Ah, I had a feeling you might need more! I think I have just the thing to help! It's the windows application that came with it, it's basically a virtual PG-200. I imagine it should be fairly easy to capture the output of the application. Would you like me to send you the app or is there something in particular you need me to attempt to find?

-Jordan

--- In kiwitechnics@yahoogroups.com , Kiwitechnics <yahoogroups@...> wrote:
>
> Certainly and that is a good idea. Unfortunately the midi documentation
> isn't good enough to create a patch from. In addition to the CC numbers
> for each variable parameter I would need the valid data ranges and for
> switches I would need the setting corresponding to the switch position
> for every valid position. I could make educated guesses but I would
> prefer detailed data. If you are able to capture the exact midiCC output
> for every control that would be a big help.
>
> The mod you did can be left as it is. It will not effect midi operation
> in any way.
>
> MH
>
> On 23/03/2013 12:27 p.m., lx_xero wrote:
> >
> > Since pg-200 support is going away, do you think it would be possible
> > to support this mks-30 upgrade?
> >
> > http://analog.no/cms/index.php/mks-30-midi-upgrade
> >
> > I think all the midi specs are on the page, but I have them in text
> > file format as well if need be. It has full control via midi CC's and
> > supports sysex patch dumping and all that as well. I've actually been
> > meaning to ask you about that, as using the pg-200 cable is pretty
> > inconvenient when my upgraded mks-30 can do midi CCs anyway!
> >
> > Fortunately I think most people could do without PG-800 support,
> > seeing as the Colin Fraser upgrade fixes the JX-10 up enough not to
> > need it, and the mks-70 just needs a firmware update if it's out of
> > date...not a huge deal! I know I can do without, I upgraded my mks-70
> > long ago and never even thought to use pg-800 mode.
> >
> > Also curious about that mod I did a while ago to make the pg-200 work
> > in my old SN (#006) PE...Is that no longer required? Should it be
> > undone? Or is it safe to just leave it?
> >
> > -Jordan
> >
> > --- In kiwitechnics@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:kiwitechnics%40yahoogroups.com>, "kiwitechnics"
> > <yahoogroups@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Patch Editor v5.1 is finally ready for release. This has been a
> > complex upgrade with large areas of code rewritten. Controls are now
> > much smoother and the pot jitter locking is now much improved and
> > invisible to operation.
> > >
> > > Important note - If you are using the PE on the PG-200 or PG-800
> > patches do not upgrade past version 5.0. The PG-200 & PG-800 have been
> > removed in all releases past 5.0 for technical reasons to do with
> > signal timing difficulties.
> > >
> > > This has also freed up memory for future tables and enhancements.
> > >
> > > The upgrade has been posted to the files section.
> > >
> > > MH
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Kind Regards
> Murray
> info@...
> www.kiwitechnics.com
>