Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can't set pan/balance of an SQ5 Matrix 3 output #59

Open
jswalden opened this issue Jun 9, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

Can't set pan/balance of an SQ5 Matrix 3 output #59

jswalden opened this issue Jun 9, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@jswalden
Copy link
Collaborator

jswalden commented Jun 9, 2024

The "Pan/Bal level to output" action on an SQ-5 has matrixes 1/2, but it's missing 3. This seems to be because the choices list populated for that action cuts off the "all faders" list at 19, when it should be 20.

From what I can tell, tho, the list is also overinclusive as well as underinclusive. The SQ MIDI Protocol document v3 does say you can control pan/balance of FX sends output in the table -- but by v5 those entries are gone (and it isn't especially clear this would even make sense). So that entire choices list needs some rejiggering.

@jswalden
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jswalden commented Jul 2, 2024

Matrix 3 was added to the choices, and FX sends were removed from choices, in 809f86b.

No estimate yet on when this will be in a release. My local tree is down to about a thousand lines of relatively-spaghetti code needing cleanup still, as I've massaged more and more of the existing code into a sane state. Unfortunately these last bunches of lines are some of the most difficult to understand, so they'll be nearly hardest to get through.

@josephdadams
Copy link
Member

@jswalden I did some work on this module last year for someone and man. I’d love to get into the mind of the original author.

@jswalden
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jswalden commented Jul 2, 2024

@josephdadams You and me both.

In fairness, this module was copied from yet another one, and that one hasn't really been touched in approximately years, so it goes a long ways back. And I gather from the state of it that pre-Companion v3 modules were significantly less isolated and the resulting dependencies were much more confusing, which makes it worse!

I would say that you should look at the current state of the code to see the level/degree of change. (Even just the source-to-sink assignment code is waaaaaay more understandable than it used to be.) But from what (little) you've touched in it, I gather that setLevel and fadeLevel were probably the most perplexing bits of it for you, so you might as well wait a tad longer since those portions are hopefully getting replaced Real Soon Now.

@josephdadams
Copy link
Member

Fix the QU next. 😂

@jswalden
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jswalden commented Jul 2, 2024

Heh. Fork and adapt (to get mildly political...repeal and replace? 😅) could easily be your best bet!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants