Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


AlenK last won the day on September 12

AlenK had the most liked content!


About AlenK

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    : Planet Remulac
  • Interests
    Music and synthesizers (duh!), astronomy, astrophotography, writing

Recent Profile Visitors

1,995 profile views
  1. PX-560 Tutorials

    I have collected in this thread all of the English-language PX-560 tutorials from Casio to date, including the live online webinars done by Mike Martin. There aren't many but new owners of the PX-560 should definitely start with these.
  2. Expression Pedal EV-5 Set Up

    Short answer: First you have to tell it you have an expression pedal plugged in (it defaults to a foot-switch). Then you have to assign the expression pedal a target parameter (or even two). See the following video (hopefully it will begin at the correct time; otherwise start at 22m58s). You'll notice Mike had some trouble calibrating his M-Audio pedal, which is compatible with Roland's EV-5. I had the EV-5 for a short time and IIRC I had the best results with the side knob at zero. I didn't have any problems with calibration.
  3. Metronome Volume

    I suppose it is off by default because Casio thought that beginning users might be confused if the PX-560 powered up with settings that they didn't remember making the last time they used it. But to me it's not intuitive. I just assumed it wouldn't do that and it caught me. I should have remembered: With Casio assume nothing!
  4. Metronome Volume

    Good point! I did not have "auto resume" turned on. It is off by default, which is something I didn't expect. The OP was hoping the metronome volume would be stored in a registration. But since it's just an audio aid for practise and not something you'd normally want to hear during a musical performance, there really shouldn't be any need for more than one user setting: whatever works in the current audio environment (assuming the default setting of 127 is too loud, and it certainly is in my 560's environment). I'm sure that's why it isn't saved in a registration. But it's not obvious from the user's guide that it will or won't be saved in a registration, which was the OP's original question. That is unlike the case with the XW-P1, which does clearly list the parameters in a Performance (the P1's equivalent to a registration).
  5. Metronome Volume

    I tried it. Metronome volume did not survive a power down. It did not get stored in a registration, to confirm what you first reported, although the tempo setting I used did get saved. I would call this a bug except that the manual says nothing about how Casio intended this to work.
  6. Metronome Volume

    Try changing the volume of other parts from the BALANCE screen (e.g., Accompaniment). If they don't seem to be savable to the current registration either it means that none of the BALANCE parameters are savable. I haven't had time to try this myself. Tellingly, I don't see the BALANCE parameters listed on page EN-80 of the User's Guide, which shows which parameters saved in a registration can be protected from change when you load a new registration to replace the currently active one. This suggests, but does not prove, that the BALANCE parameters are not savable (hence no need to include them on this screen).
  7. Connect a Roland expression pedal to a zone

    I suspect there has been no reply because you can't really do what you seem to want to do with the PX-5S. Its pedal input doesn't have the required circuitry to work with a Roland (or indeed any) expression pedal (e.g., EV-5). It's only meant for a switch-type pedal. But then you also mention _volume_ pedal in the body of your post. If that's what you really meant you can of course connect the PX-5S's audio output through such a pedal but you can't selectively send the output of individual zones through it. Not unless you are prepared to sacrifice stereo capability, which would allow you to use, say, the PX-5S's left audio output for sending through the volume pedal and the right output for bypassing it.
  8. The icons seem to have changed, I'm seeing colors I haven't noticed before and the fonts seem different. Am I going nuts or did anyone else notice this?
  9. Of course, the Hex Layer engines in the PX-5S, PX-560 and X500 are much more advanced than the Hex Layer engine in the XW-P1, with the one in the MZ-X500 having the most parameters as Brad pointed out in another thread. Additionally, the X500 Hex Layer Engine can, uniquely, operate in monophonic modes. (Monophonic operation on the XW-P1 is accomplished with its dedicated solo-synth engine instead, which has multiple features missing from the monophonic X500 Hex Layer modes.) However, there are some points of essential similarity. You are in all cases combining six components, each with its own pitch control, filter control and amplitude control. The degree of that control is what differs between the models. None of the components in any of the Hex Layer engines can interact or modulate any of the others. That is different than the XW-P1's solo synth, which provides hard sync between two of its oscillators. Also, the oscillators in the Hex Layer engines don't allow for pulse-width modulation (PWM), which is another feature offered by the XW-P1's solo synth. So I do believe that enough of the essential principles of Hex Layer programming translate between models. The XW-P1 would likely to be the "odd man out" in conversations despite being the first to implement a Hex Layer mode. Sometimes coming out first means getting all the arrows.
  10. No offense, XW-Addict, you are a very enthusiastic Casio user and make good contributions here. But from the phrasing of your posts I have to assume your first language is not English. So you will have to forgive me for not always immediately understanding what you write. For instance, you conjoined two sentences above and didn't use proper punctuation, making it hard to understand. I gather you were trying to say: "Would it be a bit odd to have a thread dedicated to Hex Layers? Might we have a poll on that?" However, on the surface even the corrected version is not clear. The second sentence doesn't make sense in the context of the first. You don't need to hold a poll to start a thread. But if you really meant to say "forum" instead of "thread" then all becomes clear. "Would it be a bit odd to have a forum dedicated to Hex Layers?" No, IMO it would not be odd. It's not a bad idea at all. And a poll on the issue might be useful. However, maybe you should make a request directly to Scott. If he doesn't want to do it I doubt a favourable poll would convince him. On the other hand if he likes the idea you won't need a poll.
  11. There's one going on in the MZ-X300/X500 forum. But if you want to talk about a particular aspect of Hex Layers just start a thread. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.
  12. Hex layers imported from PX560? PX5s?

    The time aspect I understand but I don't believe there any applicable legal aspects. You would not be trying to break any code or create a competing product. You would just be trying to figure out the file structure. I'm pretty sure Casio would not object.
  13. Hex layers imported from PX560? PX5s?

    Yup, we've both been bitten by that. Let's start a petition: Casio, please update your darn (ahem) manuals.
  14. Hex layers imported from PX560? PX5s?

    Unfortunately, I don't think there is ANY public information about the file formats. You would have to reverse engineer. However, I suspect that a good part of the file structure, or chunks of it, follows the parameter structure shown in the MZ-X500 MIDI implementation document. It would be the easiest path and hence the one Casio's engineers probably took. (My guess is based on my own experience writing a fair bit of embedded code as well as designing the hardware that ran that code. You don't add needless work to any task, be it hardware or software design, if you want to meet a development schedule.)
  15. Hex layers imported from PX560? PX5s?

    No, they are not different. See pages EN-31 and EN-32 of the PX-560 User's Guide and page 3 of the PX-5S Firmware Version 1.10 User's Manual and compare them to pages EN-15 and EN-16 of the MZ-X500 User's Guide (Tutorial). On those pages is described the key-follow parameters for filter cutoff and amplitude. They are obviously the same between all three models. The key-follow parameters for pitch are also the same for all three models but uses the single key-follow base system you described above. The other system essential splits the key follow into three regions across the MIDI note range, with independant control over the rate of change of the relevant parameter (filter cutoff or amplitude) in two of the three regions. C'mon, Brad, you can admit it. Aside from mono mode and bass synth mode (which are REALLY NICE improvements) and the accessible waves (admittedly a huge stumbling block wrt conversion of tones) there are only a handful of parameters that are different between the Hex Layer modes in the three models we are talking about. They are, as I said, very similar.