5 ms·

The fun thing was the Roland Sync. You could sync up all the TB-303, TB-909 and all the others with a 5-pole DIN cable. The sync was badly implemented. It lagge

• Applejinx 7mo ago
  This I don't understand. DINsync is raw trigger outputs/inputs like you'd have in a modular synth, in contrast to MIDI that has to send serial messages over a 1k data bus. Perhaps this take has something to do with calling a five-pin DIN plug '5-pole'? Something's wrong and backwards here. Again, I guess this is where we are now? I remember reality, but here we are.
  • svantana 7mo ago
    No, this is different from pure CV. Each device has its own (digital) sequencer that can synchronize with others using pulse trains over DIN cable. Lots of places where latency and instability can occur! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_sync https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_sync
  • deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
  • windowliker 7mo ago
    DIN sync is not trigger based, it's a full clock protocol invented by Roland that has various different states. The fact is that not all DIN sync capable machines implement it the correct way, leading to slight differences in synchronisation, even between devices made by Roland.
    • _annum 7mo ago
      Interesting, I'd be curious to read a technical analysis of the differences. DIN provides by far the tightest sync we've ever seen in hardware, so I question the idea that lag and latency are a defining feature of the protocol.
• squigg 7mo ago
  Owner of all (ALL!!) the classic Roland x0x boxes here, which are connected together using DIN Sync - the sync was not badly implemented at all - they sync together perfectly. The sequencers in each of the machines have a bit of nuance, which is where that famous groove comes from! You might be confusing this with the sometimes hilarious midi timing of the 909 and 707.
• dylan604 7mo ago
  > 5-pole DIN cable. The sync was badly implemented. It lagged, it had latency. Sounds like you are describing MIDI