the secondary
> intervals are pretty decent.
> It's funny, I like the sound of 19, always have.

>> it's for putting the pedal to the medal and sounding >> quirky and sour with traditional and quasi-traditional progressions in a >> delicious way.
>> >
> Oh, OK, I suppose you have a point there. Do you recommend
> any scales in 19? Have you been approaching it that way? Do you
> find you gravitate toward the diatonic scale?
> Yes, I think I like doing traditional 5-limit type things in surprising ways.

<snip>
> I'm working on it. I just bought pianoteq, and I'm working on
> getting it working with my score editor in 19. . . in the meantime,
> I've been fooling around on the keyboard for ideas.
> Cool...

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl:
>>Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy. Even
>>musicians could probably do it.

Aaron:
> Why is a comment like that necessary?

Oh, I certainly found that comment helpful. If we're talking about a breadboard, switches, some wires, a magic MIDI box, then I can see that's fairly easy. You don't have to get involved with woodworking for example.

I'd still like a howto guide though. Like where do the breadboards come from? And which switches to get? I can see lots of switches listed but I don't know how musical they'd be.

I'm guessing that velocity sensitivity goes out the window as well. That's not critical but the prices are looking high as well. So it's a bang for the buck thing.

Graham

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

At 07:38 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
>Carl:
>>>Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy.
>>>Even musicians could probably do it.
>
>Aaron:
>> Why is a comment like that necessary?
>
>Oh, I certainly found that comment helpful. If we're
>talking about a breadboard, switches, some wires, a magic
>MIDI box, then I can see that's fairly easy. You don't have
>to get involved with woodworking for example.

Interesting that I meant it as a joke, Aaron took it as
an insult, and you thought it was sincere (it certainly
is true, musicians might balk at the idea even though
they'd probably be surprised how easy it is.

>I'd still like a howto guide though. Like where do the
>breadboards come from?

Your local electronics hobby shop? Jameco?

>And which switches to get? I can
>see lots of switches listed but I don't know how musical
>they'd be.

None of them would be musical.

>I'm guessing that velocity sensitivity goes out the window
>as well.

You can buy velocity sensitive switches.

>That's not critical but the prices are looking
>high as well. So it's a bang for the buck thing.

Yes. As I recall, the sensor->MIDI thing all the makers
in NYC were buying in 2005 was $100. Breadboards costs
a few bucks. Then it's down to the switches and maybe a
serial bus. If you want 205-ET, the switches might add
up to a lot. But for 5 * 19 = 95, it shouldn't bee too bad.

On another note, microtonalists must be poor even by
musician standards. People balking at $2000 for a hypothetical
microtonal keyboard that less than 1% of the population would
even consider buying? Ordinary keyboard players spend that
kind of dough on commodity 12-tET keyboards without batting
an eye.

-Carl

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
> At 07:38 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
> >>Carl:
>>
>>>>Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy.
>>>>Even musicians could probably do it.
>>
>>Aaron:
>>
>>>Why is a comment like that necessary?
>>
>>Oh, I certainly found that comment helpful. If we're >>talking about a breadboard, switches, some wires, a magic >>MIDI box, then I can see that's fairly easy. You don't have >>to get involved with woodworking for example.
> > Interesting that I meant it as a joke, Aaron took it as
> an insult, and you thought it was sincere (it certainly
> is true, musicians might balk at the idea even though
> they'd probably be surprised how easy it is.

Well, I took it as light-hearted, of course. But the point is that you don't need skills a musician wouldn't be expected to have, and that was well taken.

>>I'd still like a howto guide though. Like where do the >>breadboards come from?
> > Your local electronics hobby shop? Jameco?

Eugh? I don't know of any shops like that in Lianyungang. What's Jameco? I suppose there must be some suppliers -- I could ask the electronics department at the institute I work at ;-) Hey, I've even found the Chinese word for "breadboard"! But I wondered if the breadboards were supposed to match the switches.

>>And which switches to get? I can >>see lots of switches listed but I don't know how musical >>they'd be.
> > None of them would be musical.

Well, we're talking about a musical instrument here.

>>I'm guessing that velocity sensitivity goes out the window >>as well.
> > You can buy velocity sensitive switches.

You can? I didn't see them on the website.

>>That's not critical but the prices are looking >>high as well. So it's a bang for the buck thing.
> > Yes. As I recall, the sensor->MIDI thing all the makers
> in NYC were buying in 2005 was $100. Breadboards costs
> a few bucks. Then it's down to the switches and maybe a
> serial bus. If you want 205-ET, the switches might add
> up to a lot. But for 5 * 19 = 95, it shouldn't bee too bad.

Okay, not so bad. The 320 key controller is $250. The first thing I clicked on was the 1024/2048 key encoder, which is $442.

> On another note, microtonalists must be poor even by
> musician standards. People balking at $2000 for a hypothetical
> microtonal keyboard that less than 1% of the population would
> even consider buying? Ordinary keyboard players spend that
> kind of dough on commodity 12-tET keyboards without batting
> an eye.

I did buy a $2000 keyboard back when I was a programmer! I get third world wages now and I move around a lot. And music's only one part of my life. But certainly this is worth considering. There's also a chance I could find a workshop to make what I really want at third world prices as well -- that's always at the back of my mind.

Graham

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> Your local electronics hobby shop? Jameco?
>
>Eugh? I don't know of any shops like that in Lianyungang.
>What's Jameco? I suppose there must be some suppliers -- I
>could ask the electronics department at the institute I work
>at ;-) Hey, I've even found the Chinese word for
>"breadboard"! But I wondered if the breadboards were
>supposed to match the switches.

A famous shop that turns out to be near my house.

http://www.jameco.com

>>>And which switches to get? I can
>>>see lots of switches listed but I don't know how musical
>>>they'd be.
>>
>> None of them would be musical.
>
>Well, we're talking about a musical instrument here.

We're talking about a bargain-basement, turnkey kit
project here.

>>>I'm guessing that velocity sensitivity goes out the window
>>>as well.
>>
>> You can buy velocity sensitive switches.
>
>You can? I didn't see them on the website.

They *are* mass produced. Lots.

>> On another note, microtonalists must be poor even by
>> musician standards. People balking at $2000 for a hypothetical
>> microtonal keyboard that less than 1% of the population would
>> even consider buying? Ordinary keyboard players spend that
>> kind of dough on commodity 12-tET keyboards without batting
>> an eye.
>
>I did buy a $2000 keyboard back when I was a programmer! I
>get third world wages now and I move around a lot. And
>music's only one part of my life. But certainly this is
>worth considering. There's also a chance I could find a
>workshop to make what I really want at third world prices as
>well -- that's always at the back of my mind.

Another neat thing near my house is:

http://techshop.ws

My wife is thinking of finishing her bluetooth tap shoe there.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

A question that comes to mind. can one make such a thing in stages? adding more notes as you go on. that might make it easier for some.

Graham Breed wrote:
>
> Carl:
> >>Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy. Even
> >>musicians could probably do it.
>
> Aaron:
> > Why is a comment like that necessary?
>
> Oh, I certainly found that comment helpful. If we're
> talking about a breadboard, switches, some wires, a magic
> MIDI box, then I can see that's fairly easy. You don't have
> to get involved with woodworking for example.
>
> I'd still like a howto guide though. Like where do the
> breadboards come from? And which switches to get? I can
> see lots of switches listed but I don't know how musical
> they'd be.
>
> I'm guessing that velocity sensitivity goes out the window
> as well. That's not critical but the prices are looking
> high as well. So it's a bang for the buck thing.
>
> Graham
>
> -- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island <http://anaphoria.com/index.html>
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU <http://www.kxlu.com/main/index.asp> 88.9 FM Wed 8-9 pm Los Angeles

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

All told it is not cheap to build your own keyboard
and it takes a lot of time, patience, and a fair bit of
skill with a soldering iron.

BTW, there aren't zillions of "velocity sensing"
switches out there. There are a handful of
non-shorting SPDT or DPDT switches, of pushbutton
or detector variety, which you can use for velocity
sensing if you know what you're doing, but most of
them do not work well for this purpose. Using a DT
switch, velocity is calculated by a microcontroller by
taking the timing difference between the NC and
NO switches = the time between
a break and make of two pairs of contacts.

Take a look inside a velocity sensing
MIDI keyboard and you'll see that in the real deal it's
done a bit differently. Two silicon carbon-pill plunger
switches are positioned within an inch of each other.
The timing difference between those two NO
switches gives velocity.

The problem with using DPST switches for velocity
is (1) they normally do not have a wide enough
gap between break and make to give any velocity
sensing worth anythingunless you actuate them
with a lever, and (2) they normally use compression
springs which means the further down you press
the switch the more it pushes back up at you =
not a nice feeling for playing a musical instrument
unless again thisforce is transferred to a lever.
Again check out your favorite synth action
(probably a Fatar) and you'll find springs at the
ends of the keys are stretched, not compressed,
when a key is pushed down.

My advice for DIY is skip velocity sensing unless
you are using lever action keys as in a real piano
or organ keyboard. Otherwise it's not worth it. If you
can actuate the switch with a lever, use the Omron
subminiature detector switch D3C or D2A. These are
the only ones I know of that can actually do the job
well. You can buy them at Digi-key.\

For non-velocity, there are plenty of options. Just don't
use anything with over 1N or 100 grams of actuation
force.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <gbreed@...> wrote:
> If somebody could put together an
> article saying what to get, how to build it, how much it
> costs and what the results are then maybe people out there
> will consider it as an interesting project. I started out
> knowing almost nothing about this and I'm still not that
> clear. There must be others in the same boat.
>
>
> Graham
>

🔗Jacob <tricesimoprimalist@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

Oh, there are a lot more options. I don't have the energy
right now, but a 2-second google leads immediately to stuff
like

http://www.chipcatalog.com/Cat/829.htm

http://www.eeproductcenter.com/electromech/brief/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199903962

http://dansworkshop.com/Homebuilt%20Solid%20State%20Ignition%20Module.shtml

-C.

At 11:12 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
>All told it is not cheap to build your own keyboard
>and it takes a lot of time, patience, and a fair bit of
>skill with a soldering iron.
>
>BTW, there aren't zillions of "velocity sensing"
>switches out there. There are a handful of
>non-shorting SPDT or DPDT switches, of pushbutton
>or detector variety, which you can use for velocity
>sensing if you know what you're doing, but most of
>them do not work well for this purpose. Using a DT
>switch, velocity is calculated by a microcontroller by
>taking the timing difference between the NC and
>NO switches = the time between
>a break and make of two pairs of contacts.
>
>Take a look inside a velocity sensing
>MIDI keyboard and you'll see that in the real deal it's
>done a bit differently. Two silicon carbon-pill plunger
>switches are positioned within an inch of each other.
>The timing difference between those two NO
>switches gives velocity.
>
>The problem with using DPST switches for velocity
>is (1) they normally do not have a wide enough
>gap between break and make to give any velocity
>sensing worth anythingunless you actuate them
>with a lever, and (2) they normally use compression
>springs which means the further down you press
> the switch the more it pushes back up at you =
>not a nice feeling for playing a musical instrument
>unless again thisforce is transferred to a lever.
>Again check out your favorite synth action
>(probably a Fatar) and you'll find springs at the
>ends of the keys are stretched, not compressed,
>when a key is pushed down.
>
>My advice for DIY is skip velocity sensing unless
>you are using lever action keys as in a real piano
>or organ keyboard. Otherwise it's not worth it. If you
>can actuate the switch with a lever, use the Omron
>subminiature detector switch D3C or D2A. These are
>the only ones I know of that can actually do the job
>well. You can buy them at Digi-key.\
>
>For non-velocity, there are plenty of options. Just don't
>use anything with over 1N or 100 grams of actuation
>force.
>
>Yours,
>Aaron Hunt
>H-Pi Instruments
>
>
>
>
>--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <gbreed@...> wrote:
>> If somebody could put together an
>> article saying what to get, how to build it, how much it
>> costs and what the results are then maybe people out there
>> will consider it as an interesting project. I started out
>> knowing almost nothing about this and I'm still not that
>> clear. There must be others in the same boat.
>>
>>
>> Graham
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

Not to mention:

http://www.piezoswitch.com

For your first project, though, skip velocity sensing.

In fact, for my first project, I'd just use gutted computer
keyboard switches. I'd use it as a way to learn the MIDI
part, and test the layout I wanted.

The soldering involved in a project like this is easy, by
the way. Just melt some solder wire on the joint and you're
good to go. I've had no instruction whatsoever and I've
been able to get by.

-Carl

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

Sure, go ahead and use Hall effect sensors for your DIY
project. Then let me know when you pay off your loan
for the sensors and custom firmware development for the
MIDI encoder. You'd be re-inventing the Terpstra keyboard,
by the way.

To get back to the real world, for each ST switch you need
a diode. Just getting the switches working with MIDI is no
big deal. But that's not an instrument. You want key caps.
You want shapes and colors. You want a particular layout.
You want it not to fall apart when you play it. On and on,
it's design, it's engineering; it's a lot of work, and the stuff
that will really do the job is not so easy to find.

There is the added problem of exactly how you get this thing
working to retune MIDI. What are you going to use? Are
you going to depend on a microtonal-capable software synth?
What MIDI messages do your keys send? Etc. etc.

BTW, this is the kind of thing that should be discussed at the
H-Pi Forum. Please join if you are interested.

<http://www.h-pi.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=2>

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> Oh, there are a lot more options. I don't have the energy
> right now, but a 2-second google leads immediately to stuff
> like
>
> http://www.chipcatalog.com/Cat/829.htm
>
> http://www.eeproductcenter.com/electromech/brief/showArticle.jhtml?
articleID=199903962
>
> http://dansworkshop.com/Homebuilt%20Solid%20State%20Ignition%20Module.shtml
>
> -C.
>
> At 11:12 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
> >All told it is not cheap to build your own keyboard
> >and it takes a lot of time, patience, and a fair bit of
> >skill with a soldering iron.
> >
> >BTW, there aren't zillions of "velocity sensing"
> >switches out there. There are a handful of
> >non-shorting SPDT or DPDT switches, of pushbutton
> >or detector variety, which you can use for velocity
> >sensing if you know what you're doing, but most of
> >them do not work well for this purpose. Using a DT
> >switch, velocity is calculated by a microcontroller by
> >taking the timing difference between the NC and
> >NO switches = the time between
> >a break and make of two pairs of contacts.
> >
> >Take a look inside a velocity sensing
> >MIDI keyboard and you'll see that in the real deal it's
> >done a bit differently. Two silicon carbon-pill plunger
> >switches are positioned within an inch of each other.
> >The timing difference between those two NO
> >switches gives velocity.
> >
> >The problem with using DPST switches for velocity
> >is (1) they normally do not have a wide enough
> >gap between break and make to give any velocity
> >sensing worth anythingunless you actuate them
> >with a lever, and (2) they normally use compression
> >springs which means the further down you press
> > the switch the more it pushes back up at you =
> >not a nice feeling for playing a musical instrument
> >unless again thisforce is transferred to a lever.
> >Again check out your favorite synth action
> >(probably a Fatar) and you'll find springs at the
> >ends of the keys are stretched, not compressed,
> >when a key is pushed down.
> >
> >My advice for DIY is skip velocity sensing unless
> >you are using lever action keys as in a real piano
> >or organ keyboard. Otherwise it's not worth it. If you
> >can actuate the switch with a lever, use the Omron
> >subminiature detector switch D3C or D2A. These are
> >the only ones I know of that can actually do the job
> >well. You can buy them at Digi-key.\
> >
> >For non-velocity, there are plenty of options. Just don't
> >use anything with over 1N or 100 grams of actuation
> >force.
> >
> >Yours,
> >Aaron Hunt
> >H-Pi Instruments
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <gbreed@> wrote:
> >> If somebody could put together an
> >> article saying what to get, how to build it, how much it
> >> costs and what the results are then maybe people out there
> >> will consider it as an interesting project. I started out
> >> knowing almost nothing about this and I'm still not that
> >> clear. There must be others in the same boat.
> >>
> >>
> >> Graham
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

Correction:

I wrote:
> >The problem with using DPST switches for velocity
> >is

I meant:
> >The problem with using SPDT or DPDT switches for velocity
> >is

Carl, please let's see your DIY resoldered microtonal
computer keyboard.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> Not to mention:
>
> http://www.piezoswitch.com
>
> For your first project, though, skip velocity sensing.
>
> In fact, for my first project, I'd just use gutted computer
> keyboard switches. I'd use it as a way to learn the MIDI
> part, and test the layout I wanted.
>
> The soldering involved in a project like this is easy, by
> the way. Just melt some solder wire on the joint and you're
> good to go. I've had no instruction whatsoever and I've
> been able to get by.
>
> -Carl
>
> At 11:12 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
> >All told it is not cheap to build your own keyboard
> >and it takes a lot of time, patience, and a fair bit of
> >skill with a soldering iron.
> >
> >BTW, there aren't zillions of "velocity sensing"
> >switches out there. There are a handful of
> >non-shorting SPDT or DPDT switches, of pushbutton
> >or detector variety, which you can use for velocity
> >sensing if you know what you're doing, but most of
> >them do not work well for this purpose. Using a DT
> >switch, velocity is calculated by a microcontroller by
> >taking the timing difference between the NC and
> >NO switches = the time between
> >a break and make of two pairs of contacts.
> >
> >Take a look inside a velocity sensing
> >MIDI keyboard and you'll see that in the real deal it's
> >done a bit differently. Two silicon carbon-pill plunger
> >switches are positioned within an inch of each other.
> >The timing difference between those two NO
> >switches gives velocity.
> >
> >The problem with using DPST switches for velocity
> >is (1) they normally do not have a wide enough
> >gap between break and make to give any velocity
> >sensing worth anythingunless you actuate them
> >with a lever, and (2) they normally use compression
> >springs which means the further down you press
> > the switch the more it pushes back up at you =
> >not a nice feeling for playing a musical instrument
> >unless again thisforce is transferred to a lever.
> >Again check out your favorite synth action
> >(probably a Fatar) and you'll find springs at the
> >ends of the keys are stretched, not compressed,
> >when a key is pushed down.
> >
> >My advice for DIY is skip velocity sensing unless
> >you are using lever action keys as in a real piano
> >or organ keyboard. Otherwise it's not worth it. If you
> >can actuate the switch with a lever, use the Omron
> >subminiature detector switch D3C or D2A. These are
> >the only ones I know of that can actually do the job
> >well. You can buy them at Digi-key.\
> >
> >For non-velocity, there are plenty of options. Just don't
> >use anything with over 1N or 100 grams of actuation
> >force.
> >
> >Yours,
> >Aaron Hunt
> >H-Pi Instruments
>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

Carl Lumma wrote:
> At 07:38 PM 9/13/2007, you wrote:
> >> Carl:
>> >>>> Breadboarding a bunch of switches together is very easy.
>>>> Even musicians could probably do it.
>>>> >> Aaron:
>> >>> Why is a comment like that necessary?
>>> >> Oh, I certainly found that comment helpful. If we're >> talking about a breadboard, switches, some wires, a magic >> MIDI box, then I can see that's fairly easy. You don't have >> to get involved with woodworking for example.
>> >
> Interesting that I meant it as a joke, Aaron took it as
> an insult, and you thought it was sincere (it certainly
> is true, musicians might balk at the idea even though
> they'd probably be surprised how easy it is.
> Well, when things get nasty around here, and people start insulting one another, and email doesn't have subtleties of tone, on can start to think you are being nasty when you're not, I guess.

-A.

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Andrew Hunt"
<aahunt@...> wrote:
>
> Sure, go ahead and use Hall effect sensors for your DIY
> project. Then let me know when you pay off your loan
> for the sensors and custom firmware development for the
> MIDI encoder.

They're only $0.31 apiece (in units of 50,000).

> You'd be re-inventing the Terpstra keyboard,
> by the way.

One design choice out of many.

> To get back to the real world, for each ST switch you need
> a diode. Just getting the switches working with MIDI is no
> big deal. But that's not an instrument. You want key caps.
> You want shapes and colors. You want a particular layout.
> You want it not to fall apart when you play it. On and on,
> it's design, it's engineering; it's a lot of work,

Of course.

> There is the added problem of exactly how you get this thing
> working to retune MIDI. What are you going to use? Are
> you going to depend on a microtonal-capable software synth?

Heaven forbid. I'd use a Tuning Box.

> What MIDI messages do your keys send? Etc. etc.

Depends on the layout. Most keyboards have a monotonically
rising pitch axis. Mapping MIDI note numbers sequentially
up this axis is a good idea. If you run out, start on
another channel.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <ekin@...> wrote:
> > Hall effect sensors for your DIY
> > project...
>
> They're only $0.31 apiece (in units of 50,000).

Either that's one monster keyboard, or that's a
group buy for a lot of DIY projects. Anyway, the problem
with Hall sensors is not only the higher cost
for the sensor and the firmware development, but most
importantly the engineering for the actuation system
needed to employ them. That's exactly why you'd be
reinventing the Terpstra. If you want a Hall sensor
keyboard, don't waste your time trying to reinvent
what's already been invented. You'll have to go
just as far with the design in order to get the results
you want, so just get a Terpstra.

> > There is the added problem of exactly how you get this thing
> > working to retune MIDI. What are you going to use? Are
> > you going to depend on a microtonal-capable software synth?
>
> Heaven forbid. I'd use a Tuning Box.

Good choice ; )

> > What MIDI messages do your keys send? Etc. etc.
>
> Depends on the layout. Most keyboards have a monotonically
> rising pitch axis. Mapping MIDI note numbers sequentially
> up this axis is a good idea. If you run out, start on
> another channel.

Good; that's the best way for a generic system.

But what about the initial 19 idea? Do you want the 12 to
give normal 12 without retuning MIDI? Someone suggested the
'added' subsemitones could be programmable to whatever. So
that changes your firmware and your wiring system.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <carl@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron H. wrote...
> >the problem
> >with Hall sensors is not only the higher cost
> >for the sensor and the firmware development,
>
> Why do you think the firmware development is harder?
> Instead of timing differences, you get a voltage change.
> Sounds easier, if anything.

Just ask the question - Which is simpler:

(a) dealing with mass quantities of data for every
keystroke,

(b) getting 2 signals and using clock subtraction.

Furthermore,

(1) MGB firmware for contact pairs already exists, with calibration
options

(2) MGB firmware for Hall sensors does not yet exist

(3) Not all sensors are alike; firmware has to be calibrated to
the sensor. This means lots of sample testing and trial and
error development.

(4) To calibrate to the sensor, you need the actuation system!
Otherwise the calibration means nothing.

Yours,
Aaron Hunt
H-Pi Instruments

Still looking for Mr. Yasser

🔗J.Smith <jsmith9624@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗Graham Breed <gbreed@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Jacob <tricesimoprimalist@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Aaron K. Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <carl@...>

🔗Aaron Andrew Hunt <aahunt@...>