If I were to use a separate system to control a Daisy what would be the lowest latency means of controlling the Daisy?
For example, a custom control surface with a screen (likely a Raspberry something something) telling a Daisy what to do.
Clearly the Daisy is a lowest latency option for generating audio but not a large UI. MIDI has its own inherent latency as well so that’s the wrong option as well. For example, a custom Arduino MIDI controller running a Daisy with a MIDI input would be rather full of additional latency.
So what? SPI or I2cwith a custom messaging system? Hurts my brain a little.
What I am imaging is ridiculous, see attached picture of an ultrasound machine.
You could consider UART, it can usually be run up to 1 Mbit / sec, and then do some kind of command packet protocol on top of it.
1 Like
Also, you can get quite a few controls on daisy by using multiplexers, with no need for an external control system
Yes indeed I understand BUT
If I was considering a dedicated UI co-processor, I’d probably consider MIDI running at much higher UART rates. MIDI’s ‘inherent latency’ is mostly about the 31.25k Baud rate.
but… what? just curious how it would work if you needed more controls than you could get with multiplexers?
A worthwhile exercise… I’d try UART first for sure, there’s already a framework for dealing with it in the libdaisy library
I’m imagineering here, fully. Having a raspberry run a full color touch screen interface for control of a polyphonic daisy or two or even four/eight was a possible idea. Sequencer, graphic interface for synths and FX, mixing and routing, I don’t know. I’m conceptualizing here. I was already concepting a Daisy powered multi-channel mixer with EQ/comp/FX/routing and this was an extension of that.