Graham Breed's relay DON'T MAKE THIS MISTAKE

Additionally, when you download Grahm Breed's software... if you
don't already have it...

http://x31eq.com/software.htm

Don't click on the first thing you see!

[Graham you may want to fix this.]

The version most people will want... assuming you have something
later than Windows 3.1... which I assume most of you do... is DOWN
FURTHER ON THE PAGE IN A TINY LINK.

DON'T MISS IT LIKE I DID... because THAT is the version that will
allow you to use LONG FILE NAMES...

and that makes a BIG difference, particularly for SCALA files.

Yes, the SCALA files "work like a dream".. IMMEDIATELY audible either
through sound card or synthesizer.

I wish I had had this when Joel Mandelbaum came to visit as part of
our recent AFMM board meeting. He had never heard his OWN 19-tone
scale... that he had written about all his life!!!

I tuned it up for him... but it was the laborious method of retuning
the synthesizer through uploaded MIDI files.

Well, that's great for an extended composition project, but for a
simple AUDITION OF A SCALA FILE... GRAHAM BREED'S MIDI RELAY is the
"tea and crumpets!!!"

____________ ____ __ __
Joseph Pehrson

Joseph Pehrson wrote:

> The version most people will want... assuming you have something
> later than Windows 3.1... which I assume most of you do... is DOWN
> FURTHER ON THE PAGE IN A TINY LINK.

And what version of Windows are you using JP?

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

--- In tuning@egroups.com, David Beardsley <xouoxno@v...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13421

> Joseph Pehrson wrote:
>
>
> > The version most people will want... assuming you have something
> > later than Windows 3.1... which I assume most of you do... is DOWN
> > FURTHER ON THE PAGE IN A TINY LINK.
>
> And what version of Windows are you using JP?
>

Hi David...

I'm using Windows 98... and apparently the "new" "long filename"
version of Graham's MIDI RELAY, is a 32 bit application, so Windows
3.1 won't cut it.

The long filenames are really important for Scala, unless, that is,
you are enamored of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !!!!

_________ ___ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

Joseph Pehrson wrote:

> --- In tuning@egroups.com, David Beardsley <xouoxno@v...> wrote:
>
> http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13421
>
> > Joseph Pehrson wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The version most people will want... assuming you have something
> > > later than Windows 3.1... which I assume most of you do... is DOWN
> > > FURTHER ON THE PAGE IN A TINY LINK.
> >
> > And what version of Windows are you using JP?
> >
>
> Hi David...
>
> I'm using Windows 98... and apparently the "new" "long filename"
> version of Graham's MIDI RELAY, is a 32 bit application, so Windows
> 3.1 won't cut it.
>
> The long filenames are really important for Scala, unless, that is,
> you are enamored of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !!!!

And if you're using Win 98, why would this be a problem?

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

--- In tuning@egroups.com, David Beardsley <xouoxno@v...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13424

> > The long filenames are really important for Scala, unless, that
is,
> > you are enamored of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !!!!
>
> And if you're using Win 98, why would this be a problem?
>

David... are you really paying attention... or did you put something
in your Meerschaum??

The link that is PROMINENT on Graham's site downloads software that
ONLY HANDLES 8 character filenames... whether you run it on a 32 bit
system or not!

There's a LITTLE link below... teeney tiney, that has the UPDATED
version of the software... that's the 32 bit version that has the
long filenames.

http://x31eq.com/software.htm

It makes a *BIG* difference in Scala files, as I am certain you are
aware... where a lot of the description is AFTER the first 8
letters...

I had downloaded the EARLIER version of the software, and then had to
do the entire process over again... actually it doesn't take so
long... to get the version I needed.

Sure, I could have read the page more carefully, but the version that
JUMPS OUT is the older version.

Anyway, it's REALLY A TREMENDOUS PROGRAM and I'm still SHOUTING about
it... since it makes the Scala files IMMEDIATELY AUDIBLE.
WHOOPIE!!...either with a sound card or external synth driven by the
soundcard OUT port.

It's EXACTLY what I was looking for, and I guess I should apologize
to Robert Walker again, since, actually, Carl Lumma is right---
that's not what his software was intended to do anyway...

And while I'm writing to *YOU*... I think the best thing we could do
right now... everybody on the list, is to strap ourselves in chairs
and listen to the FULL CD of your terrific SONIC BLOOM.

We gotta relax, man... we all gotta relax!

Beam me up, Scotty! Let's have some happy funbeams...
________ ___ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

"Joseph Pehrson" wrote:

> The link that is PROMINENT on Graham's site downloads software that
> ONLY HANDLES 8 character filenames... whether you run it on a 32
bit
> system or not!

Well, yeah, think of the folks who only have Windows 3.1. They don't
want to find they've downloaded a program that won't run for them do
they? Especially as they're likely to have slower connections.

> There's a LITTLE link below... teeney tiney, that has the UPDATED
> version of the software... that's the 32 bit version that has the
> long filenames.

Say, do you think that link should be a bit bigger?

I'm not sure if the 32-bit version is more up to date, although if I
ever get a new one compiled it probably will be 32-bit only.

> I had downloaded the EARLIER version of the software, and then had
to
> do the entire process over again... actually it doesn't take so
> long... to get the version I needed.
>
> Sure, I could have read the page more carefully, but the version
that
> JUMPS OUT is the older version.

Yes, if you read all 12 lines, it should have been obvious which one
you wanted. And I did rephrase that once before to make it more
obvious than it used to be.

The reason for that is I was in a job interview, and we downloaded
this program as an example of what I had written. But I -- yes I --
downloaded the 16-bit one. Unfortunately, at that stage, the DLLs
were wrong so it wouldn't actually work. Nobody had reported this
because they'd all been using the 32-bit one.

I didn't get the job.

> Anyway, it's REALLY A TREMENDOUS PROGRAM and I'm still SHOUTING
about
> it... since it makes the Scala files IMMEDIATELY AUDIBLE.
> WHOOPIE!!...either with a sound card or external synth driven by
the
> soundcard OUT port.

Well, it's nice that you have such a realistic opinion of it :) That
subject line did worry me for a minute.

Presumably it doesn't crash when you load tuning files? I think I
know what was causing that. I was making incorrect assumptions about
how cin reads inexistent data. Unfortunately, it's a non-trivial
task to rewrite it, and I haven't done so yet.

I've updated the page to make 32-bit the default.

Graham

--- In tuning@egroups.com, "Graham Breed" <graham@m...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13442

> > There's a LITTLE link below... teeney tiney, that has the UPDATED
> > version of the software... that's the 32 bit version that has the
> > long filenames.
>
> Say, do you think that link should be a bit bigger?

Just a tad... but thanks for fixing it! I think by now the 32-bit
version is really the one to "advertise." You can't "blame" me for
downloading the wrong one by mistake the way it was the first time
(!!)

> Yes, if you read all 12 lines, it should have been obvious which
one you wanted. And I did rephrase that once before to make it more
> obvious than it used to be.
>
That was a *LOT* to ask. 12 full lines of type on the screen?? No
can do.

> The reason for that is I was in a job interview, and we downloaded
> this program as an example of what I had written. But I -- yes I
-- downloaded the 16-bit one. Unfortunately, at that stage, the DLLs
> were wrong so it wouldn't actually work. Nobody had reported this
> because they'd all been using the 32-bit one.
>
> I didn't get the job.
>

Man, if somebody *ACTUALLY* gets a job resulting from work with
tuning theory, I think we should put it on the front page of the
newspaper...

> > Anyway, it's REALLY A TREMENDOUS PROGRAM and I'm still SHOUTING
> about it... since it makes the Scala files IMMEDIATELY AUDIBLE.
> > WHOOPIE!!...either with a sound card or external synth driven by
> the soundcard OUT port.
>
> Well, it's nice that you have such a realistic opinion of it :)

YEPPIR! It really made my weekend! It's nice to actually accomplish
something every once in a while.

Next to SCALA, it is the MOST EXCITING xenharmonic software (for ME)
I have ever seen.

It's almost as good as "sliced bread." You have "sliced bread" in
England, don't you??

That subject line did worry me for a minute.
>

This medium is so cuckoo! One really has to be absolutely careful
with everything. I had no idea that could be misread when I wrote it!

> Presumably it doesn't crash when you load tuning files?

Don't scare me. I've only been using it with SCALA files, and it's
been working great.

I think I know what was causing that. I was making incorrect
assumptions about how cin reads inexistent data. Unfortunately, it's
a non-trivial task to rewrite it, and I haven't done so yet.
>

I haven't experienced any "bugs" yet, though I think I'll stick with
SCALA files. There's PLENTY to do there!!!

>
> I've updated the page to make 32-bit the default.
>
>
> Graham

The whole program is a REVELATION... in the courthouse or out of the
courthouse...
_____________ _____ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson