anotherscott

DSP is just effects. Whether more or different or more control over effects makes a sound "better" is a matter of perspective and semantics, I guess. But I think Brad's Jan 3 message above addresses whether the "same" sounds would sound "better" on the 500, when he says, "Shared tones between both models include the same DSP effects. The effects are preset as part of the tone on the CT-S400, meaning not editable. The DSP effects are editable on the CT-S500. " IOW, they sound the same (not better), BUT since you can edit the DSP, you might be able too tweak them to make them sound better to your tastes.

You can create sounds from scratch using the hexlayer mode. If you want to do traditional synth style programming, for your waveforms, select waves 764 and up, where you will find a a variety of triangle, square, saw, pulse, and noise (and you can combine up to 6 of them, in any combination, each with their own pitch, envelope, filter, and LFO settings if desired). See p.30 of the manual.

The Oct 2022 update described at https://www.casiomusicforums.com/index.php?/topic/21937-ct-s500-ct-s1000v-firmware-update-now-available/ should let you do what you want.

If your application is not finding the bluetooth MIDI, try loading some other app that does see it. Once you establish the connection with that other app, the first app may then work. (This seemed to solve the similar problem I was having on an iPad.)

To change the octave of your left hand sound (when using a split), the instructions say, "While holding down the SPLIT button and the TONE/REGISTRATION button, press the keyboard key of C that you want located at C4 (middle C) of the left keyboard" and you should see a screen with an L (for Left) and a number (indicating the amount of your octave shift), as shown in the screenshot from the manual below. Although the English is poor, I think I know what it wants... but any time I try, it behaves the same as if I were only holding down the Split button (and not also the TONE/REGISTRATION button)... that is, whatever C key I hit (with those two buttons depressed) simply changes the split point to that key, rather than doing an octave shift. Has anyone gotten this to work? Any clue as to what I might be doing wrong? (It may be moot, because if this isn't saved as part of a Registration, it would be a useless function for me anyway, but I can't even get it to work so I can try it.)

a regular USB A-to-B cable (typical printer cable) plus Apple's "Lightning to USB 3 Camera Adapter" (USB-to-lightning adapter). Apple also makes a cheaper version ("Lightning to USB Camera Adapter") but that one doesn't let you leave the charging cable in at the same time.

For sustain pedal, I believe it simply makes or breaks (opens or closes) a connection, i.e. voltage passes through or it does not (and the keyboard is programmed to behave differently based on whether that connection is or is not made). Expression pedal has a potentiometer, so it can provide a range of values instead of only on/off. It receives a voltage from the keyboard, the pot (whose value you are controlling with your foot) alters that voltage depending on where in the travel it is, and the keyboard reads that revised value and behaves accordingly. Whether sending or reading a voltage value is "sending or receiving data" is semantically questionable. But regardless, you're again running into the same conceptual issue as addressed with your earlier question. The issue isn't simply a matter of whether these jacks "send" anything, there's still the fundamental issue of what those jacks connect TO (inside the keyboard). Pedal jacks do not directly connect to anything in either the analog audio path or the digital processing path, they are essentially connecting to electrical circuits. In a way, these questions are similar to asking, if you were to run the Casio from batteries, could you use the board's AC power adapter connection to send audio. Sure, you could rig up its wires to terminate in a 1/4" connector, but there would still be no physical path to get audio to it, it is only connected to the power circuitry. You can have all kinds of connections on a keyboard... TS or TRS 1/4" and 1/8", XLR, 5-pin, USB, power... what they can do is not determined merely by their size/shape or by programming or whether they connect unidirectionally or bidirectionally, but are very much determined by what they are physically connected to inside the keyboard. That should work fine, using a MIDI routing app like Keystage or Camelot Pro.

Right, that's what I've been saying, you need separate jacks. But once you're going to install separate jacks, unless it's a tiny device where space is at a premium, why use the TRS connector, instead of the 5-pin? You're then dealing with having to have more "special" cables around, as well as increasing the possibility that someone will plug something into the wrong jack and wonder why it's not working. Not "normally," -- always. Not directly, for the reasons I've already described. Indirectly? See next part... So again starting from the foundation that the audio jacks are physically wired to analog circuitry in the board, that there is no physical path for digital data to get to that connector, in referencing the DAC, I think you're suggesting that your solution to this would be to convert the digital data to analog. Could the board's firmware be modified to permit the digital data be converted to analog and sent out a TRS jack? Maybe. But there are numerous reason this won't happen, not least of which is that, even if were done, you would not be able to use a TRS MIDI cable to connect it to your external MIDI device... you would need an intermediate box to take the analog signal that has the analog representation of the digital MIDI data and convert it back to the actual digital MIDI data your external device needs to see. Analog data (as in information) can be anything. For example, the grooves of a vinyl record or the magnetic particles of the strips of a cassette tape contain "analog data" and sure, they can have music, or they can have speech, or they can have noise, or they can have (something close to) silence, and yes, it is possible for them to store digital data as well, but in analog form (and it would "sound" like noise, as I talked about earlier). But again, even if the Casio somehow were able to produce that signal, there's no MIDI device on the market capable of understanding it.

I know. You left out too much of the quote . Your quoted me as saying "TRS jack is probably moot (regardless of whether or not it is technically possible)" when the quote actually said (responding to your comment about Casio building an additional board) "a board that would allow you to send your choice of MIDI or analog audio out a TRS jack is probably moot (regardless of whether or not it is technically possible)" - the issue isn't the viability of sending MIDI over TRS, it's the viability of sending your choice of MIDI or audio over that same TRS connector (i.e. what you've been asking about through this whole thread).

I don't fully understand your questions. But if it helps, bluetooth does not transmit analog audio. It transmits digital audio, and the receiving device has a DAC that converts it to analog. And it is certainly possibly to transmit multiple digital signals out of a single data stream, which are then routed to different places to be processed by separately by different electronics. The fact that USB hubs work is an obvious example... you send a single USB digital data stream out of your computer, and each destination device attached to the hub recognizes and processes only the data it is supposed to see (i.e. an attached USB printer, scanner, multiple thumb drives, etc. are all getting the info designated for them from the single data stream coming out of the computer into the hub). So sure, you can simultaneously transfer digital audio and MIDI (which is also digital) simultaneously over the same digital connection (whether USB or bluetooth, whatever). Whether Casio could build (for some future model) a board that would allow you to send your choice of MIDI or analog audio out a TRS jack is probably moot (regardless of whether or not it is technically possible)... I think it would probably be cheaper to include separate jacks, which would also certainly be preferable for the user.

Pretty much correct. CPU deals with digital signals only (ones and zeroes), not analog signals. Once the DAC converts the digital signal to analog, the CPU can no longer do anything with it. The reason I qualified the answer by saying "pretty much" is because there can be digital control over analog routing (e.g.to route a given audio signal to one jack or another, or to enable/disable the speakers). But again, "a connector is just a connector... what it connects TO matters", e.g. software cannot control which physical connector an analog signal goes to unless an analog signal is physically wired to that connector. Being digital, MIDI cannot be played back through a speaker, it would have to be converted to analog first. And since MIDI data has no audio component whatsoever (it contains no digital audio data that can be converted to analog), even assuming you found a way to convert its digital content to analog in order to hear it through a speaker, it would sound like noise. (Think dial-up modems.) Picking up from the previous point, technically it is possible to convert MIDI data to an analog signal, to record it as audio (which sounds like noise), and then play it back in such a way that it is converted from analog back to digital MIDI. Back in the 80s, there were devices that could convert MIDI data to an analog signal that could be recorded to cassette tape, and then played back into the device. But this required additional electronics in the device, e.g. you didn't simply run a wire from the cassette player's audio out to the device's MIDI in , the device would have had an audio input designed for this purpose, which would take the analog version of the MIDI signal and convert it to digital. Again, what a connector connects TO matters. The MIDI jack would not be connected to any kind of analog processing capability... analog signals get processed through an analog signal chain, and digital signals get processed digitally, and any time you need to get from one to the other, you can't just connect a wire, you need a converter (DAC digital to analog, or ADC in the other direction).

Non-standard. I would not assume compatibility with anything other than the specific things it was made for. Audio outputs are analog. Analog audio is not generated or routed by the CPU. Once the audio signal exists (i.e. post DAC), the CPU is removed from the equation. This gets back to one of the first things I said. A connector is just a connector... what it connects TO matters. What comes out of the 1/4" jack is not determined by the CPU, it is determined by what the jack is physically wired to. Inside the board, a MIDI connection connects to digital circuitry for transporting a digital data stream, an audio connection connects to analog circuitry for transporting analog audio. While a TRS jack can be used for either, the jack would be physically wired to one set of electronics or the other, not both. Discussed at https://www.casiomusicforums.com/index.php?/topic/21937-ct-s500-ct-s1000v-firmware-update-now-available/

MIDI requires 3 points of connection, not 2. You can already send either audio or MIDI through TRS. But you can't send both. TRS is merely a connector. It gets physically wired to different electronics depending on whether you're using it for audio or MIDI. It does not function as a host for another USB enabled MIDI device, AFAIK.

You put one CME WIDI Jack or WIDI Master piece on your device that has the 5-pin connector. On the CT-S1000V, you may be able to use Casio's supplied bluetooth dongle, or you may have to buy a CME Uhost, which may have to be connected to the Casio's "other" USB connection (the micro), not the one Casio's own adapter plugs into.

right, the XLR inputs on an audio interface are balanced microphone inputs., and yes, they have 3 wires. While it's not technically impossible to use an XLR connector for an unbalanced stereo signal, that would be a very unusual thing to do, and wiring it to do that would prevent it from being used as a mic input.

Yes, *IF* your audio interface has a stereo TRS line input. (Unlikely, I believe.) Otherwise, you would need a splitter ("Y") cable to go from the single TRS headphone output to a pair of mono inputs in your interface. For the purpose you describe? Possibly. The impedance and amplified output level of the headphone jack is designed for, well, headphones, so there could be some slight degradation of signal when used for this other purpose. At the minimum, you'd have to keep the on-board ("headphone") volume quite low, though you'd be (unnecessarily) sending your signal through it's small built-in headphone amp regardless.

A Y-cable that connected a pair of TS audio connections to a single TRS connector could create a stereo connection, i.e. via a left connection, right connection, and common ground. (But this is just for audio, nothing related to MIDI.) Yes, those are TRS stereo audio connections. (Though again, they don't connect to anything that could send or receive MIDI.) If you connected your keyboard to another device via MIDI, then yes, the sounds of that second keyboard would come out of the line out of that keyboard, but the sound of the first keyboard (the one whose keys you are playing) would not.

No, such an adapter would not be possible. It's not about the physical connector, it's about what the physical connector is connected to inside the unit. A TRS (or any connector) is just a connection point, its capabilities depend on what it is it is wired to inside the device, and you can't change the wiring with a firmware update. (Also, the Casio doesn't have TRS line connections, it has TS, but that's moot because the concept doesn't work in the first place.) Also not possible, since MIDI connections carry no audio. But to actually solve the problem at hand, if you want to connect a 5-pin MIDI device to your CT without having to use a computer, you can use CME WIDI devices to establish bluetooth communication between them; or you can use a standalone MIDI host device (like the ones from Kenton or Camola), or you can use an iPhone or iPad (which essentially is a computer, but may be less off-putting to you than connecting to a traditional Mac/PC).

An actual Leslie is inherently somewhat stereo, in that the sound emanates (at different times) from different points in space, but those points are not all that far apart, so to that extent, the stereo-ness is minimal. But since they are most often played indoors, room reflections come into play, which increases the sense of stereo. In a larger venue, to get enough volume, a Leslie will be miked up, but they are often miked in mono (one microphone on top, one on bottom), so the effect to the audience through the PA is mono. On recordings, a Leslie can be mono or stereo, though if stereo, it is unlikely that the two upper microphone signals will be panned hard left and right. It might be done for effect, but spatially, it wouldn't sound much like an actual Leslie (unless maybe your playback speakers are as close to each other as the two sides of a Leslie cabinet are). Similarly, in a live situation, if miked in stereo, I would not expect the Leslie's mikes to be panned hard right and left, unless desired for effect (i.e. it would not sound very faithful to what you'd be hearing directly from a Leslie).

Ah! When I referred to the MIDI Implementation Chart, that was a mistake on my part, I was referring to the docs that come with the update. And I thought they referred the reader to the owner's manual, not the parameter guide. (I think because of the text of the link provided.) Whoops! Though as it turns out, even those sections of the MIDI Implementation manual you pointed me are still kind of cryptic. 7.1 does give you the MSB for the bank change (in hex). But then for the Program Change needed, all section 8 gives us is: So, yeah, it's kinda there, but you may need your special MIDI decoding glasses. ;-) 13.3.15 only presents a sysex alternative, I believe. But anyway, thanks for the info, and showing me where it came from. Very helpful!

Wonderful!! Where did you find this info? Weirdly, the MIDI implementation chart (the version updated to include the firmware changes) describes the feature, but tells you to check the original manual to get the actual Program Change data... but of course, the original manual pre-dates the update, and the info isn't there.

At one point, I had a Roland VR-09 which, like the CT-S500, uses a large scroll wheel for its screen navigation/parameter selection. While that can work well for scrolling through large territory, I find it very awkward for incrementing an item or value one step at a time. I popped off that wheel and attached a much smaller "normal sized" knob, and for me, it worked much better. I'd like to try the same on the CT-S500, but the wheel is not popping off as easily, and I don't want to force anything and possibly break it. So can anyone tell me, should I just be able to pop this off, do I just need to use more force? Or is attached in some other way, and I should not simply use force to get it off?

In this context, MSB and LSB are bank change commands, typically used if the thing you're trying to control has more than 128 Programs. If the thing you're trying to control has 128 or fewer programs, then usually you wouldn't use the MSB/LSB parameters. If they are needed, you should be able to find them on the same page of the documentation that has the program change numbers themselves. Basically, a bank of MIDI Programs can't exceed 128, so if there are more than 128 Programs in the device you're controlling, you need to add one of both of those other commands to tell it which bank (of up to 128) it should use. You can save 64 Registrations but also 4 Setups. It looks like some of the MIDI parameters can be saved in a Setup, though not in a Registration. Setups save more data than Registrations do, and you can even name them. But there are only 4 of them (1 of which is the one that is automatically loaded when you turn the keyboard on). and you have to navigate more to change them than you do to change Registrations (for which there is a dedicated front panel button). So a setup can store the Local Off status you want, and/or it can store a program change to send to an external module. I haven't played with any of this yet, though. The manual is confusing here, because the section starting on p.106 is "Saving and Recalling a Setup" (for addressing the 4 setups), while the section starting on p.136 is "Saving and Recalling Setups (Registrations)" (for addressing the 64 registrations), and they continue to use the word Setup repeatedly in that section. They really shouldn't have used the word "setup" in that section, because Setups are really something else, as discussed in the earlier section. Using the same word for two completely different things is bound to cause some head-scratching.

Maybe Casio figured that it would be simpler for new users if the knobs always did the same thing (until they got to the point where they might specifically program them to do something else).

It is an irritation on many boards that, once you split, they seem to think you'll only want to change the LH sound. Sometimes there's a way around it, sometimes there's not. It always seems weird to me especially when they (sensibly) default to some kind of bass sound on the left. Once you have the bass sound, if you want to change something during a song, it will almost never be the bass sound. If you want to make some change for the chorus or bridge, the bass will keep going, and it is almost invariably the right hand sound that you want to change. As far as I can see, there's no workaround on the 350, it looks like you can't even change the RH sound via MIDI. This was something that was nicely addressed with the touchscreen interface on the PX360/CGP-700/PX560, though.