It's all about the Software

Is it possible ( pretty please) to add the facility to cycle through the filters with a MIDI device as defined in the current mode selection?

As I posted on the IO forum, I find the incremental change of 50hz much too low when in BFM mode.. what would be handy is the ability to cycle up/down through the filter sizes I've defined in the filter definitions, for example I've defined 40/60/80/100/120/125/140/150 Khz filters.

The beauty of MIDI is that I can do Console functions without having to give Console focus.

TIA..

Jim.

Simon: Let me add a resounding "me too!" to G0OFE's request for a filter up/down function in the MIDI interface. Additionally, I would like an enhancement to the Mode selection. Right now, the mode function cycles through all modes, even the "invisible" ones not displayed. And the order they are in makes no sense to me, and doesn't correspond to what's displayed on the screen. It would be great to be able to put the mode buttons in whatever order we choose, and only cycle through those currently displayed. That way, we could place related modes together. Turning a controller knob would cycle up or down between modes, matching how we see them on the screen. So I could have (for example) onscreen buttons for AM, SAM, NFM, WFM, CW, LSB, USB, that display on the screen in that order, and a controller knob that cycles them up and down in that same order. If I want to add another seldom-used mode later, I just add it at the end of the list.

Ideally, I'd like to also be able to map Note-On buttons on my MIDI controller directly to specific modes or filters--Mode(1), Mode(2)... Mode(9) etc., corresponding to the order of the mode and filter buttons as displayed on the screen. But what's described in the previous paragraph would work well, too.

It would also be very nice to have keyboard shortcuts for the various ribbons. In other words, be able to type something like Alt-H for Home, Alt-V for View, and so forth. And maybe a few shortcuts for often-used functions like "Stop and Start the current receiver."

My overall desire is to have discrete controls for the most often-used functions, so mousing around can be limited to details and things we don't do nearly as often. You've designed a great GUI, but some of us prefer to turn knobs or press keys and buttons for things we do all the time.

One basic problem is it appears SDRC is not well designed to be remotely controlled, not that I can think of how to properly design it for that. SDRC does too much. Defining an interface to work with it in all its respects would be a real killer of a job.

Making the mappings you want might be possible within the ribbon framework. But, darned if I know how I'd go about it if it is not already there. I found a way into the Microsoft Foundation Classes control options for things like ctl-alt-c. alt-d, or whatever you want. Alas, it only works on the elements within the Home ribbon with no way to simply select it. So I suspect for something so simple seeming it would be (cough) "interesting" as in torturous to implement in any globally sensible way.

{^_^}

MIDI isn't a new interface. It's just an alternative way to give commands to an existing interface.
That's why it's extremely useful with Pluto and similar devices (for which I recommend the RIT) that don't have their own commands like a radio.

I2OIM

jdow wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 8:33 am One basic problem is it appears SDRC is not well designed to be remotely controlled, not that I can think of how to properly design it for that. SDRC does too much. Defining an interface to work with it in all its respects would be a real killer of a job.

Making the mappings you want might be possible within the ribbon framework. But, darned if I know how I'd go about it if it is not already there. I found a way into the Microsoft Foundation Classes control options for things like ctl-alt-c. alt-d, or whatever you want. Alas, it only works on the elements within the Home ribbon with no way to simply select it. So I suspect for something so simple seeming it would be (cough) "interesting" as in torturous to implement in any globally sensible way.

{^_^}