G2 to NM1 conversion?

dasz · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 9:52 am Post subject: G2 to NM1 conversion?

hey, what about doing a backwards conversion utility ? Any new G2 modules not available in the NM1 could be omitted. Each G2 patch would create 8 NM classic patches (if the variations are different).

But it would make the community & patch sharing more united.

Your thoughts?
/Dasz

3phase · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:20 am Post subject:

actually i think it woule be very nice... but as long qfinger dont has a nm1 its probably hard to see reason for that...

I also wouldnt call it essential..but actually it would be a great tool for people that like to work with booth machines... or to bring some patches in nm1 based studios..there are far more nm1 around than G2..at least in berlin...

Theoretical it should be possible but there are really many things the G2 can do you just cant translate.. or you would need expensiv models..what gets a dsp ptoblem on the Nm1 because patches grow faster there..
You defenetly can do bigger patches on the G2...even when the voicecount in the end appears like that booth machines have similar capacitys patches can be bigger by module counts on the G2...

Maybe if such a converter would be just a rough tool to transport basic ideas?

all fancy stuff like mux switches and recordable sequencesr stay out...

No switches..just the actual state/signelflow of the saved patch...

only audio delays up to 15 ms are accepted...

would be a lot of work again to get all this handling programed...
The actual conversion of exsisting modules is probably rather easy..

Fozzie · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:02 am Post subject:

I opted for the 'bad idea' answer. I don't really think it is a bad idea as such, but I see too many problems because of inconvertible modules. In addition, I have no buddies with NM1's, so that option was out Wink

dasz · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:04 am Post subject:

I'm thinking of things like building blocks being made more accessible for NM1 users. this 2 way conversion would be a way for people to communicate ideas.

I only voted for "Totally necessary" to stir things up Wink

/Dasz

Fozzie · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:33 pm Post subject:

Kassen · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject:

As has been pointed out; the G2 has a optimised calculation order which is a big advantage over the NM.

The NM instead calculates patches in the order that the modules are defined in in the PCH file.

Hence; if we could optimise the order in which the modules in the pch file are defined NM patches could become more dependable/faster/less glitchy/nicer in general.

So; I'd be very interested in something (other than the NM editor) that can create NM patches and give optimisation a stab. A G2=>NM converter might do the same, asming we could "borow" the optimisation routine in the G2 editor.

blue hell · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:49 pm Post subject:

Time for some linking I guess : http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-15810.html , exciting times Very Happy

Kassen · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:12 pm Post subject:

Lovely! Not sure how I missed that, please ignore that other post.

Thanks, Jan!

blue hell · Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:20 pm Post subject:

j · Joined: Dec 06, 2006 Posts: 26 Location: us

I was thinking of this idea a while ago. It would be really cool to be able to to even just take the converted nm1 patch and use the mutator on it and then put it back into the g1 !
It seems like that would be simpler than trying to convert a g2 patch(made on the g2) into a nm classic patch(but i know nothing about programming). I vote it a good idea!

Wout Blommers · Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:40 am Post subject:

dasz · Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:02 am Post subject:

334 views and only 11 votes? c'mon lukers!
/Dasz