ZioGuido

Fixed.

And I can confirm that I am still working on improving the AP and the CP models... It's likely that the Seven will see its first firmware update very soon. I couldn't have said it better.

Unfortunately there's a technical reason - that I can't explain - that prevents the Mojo61 from doing a few things, including hosting the AP synthesis model or being bi-timbral. The Mojo61 stays where it is now, and it's not little considering it has 7 out of 15 synthesizers from the Gemini, plus the sample playback engine. One thing that could be done is to replace the existing piano sampleset with a new one, but this can only be done whenever we get to source a better piano sample.

There are a few things I'm checking during these days to see if the AP model can find its way into the Gemini as the 16th engine, but I'm not sure yet. Fingers crossed.

The point is that the AP is the one sound that wasn't supposed to be in the Mojo61... but you know, sometimes we like to play with our fate, and it ended up that the Mojo61 - which is born as a clonewheel organ - is now criticized for the only sound that it wasn't supposed to have.

No, sorry.

Just to be picky... the signal chain in the Seven is: Piano -> FX1 (Tremolo|Pan|Wha) -> FX2 (Chorus|Phaser|Flanger|Delay) -> Amp Sim (with overdrive and EQ) -> Reverb -> Master EQ / Volume. So you actually have a total of 6 effects in the chain. On a side note, I'm surprised that you knew Pino Daniele

Sounds like (He was a very famous italian artist, I've grown with his music and those sounds)

We could say that it all started from there, but it's not quite the same as the plugin... None of the sounds running in the Crumar or GSi hardware products has much in common with the plugins, because at some point I had a fresh start with all of the sounds I had already made in the past. By the way, here's a new video.

Maybe not: if I had used a DX7-IID (which I also own), it had responded exactly like the Seven, because they solved this velocity issue with the Mark II of DX7... not to mention that one has a very soft (and wear out) synth action keybed, the other has a hammer-action keybed. And it's a very old debate between DX7-I and DX7-II, some people still think that the DX7-I sounds warmer just because the Mark I of everything has to sound warmer (think at Minimoogs, Prophets, and so on). Also, if a digital emulation of something is compared to the real thing, it's of mathematical certainty that the real thing sounds warmer, because our brain tells us so.

Actually, the difference between the real DX7 (mark I), that I used in that video, and the Seven is that the old DX7's internal keyboard doesn't respond to the full MIDI velocity range, it just stops around 102 or 104 out of 127 values, while the Seven responds to the full range. If you try to control a DX7 from an external MIDI master keyboard that uses the whole range, you'll notice that you can reach a brigher sound that you won't reach even applying the same force on the DX7's internal keyboard. This explains why the DX7 sounds kind of "rounder, fatter more mellow"... And is pretty funny because both instruments are digital and the sound generation is the same. This also applies to all other FM synth emulations or clones that can replicate the DX7 presets. If there's a difference, it's only about how the keyboard responds to MIDI velocity and / or how sound parameters are mapped.

The CP in that video is a mix between the line signal and the acoustic sound, and this also explain why the lid is open and the recording is stereo. A CP has only a mono output. The Seven models the sound of a CP as it comes from the line outputs, with the EQ set flat and the Brilliance switch on HIGH. In the video I made with the real CP there's an obvious difference between the two, because the real CP is very detuned and sounds much darker than it should if it was serviced, but I mostly wanted to demonstrate how realistic the Seven responds on ribatutto and dynamic changes. As for the tone itself, the Seven can be adjusted to sound anyway you like, darker, brighter, detuned, resonant, and so on. The default preset is set to sound like a well mantained CP, straight from its mono line output. I might do a new video demonstrating how it can be blended to sound in different ways. However, the CP simulation in the current Gemini version is different than the one in the Seven, which was completely rewritten from the gound up. The next update for the gemini will replace the old model with the new one.

The flat zone is 19,5 cm deep (7,7"). The Mojo 61 has the rubber feet very close to the edges, so I can put it on top of the Seven by leaving the edges outside, in a way that it sticks out just enough not to overlap the Seven's panel. It is safe, but you'd have to use some soft material (possibly a rubber pad) between the two instruments otherwise there will not be enough friction to keep the Mojo61 stable and also the screws underneath the Mojo61 will scratch the beautiful Seven hood

Wow, what a coincindence! I was just about to upload a new demo video to YouTube and the focus this time is the Wurly ;D

No, the FM synth inside the Seven (and Gemini) was made to recreate only the E.PIANO1 patch, that uses DX7's algorithm n.5. The other 8 variations are different uses of the same algorithm. A quote from the manual: "This instrument has only one parameter, which offers 9 variations of sound using the same algorithm, among which we also find an organ, a brass section, a bass and a marimba, of course all with that FM taste that is not actually focused at realism."

You're comparing instruments made 30 years ago in Japan or other asian Countries to instruments made today by smaller Companies located in EU or US. I'm sorry, but it's even worse than comparing apples and oranges. 1. What was the cost of a brand new DX7 in 1983 and what was the average income in the same year? You needed to sum 6 monthly salaries to afford a DX7. 2. What was (and still is) the average cost of an asian worker? It was (and still is) at least 1/4 of an average western worker. I'm not going further because these two aspects alone should be more than enough to help you understand the difference between now and then, and between here and there. But there's more: instruments are made from several parts - including wood, iron, aluminium, wirings - plus the circuit boards and the silicon components. Let's take the wood alone - can you imagine how the new anti-pollution international regulations have affected the quality of a single piece of wood? And what about the non recyclable parts such as the printed circuit boards or the "lead free" and "ROHS" solder tin? Shall I continue? What about the lead-less paint? And what about the lack of copper on the planet that causes many electric wire manufacturers to replace the copper wires with copper-plated aluminium-core wires? And what about the freight from Asia to western Countries? Is it cheaper now than 30 years ago? No. It's not the quality of our keyboards that has decreased during all these years, and it's not the quality of the human craftsmanship - it's the quality of everything. The world population has enormously increased, and so has the consumption rate. It's like the cake (i.e. natural resources) has kept the same dimensions, but now has to be split in more parts (consumers).

I agree, but there's always a work-around: We omitted the MIDI IN for a reason. Anyway, you can just use a cheap $10 MIDI-USB cable (interface) like this and get into that USB Type-A port that also accepts "Class Compliant" USB MIDI devices.

Actually, the "Horn EQ" parameter has been there since day 1.

Hi Dave. Excuse me but I don't read all the posts on the forum and wasn't aware of a similar explanation you did in a different thread. I was just replying to someone else wondering why a wearout pedal should cause problems to an instrument. The reason why your Mojo61 didn't boot up at all at the gig might be due to power problems, but this is a different matter that requires some deeper investigation. And, as you know, a problem can be addressed and resolved only if it's replicable at any time.

It's not the 10K vs 50K pot value. The problem resides in how the pot is scanned inside the pedal along its 270 degree rotation. The Crumar pedal (that is actually made by Fatar) scans almost the whole range, leaving only a 10% at the edges that is compensated by the software; the Yamaha FC-7 is one of the very few pedals that is able to scan the whole range or most of it. Other pedals scan only a small part of the range, and since there are dozens of them, we can't support them all so we only support our Crumar branded pedal officially, and a few others non officially, one of which is the FC-7. On the other hand, the FC-7 tends to wear out pretty rapidly, it's a great pedal with great ergonomy but I myself had to buy 3 of them in the past 7 or 8 years. A cheaper option is the Behringer FCV-100 that is perfectly compatible as well, but it will last even less than the FC-7. The cause is probably the fact that the potentiometer inside it has the open side towards the top, from where dust coming off the shoe gets in. I'm not sure if you're completely aware as to how an expression pedal works in a digital keyboard... Its resistance value is applied to a fixed voltage so the pot functions as a variable voltage divider, in other words the resistance is converted in voltage, that is later read by an ADC (Analog to Digital Converter) and then converted into digital data to be elaborated by the software. A very wearout pedal can either be completely innocuous or be a big problem according to its role into the circuit. With a generic workstation where the expression pedal is only used by a few patches, having a wearout pedal connected would probably be unnoticed most of the times, but with a clonewheel organ the pedal is a very important part of the instrument and is constantly scanned and applied to the sound, so having a wearout pedal in this case is a problem that the software can't handle because all the software does is reading the data coming from the ADC, and the ADC transforms into data the voltage coming from the voltage divider. If this voltage is continuously drifting over time, the result is unstable digital data that can cause problems either to the software or to the general operation of the instrument. I think what I've just explained can be applied to ANY digital keyboard because we've not reinvented the wheel, this is exactly how an expression pedal works in every digital instrument, since the invention of the ADC.

That's a good point. Switching PSUs have the advantage to accept a wide range of input voltage, have a stable DC output and a low cost. Even though we use mostly MeanWell PSUs, that aren't cheap at all (and whoever is into electronics can confirm this), still they're not perfect. Should we use a linear PSU? Really? Something with a 5 pound transformer for a 2 Ampere output? Should we build our own PSU? Really? Do we have more expertise in PSU electronics than MeanWell? We just do the right thing, we use high quality external power supplies made by a well known leader in this field. And we always use standard ratings, and standard hookups, the Mojo61 runs on 9V 2A, and uses a standard 2.1 DC socket, so a faulty PSU can be replaced with a new one or equivalent at any time, even with a Wallmart spare. Unfortunately, a switching PSU isn't fast enough to compensate for drastic voltage drops, and some of the internal CPUs (yes, there's more than just one!) may brown out before the voltage stabilizes again. I have a Mojo61 next to me in my office that is on almost 20 hours a day since the first days of 2016 and it has never frozen, because the power in my home is stable. But I've been a gigging musician for quite some time before I started making instruments myself, and had similar experiences with my keyboards that occasionally froze during a gig and most of the times it was because something was turned on that caused a voltage drop, something like big aircons or fridges in the bar or light equipments on the stage. The only thing that never froze was the PC because it ran on battery as soon as power went off. As a side note... a new firmware update for the Mojo61 will be released during this week.

Oh right. If you put kerosene in a car tank you should not blame the fuel.

I'm taking note for the next firmware update: 1. Send velocity from the lower manual 2. Clavinet note-off at the bottom contact 3. Send MIDI program change events when switching between the 8 sounds 4. Split output option* (organs on the left, pianos on the right) What else? Expect it in mid-November. *Since the Mojo-61 is mono-timbral, I see a high risk of misinterpretation of a "split" output option... we'd rather call it "output selection" or "OB-Dave Option"

That would make no point because the Gemini would not provide power to the Lower manual. They're two products aimed at two distinct uses... and don't even come under the same brand However, for someone wanting to "hack" the lower manual, it'd be very easy to do with an Arduino board and a soldering iron.

It's no secret, and nothing really special... we just implemented what someone calls "Power Over MIDI", that consists, as someone stated before, in taking advantage of the two unused pins of a DIN5 connector used for the MIDI connection (which only uses the middle 3 pins) for providing power to a device connected to the MIDI INPUT socket. The only special thing in the MIDI cable used for the Mojo61 Lower manual is the way it is constructed, because it uses two L-shape plugs soldered in opposite directions, and of course all 5 pins are connected. That cable can be easily replaced with any other MIDI cable that uses all 5 wires. The reason why the Lower manual itself can't be used with other equipment is that it doesn't send standard MIDI NOTE messages. It's still MIDI, but it would require some external "translator" unit that transforms the message it produces into standard note on and off messages. The Lower manual was part of the Mojo61 project since the beginning, everything was well thought out and planned since day one.