Yamaha AN1x firmware update seeking

[teevee]

I made copy of the firmware from my Yamaha VL-70m, which used a OTP chip branded Yamaha. I read-off as 27C160 and as 4 bank, if I only had read one side, then I would only have 50 % of the firmware as backup.

I used a cheap eprom burner called “MiniPro TL866” and this is not able to automatically switch bank, this have to be done manually with settings.

Interesting.

I don't know this for sure, but it could be a high and low byte image duplicated once to fill a double-sized EPROM.

Are you the original owner? Do you have a picture of the EPROM in question?

I`m not owner of Yamaha An1X, i´m just interested in this topic. I would just like to know if the image is duplicated on both banks for the knowledge

Note:
I helped a friend recently with updating his Yamaha EX-5 to the newest OS. It was 4 chips, where I had to duplicate same content on both banks for each 27C800.

[Rasputin]

I made copy of the firmware from my Yamaha VL-70m, which used a OTP chip branded Yamaha. I read-off as 27C160 and as 4 bank, if I only had read one side, then I would only have 50 % of the firmware as backup.

I used a cheap eprom burner called “MiniPro TL866” and this is not able to automatically switch bank, this have to be done manually with settings.

I`m not owner of Yamaha An1X, i´m just interested in this topic. I would just like to know if the image is duplicated on both banks for the knowledge

I meant the VL-70m. Because I would like to see a picture of the EPROM in question. I would like to find out the checksum (which is usually printed on the label) among other things. If someone had replaced the stock EPROM in your VL-70m then that would explain why banks were duplicated.

Most stock EPROMs are the capacity they are intended to be, it's usually people burning their own that end up with oversized EPROMs that need filler data, so I'd suspect this to be the case here.

As for your question: I'll spell it out a little more for you. You can check the size of the AN1x EPROM by downloading it. Now look in the service manual for the AN1x. IC2 (which is the ROM) is specified as 8M. This should tell you everything you need to know.

[ʝɵʝɵ]

Has anyone else noticed that the AN1x boots up considerably slower with the 1.04 OS compared to 1.02? Each of the individual texts of the welcome message appears to stay on-screen for a bit longer. I am considering reverting to 1.02 because the the changes this version brings aren't important enough for me compared to being able to start a quick jam (as a funny coincidence, after upgrading to 1.04 I do get a low battery warning... just in time!). I wasn't aware of the changelog before purchasing the upgraded ROM, if I had known this I would probably not have done it.

If anyone still wants to upgrade to 1.04, I can probably sell my EPROM upgrade to you, let me know.

[Yekuku]

Hi Jojo,
could it be that the seller that you bought the eprom from, used a slower chip ?
It has been more than 15 years that I have updated mine, I dont remember if it was booting faster.

[ʝɵʝɵ]

I don't really know if that would work, as I'm sure that a lot of the code highly depends on being able to be executed at a certain speed. But we can compare: With version 1.04, the startup sequence from pressing the power button to seeing the currently selected patch on display is almost exactly 9 seconds for me. How long does it take for you?

[ʝɵʝɵ]

Update: I reverted back to my previous 1.01 (not 1.02 as I thought) EPROM, and startup time is back to about 3.5 seconds.

[Yekuku]

Unfortunately the An1x is not in my current setup, so I cant test this right now.
Hopefully in a few weeks, I will let you know.

[Tekhed66]

Update: I reverted back to my previous 1.01 (not 1.02 as I thought) EPROM, and startup time is back to about 3.5 seconds.

I'm running v1.02 and the startup time from power on to patch name display is about 8.5 seconds (less than 9 sec, more than 8 sec)

ponderous :-/

[ʝɵʝɵ]

Wow, so I guess version 1.01 is the outlier, not version 1.04? It really makes me wonder - increasing the startup time by 2.5x isn't something that should go unnoticed during testing, and I cannot quite imagine what important things the synth would be doing during startup that take so much longer compared to older versions. Does anyone know if there's an 1.02 changelog available somewhere?