RE: Patrick/Roland future

I've been working on such a list for my web site based upon information from
this forum. I will post it soon and open it up for comments. I'm breaking
the wish list up into low, medium and high end, as some requests are too
specialized to be achieved on all instruments.

1) Full keyboard scales are obviously preferable, except when you have
something like Justonic's Pitch Pallette that updates tunings in realtime
over MIDI. Sending an entire keyboard table clogs up the MIDI data stream,
while an octave table does not. This is the argument I have against the
stance that full keyboard scales are all that is necesary. We've waited
centuries to get keyboard-based instruments that can modulate freely in just
intonation, why hamper it now by limited software definitions? Until we get
a better protocol than MIDI I think a mix of keyboard and octave scales is
needed.
2) I feel that 5 or 6 quickly accessible tunings are insufficient if you're
doing realtime modulation in just intonation. I recommend at least 64
tables (defined globally and assigned per MIDI channel) for a medium priced
instrument.

John Loffink
jloffink@pdq.net

> From: Rick Sanford <76122.2237@compuserve.com>
>
> Has there, in the past, ever been a "wish list"
> sent around collectively? Things like pitch
> resolution, non-octave repeating scales, etc?
>
> The two pieces I find usually missing are:
> 1) Only 12 pitches to choose (then next octave
> repeats)
> 2) Only ONE (or maybe 2, e.g. Yamaha) storable
> user scale, necessitating frequent trips to
> a librarian application to get a new tuning.
>
> Ideally, for me, one would have 5 or 6 tunings
> quickley accessible, then these would also
> be non octave-repeating. We could frame our request
> as coming from the WM school, no?
>
>