http://www.bonnersmusic.co.uk/buy/Hammond/PK25PXK_25_Note_Midi_Pedalboard

...uh, yeah, maybe I won't bother. O_O

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

They say necessity is the mother of all invention. Well I've just 
invented something truly absurd. I've found a way to play bass notes 
even though I don't have a peddle board. The concept is quite simple: 
play the note with my finger, and then hold it down with my foot, while 
I play the rest of the music. The result has to be seen to be believed.

I should probably get out more...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
4a89c8c0$1@news.povray.org...
> They say necessity is the mother of all invention. Well I've just invented 
> something truly absurd. I've found a way to play bass notes even though I 
> don't have a peddle board. The concept is quite simple: play the note with 
> my finger, and then hold it down with my foot, while I play the rest of 
> the music. The result has to be seen to be believed.
>
LOL  !
My father who plays organ at the church and has only an old piano to 
practice home built a pedalbord which just pulls the lower octaves keys from 
under with nylon strings.

Another way :  http://www.orchetect.com/resources/midi-organ-pedals.php

Marc

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> http://www.bonnersmusic.co.uk/buy/Hammond/PK25PXK_25_Note_Midi_Pedalboard
> 
> ...uh, yeah, maybe I won't bother. O_O
> 

Ooh, I want one!

...but I need a keyboard first :(

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> They say necessity is the mother of all invention. Well I've just 
> invented something truly absurd. I've found a way to play bass notes 
> even though I don't have a peddle board. The concept is quite simple: 
> play the note with my finger, and then hold it down with my foot, while 
> I play the rest of the music. The result has to be seen to be believed.
> 
> I should probably get out more...
> 

How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire them 
up to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?

Then you could go to the pub and tell some random girl, "Hey, baby, you 
ever dated a guy who wired his own base?" :)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

> How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire them up 
> to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?

That's what I thought the moment I saw it.  Or maybe simpler to buy a 
standard cheap MIDI keyboard to get all the electronics and rig up some nice 
wooden pedals to it.

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire them 
> up to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?

Harder than you'd think.

A peddleboard needs to not break when an 80 Kg person stamps on it. This 
is non-trivial.

Where the hell do you buy pressure sensors?

You realise that MIDI is a serial communications protocol, right? It's 
not like you just connect each sensor to a different pin on the plug; 
you need some fairly elaborate electronics in there.

> Then you could go to the pub and tell some random girl, "Hey, baby, you 
> ever dated a guy who wired his own base?" :)

*facepalm*

Post a reply to this message

>> How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire 
>> them up to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?
> 
> That's what I thought the moment I saw it.  Or maybe simpler to buy a 
> standard cheap MIDI keyboard to get all the electronics and rig up some 
> nice wooden pedals to it.

I guess that's a possibility, assuming I can find one that isn't 
touch-sensitive. (For some reason, as soon as you buy a stand-alone MIDI 
controller everybody automatically thinks you want the finest 
weighted-key action with touch sensitivity and polyphonic aftertouch... 
Hence, keyboards that have MIDI are quite cheap, but MIDI keyboards are 
surprisingly expensive.)

Assuming you find one that isn't touch-sensitive, so pressing a key just 
closes a circuit, it should be possible to rig something up.

The next problem is going to be how to make it sturdy enough to not fall 
apart. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

> I guess that's a possibility, assuming I can find one that isn't 
> touch-sensitive.

Oh ok I didn't realise the pedals didn't need to be touch sensitive, even 
simpler then!

> Assuming you find one that isn't touch-sensitive, so pressing a key just 
> closes a circuit, it should be possible to rig something up.

Alternatively use another input method to a PC (you can get multiple digital 
input to USB boards) and then generate the MIDI signals in software.

> The next problem is going to be how to make it sturdy enough to not fall 
> apart. ;-)

The pedals are not going to be taking massive forces so you don't need to 
worry about using bearings or anything fancy like that.  I would just put a 
hole through the pedal at the back and let it rotate on a bolt that is 
secured to some base-plate.  That way you can place each pedal at a 
different angle.  To provide the resistance just glue on a lump of stiff 
rubber underneath each pedal and mount a micro-switch to trigger at the 
correct position.  Shouldn't take too much work.

Post a reply to this message

>> I guess that's a possibility, assuming I can find one that isn't 
>> touch-sensitive.
> 
> Oh ok I didn't realise the pedals didn't need to be touch sensitive, 
> even simpler then!

I'm trying to simulate a pipe organ here. They're generally not 
particularly touch sensitive. ;-)

[Although... the mechanical-action ones *are* very slightly touch 
sensitive, which not a lot of people know.]

>> Assuming you find one that isn't touch-sensitive, so pressing a key 
>> just closes a circuit, it should be possible to rig something up.
> 
> Alternatively use another input method to a PC (you can get multiple 
> digital input to USB boards) and then generate the MIDI signals in 
> software.

I'm guessing generating MIDI signals in software is going to be intractable.

>> The next problem is going to be how to make it sturdy enough to not 
>> fall apart. ;-)
> 
> The pedals are not going to be taking massive forces so you don't need 
> to worry about using bearings or anything fancy like that.  I would just 
> put a hole through the pedal at the back and let it rotate on a bolt 
> that is secured to some base-plate.  That way you can place each pedal 
> at a different angle.  To provide the resistance just glue on a lump of 
> stiff rubber underneath each pedal and mount a micro-switch to trigger 
> at the correct position.  Shouldn't take too much work.

For one thing, it's going to take some big chunks of solid wood, and a 
big iron bolt. Given how ludicrously expensive actual wood is, I guess 
it might not even come out any cheaper than just buying the one in the 
shop...

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire 
>> them up to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?
> 
> That's what I thought the moment I saw it.  Or maybe simpler to buy a 
> standard cheap MIDI keyboard to get all the electronics and rig up some 
> nice wooden pedals to it.

Ooo, hey! Maplin had a roll-up keyboard MIDI-controller thingy. Add some 
mechanical linkage and some springs and you got a MIDI peddalboard. :-D

The only *minor* detail that remains is... building a peddalboard in the 
first place. :-/

Post a reply to this message

> I'm guessing generating MIDI signals in software is going to be 
> intractable.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711640(VS.85).aspx

I believe also if you have access to DirectX on your system then DirectMusic 
offers a higher level interface to the MIDI controller.

> For one thing, it's going to take some big chunks of solid wood, and a big 
> iron bolt.

An M4 or M6 standard steel bolt will do, you're not going to be levering up 
cars with this thing!

> Given how ludicrously expensive actual wood is,

It's only expensive *after* someone has spent time shaping it and treating 
it.  Raw wood is pretty cheap, I would imagine that enough for a set of 
pedals is not going to cost more than fifty quid.  It's up to you how much 
time you then want to spend shaping and treating it.

> I guess it might not even come out any cheaper than just buying the one in 
> the shop...

Oh it will definitely come out at least an order of magnitude cheaper, but 
of course it's going to take some time and skill on your part...

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm guessing generating MIDI signals in software is going to be 
>> intractable.
> 
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711640(VS.85).aspx
> 
> I believe also if you have access to DirectX on your system then 
> DirectMusic offers a higher level interface to the MIDI controller.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd551276(VS.85).aspx

"Warning: This technology is deprecated as is all of DirectMusic."

Gee, thanks for telling us what the recommended alternative is. :-P

I wonder though... I've always thought of writing "fancy" Windows 
programs as intractable, since it requires calling the Win32 API, and 
very few useful programming languages can do this. However, I did 
successfully write a Haskell library that talks to the Windows console 
functions, and it worked fine. I wonder if it's really possible to write 
a Haskell library that does something nontrivial like sending and 
receiving MIDI messages?

>> For one thing, it's going to take some big chunks of solid wood, and a 
>> big iron bolt.
> 
> An M4 or M6 standard steel bolt will do, you're not going to be levering 
> up cars with this thing!

I'm guessing you can't buy that stuff at the local hardware store though.

>> Given how ludicrously expensive actual wood is,
> 
> It's only expensive *after* someone has spent time shaping it and 
> treating it.  Raw wood is pretty cheap, I would imagine that enough for 
> a set of pedals is not going to cost more than fifty quid.  It's up to 
> you how much time you then want to spend shaping and treating it.

Well, I don't have to worry about splinters. ;-) I suspect cutting it to 
a precise shape isn't going to be easy though. Hmm, I'll have a think 
about it.

>> I guess it might not even come out any cheaper than just buying the 
>> one in the shop...
> 
> Oh it will definitely come out at least an order of magnitude cheaper, 
> but of course it's going to take some time and skill on your part...

Indeed.

Post a reply to this message

> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd551276(VS.85).aspx
>
> "Warning: This technology is deprecated as is all of DirectMusic."
>
> Gee, thanks for telling us what the recommended alternative is. :-P

Hehe yes true, it doesn't look like they do suggest an alternative for 
communicating with MIDI hardware!

> I wonder though... I've always thought of writing "fancy" Windows programs 
> as intractable, since it requires calling the Win32 API, and very few 
> useful programming languages can do this. However, I did successfully 
> write a Haskell library that talks to the Windows console functions, and 
> it worked fine. I wonder if it's really possible to write a Haskell 
> library that does something nontrivial like sending and receiving MIDI 
> messages?

It should be no problem if you can call Windows API functions, the ones for 
MIDI control are all still there.

>> An M4 or M6 standard steel bolt will do, you're not going to be levering 
>> up cars with this thing!
>
> I'm guessing you can't buy that stuff at the local hardware store though.

Of course you can and they're dead cheap, B&Q will have a good supply of M4 
and M6 bolts (plus many other diameters) at all sorts of lengths and head 
types.  They do nuts and washers too.

> I suspect cutting it to a precise shape isn't going to be easy though.

If you're making a load of pedals then I would be tempted to first make a 
jig so that you can cut each one to exactly the same dimensions.  You can 
finish them off with some sand paper or an electric sander (more expensive 
but faster).

Post a reply to this message

>> "Warning: This technology is deprecated as is all of DirectMusic."
>>
>> Gee, thanks for telling us what the recommended alternative is. :-P
> 
> Hehe yes true, it doesn't look like they do suggest an alternative for 
> communicating with MIDI hardware!

That was the conclusion I came to also, yes.

Their main section on MIDI control still mentions the same function 
names, so...

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms712733(VS.85).aspx

>>> An M4 or M6 standard steel bolt will do, you're not going to be 
>>> levering up cars with this thing!
>>
>> I'm guessing you can't buy that stuff at the local hardware store though.
> 
> Of course you can and they're dead cheap, B&Q will have a good supply of 
> M4 and M6 bolts (plus many other diameters) at all sorts of lengths and 
> head types.  They do nuts and washers too.

B&Q sell nuts and bolts, but I doubt they sell large pieces of metal 
such as random poles and rods.

>> I suspect cutting it to a precise shape isn't going to be easy though.
> 
> If you're making a load of pedals then I would be tempted to first make 
> a jig so that you can cut each one to exactly the same dimensions.  You 
> can finish them off with some sand paper or an electric sander (more 
> expensive but faster).

My dad probably already has an electric sander or five.

I think the basic problem is that even if I do all this, it's never 
going to be exactly like a real organ peddalboard. The whole point of 
practicing is to get used to the feel of the real thing, so... I guess 
I'll just stick to sneaking into the local church on saturdays. Much 
cheaper. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

> B&Q sell nuts and bolts, but I doubt they sell large pieces of metal such 
> as random poles and rods.

I suspect they do actually, but I wouldn't do it with those.  I would get a 
sheet of wood about 20 or 30mm thick to use as the base board.  I would then 
get a thin strip of aluminium (25x2 cross section would be perfect, I got 
metre lengths of that from B&Q before), cut it into perhaps 150mm lengths 
and bend it into a U shape.  The bottom of the U I would bolt onto the base 
board for each pedal, then fix an M4 bolt horizontally across the top of 
each U with the pedal mounted on it so it's free to rotate.

> My dad probably already has an electric sander or five.

Job done then!

> I think the basic problem is that even if I do all this, it's never going 
> to be exactly like a real organ peddalboard.

Isn't there any way you can replicate what the pedal is actually connected 
to in a real one?  It shouldn't be hard to think of something to replicate 
the feeling.

Post a reply to this message

>> I think the basic problem is that even if I do all this, it's never 
>> going to be exactly like a real organ peddalboard.
> 
> Isn't there any way you can replicate what the pedal is actually 
> connected to in a real one?  It shouldn't be hard to think of something 
> to replicate the feeling.

I was thinking that I'll never get the exact spacing between the notes, 
the curvature of the peddals, etc. exactly right.

Post a reply to this message

> I was thinking that I'll never get the exact spacing between the notes, 
> the curvature of the peddals, etc. exactly right.

There's probably some design information on the internet somewhere that can 
help you out with that.  Or just take a ruler and a notebook one time to the 
church...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
> 
>> How hard would it be to get a couple of pressure sensors, and wire 
>> them up to a MIDI plug so you could have your own?
> 
> Harder than you'd think.
> 
> A peddleboard needs to not break when an 80 Kg person stamps on it. This 
> is non-trivial.

Not necessarily.  If, as you stated, all you need to do is close a 
circuit... well, you can do that quite easily.

> Where the hell do you buy pressure sensors?

Take apart any electronic scale, if you must.  Other than that, I'm sure 
Radioshack has them (though I don't know about the tolerances of their 
models).

> You realise that MIDI is a serial communications protocol, right? It's 
> not like you just connect each sensor to a different pin on the plug; 
> you need some fairly elaborate electronics in there.

Good point; maybe just wire it up to a parallel port, then, and generate 
the MIDI signal via software.

Or, put something together with that breadboard you've been playing with ;)


>> Then you could go to the pub and tell some random girl, "Hey, baby, 
>> you ever dated a guy who wired his own base?" :)
> 
> *facepalm*

What, girls like a guy who can get things done! :)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Where the hell do you buy pressure sensors?
> 

My choices are places like Adafruit and Sparkfun. Digikey, Mouser for
bulk parts, or for catalogs that are great brainstorming material (open
to random page, what could this part be used for). Radioshack if you
must. Or call a company that makes the sensor and ask for some samples
for a project you are developing.

Thinking about it, I don't know that I would use pressure sensors unless
you wanted pressure measurements. I don't know if that would matter for
pedals, as the pressure is going to be checked only once you have
already pushed it down. Simple dial resistors on each pedal would tell
you how far down they were pressed; optical encoders would work too
(dead mice scroll wheels, if you want those cheap). For more accuracy
than that, I would have to think about it more. Magnetic sensors might
work, but you would have to calibrate the whole set.

> You realise that MIDI is a serial communications protocol, right? It's
> not like you just connect each sensor to a different pin on the plug;
> you need some fairly elaborate electronics in there.
> 

At the very simplest form, one input pin on any ol' micro-controller for
each pedal. If you have a force sensitive resistor (basic pressure
sensor) that is high resistance with no pressure and low when it has
pressure, use it to pull the pin low when pedal is pushed.** Wire it
differently if the sensor is different. Controller can just poll each
pin, or batches of pins where speed is an issue, and create the MIDI
packet to send. And if you are really set on having X packets per
second, the poll routine just stores the bits, and a timer interrupt
creates and sends the packet. Just make sure to have an optoisolator on
. . . crud, it has been forever since I did anything MIDI, I don't
remember if it is on the TX or RX wire.

Throw a multiplexer in, and you could use fewer i/o pins at the cost of
extra cpu cycles switching and waiting on the multiplexer. Going the
other way, a bigger chip so you can use 4 8-bit reads to get 32 pedals.
Or, really fancy, a 16 or 32-bit controller.

Elaborate? $8 micro-controllers are absurdly powerful now, and very easy
to program. Granted, most of the time it is assembly or some odd looking
java-esque language, but GCC will cross-compile to AVR and ARM chips.
The soldering might be tough, but for a prototype just breadboard it.


**I think that would result in less power drain than the other way
round, but I hack at these kinds of things, I don't engineer them.
Current limiting resistor on either supply or ground side, depending on
where you put the sensor, of course.

Post a reply to this message

> Thinking about it, I don't know that I would use pressure sensors unless
> you wanted pressure measurements. I don't know if that would matter for
> pedals, as the pressure is going to be checked only once you have
> already pushed it down. Simple dial resistors on each pedal would tell
> you how far down they were pressed; optical encoders would work too
> (dead mice scroll wheels, if you want those cheap). For more accuracy
> than that, I would have to think about it more. Magnetic sensors might
> work, but you would have to calibrate the whole set.

I've made a few sets of pedals for car racing games (where I think the 
forces on the brake pedals are much higher than what would typically be used 
to activate an organ pedal).  The usual construction is to have the pedal 
rotating on a bearing with a big stiff spring giving the resistance force, 
then a simple rotary potentiometer (variable resistor) is wired up as a 
voltage divider (0V on one end, 5V on the other end) on the pedal axle with 
an ADC (as you say often part of the microcontroller itself) converting the 
centre tap into a digital signal that can be sent to the PC via USB.  This 
setup is accurate enough to give good control over controlling the brakes in 
a car racing game without any noise or spurious signals, so it should be 
fine for controlling an organ pipe :-)

It would be a nice little project, you can buy ready-made PCBs with USB 
interface and analog/digital interfaces if you don't feel like doing too 
much of the electronics and microcontroller software yourself.

Post a reply to this message

>>> Then you could go to the pub and tell some random girl, "Hey, baby, 
>>> you ever dated a guy who wired his own base?" :)
>>
>> *facepalm*
> 
> What, girls like a guy who can get things done! :)

They also hate nerds with a passion.

Post a reply to this message

Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> Elaborate? $8 micro-controllers are absurdly powerful now, and very easy
> to program. Granted, most of the time it is assembly or some odd looking
> java-esque language,

Many of them even have BASIC interpreters on chip, don't they? Or FORTH? 
Weird stuff like that?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>> Elaborate? $8 micro-controllers are absurdly powerful now, and very easy
>> to program. Granted, most of the time it is assembly or some odd looking
>> java-esque language,
> 
> Many of them even have BASIC interpreters on chip, don't they? Or FORTH?
> Weird stuff like that?
> 

I know that some of the PIC boards come with BASIC software, google says
that they also have support for FORTH. From what little time I have used
PIC BASIC, it isn't something I would recommend. In the version I had,
you could only read or set one I/O pin per instruction, even digital
pins, instead of reading and setting 8 pin banks. For what I was doing,
and for a 25 pedal controller, that seems just a bit slow. For FORTH, I
don't have any more info than what google just showed me, that there
isn't a GCC port for PICs, and that most of the compilers are
proprietary. Don't have a clue how many are free and proprietary.

Post a reply to this message

>> You realise that MIDI is a serial communications protocol, right? It's
>> not like you just connect each sensor to a different pin on the plug;
>> you need some fairly elaborate electronics in there.
> 
> At the very simplest form, one input pin on any ol' micro-controller for
> each pedal.

Micro-controller? Ouch.

> Controller can just poll each
> pin, or batches of pins where speed is an issue, and create the MIDI
> packet to send.

Not quite.

MIDI sends note-on and note-off messages, so the controller needs to 
"remember" the previous pin state to decide whether anything has changed.

> Just make sure to have an optoisolator on
> . . . crud, it has been forever since I did anything MIDI, I don't
> remember if it is on the TX or RX wire.

MIDI is simplex, not duplex. A single MIDI cable carries messages in one 
direction only. And I'm pretty sure it's the receiving end that's 
supposed to be opto-isolated. (I.e., I don't have to do anything.)

OTOH, I don't fancy paying £50 for a new MIDI interface if I fry mine!

> Elaborate? $8 micro-controllers are absurdly powerful now, and very easy
> to program. Granted, most of the time it is assembly or some odd looking
> java-esque language, but GCC will cross-compile to AVR and ARM chips.
> The soldering might be tough, but for a prototype just breadboard it.

1. I'd be very surprised if you can buy any sort of microcontroller for 
less than £10. Last time I checked, a 1KB RAM chip was about £15.

2. A microcontroller on its own isn't going to do much good - unless I 
also go out and buy a RAM ship and either a PROM and burner or some 
flash RAM. I would think a PIC would be the way to go.

3. Even a PIC is probably vastly too difficult to program. And if it 
doesn't work? It's not like you can debug it...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> You realise that MIDI is a serial communications protocol, right? It's
>>> not like you just connect each sensor to a different pin on the plug;
>>> you need some fairly elaborate electronics in there.
>>
>> At the very simplest form, one input pin on any ol' micro-controller for
>> each pedal.
> 
> Micro-controller? Ouch.
> 
>> Controller can just poll each
>> pin, or batches of pins where speed is an issue, and create the MIDI
>> packet to send.
> 
> Not quite.
> 
> MIDI sends note-on and note-off messages, so the controller needs to
> "remember" the previous pin state to decide whether anything has changed.
> 

So, you need RAM, no problem. Poll the pins, compare the state, and
construct the packets to send. Even without RAM, a few bytes of cache
would be enough. Even with 25 pedals and 10-bit ADC, that is still only
250 bits.

>> Just make sure to have an optoisolator on
>> . . . crud, it has been forever since I did anything MIDI, I don't
>> remember if it is on the TX or RX wire.
> 
> MIDI is simplex, not duplex. A single MIDI cable carries messages in one
> direction only. And I'm pretty sure it's the receiving end that's
> supposed to be opto-isolated. (I.e., I don't have to do anything.)
> 
> OTOH, I don't fancy paying £50 for a new MIDI interface if I fry mine!
> 

Shows how long it's been since I've done anything with MIDI. But if you
have a controller, why not have it capable of receiving MIDI
instructions? May want to use it for something else later.

>> Elaborate? $8 micro-controllers are absurdly powerful now, and very easy
>> to program. Granted, most of the time it is assembly or some odd looking
>> java-esque language, but GCC will cross-compile to AVR and ARM chips.
>> The soldering might be tough, but for a prototype just breadboard it.
> 
> 1. I'd be very surprised if you can buy any sort of microcontroller for
> less than £10. Last time I checked, a 1KB RAM chip was about £15.
> 

Atmel's ATmega168 in DIP form are under $3 each. The 128, which has
enough digital I/O pins for 25 pedals is under $10. For 25 analog pins,
you may have to look elsewhere. Off hand I can't think of any, so
multiplexers might be the only way. Still, a $3 controller and a few $1
mux chips.

> 2. A microcontroller on its own isn't going to do much good - unless I
> also go out and buy a RAM ship and either a PROM and burner or some
> flash RAM. I would think a PIC would be the way to go.
> 

Most of them, now days, have built in flash memory for code, EEPROM that
the code can store stuff in over power loss, and built in RAM. The 168
has 1kB of RAM, 512B EEPROM, built in serial and 16kB of flash.

For programing, serial to a simple JTAG programmer (6 wires, right from
the serial port to certain pins) works great. If you prefer USB, look at
something like the Arduino, with built in USB, a custom bootloader, and
an development environment.

> 3. Even a PIC is probably vastly too difficult to program. And if it
> doesn't work? It's not like you can debug it...

Why can't you debug them? Connect it to a PC via USB or serial, throw
some printf statements in to chat over the serial conncetion, and watch
what happens. Or use an in circuit debugger. It isn't what programmers
normally think of as debugging, but you could have it print blocks of
memory out, and only work through the next step of code when you send a
certain command. Takes longer to program that way. Some chips probably
have in chip debuggers, I think I have seen that on some Motorola or
another.

For easy programing, assuming C doesn't feel too low-level, take a look
at the Arduino. Lots of different forms, from really small breadboard
units, to full programers, a variety of chips for various pin counts,
with or without USB and headers for lots of external devices, and for
the most part they are around $30; 10 for breadboard kits, around 50 or
60 for larger pre-made boards with lots of I/O pins and RAM.


All prices are in USD, and as you can guess I use AVRs a lot more than
most of the other chips. I don't want to start the avr/pic/arm/mips holy
war here, those are just the chips I know.

Post a reply to this message