Hold keys via sustain pedal - wish for feature

[bavan]

I have a Hammond XK1 connected to the HX3. Sound of the HX3 is great but for some music I still use the sounds of the XK1 because the XK1 can hold notes if you connect a sustain pedal to the XK1 footswitch input jack or if you connect a midi controller to it as lower keyboard via the XK1 lower midi input. Would it be possible for the HX3 to do the same meaning connecting a sustain pedal to the HX3 footswitch or swell (expression pedal) input jack to keep notes on until the sustain pedal is released? Ofcourse having this HX3 feature via midi control would be great but using a sustain pedal connected via one of the HX3 input jacks to have sustain notes on/off would be fine to. Today the footswitch input on the HX3 only controls Leslie on/off (start/stop). The sustain functionality would be most welcome and more than a nice to have feature. Anyone any idea how to request Carsten if this is feasable (either via jack input , midi control or both)?

[Michael1]

Hi all,
In spite of all philosophies whether this feature does not exist on a real organ and use tooth sticks or something else to hold on notes I think Carsten should also have a look on business aspects. When I found out later on that this feature is not supported I wouldn’t have bought the organ. If I am playing just Organ on the stage I agree that you don’t need it, but I think about it, most of the users that use the expander are not just playing organ. And for quit every keyboarder it is very imported to widen the sound with some organ and playing the piano and some pads with the other 2 Hands. My current way is to implement a solution for midi but I’m not sure, because of performance aspects, if this will work. Carsten it would be great if you would think again of implementing this feature even I know this is not an easy one!

Thx

[Valpurgis]

I have no idea of how the other clone-manufacturers implement this feature but it's on every clone I know about except the Numa organ (KeyB products?) and HX3. I can not really see the problems that happyfreddy see with implementing it, and as Michael1 says for business aspects it should be positive for the HX3 even if it is not what a Hammond "purist" will ever accept as hammondish. I my world you are not a Hammond purist if you plan anyting else than a Hammond.

[happyfreddy]

Hi ,
The "problem" is there is no space for such things in FPGA chip itself.
If someone still wants this feature he must accept that others can´t be realized any longer - perhaps Leslie simulation or split etc
I´m sure You don´t want this ? ! ?

The other way will be : once more a new design with next greater FPGA chip on new board. No chance for any updating via USB with "old boards mk4 ".

Every other Hammond clone works via Software and Samples or generating Sound after getting Parameters like Keys, Drawbar position.
HX 3 works with physically modelling, that means all components work in parallel mode and it is still "hardware" configurated in FPGA by programming this chip. Programming FPGA chip means to tell him the design of internally hardware - each programming byte means a "virtual soldering" of connections in the chip. That is the main difference and You can´t compare this with other clones still based on software.

So the only way to realize this with the existing HX3 modul is to find out an extern MIDI Box which makes it possible.
But this in not easy :
You have to store each Key keeping hold and you have to send - when Footswitch open again- these stored keys as MIDI NOTE OFF Command. Otherwise You have key hangers

[Valpurgis]

Thank you for your explanation happyfreddy. Still I am not sure if I understand whether the problem is the size of the current FPGA chip or an inherent limitation in the FPGA technology.

I use the expander with a Leslie 3300 or a Ventilator so it would be OK for me to be without the internal simulator. But of course I see this would be impossible from a logistical point of view.

[happyfreddy]

Hi
The problem is the capacity of logical cells inside a FPGA. The greater the more functions are realizable.
BUT ........ the greater the more pins of these chips You find on solder side of the chip . If You want to connect this You must reach
them with layout. On HX 3 mainboard You only can see two sides .. upper and lower one. But meanwhile on mk4 version we have
4 layers and the inside two extra layers You don´t see.
The actual FPGA chip has 256 Ball Grid Pins on solder side !
The next greater FPGA has more than 256 pins and will surely need 6 layers which You have to design in Your layout.
Even for prototype version You must have a professional made board and this costs money because such BALL GRID CHIPS ( BGA design of FPGA )
only can be soldered professionally. No chance with DIY manner . If You make a mistake in layout You have to do it once more. Mistakes in layout are not only wrong connections but also the way how to route the copper lines of wiring. So finally You need some prototype boards till getting the optimum
in layout design and each board in this test phase You have to pay extra.
Even when all is surely ready You are able to say let´s produce them in small ZERO series.
Again the next test phase and after all is ready and tested You can start to produce the next mk X serie - long way for sure.

So in actual HX 3 verson there is no space for things like key hold. Users who want this must go an extern way by little MIDI box which can realize this. If it´s possible it only will work with HX3 expander and no HX3 board build in an organ. This is fact because in organ models You use real manual keys connected to HX 3 board and no MIDI IN for key informations.
To realize this in organ models needs a greater FPGA and new board. At this time no need for it to do so. So don´t be sad perhaps somewhere such MIDI BOX with key hold feature still exists ............and You only have to buy it - don´t know.

[drawbar12]

So it was like a fantastic accident that this special FPGA happened to have *just enough* resources to implement a truly impressive Hammond organ model, but then the resources were fully used.
But is it not in principle possible to still optimize the programming, so that some extra resources would be freed? Just asking, HX3 is good also as it is.

[bavan]

Hi all,

thanks for sharing the ideas and technical explanations.

As from my point of view don't touch the internal HX3 Leslie simulation to sacrifise some resources for getting sustain hold implemented. This is not the route to go.

I have a Hammond XK1 so it's a real Hammond and no it's not a B3 or XK3 as I don't have the budget to buy one but it's serving me well. It has sustain on board as well with pedal jack input as from midi controlled and I use the sustain fairly well. The XK1 however doesn't has a very good B3 sound onboard (after tweaking it's close but not 100%), and it does have some other fantastic sounds, so I bought the HX3 expander and so far I'm very please with the sound. Only ... yep, well I'm missing the sustain function on the HX3 but that you know already.

I'm not sure whether this is a good idea and if it would be feasable but is there not something simple like programming the HX3 with a function which could block note off midi codes, or let's say filter out note off midi codes, when using a sustain pedal via one of the input jacks on the rear panel? And maybe at the moment you release the sustain pedal nothing is filtered anymore (or clear all notes on)?

I know in this way you have to sacrifise the Leslie or Expression pedal jack input on the HX3 but both functions are also supported by the HX3 via midi so full functionality remains in a midi controlled HX3 expander setup. And my preference would be to sacrifise the expression jack input as I have a half moon switch on the Leslie jack input, until I can buy a real Leslie and have enough room to install it (not mentioning headphone use for quite practising), or having the HX3 configuration possibility to select the jack input you want to sacrifise for sustain.

And if someone finds a sustain midi box which can be put in between the midi controller and the HX3 to fill the sustain gap let us know please.

Just an idea so don't shoot it. Sharing ideas makes the world so much more enjoyable. :D

PS: I never got the HX3 midi passthrough to work so maybe it's also something related to the hardware resource problem or HX3 limited midi capabilities but that's another discussion.

Greetings.

[drawbar12]

I would not sacrifice the Expression input by no means, as it is much more reliable and accurate than expression via MIDI input.

And while we are at it, if Hold is to be implemented via external MIDI box, I would prefer separate Sustenato too. 8-)

For such a box I would be willing to pay at least 100e. Come on Midi Solutions, for example, show what you are made of!

Third possibility would be, if you route MIDI through a sequencer host, purely via software. A la "Midi Input Transformer" in Cubase.

[happyfreddy]

And while we are at it,.................., I would prefer separate Sustenato too. 8-)

...... and I would prefer a portamento, Hawaii effekt, Flanger, Crybaby WahWah too :mrgreen:

... and for it´s next weeks christmas time a ringing bell will be useful to play old xmas tunes.....