Do someone want to speak about a possible editor?

totally not !
this was not the case !!!

NO please, don’t speak about editors…you satanic and blasphemic !

1 Like


ok, I’ll bite, what do you want to say about editors?

what specifically would you want an editor to do?
(I assume you mean running on a desktop/computer?)

here is my take:
(I have actually looked at this before, as a developer Im always curiosity about possibilities!)

midi data

the midi data is already editable in a DAW that support midi type 1 files.
this was improved for v3.0, but I’ll be honest Ive not really dug into this much since the release. but what i did try worked really well
I personally would not be interested in creating a midi editor, its quite a task, and DAWs already do it a lot better than some ‘knocked up’ editor would do.


sure this is possible, but this is pretty easy with a plain text editor already, cant see much advantage…

project parameters/track setup

ok, so these exist in a plain text file called core.pyr
its contents is pretty simple to parse, pretty simple name/value pair stuff.
the difficulties/time consuming stuff are

handling different OS versions…

id not even touch this, as its a minefield of compatibility issues, and lots of code to handle alternative versions.

determine all the keys, and what they are used for…

the main ones for settings, track, patterns are pretty simple, but some you need to use the ‘feature’ to see (e.g. custom chords) - so thats research.
its not too problematic though, since as long as you leave ‘unknown’ keys untouched when you write the file, then the editor can be used just for whats it does support.

what key values mean?

so all key values are numeric, so in many cases the meaning is pretty obvious e.g. TR>01_Channel:0 means track 1is using midi channel 1… BUT often the values are enumerations, which are dependent on a couple of things


this means the 2nd fx slot on track 2 is a randomiser, (FX2:6) , set to octave (P01:1) with rand- = 53% (68/127) , rand+ =100% ( 127/127) … P05 is irrelevant here as randomiser doesn’t use it.

so this is the difficult one , for an editor you’d need to go thru each option and one by one decode them.

this is made much more time consuming since to do this you need to:
a) go to pyramid, set up a track to ‘research’ options, save project
b) unmount card, mount on pc
c) open up in editor, review changes
then repeat this for every combination…

its very possible, but just quite time consuming


if/when squarp released a new version of the OS, you would have to review it all again, since the file format is ‘private’ they are at liberty to change it. so it could create a little or alot of work to update it to a new OS.
ok, I think PyraOS now pretty much ‘finished’, so likely to be only small options for tinkering now.

so thats pretty much a summary of what would need to be done/viability.

its possible, but quite a bit of work…

so lets talk about why?

what would doing this actually get me?

I cant really see it helps much… the UI on the Pyramid I think is actually really good.

also I think popping out the SD card to have to edit this stuff, is a lot of effort for no huge gain, so its not a great workflow - lets be clear here, you cant ‘add functionality’ to the Pyramid by doing any of this.

I think the exception to this is editing midi data…
if you have a large number of complex tracks, then editing on a high quality daw is going to be much easier, they often have a lot of sophisticated tools for editing, and of course you have a much bigger screen :slight_smile:
but this is already possible by just editing the midi file, you dont need an editor!?

what do you think an pyramid editor is? what would it do for you?

so i don’t really see it as blasphemous, but im not sure what you are hoping to achieve!

off topic…

if I didnt want an editor… why did i previously research the core.pyr file?

well, as stated above I’m curious, but also because it reveals quite a bit about how the pyramid structures things internally, and how it works… and in particular I was interested in what data was stored per patterns vs per track
I was also vaguely interested in what might happen if I created pattern alternatives in a daw, and saved as midi type 1, how could I make these available on the pyramid.

really really off-topic… blue sky, never going to happen!

so amusingly, I can see a much better reason for understanding the Pyramid files.
to create software that could play back pyramid projects on your desktop/raspberry pi…

this could be kind of fun, you could develop the project on pyramid hardware then move it over to somewhere else to ‘play it back’, by interpreting all the settings you’d be able make it playback pretty convincingly.
(ok, you’d have to either reimplement the midi fx, or interpret as midi vst parameters, not easy, but not impossible)

Ive no intention of doing this, way too many other projects, rather it just occurred to me when I was wondering why you’d want a desktop to be able to understand the Pyramid project :slight_smile:


No. Not at all.

wow … really perfectly centered points

ok give me some time for a useful answer …


here I am again !

Yes , first. Meaning of the Editor:

a desktio like there are many , like we use to have to manage complex synthesizers, Non less… even .
Even motas 6 got an editor… but ok we talking about midi not sound. What changes really?

We got fair easy to program sequencer.
It just become complex when we start becoming musical.
ON Pyramid , lack of imagination and experience in music is paid heavily .
So here I am learning more and more and fun start to begin…but!
In the moment projects start to become heavy, complex and full of parameters, and tracks, the managing and the arranging start to become quite an issue.
Moving all sequences here and there, tracks arranged fast , cut, up and down , listen how does it sounds, again changing, attaching, volume controlling making crossfading… I THINK all this is just really too tedious :slight_smile:

1 to learn on board keeps an enormous time
2 to effectively managing all things in a bigger view, when project is almost done, is frustrating


Point 1:
Pyramid can be difficult to get in all its parameters, a bit also because of learning the buttons , but mostly because of the screen and how we visualize thing between screen , buttons and imagination…
I am sure that screening better on a Editor would let us learn much more fast all things inside … and it can be interactive when learning!

point 2:
_______I am sure an editor could replicate the exact view of what Pyramid does, no more no less…
Not asking to make on editor which does things pyramid can’t do, but just basically doing it faster, in blocks…

Create a midi editor is a task , but of course it is … someone can start trying out one day… NObody told should be Squarp, but of course it would be nice by them

well cool

yes , this is a point ! Of course one has to take in account that can’t exist an editor each singular update… but for this we should n’t be on minor updates as before…

if is not possible to make it straight from the pyramid to the PC/iPAd then for me has no value at all… of course this editor shoudl prevent unmounting cards

same thing as for “the key values mean”

I would like someone busy in to that for sure… if is not you, who?

An Arranger Editor.

I agree, it’d be a really awkward workflow to keep ejecting the sdcard.
but this is currently not possible, and would require squarp to introduce a whole communication layer to communicate between pc/ipad and pyramid over usb.

even the current pyramidi implementation is pretty limited,
so seems highly unlikely they would be interested in going to the effort of full remote control/querying over usb.

1 Like

I don’t add anything else. Updates are almost finished… if there will be a 4.0 it would be a miracle
So we’re done, and now what?

I think there is no excuse to that.
As I have no excuse to be damn slow in getting CCs/sysex programming and Chords/hamonics;
every obmision on this theme it will be a minor point for whom is responsable of limitations.

make music :wink:


I do
I will not stop

I think there is some irony in the fact that first folks (not necessarily OP) want to go DAWless and now need to go back to the big screen to edit.

But I get your point. I too felt frustration when I wanted to rearrange a complex project. Especially the UNDO and COPY/PASTE workflow could be better. Here’s where I could see advantage in some sort of editor. I’d especially be interested in inter-project copy/pasting.

I often just fire up a blank project and jam away. When I want to incorporate my results into my main performance project I either have to fiddle with the midi on SD card file system level or recreate it, which really sucks. I would love a way of consolidating two projects.


ye i agree about the annoying part of getting sequences between projects, but you can change projects with the pyramid running, so why not split songs into different projects? or you can just use a daw as “midi editor” just record the midi into your daw via usb, change project on pyramid and send the midi back to the pyramid, record it where you want it, you will get rid of the hassle with the sd card.

to be honest, an pc editor for the pyramid is very…very unlikely in my opinion.

1 Like

This. So i keep copying, renaming and pasting stuff, just because i want to reuse sequences, mostly drums so i can mess with it in a different project. Having said that, i’m glad that i’ts possible at all, now i can copy type 1 midi without scratching my head…

1 Like

Just a quick side note: the new and reworked feature of sending clock while loading still doesn’t work for me. I’m getting dropouts, unusable for me.


Note on note .

Me too…
and also… NOt working the copy/paste sequence. Not in this update, not in the previous one… It just does copy other on/off states…


well , no too bad for to be an Off topic/ Tabù argument…

Really, no too bad. :slight_smile:

these numbers show a different reality from the one most of us keep believing on.

Reality says that all pieces of hardwares could have today (for a question of adaption) a dedicated editor.

NObody says we should use editors in a live environment. I damn hate see computers on desktops when playing .

dedicated hardwares are not only funny, but also a respectful way to approach to music, and mostly to public.

I am the first who avoid pcs… But this is not funny @thetechnobear . This is how it is.

I avoided the editor for blofeld almost two years, and now since I have a feel much better cus thanks to it I know my
blofeld 4 times more than before…

I use a BCR controller of a friend to can play it…
and when really playing I don’t use any of the editors BCR and BLOFELD offer, just hardwares.
So, I don’t see the “need” to bring editors on stages.

Sincerelly, yours

you are right, thought it was fixed by now. kinda worthless in its current state :frowning:

1 Like

btw I think that that a “midi librarian” is more plausible than a full editor. just for moving midi patterns between projects. i guess the issue is that you cant access the sd card va usb.

1 Like

We need more than that.

One of the things I have attention on recently is the Pattern duplication .
Let’s say I change one note. Now this patterns is not the same. Let’s say I want it shorter. I do it and now is not the same anymore. So, if I change pattern 1 in sequence 1, if this pattern is also present and active in all the sequnces it will change in all the sequences, not only in the one I am working on at the moment.
if we want a little variation, no matter what, we need to make a new pattern.
But to visualize little details in a storm of patterns , fortunally :wink: in few sequences, it is quite confusing e retarding.
If I modify one pattern, the same pattern all over the sequences is gonna change, regardless the need or the use I do of this pattern in the sequence I am working on.
I need to can go fast on this
there are patterns which are really similar to each other and for that reason I need to visualize them WHEN EDITING THE GROSS !

I don’t say it is more right to have a n editor,… I just think that pyramid is not able to be fully standalone in the today standards, as they promised .
well never mind no? what s the problem to admit it? …
but please !!! can I please manage my tracks without moving the card in and out so much as I do today?