Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Korg Poly 800 request for information

Expand Messages
  • patrioticduo
    Thanks, yes I would say I ve done a little under 20% with comments. But I should point out that this is the EX800 ROM (since I thought it might be easier to
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 3, 2006
      Thanks, yes I would say I've done a little under 20% with comments.

      But I should point out that this is the EX800 ROM (since I thought it
      might be easier to start there). And I am mostly working through the
      MIDI part of the code first. I've hit a few sections that I'm having
      trouble understanding the use of variables in memory.

      I'm going to move onto other parts of the code so that I don't lose
      momentum and become disenchanted.

      I just hope Korg releases a memory map. That would be very helpful.

      Cheers,

      Mike H.

      --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, "austeritygirlone" <ziggystar@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Let's hope that this works.
      >
      > And I suppose with 20% dissadembled you mean you have understood and
      > commented about 20% of the source code? I would call this good
      > progress. Two thumbs up!
      >
    • Michael Hawkins
      Good afternoon Jerry, Actually, being an eternal optimist I was not expecting your response at all. I feel this way because the Poly 800 design is so old and
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 6, 2006
        Good afternoon Jerry,

        Actually, being an eternal optimist I was not expecting your response at all.

        I feel this way because the Poly 800 design is so old and it's techniques and innovations so well understood in music and electronic hardware and software engineering circles that it simply wouldn't hurt Korg one iota to release a memory map or commented assembly code for the Poly 800. In fact, to have released a memory map or commented assembly code would have been demonstrating forward thinking and openness that would serve as a great advertizement to Korg's commitment to its customers. Let's face it, Korg released the hardware circuit diagrams when they published the original service manual so Korg had already released half of its intellectual property when it first produced the Poly 800.

        The Poly 800 aint rocket science!

        Furthermore, the Poly 800 is essentially an 8085 CPU computer with some sound generation hardware built around it. Thus, it is similar in many ways to dozens of early computers built in the 1980's and almost every single one of those computers had their entire assembly and memory maps released to the general public when they were manufactured.

        So I don't buy your argument at all and I urge you to push for a policy change within Korg that would release the memory map and assembly code. And just maybe, we might begin to change the insanely closed and paranoid nature of the synthesizer manufacturers - Korg included.

        Your sincerely,

        Mike Hawkins

        Jerry Kovarsky <jerryk@...> wrote:
        Hello Michael:

        I'm the Product Manager for Korg Keyboards and Recording gear in the US,
        and I was just in Japan last week working with the company.

        I showed them your email, but I'm sorry to tell you that we cannot
        comply with your request. It is our general policy not to release this
        kind of information - How we design, code and develop our products is
        part of our long-attained equity as a company and we simply do not in
        any circumstances release that information out into the public.

        I imagine you were expecting this response, but hoping against all odds
        that we might feel different. I'm truly sorry to disappoint you and we
        all appreciate your support of the Poly800 and Korg gear in general.

        Jerry Kovarsky

        > > *From:* Michael Hawkins [mailto:patrioticduo@...]
        > > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 30, 2006 3:03 PM
        > > *To:* James Sajeva
        > > *Cc:* korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
        > > *Subject:* Korg Poly 800 request for information
        > >
        > > Good afternoon James,
        > >
        > > Thanks for giving me the time to speak with you regarding
        > our request
        > > to obtain information about the Poly 800. I also appreciate
        > you giving
        > > me the opportunity to approach the Product Manager with my unusual
        > > request.
        > >
        > > At this point in time, we here on the Korg Poly 800 Yahoo
        > group have
        > > identified several modifications that we would like to
        > include in our
        > > Poly 800's. We know that the only way to get those features is to
        > > modify the assembly code of the instrument. As a result, I have
        > > embarked on a disassembly project. Obviously, this is a major
        > > undertaking. Nevertheless, I have managed to disassemble
        > about 20% of
        > > the code.
        > >
        > > However, it would be a welcome gesture and enormously
        > useful if Korg
        > > were to make available one or both of the following:
        > >
        > > a) The commented original source code.
        > > b) A memory map that detailed the use of RAM in the instrument.
        > >
        > > I understand that this information is proprietary however the
        > > instrument is now 22 years old and the technology so
        > obsolete that I
        > > hope Korg would see the benefit, particularly within the Korg
        > > enthusiast community, of releasing any information that
        > would assist
        > > us in keeping this great antique instrument alive and gigging.
        > >
        > > I look forward to hearing from you soon.
        > >
        > > Mike.
        > >
        > >
        > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        > > --
        > >
        > > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low
        > PC-to-Phone call
        > > rates.
        > >
        >
        > > om/evt=39663/*http:/voice.yahoo.com>
        > >
        >
        >

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        http://mail.yahoo.com

      • Atom Smasher
        ... ============================ Mr Kovarsky, you ve probably never heard of me. I ve published some hardware modifications to the Poly-800 series of
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 6, 2006
          > I showed them your email, but I'm sorry to tell you that we cannot
          > comply with your request. It is our general policy not to release this
          > kind of information - How we design, code and develop our products is
          > part of our long-attained equity as a company and we simply do not in
          > any circumstances release that information out into the public.
          ============================

          Mr Kovarsky, you've probably never heard of me. I've published some
          hardware modifications to the Poly-800 series of synthesizers that seems
          to have contributed quite a bit to it's cult following.

          Since both the software and hardware of the Poly-800 series of synths are
          entirely obsolete, it would seem that Korg would have absolutely nothing
          to lose from releasing details about the software. Further, it would
          demonstrate that Korg is a company that puts long-time loyal users ahead
          of obsolete secrets.

          We all know that software details of the Poly-800 would reveal no useful
          information at all about any current gear made by Korg. Nor would this
          information be useful to anyone wanting to make a new synthesizer; partly
          because the feature set is limited by modern standards and partly because
          the hardware is obsolete.

          I would certainly understand Korg not wanting to release software details
          about these synths in the 80s, or even 90s, but this is 2006. The software
          details of the Poly-800, known to be limited by features and then-current
          hardware, are absolutely useless except for one thing: breathing new life
          into an old hardware synth with a loyal following.

          I'm hopeful that a mutually beneficial arrangement can reached with Mr
          Hawkins: Perhaps you can release the code to him with a non-disclosure
          agreement? This would allow him to independently breath new life into this
          old synthesizer (and share his compiled code), without publicly releasing
          any company "secrets".

          If Korg were to publicly release such information at this point in time,
          it would only demonstrate that Korg is willing to allow (or even
          encourage) independent support for long obsolete gear. Nothing could be
          more helpful in selling new gear than confidence that the gear will be
          supported long after it's been forgotten. The good PR that Korg could gain
          by releasing the obsolete code for an obsolete synth with a loyal
          following is priceless. I will certainly consider this in future
          purchases; not all synthesizer/effect manufacturers consider such
          information to be a secret after 20+ years.

          While I certainly understand that these details are the property of Korg,
          and that Korg had invested resources into it's development, I just can't
          see any justifiable reason to keep the code locked up at this point. Nor
          can I see how it might benefit Korg in any way to keep the code secret. I
          can certainly understand that the code was, at one time, a very valuable
          asset to Korg and worthy of being locked up. While locked in a safe that
          asset certainly must have depreciated to zero within the last several
          years, if not earlier. Thus, it's "equity" to the company is currently
          much greater if it's released than it is if it's kept secret. If there's
          anything that I've overlooked in my reasoning or I don't seem to
          understand, please feel free to contact me and let me know what I'm
          missing.

          I hope that you can understand my reasoning, and that you may be able to
          advocate this position within the company. Perhaps a request such as this
          should be directed to R&D, or the legal department. If that's the case,
          please send their contact information to me and Mr Hawkins, so we can
          pursue this further.

          Thank you for your time.


          --
          ...atom

          ________________________
          http://atom.smasher.org/
          762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
          -------------------------------------------------

          "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
          -- Charles H. Duell,
          Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899
        • Dave Bowman
          hi there, well, after having read all these threads, i guess it couldn t be a bad idea to let them Korg guys know that at least a couple dozens of us are
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 7, 2006
            hi there,

            well, after having read all these threads, i guess it couldn't be a
            bad idea to let them Korg guys know that at least a couple dozens of
            us are really willing that they release the code for the Poly-800.
            Maybe we could get on the same page as regards what will be asked and
            then act in consequence. I'mm all for M. Hawkins move. Count me in.

            Dave

            --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
            >
            > > I showed them your email, but I'm sorry to tell you that we
            cannot
            > > comply with your request. It is our general policy not to release
            this
            > > kind of information - How we design, code and develop our
            products is
            > > part of our long-attained equity as a company and we simply do
            not in
            > > any circumstances release that information out into the public.
            > ============================
            >
            > Mr Kovarsky, you've probably never heard of me. I've published some
            > hardware modifications to the Poly-800 series of synthesizers that
            seems
            > to have contributed quite a bit to it's cult following.
            >
            > Since both the software and hardware of the Poly-800 series of
            synths are
            > entirely obsolete, it would seem that Korg would have absolutely
            nothing
            > to lose from releasing details about the software. Further, it
            would
            > demonstrate that Korg is a company that puts long-time loyal users
            ahead
            > of obsolete secrets.
            >
            > We all know that software details of the Poly-800 would reveal no
            useful
            > information at all about any current gear made by Korg. Nor would
            this
            > information be useful to anyone wanting to make a new synthesizer;
            partly
            > because the feature set is limited by modern standards and partly
            because
            > the hardware is obsolete.
            >
            > I would certainly understand Korg not wanting to release software
            details
            > about these synths in the 80s, or even 90s, but this is 2006. The
            software
            > details of the Poly-800, known to be limited by features and then-
            current
            > hardware, are absolutely useless except for one thing: breathing
            new life
            > into an old hardware synth with a loyal following.
            >
            > I'm hopeful that a mutually beneficial arrangement can reached with
            Mr
            > Hawkins: Perhaps you can release the code to him with a non-
            disclosure
            > agreement? This would allow him to independently breath new life
            into this
            > old synthesizer (and share his compiled code), without publicly
            releasing
            > any company "secrets".
            >
            > If Korg were to publicly release such information at this point in
            time,
            > it would only demonstrate that Korg is willing to allow (or even
            > encourage) independent support for long obsolete gear. Nothing
            could be
            > more helpful in selling new gear than confidence that the gear will
            be
            > supported long after it's been forgotten. The good PR that Korg
            could gain
            > by releasing the obsolete code for an obsolete synth with a loyal
            > following is priceless. I will certainly consider this in future
            > purchases; not all synthesizer/effect manufacturers consider such
            > information to be a secret after 20+ years.
            >
            > While I certainly understand that these details are the property of
            Korg,
            > and that Korg had invested resources into it's development, I just
            can't
            > see any justifiable reason to keep the code locked up at this
            point. Nor
            > can I see how it might benefit Korg in any way to keep the code
            secret. I
            > can certainly understand that the code was, at one time, a very
            valuable
            > asset to Korg and worthy of being locked up. While locked in a safe
            that
            > asset certainly must have depreciated to zero within the last
            several
            > years, if not earlier. Thus, it's "equity" to the company is
            currently
            > much greater if it's released than it is if it's kept secret. If
            there's
            > anything that I've overlooked in my reasoning or I don't seem to
            > understand, please feel free to contact me and let me know what I'm
            > missing.
            >
            > I hope that you can understand my reasoning, and that you may be
            able to
            > advocate this position within the company. Perhaps a request such
            as this
            > should be directed to R&D, or the legal department. If that's the
            case,
            > please send their contact information to me and Mr Hawkins, so we
            can
            > pursue this further.
            >
            > Thank you for your time.
            >
            >
            > --
            > ...atom
            >
            > ________________________
            > http://atom.smasher.org/
            > 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
            > -------------------------------------------------
            >
            > "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
            > -- Charles H. Duell,
            > Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.