LAPC-I Rev 0.5?

[Cloudschatze]

I'll have to double check but I am almost postitive they DO NOT differ.

No, there are two distinct ASSY numbers, suggesting at least an 01 revision:

7542030000
7542030001

The problem is that the service notes don't address the latter, so unless an applicable service bulletin becomes available, any information regarding the change(s) is guesswork. As such, I wouldn't want to be quoted on it.

With this in mind, the only apparent hardware change not found in the 00 ASSY is switch to the soldered, 1.02 MASK ROM.

[Shadow Lord]

Like i said don't quote me on it  .

I will check when I get home regarding the other board. Now, I am not sure exactly what you are referring to when you say the only change is the Mask ROM. Are you saying between 00 and 01, or something else?

[Cloudschatze]

Are you saying between 00 and 01, or something else?

Yep, between 00 and 01. I'm basically assuming that there are no 00 boards with a soldered MASK ROM.

[Shadow Lord]

Are you saying between 00 and 01, or something else?

Yep, between 00 and 01. I'm basically assuming that there are no 00 boards with a soldered MASK ROM.

I'd say that is probably true (w/o any official word from Roland). But there are other changes as well some minor (change at C66) and some possibly important (e.g. IRQ jumpers). Do you know of any 00 boards w/ IRQ jumpers? I will check on my socketed ROM board w/ the shielded OPAMP to see what the ASS number is.

[Mau1wurf1977]

The two documents at the bottom, being Roland Service Notes, are actually the source all of the technical information. Hence, it is properly sourced.

Yes I saw these references, but when you click on it you aren't taken to these notes... I was hoping they would actually point to the actual documents...

[Cloudschatze]

Do you know of any 00 boards w/ IRQ jumpers?

It's not mentioned in the (00) service manual, including the parts list. Without knowing when it was added, it's possible that this change also occurred with the 01 revision. I guess I'd be curious to know if there are 00 boards with the header, as well as 01 boards without.


So, don't quote this (because the 7542030001 stuff is still speculation)...


LAPC-I Change Information

ASSY 7542030000

ZA31200 - UP: OP-Amp IC21 has been covered with a shield
ZA84200 - UP: Ceramic disc capacitor C66 changed to axial-type


ASSY 7542030001 (Rev. 01)

ZA9xxxx - UP: Socketed EPROM IC3 (v 1.0.0) replaced with soldered MASK ROM (v 1.0.2)
ZAxxxxx - UP: IRQ selection pin header installed at J01 - J06

The two documents at the bottom, being Roland Service Notes, are actually the source all of the technical information. Hence, it is properly sourced.

Yes I saw these references, but when you click on it you aren't taken to these notes... I was hoping they would actually point to the actual documents...

Roland still sells printed copies of the scanned originals, so I'm not sure that they can be made freely available (without permission). This doesn't seem to deter the guys on eBay selling PDF scans, however...

[NewRisingSUn]

Yes I saw these references, but when you click on it you aren't taken to these notes... I was hoping they would actually point to the actual documents...

Why would you expect such a thing? If that were the requirement, no print publication would ever count as a source (shakes head).

As for the metal shielding, maybe it was included on all cards but just fell off, or was removed by the owners for some reason?

As for the jumpers, what is there in their place on cards that don't have them?

[Shadow Lord]

As for the metal shielding, maybe it was included on all cards but just fell off, or was removed by the owners for some reason?

As for the jumpers, what is there in their place on cards that don't have them?

No, the cards with the metal shielding have an actual solder point in the PCB to anchor the shield. As for the jumpers, they are blank. I.E. the solder points are there but there is no jumpers placed in them and IRQ 2 is permanently shorted.

[Mau1wurf1977]

Why would you expect such a thing? If that were the requirement, no print publication would ever count as a source (shakes head).

Why? Oh come on what a disappointing statement...

References of printed publications point to a publisher, a newspaper, a google books page, an amazon store page, a ISSN number, something where one can go to actually read up on it...

And because it isn't a requirement, doesn't mean we should stop trying to achieve a higher standard.

You come across as someone with huge chip on your shoulder. Nobody is trying to take away anything of the work you have done. We just like to add credibility and popper references that check out.

Roland still sells printed copies of the scanned originals, so I'm not sure that they can be made freely available (without permission). This doesn't seem to deter the guys on eBay selling PDF scans, however...

Do you have a link maybe? Then I / we can update the reference.

[Cloudschatze]

And because it isn't a requirement, doesn't mean we should stop trying to achieve a higher standard.

Speaking of which, the inline citations added to the MT-32 article aren't necessary, as defined by the citation guidelines.

Roland still sells printed copies of the scanned originals, so I'm not sure that they can be made freely available (without permission). This doesn't seem to deter the guys on eBay selling PDF scans, however...

Do you have a link maybe? Then I / we can update the reference.

A link to what?

[Mau1wurf1977]

You said Roland sells these documents. Is there a link which we can use for the References.

[NewRisingSUn]

References of printed publications point to a publisher, a newspaper, a google books page, an amazon store page, a ISSN number, something where one can go to actually read up on it...

The publisher of the service notes is Roland, they're not available on Google books, have no ISSN number, and are not available on Amazon. But I'll tell you what: you upload the scanned service notes to your webserver, I'll modify the article to link to the PDFs on your server.

We just like to add credibility and proper references that check out.

But you haven't pointed out any lack of credibility or proper references. You have merely complained that the references aren't clickable; in other words, you are requiring that the article should not only cite its sources, but supply them. It's this "if it ain't online, it doesn't exist" attitude among the younger generation that I find quite infuriating. If you think that's having a "huge chip on my shoulder", so be it.

[Mau1wurf1977]

One of my best lecturers told us something unforgettable during our first class. He told us the first thing he will do when looking at our work is check the references. If there aren't several reverences per page he will fail us right away. Because research isn't about your opinion but about facts and drawing conclusions from them...

You have whole page with tons of really exciting information. It likely took you guys lots of time to find out all these little differences. But without references these are just personal opinions, not facts.

I do not believe you at all, when you say that the article is based on these two references. They are cited as being from 1988, yet there is information in this article from the early 90s with no references whatsoever...

Without a single inline citation in the whole article, how one earth can you stand there and claim that the article is well references?

I have no interest in hosting these documents, but I would like to read up on them and there is no information telling me where to get them...

[Cloudschatze]

But without references these are just personal opinions, not facts.

Ah, this would be an example of that "if it ain't online, it doesn't exist" mentality that NewRisingSun mentioned...  

[Mau1wurf1977]

Ah, this would be an example of that "if it ain't online, it doesn't exist" mentality that NewRisingSun mentioned...

What's with all the assumptions? There was no internet in the late 80s, so these documents where obviously printed...

You mentioned Roland sells them. I asked you already, and I am asking again. Where does one go or turn to, to obtain these documents, if they want to do further reading...

And what about the missing references from after 1988? Care to comment on these?

[Cloudschatze]

You mentioned Roland sells them. I asked you already, and I am asking again. Where does one go or turn to, to obtain these documents, if they want to do further reading...

They can be purchased directly from Roland - just call the contact number on their website.

And what about the missing references from after 1988? Care to comment on these?

Not really. This conversation is tiring and needlessly antagonistic. Feel free to continue it on the MT-32 Wikipedia Talk page, in fact.

[Mau1wurf1977]

Oh well... Moving on...

Got some soundcards today, that will keep me busy

[Mau1wurf1977]

I got the service notes today. Roland Australia was kind enough to help me out and there was no charge.

They refer to MT-32 (Old) and MT-32 (New) and also MT-32 (without headphones) and MT-32 (with headphones).

I didn't find any reference to "generations" or a "third generation" so I rearranged the wikipedia article a little.

I split up these three generations into two main areas:

MT-32 (with MT-32 (Old) and MT-32 (New)

and

MT-32 compatible models (with all the CMs)