Post by joshua on Jun 23, 2020 10:45:59 GMT
Hey guys
I'm slowly diving into using my new 2nd hand iRig BlueBoard MIDI foot controller.
As you may know, it has 4 switches (A, B, C, D), and by default I can hold A to switch to the next bank, or B to switch down. In theory, this gives me a huge array of switches (A, B, C, D, E, F, G...). But in practice it is quite cumbersome to switch through the banks, as I need to hold A (or B) for quite an amount of time (1-2 secs or so), and there's no way of jumping back to the start again (where I would have my most used commands).
So I thought about trying to "tweak" the controls, so I would be able to send all commands from the same bank, but by using combinations of the buttons.
For a start, I could assign the <3 very most important commands to A, B, C, and D. They would fire not upon **pressing** the control, but upon **releasing** it. This allows additional conditions, for example: **While holding** down A, press B, C, or D to trigger some more commands, or while holding down B, press A, C, or D to do alike (same for C, and D) => this would give me another 9 commands.
Or instead of holding down while pressing some other button, I could define **sequences**. Let's say that D does NOT have a <3 very most important command assigned to it (so it would not be fired upon releasing it), but it would trigger the "sequences mode". Now, by pressing a specific sequence (e.g. A, then B) another command would be fired. To end the "sequences mode", there could be different options:
- It would be ended by pressing D again
- Or a time limit between pressing switches could be set, so e.g. as long as I press additional switches within 1sec after each other, the switches are added to the sequence
- Or there is only a limited number of distinctive sequences possible, e.g. A, B->A / B->B, C->A / C->B / C->C, so the end of the sequence can be programmatically determined
I also wonder, whether there could be something like a double-click implemented? This would mean that single clicks were not as precise anymore (because the software has to wait and see whether a 2nd click comes after the 1st one, and if not, only then will fire the single click). So for very timely critical commands, double clicks should ever be used. So for example, for the <3 very most important command A (which is very timely critical), no double click is possible. But for the <3 very most important commands B and C (which aren't very timely critical), double clicks are possible. The same could be defined for **holding** of switches. But for **sequences** of switches (which are never timely critical by their very nature), double clicks would be always possible.
Can Midiflow do this? And then translate these signals to one specific signal and send this one to other apps (e.g. to AUM and Loopy)?
Thanks a lot
Joshua
I'm slowly diving into using my new 2nd hand iRig BlueBoard MIDI foot controller.
As you may know, it has 4 switches (A, B, C, D), and by default I can hold A to switch to the next bank, or B to switch down. In theory, this gives me a huge array of switches (A, B, C, D, E, F, G...). But in practice it is quite cumbersome to switch through the banks, as I need to hold A (or B) for quite an amount of time (1-2 secs or so), and there's no way of jumping back to the start again (where I would have my most used commands).
So I thought about trying to "tweak" the controls, so I would be able to send all commands from the same bank, but by using combinations of the buttons.
For a start, I could assign the <3 very most important commands to A, B, C, and D. They would fire not upon **pressing** the control, but upon **releasing** it. This allows additional conditions, for example: **While holding** down A, press B, C, or D to trigger some more commands, or while holding down B, press A, C, or D to do alike (same for C, and D) => this would give me another 9 commands.
Or instead of holding down while pressing some other button, I could define **sequences**. Let's say that D does NOT have a <3 very most important command assigned to it (so it would not be fired upon releasing it), but it would trigger the "sequences mode". Now, by pressing a specific sequence (e.g. A, then B) another command would be fired. To end the "sequences mode", there could be different options:
- It would be ended by pressing D again
- Or a time limit between pressing switches could be set, so e.g. as long as I press additional switches within 1sec after each other, the switches are added to the sequence
- Or there is only a limited number of distinctive sequences possible, e.g. A, B->A / B->B, C->A / C->B / C->C, so the end of the sequence can be programmatically determined
I also wonder, whether there could be something like a double-click implemented? This would mean that single clicks were not as precise anymore (because the software has to wait and see whether a 2nd click comes after the 1st one, and if not, only then will fire the single click). So for very timely critical commands, double clicks should ever be used. So for example, for the <3 very most important command A (which is very timely critical), no double click is possible. But for the <3 very most important commands B and C (which aren't very timely critical), double clicks are possible. The same could be defined for **holding** of switches. But for **sequences** of switches (which are never timely critical by their very nature), double clicks would be always possible.
Can Midiflow do this? And then translate these signals to one specific signal and send this one to other apps (e.g. to AUM and Loopy)?
Thanks a lot
Joshua
