For me to remember, the osc list of SooperLooper:
https://sonosaurus.com/sooperlooper/doc_osc.html
And an idea : some “per Chanel” and “selected/all” design :
1 Like
Would it be possible to choose between momentary/latching mode by short/long-pressing the midi pedal?
It’s definitely not a simplification of the concept, but long-pressing random buttons is in no way a unknown habit among Zynthianers.
Maybe an onscreen overlay with an animated “loading” ring/bar could assist.
Knowing nothing about the underlying engine for midi-learn, I’m just throwing out random thoughts.
Btw. checkout Pedalino for a totally custom midi pedal: GitHub - alf45tar/PedalinoMini: Wireless and Bluetooth MIDI Foot Controller
Yes you can do that with PedalinoMini, send a different osc message for short or long press (or short and long depress but it didn’t understand this last behavior).
…
… or even click, double click, bla bla bla 
1 Like
I discovered some minutes ago that a Korg nanoPad2 can be a great cheap midi controller to use with SooperLooper. You can put it on the ground and use it with your bare toes (only the thumb work for me 
). It’s not the best comfortable controller but it’s the cheapest you can find, i guess.
And you can set up all the pads with the free editor, chosing midi channel, different CC number and the behavior (momentary or toggle).
6 Likes
Does osc command can pass thru Zynthian 1370 port ? I’m not able to send different osc messages to different port like 9951/1370
…
Or is it a valid excuse to make a special dedicated pedal ??
Hi,
Port 1370 Is for zynthian OSC - mixer and CUIA . Sooperlooper OSC you must send on port 9951, this is default port for it. I dont try some users setups of OSC ports.
More can read this: SooperLooper - In Testing - #16 by riban
2 Likes
What a lovely coloured Version 5…
1 Like
Yes, it’s beautiful. I’m sure that also a blue one would be gorgeous.
Can’t we change one port or an other ? The messages are nite the same and if Zynthian can do a “thru” feature it can be helpful for my gears…
I’m just an educated user who learned how to make templates for Open Stage Control. In that I can change the output port according to the osc command.
In Zynthian it was probably easier to keep the original port from SooperLooper, it’s more of a question for the programmers.
@jofemodo hellooooow 
Do you think it’s possible to have a router rule for OSC thing ?
For instance, if i send the osc command 9951/sl/record/down it automaticly transfert that to … you know… SooperLooper ?
In my setup, my pedalboard can not send OSC messages to two differents IP/ports 
What do you want to do with sooperlooper? Controlling it directly may interfere with Zynthian’s control and monitoring of it. Can you not do what you want by controlling zynthian?
I would “just” like to command it via osc messages and not via midi CC.
As osc messages are not volatile
Zynthian supports OSC control so you may be able to control Zynthian with OSC that can then control Sooperlooper. I can’t remember if it is fully controllable but in theory it should be.
1 Like
Nice then 
New kind of router rules then 
Actually… I just checked the source code and it may not be possible (or at least easy) to use OSC to control Zynthian’s sooperlooper indirectly. IIRC we assign dynamic ports to sooperlooper instances so the port may change based on the instance. A fuller API is on the roadmap and some work done in dev over the past year has moved that closer but still it sits over the horizon.
1 Like
Thank you anyway for having take a look at that 
1 Like
I just had another look at the code to refresh my memory. You can only create a single instance of SooperLooper in Zynthian and is uses UDP port 9951. Zynthian starts and instance of SL then controls and monitors it using OSC. In theory you can also control and monitor that instance separately but SL has various different monitoring mechanisms and they don’t all necessarily play nicesly together so it is plausible that actions from one client do not always update another. The Zynthian code is written to give as robust an interface as possible to Zynthian without concern for other OSC clients so - although direct control and monitoring of SL via OSC should be possible, YMMV.
Regarding adding an OSC forwarder: there are several engines that are controlled and monitored via OSC so the request may be more complex. An engine has to decide where to send its updates and a common method is to detect incoming messages or use a registration mechanism so the engine (e.g. SooperLooper) may need a direct connection from the client to be able to reply to it. Adding a proxy then becomes more complex as the proxy needs to have the concept of sessions for each of its clients.
I don’t think it appropriate to go down this route. We would better spend our time working on the API to allow more integration of OSC control and monitoring of engine parameters.
3 Likes
I have understood everything but the last paragraph.
Are you able to explain with simplest words or an example?