Nothing gets changed in the patch. This is not like a memory corruption problem.
What is happening is that what the display says does not match the
sound the machine makes. For example, the display says all output
levels are zero except OP1 with 99. I can save this just fine, that is
not the problem. The sound that comes out the machine is just not what
the display says.
The main CPU is responsible for editing and patch storage. The
secondary ("slave") CPU is responsible for sending the currently
playing sounds into the EGM, and the algorithm into the OPS2. This is
where the problem must be.
Using a software MIDI editor tells me nothing about what goes on with
the EGM. The MIDI editor can only talk to the main CPU and the main
CPU thinks everything is fine.
I suspect that the output levels and the L1, L2 and L3 levels are
combined because changing L1, L2 and L3 does nothing, just like
changing output levels do nothing
Changing L4 does work; if I set it to 99 on a carrier I get the drone
sound you would expect.
The other thing that _does_ work is setting envelope rates. If I take
an init patch and set R1 of OP2 and OP3 to 0, then I get the proper
sound (single operator sine wave).
My best guess is still that some but not all of the 32 bytes that go
into the EGM get corrupted. And it's always the same bytes that get
corrupted.
Op vr 3 feb. 2023 om 21:45 schreef belzrebuth s via
<belzrebuth=
[email protected]>:
>
> I would troubleshoot with a midi editor like SoundQuest or whatever to see exactly what gets changed realtime.
>
> With an init patch you may be missing something.
>
> If you get the other operator levels back to zero do they stay at zero after saving?
>
> Can you make a patch? from scratch set levels back to zero and then set them like 10 20 30 then save and recall that patch?
>
> If you're able to recall that patch I would compare the original and the modified one (modified by the machine I mean) to verify my findings.
>
> If it's indeed *only* the OP output levels that get scrambled only then I would proceed further chasing that error.
>
> In fact one could take it even further and take a screenshot of a patch with ALL values set in a custom way and check what else gets changed before going into a single direction.
>
> On 2/3/2023 10:31 PM, José Juan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I did a full recap of the TX802, and it sounded awesome afterwards.
>
> Electrolytic capacitors are dead on most 80s Yamaha Roland Korg gear.
>
> To change all capacitors is a PITA, but the machine gets new expected life.
>
> Just my suggest. Not every tech guy is capable of doing that without damaging the unit.
>
> Good luck, and take care.
>
> JJ
>
> El vie, 3 feb 2023, 21:24, <
contact@...> escribió:
>>
>> Hello group,
>>
>> I would like to share a troubleshooting story I am in the middle of.
>>
>> I bought a broken TX802 on the internet. I knew it was broken when I bought it, I felt like taking a chance. The seller said it worked but has "digital noise".
>>
>> It turns out this TX802 is in pretty good shape. Everything works except that the sounds are wrong. There appears to be something wrong with the output levels of the operators.
>>
>> If I make an init sound, I am supposed to get a single operator sine wave with an organ envelope. The user interface shows the expected parameters. But when I play it, I get more or less the sound of algorithm 1 with all operators at 99. A harsh overmodulated FM sound. When I then change the algorithm to 32, I get a clean sine wave sound.
>>
>> It's a fascinating puzzle for me. Almost all the explanations I can come up with would make the TX sound more broken than it actually does. The EGM and OPS2 chips cannot be broken because they can make clean sounds. (I have a DX7II which is my reference.) Data is getting corrupted only in a very specific place, which happens to affect the output levels.
>>
>> My best guess at the moment is that there is a problem with the chip enable line of the EGM chip that causes it to latch bad output level data when it should not be reading data in the first place. But I have not seen evidence of that yet on my oscilloscope.
>>
>> I don't know if anyone else finds this interesting, but if there is someone who finds it interesting, they are probably on this list. :)
>>
>> Cheers, Jacob
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
