There are some nice features on it - and I think the lesson to be learned here is that an analog filter complements the 8 bit-ness quite well. Others have already noticed this for the WTPA:
Neat. I do like some of those features, like being able to mess with each bit independently. So WTPA will always be a digital sampler, with pretty much anything else you can do in firmware. As long as it's a kit, the filter part would be a pain, since it would require different supplies, a bigger board, a lot more parts, etc etc.
Someday I'll make some biz that isn't a kit, and that may have the whole kitchen sink, but with WTPA, I want to keep it nice and focused.
One thing about that article that was a huge bummer (to me anyway) was hearing the dude talk about the size of the operation. Him, another engineer, a design firm, contractors... Yikes. He handled getting it out there, which is awesome, and better than me in a lot of ways, but all that stuff scares me. I like just being a weirdo with a workbench. But it does make me slow. Best, TB
As I understand it, it means that instead of just dropping off the LSbs in order, you could, say, drop out bit 4 and invert bit 6. I had sketched something like this up a long time ago but flaked on it. It's a cool idea. Mostly I bet it sounds like kind of generic digital distortion, but it's tweaky and I like that. There's probably magic in there for the patient.
Frankly, the only thing the WTPA needs in order to "compete" with this is a case...and analog filter...and EFX...but that's not what the WTPA is about. The "Pass the Courvoisier WTPA"? That's a different story. To some, the features may seem to overlap (with the OTO device), but that's where some proper marketing should be applied. No, this ain't just some bit-reduction effect, it's a real 8-bit sampler! And it has cool effects! And it has start/end/loop adjustment (someday...)!
With regards to the individual-bit-state-switching-thing: you could do this in the firmware, right, Todd? The state of the bit could probably be controlled by midi CC#s. For instance, midi CC# 33 could control bit #1, CC#34, bit #2, and so on... Another interesting thing I found in this article was that the guy said that the delay effect was done on the PIC. That's possibly another thing to consider for the "Ballin'" version of the WTPA.
I guess my point is that the OTO device isn't that special, but one could see how the WTPA and it could be in competition.
The delay effect is an angel I wrestled with when designing WTPA. I had a big old chip on my shoulder about distinguishing WTPA from a guitar pedal, and I kind of hate delay, so I didn't include it. I've had to code delay routines about a million times for toys, so it would totally be no biggie to add even to the current WTPA. It's kindof stupid and ass-backwards not to, really.
The next WTPA will have an optional enclosure, and you'll be able to buy it fully assembled. This should "change the game" as they say. It'll probably be pretty expensive too, although it'll still be open source and the kit form will always be available.
As far as the bit-switching, I was thinking this: The new WTPA will have 8 buttons instead of six (I hate the three-combo keystroke thing currently) so each button could correspond to a bit, sort of like in the OTO. I keep trying to think of a way to make the CCs such that CC#33 could control the "INVERT" mask for the bits, CC#34 could control the "DROP" mask and CC#35 could control the "NORMAL" mask, because I think it'd be cool to sweep a knob or a fader through all those options, but there really doesn't seem to be a way to do it for all 8 bits, since the value in a MIDI message is a 7 bit number. So, @glitched I think your way might make the most sense.
Hmm.... Perhaps while we were at it, the BIT_CONTROL CCs could also control the output combinations in a bitwise way -- instead of XORing the entire byte from BANKA and BANKB you could pick the bits you wanted to XOR or AND or whatever. This might be cool.
Re: "I've had to code delay routines about a million times for toys, so it would totally be no biggie to add even to the current WTPA. It's kindof stupid and ass-backwards not to, really." uhm Todd, ah, so, uhm, your actually, uhm, really, really good at writing delay code, correct? hmm, I can see why you don't want to put any in, ah, the design of, dare I say, something you really love? ..... sealion
re other stuff, so sweep every even bit and option sweep every odd bit?