Home | ER-101 | ER-102 | ER-301 | Wiki | Contact

I2C communication with Monome Teletype


for me, the biggest benefit isn’t so much using less inputs on the 301, but keeping my limited teletype outputs available for other uses.


Can these be independently assigned, i.e. communication with ER-301 doing one set of things, physical outs doing another set of things?





That’s a lot of stuff going on, I am obviously interested in this a lot, but the one thing that puts me off more than anything is the keyboard, I stare at one of those far too much anyway, the idea of introducing it into my music making seems well… totally and utterly awful!

Ambivalence is an understatement :smiley:


So while the i2c communication allows the front side physical outs to remain available, scripting to the ER-301 over i2c is still limited to the 8 available scripts right?


Yes, scripts 1 - 8 are still bound to trigger inputs 1 - 8. Then you have script M by the internal Metronome and the initial script I.


So 8 inputs triggering 8 scripts, can each script output to more than one output, so for example, could you assign gate and cv to the 8 outputs in one script?


Yes you could.


there are 8 scripts (plus metro and init), and normally they are mapped to the 8 trigger inputs. this was the original implementation, now we also have the ability to mute specific inputs (so they don’t trigger scripts anymore), and you can call a script from another script, so they can be used as functions, sort of.

scripts are not mapped to outputs at all - any script can update any output. you could have all 8 scripts updating the same CV and trigger outputs, for instance.

you could also have one script update multiple outputs in one script, as mentioned. as a matter of fact, you could do something like this: L 1 100: SC.CV * I 100 - this will update all 100 er-301 teletype CVs at once.


regarding screen/keyboard fears: i feel like i spend more time thinking about what i want to do than staring at a screen & typing. usually once the concept of what you’re after hits you, achieving it with a script is pretty quick work.


This, and also to me it is so much fun to build something out of scripts, toggling back and forth through the modes to try something out an let it grow and evolve, like patching. It Does not feel like working in front of a screen but has an nice vintage computing vibe - somewhere between BASIC and Wargames.


Fear is the wrong word (at least for me!), overdose would be much more appropriate :weary:


Just when I thought about what is needed to connect TT to two ER-301. Out of laziness I orderd one bus board from you.
Amazing project.


But also, scripts can trigger each other… so you are not really "abound to 8 trigger inputs.


Granted, we are all just beginning to explore this awesome alliance. I would want to say that communicating directly between TT and ER-301 allows for so much more nuanced and detailed control.
Things that really come to shine when using the SC.CV commands which TT can sculpt in many ways (for example dynamic manipulations of the slew, etc.) And since we are now not bound by the number of physical inputs on the ER-301, you can control bejillion parameters within your chains/units.

It’s crazy amazing!


I looove my cute little keyboard!!!


Seems to be missing some keys? Did you map numbers, function keys, etc., to other keys?


It’s all there via some modifier keys (fn1 fn2 etc.)



I have a question.
So, so far I have been just exploring various applications of the i2c control of the er-301, and as it turns out I was using only first 4 outputs. When I wanted to add another stream of CV with (for example)


I was not getting anything to the ER. On output 5 nor any other higher output.
Then I found this in your description:

So, my question is: is it a temporary limitation of outputs? How do I use anything above output 4?
What am I not understanding here?

I am using: the SCALPHA (2.1.0: 205521A-ER301) version and the er-301-v0.3.07-unstable-48kHz



That is not how it works. You are taking a post from bpcmusic which was written during the highly volatile coordination and development phase. :wink:

Here is the definitive documentation: