MIDI-map a controller to two parameters?

Suppose I want a single envelope to control both VCF and VCA. This is the way it works on synths like the Roland Juno. I’d like to get the same effect with OBXd. Of course its not as flexible as having two envelopes, but easier to control. Pretty much every synth now has two separate envelopes, so you need twice as many sliders.

In the Zynthian UI I can use MIDI-learn to bind a slider to say “Attack”, but if I then bind the same slider to “FilterAttack” it cancels the previous binding. So it looks like only one parameter can be attached to each CC.

One workaround might be to duplicate the control message on another CC channel, which could be bound to another parameter. But I can’t figure out how to do this. If the “MIDI CC Map” effect had a “duplicate” option this would be useful. That is, to send on the remapped CC as well as the original CC.

I tried cloning the MIDI messages to another channel, and remapping that channel, and then sending both this and the original to the synth, but no amount of tweaking seemed to make this work. What is the difference between “Clone MIDI to…” and “MIDI Routing”? Both would seem to offer the option to send midi to another channel, but they don’t work the same way.

1 Like

I’ve got one of those with a completely awful keyboard !!! :smiley:

What you are describing is the basis of the morph feature in the Nord Modular world, which is allocating one controller to different parameters. The Nord Modular implementation allows specifying of a range on the controlled element, so you can, with the same control signal ( a pedal say) make the loud sound get a little bit louder, whilst letting the filter up open all the way, and ( I thikn you can even do it backwards !) To close the filter whilst the sound gets louder.

IT’s certainly a very useful element to introduce into the zynthian control matrix as at the moment you are limited to one controller one parameter.
Presumably we could add a morph LV2 midi component to implement the concept but as with much, our GUI control is getting ‘involved’, so it would need to be VERY carefully structured github request, but add it. It’s a required development IMHO.

2 Likes

Is the keyboard broken, or do you just not like it?

What you are describing is the basis of the morph feature in the Nord Modular world, which is allocating one controller to different parameters. … It’s a required development IMHO.

Thanks for that info. Yes, “morph groups” sounds like a really useful feature. Its basically just a modulation matrix, and ought to be quite easy to implement, but the trick would be incorporating it into the UI. With a plugin one could easily implement the logic of scaling and combining CC inputs to create new MIDI CC events. But then the challenge would be associating the new CCs with Zynthian controls. In some situations you might be able to use MIDI-learn, but this would still fail when multiple CCs respond to an input controller.

Is there a way to manually select the CC that is associated with a Zynthian control?
The only was I found to do this was to create a snapshot and then edit the “.zss” file.

1 Like

Zynthian UI Users Guide - ZynthianWiki explains the midi learning mechanism.

You should create a feature request for “CC Morphing Groups” or something like that. It’s a very interesting feature, but not easy to implement, specially at a UI level. We have to think about it carefully.

Thanks!

AAh the Alpha2 Juno Saga.
Heavily broken.
It first lost the ability to play at any velocity except 127 on the Bb below middle C, and many various attempts to clean the membrane element didn’t succeed, and other notes became intermittent.
I discovered some wonder sticky pads recommended by an America who sold me them after an exchange of emails. Applied, worked for a bit. . . .
and then started to fail spectacularly.
and they have pretty much destroyed the whole keyboard. I doubt I would trust it if I knew it had been fixed.
Certainly portable which was a big appeal, but really only kept for sentimental reasons. Never did get the PG300 which might have made it into a much more creative tool ( yeah right!! :slight_smile: )

It would make a decent MIDI controller if it actually had a working keyboard. Most of what little keyboard playing ability I have was developed on it.

sniff.

I’m sorry to hear that… truly a tale of woe :cry:

I have a Juno 60 from about 1983 which has been pretty solid. It was my first synth and I learned a lot from it, though haven’t used it much recently. It came out just before the dawn of MIDI, so it has a weird proprietary “DCB” communications bus, which only talks to other Roland synths. Back in the day I built an interface to a home computer using the same 8251A USART that is in the synth. Now I am very tempted to get the Tubbutec Juno 66 mod which adds MIDI, “adjustable fatness” by stacking voices, new arpeggio modes, and other cool stuff.

…or maybe not. Despite its fairly spartan features it has a great sound, due in part to its excellent chorus module.

The alpha Juno got a lot of it’s character out of it’s chorus but it was a bit noisy ( Bucket Brigade I believe)

The Roland Juno 106 was pretty much the same as the Korg Poly 61 under the hood–digitally controlled analog with 6 oscillator boards. The control surfaces were different in that the Juno had more real time effects like traveling filters and portamento, whilst the Poly had more pre-sequencer arpeggiator functions. I “repaired” the Poly 61 keyboard with cigarette filters cut to size. lol! Not to mention replacing the board battery by puting it off the board and running a twisted pair. A guitar playing buddy bought the Juno at a pawnshop and just gave it to me because he couldn’t get a sound out of it.

They were both working when I put them in storage.