From: alex@fiskville.mc.utexas.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: Computer<=>Sampler via SCSI  (not exactly short)
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:10:16 GMT

Karl Haberl writes
> In article <Bx7y99.85o@news.cso.uiuc.edu> furio@uiuc.edu (furio  
ercolessi) writes:
> >can a sampler and a computer share a SCSI disk (as opposed to hooking
> >directly a SCSI disk to a sampler) ? if yes , what are the conditions  
to
> >do that ? 
> 
> I don't claim to be an expert on SCSI, but I believe that it is possible
> for two separate devices (computer and sampler) to share the same SCSI
> disk, provided that they both don't try to access the disk at the same
> time, and provided that the format of the disk (or of the software that
> is responsible for reading it) is compatible with each. Since the K2000
> wants DOS format, this might be a problem if you want to hang a Mac on  
the
> other end (?). Each SCSI device must be assigned a unique SCSI ID and  
the SCSI
> bus must be properly terminated (there are connectors for this).

That's close but there is one problem here. Both the Computer and the  
Sampler cannot use the *same* disk. They can both be connected to the same  
SCSI bus and they can each have their own disk but they cannot share a  
single disk. You could have something like this:

(Mac) <-> (HD formatted for Mac) <-> (HD formatted for K2000) <-> (K2000)

      You could swap the locations of the drives if you wanted.

  (Mac) <-> (Removeable media drive with Mac or K2000 disk) <-> (K2000)
  
    I have a dual mechanism Syquest and can mix and match disks.

You have to be sure that there are no SCSI ID conflicts, the EPS 16+ is ID  
3 but I don't know the ID of the K2000, it may be user selectable.

> 
> >how does SMDI fit onto the picture ?
> 
> SCSI defines the _hardware_ interface requirements. SMDI is the  
_protocol_
> that defines how sample information is represented and exchanged. Two 
> different sampling tools (e.g. K2000 and Alchemy) are enabled to  
exchange 
> samples with each other SCSI because SMDI (I would assume) defines a 
> canonical format for the sample data which each tool understands, even  
if 
> they don't use that particular format internally. Thus, SCSI defines how
> hardware devices talk, SMDI defines what samples look like (for example, 
> where to find the loop points, etc.).
> 
> >perhaps in practice the computer would act as a file server for the  
sampler
> >(SCSI requires a "master", right? this has to be the computer),
> >but then the sampler would have to know something about
> >the operating system of the computer (at least the structure
> >of the file names).
> 
> No. The computer does not act as a file server. It is just another  
device
> hanging off the SCSI bus. The K2000 is its own computer, and when it  
wants
> sample data on the external disk, it becomes the master and gets the  
data
> directly. When the computer wants data on that disk, IT becomes the  
master,

All correct except for the fact that the two devices cannot share a single  
disk. I doubt seriously that the K2000 share a single disk with a PC, even  
though they use similar (the same?) file systems.  I don't believe SCSI  
allows for two master devices to access one disk.


> issuing SCSI commands to the disk. As I said above, you don't want both  
the
> computer and the K2000 to try to be the master at the same time.
> 
> The K2000 doesn't need to know anything about the computer's OS at all,  
at
> least to get data off an external disk. That is, unless Kurzweil decided  
to
> give the K2000 the ability to really act like a Mac, in which case (if  
you
> had System 7) you could set up File Sharing on your Mac to share certain
> folders containing sample data, and then get them that way over  
AppleTalk or
> EtherNet. I don't know what possibilities there may be for PCs.
> 
> If there's anybody out there who REALLY knows what they're talking  
about,
> feel free to trample all over my ego and correct any mistakes or augment
> this discussion.

Connecting a K2000 to a Mac file server (even if it could be done) would  
still probably be a bad idea. Even using ethernet connections you would  
not be helping yourself much. The best way to keep your samples on the Mac  
is to use something like Alchemy to get the samples from the source device  
(the K2000) and store them on the Mac until needed (to build a  
performance). Once samples are collected for a performance and sent back  
to the sampler, they would have to be saved by the sampler since there is  
a lot more involved in a performance than raw sample data. Alchemy and Mac  
gives you a great way to have a central storage area for samples to be  
used in different devices and for auditioning sounds before gathering them  
together in a performance. 

> 
> 
> Karl Haberl
> Internet: khaberl@bbn.com

--
***************************************
Alex Currier
Texas Union MicroCenter
University of Texas at Austin

NeXTmail Preferred
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth