Timeline for Construct a number from 0-999.9 using 5 data bytes of a MIDI SysEx message
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 25, 2020 at 3:01 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackReverseEng/status/1275987348237553665 | ||
| Jun 24, 2020 at 11:53 | history | edited | 0xC0000022L♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 50 characters in body
|
| Jun 1, 2020 at 0:18 | vote | accept | chason | ||
| May 31, 2020 at 7:47 | comment | added | Bavi_H | I was expecting only values 0 to 15 to be important. Values 16 to 126 having an effect of zero instead of repeating previous results isn't a problem, it just didn't match my guess. However, on the MK1, values 9 to 15 having an effect of zero seems like it could be a bug? Value 127 being a special case is unusual, but not a problem. If the software only sends values 0 to 15, then manually sending 127 is the only way to see it is handled differently. | |
| May 31, 2020 at 6:30 | comment | added | chason | Turns out the MK1 and MK2 are slightly different. On the MK1, yes, setting a single byte to 9 to 126 results in a tempo of 0. 127 seems to be a special case. With the MK2 byte values of 16-126 set the tempo to 0. Check my edit to the OP, that's not the case with repeating values. I think my next move is to step through tempos with Serato and spy on the output to the turntable, see if I can find a pattern from that side of things | |
| May 31, 2020 at 5:39 | comment | added | Bavi_H | During your tests of setting only one byte to a non-zero value, are you sure that setting a particular byte to values from 9 to 126 results in a tempo of zero? Does 15 produce the same tempo that 127 does? (I suspect the tempo values will repeat in cycles of 16 values, meaning byte values 0-15, 16-31, 32-47, 48-63, 64-79, 80-95, 96-111, and 112-127 produce the same tempos.) | |
| May 30, 2020 at 21:26 | history | edited | chason | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added data points
|
| May 30, 2020 at 21:17 | comment | added | chason | @IgorSkochinsky I struggled with that since Stack doesn't support tables. You're right, the full byte sequence is a lot clearer. I've updated the post for clarity and added a bunch of data points. Thanks | |
| May 30, 2020 at 21:15 | history | edited | chason | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
clarity, new information
|
| May 30, 2020 at 20:17 | comment | added | chason | @Bavi_H Reloop RP-8000 (mk1 and mk2) | |
| May 30, 2020 at 16:54 | comment | added | Igor Skochinsky♦ | Your table of byte values is not clear at all. Maybe just write out the full byte sequence for each display value? | |
| May 30, 2020 at 10:57 | comment | added | Bavi_H | What is the brand and model of the turntable? | |
| May 30, 2020 at 9:26 | history | edited | chason | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
new information
|
| May 30, 2020 at 8:34 | answer | added | Bavi_H | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 30, 2020 at 6:07 | review | First posts | |||
| Jun 1, 2020 at 19:41 | |||||
| May 30, 2020 at 5:51 | history | asked | chason | CC BY-SA 4.0 |