Hypothetical, probably both silly and impossible, idea

[bwilburn79]

I'll probably regret posting this as you will all certainly laugh at me but....

I was reading Triggera's new product posting, in Technical, which somehow wandered over into a PS debate. So let me post this hypothetical, unrealistic idea. If you employ a 2 Box module, you get the benefit of loading in your own sounds (very natural HQ sounds), but you lack the PS of a Roland module. I'd imagine this will be where 2 Box users will say it's good enough without PS. However, if one were inclined to, would it be possible to build a trigger setup that had a centered piezo wired to one TRS jack (using the other part for the rim), and another piezo (or an array of piezos) that were arranged halfway between the rim and the center, then another piezo (or array of piezos) arranged very close to the rim, both wired to a separate TRS jack. You'd use 2 module inputs, and have 3 separate sounds triggered by striking the head. Logic says that no matter where you strike the head, all three "zones" would trigger simultaneously. This might be pleasingly layered if the response from piezos closest to the strike dynamically overshadows the other "zones". If the 3 sounds assigned were: snare center, snare midway between head and rim, and snare near rim, this would in effect emulate PS? Actually, since the layering is based on dynamics it might sound more natural that Roland PS (depending upon the quality of sounds used)? Again, it's a silly idea and the sensitivity of all the zones might render the notion of dynamic overshadowing a moot point and just make a muddy mess. Anyway, I just thought I'd give the smart folks a good chuckle for the day.

[bwilburn79]

See the crude diagram below for a possible snare idea. The outer double circle represents the rim and the small yellow circles represent piezo's. The inner circles could represent some form of dampening between zones to prevent excessive crosstalk. (reduce the dynamic response from peripheral zones) This could be foam touching the head? You could just use 3 piezo's in a line if you consistently hit in a particular quadrant of your snare. Somebody shoot me so I'll stop talking about this....

[hairmetal-81]

You could wrestle with a Pos-Sens-setup arrangement on the pad-side all day, but as long as the module doesn't have the internal software-functions to 'interpret' or decode that information coming in, the DSP can't convert that into 'what sample where' ...or as the Simmons SDX called it 'zone intelligence'....


With your diagramm - and I'm sure you've put alot of thought in this matter - all you'd end up would be triggering multiple sounds at once ...like a layer function ...or the neat trick that Deacon Daniell shared with us.

Although, actually, I'm not quite sure if with multiple piezos the 'crosstalk cancel' on each channel would thwart even this plan...?






Let me ask you this rhethorical question (...I mentioned this before once...):

Let's pretend you wanted to trigger midi-velocity 99.
Can you - with confidence - claim for yourself that you can trigger that velocity-layer exactly with each stroke ....multiple times ...in succession ....and with precision?


Can You?

[triggera]

Over-engineering at its best!
No, but as I said in that thread, theoretically it should be possible even with side-mounted triggers. It should be done by the module.
The logic is simple: the module does notice the rim signals even when you're playing head - it just "suppresses" it. So, it only needs to make stages/steps in the module:

after X amount of rim signals - show only center
after X amount of rim signals - show offcenter/near rim
after X amount of rim signals - show only rim

[JmanWord]

Not to go off subject but as an info tidbit since Ddrum had Positional sensing many years back 2Box could easily support positional sensing too, even with the current module (as far as I know, with software update). It would require a center mount head piezo. There was early info concerning this on the 2Box forum, but if I had to guess it was not persued do to US patents on current US products.

As far as the current idea, think Mandala drum and FSR technology or KAT. It is possible to put many zones on a drum, and each zone while being very sensitive is completely isolated from the zone that is bordering it. As mentioned earlier though, the module would have to be designed as far as hardware and software to interpret those zones and determine sound.

[perceval]

Jman beat me to it.

I think the future of reliable PS is with FSR technology, but so far, no one has stepped up to the plate to combine and offer this.

It's coming, as more companies are looking at FSR for drum pads, but it is still in its infancy.

[hairmetal-81]

I don't wanna make any specific point. Other than perhaps that...

• 'Pos-Sens' and 'Sampling' aren't mutually exclusive
• the whole idea preceded the DDrum-3 (1994) by about 6-7 years
• I sure would be curious to know what capabilities a current $10'000+ drum-system would have

I will explain a little further, when I have time later today. By now, you may know where I'm going with this.
Just in case you don't: The SDX



HTH

[airflamesred]

Isn't the longevity of FSR the problem?

[hairmetal-81]

Isn't the longevity of FSR the problem?

According to Mark Moralez, KAT's product manager, apparently not!

II
II
II
V
V

As for the FSR let me clear this up. The FSR does not break down. The reason Aquarian commented a 40 hour life is based on users that really lay into drumheads and go through them each month or so. Once the head breaks then you need to replace it just like acoustic drums. If you don't typically break heads then the FSR will last as long as the head. This applies more to the Inhead than the Onhead since the mylar is the same as their Response 2 heads. The Kat Studio kit has what we call Nu-Bounce rubber over the FSR sensor. This will last as long as the player doesn't destroy the rubber. I am happy to say that after 4 days of heavy bashing at Namm the prototype kits showed no signs of wear.

HTH

[bwilburn79]

Good comments by all. I agree, module based PS would be much better but that might not ever happen within 2 Box. So I'm trying to think of an alternative on the pad side. 2 box is able to trigger three zones on a cymbal with only one piezo correct? That's one trigger zone and two switch zones? If you look at my diagram again, consider the center as Zone 1, the middle area as Zone 2, and the area closest to the rim as Zone 3. Couldn't you place the trigger in Zone 2 and create switches for Zones 1 and 3? Then it would be possible to trigger three separate sounds, one at a time. I would guess this could be wired just like a 2 box cymbal and use one module input? I'm not sure how to create a switch that would work but not sustain damage when the head is struck. Maybe this is the role of FSR's? Come to think of it, if you assign the three snare sounds described in the OP to a cymbal, you should be able to get the result I'm describing.

[Sylv1co]

2 box is able to trigger three zones on a cymbal with only one piezo correct? That's one trigger zone and two switch zones?

No, three zone on 2box are achieved with one piezo and one switch. Bell sounds on ride cymbals are just velocity switch : hard hits are registered as bell.
Don't forget that FSR only react to pressure, not to position, they can't really help anyone with PS. But the Aquarian Inhead let's indeed imagine that a position detection should be possible, thought it will not be FSR anymore, but more something like a SoftPot, which is made to detect position.
We've already seen here some diagrams that has two zones from the head of a snare (Hellfire should have one), and I can even remember one video of a member showing a snare with two piezos under the head, one on center, one (or maybe several in fact) under some foam put under the edge of the head. Try to find, I think it worked quite well.

[airflamesred]

So for FSR to be used, I guess you would need zones of them. As Sylv1co points out it measures pressure and so won't get crosstalk. Is this what mandala use?

Does anyone actually veer from a centre hit on kit drums? I thought that's what RR ( or alleged round robin) was for.

[bwilburn79]

I just thought of a couple of things. Someone with FSR knowledge tell me why you couldn't:

a.) Create a stick-on patch trigger for a kick drum using an FSR?
I'm thinking of a setup similar to the Aquarian kickZONE, except FSR based and mounted in the beater strike zone.
b.) Sandwich an FSR trigger between layers of a DIY mesh drum head?
c.) Create a beater trigger using an FSR?

This could be a good project for someone being that kicks are single zone and are more prone to double triggering. I'm trying to figure out why the inBOX is necessary for the Aquarian inHEAD as well.

[bwilburn79]

I did some reading about FSR's and I suspect I know why the inBOX is necessary. I think in order to use an FSR as a kick drum impact sensor like I imagine, you'd have to have a circuit that would supply a constant voltage to the module, except that it is being attenuated by the resistance of the FSR. When the FSR is struck the resistance is lowered by an amount proportional to the force of the strike, allowing "X" amount of current to pass to the module triggering a kick sound that is proportional to the force of the strike. That's probably similar to the function of the Aquarian inBOX. Did I get any part of that right?

[bwilburn79]

Seems like you could make a battery powered circuit that would pass a voltage signal (similar to typical piezo output) to the module when the resistance of the FSR was reduced due to a strike. It's exactly backward to a piezo trigger, which passes voltage to the module when it is struck. The FSR would prevent voltage from passing to the module until it is struck.

[hairmetal-81]

I think Miditronix/KAT/Aquarian had a product announced a while back similar to what you described under a).

Point b) is basically what we were pondering/thinkering/discussing a lot, ever since the inHead was first announced.

Point c) would be quite an idea! Then again, a trigger being exposed to 'rapid movement' could possibly be an unnecessary source for failure...


As I understand it, an FSR requires a power-source, so that's where the inBox comes into play. Allegedly, the upcoming DITI will be able to phantom-power OnHeads/InHeads connected to the trigger inputs, essentially bypassing the need for using the inBox (!)


HTH

[bwilburn79]

The reason I started this thread is to toss some ideas around, start a discussion. Some of my ideas are based on my own ignorance about how things work. I may be way out in left field, I don't know. Surely someone has an opinion on this FSR idea. Is it plausible? A waste of time? If I can figure out the basic current properties that a piezo normally sends to a module and replicate that with a DC powered circuit, then interrupt said circuit with an FSR, why wouldn't it work? If you hit the FSR the resistance is momentarily reduced sending a current pulse to the module to be interpreted as a strike right? The major question is, how will a module interpret a current pulse generated by the DC circuit vs. the normal pulse generated by a piezo element?