RC-300 Feature Requests

Started by Hopkins, May 20, 2012, 05:26:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hopkins

Looks great!  What is the reason for offsetting the rear-stays and the top tube?  Is it just a design thing or is there some performance reason?  (Blimey, this thread has gone OT!)

Hopkins

Well, back on topic, I'm thinking about adding to the list the things I raised in the post about drum machines, i.e. more control over MIDI start and stop messages, including the ability to send "start" when triggering a count-in bar, and not to send a "stop" when the loops end.  Does anyone here who uses MIDI to communicate with a drum machine or some other instrument have any comments or suggestions?  I have resorted to having the RC-300 rhythm track really low in the mix so I can hear it count me in, but this relies on me never having "quiet bits" in the music!

Hopkins

Added the "third track floating" unexpected behaviour and MIDI issues to the post.

Threeleggedyoyo

I've used the RC-50 extensively and know exactly what features I'd like to see implemented. I know many of these may have been implemented with the RC-300 already (I'd be interested to know which ones) but even then there are still things I'm pretty sure the 300 doesn't do. Moreover, the 300 has some unfortunate steps backward. Here's my list.


1) Seamless record. IE eliminate the "first loop" glitch.

No brainer here. I believe the 300 took care of this already. Same goes for Rec ----> overdub.

2) More outputs with the ability to map specific inputs/outputs.

As it stands with the 50, you can map Phrases to various outputs. This is great if you are using the pedal in Multi Mode. However, it is somewhat lacking if you are using it in Single. It would be nice if you could tell it to play anything recorded from a certain input only through a certain output. For example, stuff from the mic goes out of one output that goes to a PA, and only out of that output. Meanwhile the input for a bass could go to a bass amp, etc. This isn't a huge issue for me personally, but it would be nice.

You do have some flexibility to do this with the stereo options, but it would be better if you could just map it out the way you currently can with Phrases.

Moreover I'd really like to see the Headphones jack to be independent of the Main. I'd like to have the option to play a drum track only through the headphones so that I can have a click track to play to that the audience doesn't here. Right now the only workaround for this is to send the click track through the SUB and send nothing else at all through it.

3) Better slave ability.

Right now the unit makes a good master, but isn't the happiest MIDI slave. Not a big issue for me, but potentially troublesome.

4) The ability to go straight into overdub when switching phrases in Single Mode.

Right now if you indicate to go from Phrase 1 to Phrase 2, it will go straight into recording. This is good. But if you return to Phrase 1, and want to jump back to Phrase 2 again, there is no way to go immediately into Overdub mode upon hitting Phrase 2.

Part of this is that for whatever reason, as soon as one indicates that they want to switch phrases (even if it does not do so until LOOP END, if you've set it that way) it will cancel any current Overdub. IE as soon as you hit Phrase 2 whatever phrase you are on reverts to PLAY mode. This is annoying if you want to record an overdub layer up until the last moment of Phrase 1 but don't want to miss the jump to Phrase 2. There's no reason for this to be there.

This same quirk makes it very difficult to go straight into overdubbing when you switch to another Phrase with a previously recorded line. You have to do your best to hit the Overdub button as soon as possible after the switch, but it's difficult to get it perfect.

The solution is pretty simple. If you are overdubbing on Phrase 1 and hit Phrase 2 while in Loop End mode, it should just keep overdubbing until you get to Phrase 2, and then stop. For the option to go straight to overdub, you should just be able to tap the Phrase you're going to twice, thereby cycling it from "Play when current phrase ends" to "Overdub when current phrase ends."

5) Seamless Patch Switching. Right now you can't switch to a new Patch without interrupting the beat. Make it so you can. That would give you unlimited phrases to work with and would be awesome.

6) Expandable memory instead of on-board. This is less of an issue with the 300 having so much more memory. But why not have it be on a removeable drive of some kind that can be upgraded? This is how the JamMan does it. It's great. And if it were an SD card or something, you could just pop it straight into a computer instead of having to do a USB dump. A big deal? No. But it would be nice.

7) The ability to leave Loop Quantize on with the Drum machine off.

Why this option does not already exist is baffling.

Right now the 50 has a "feature" that will attempt to detect your BPM based on the length of the phrase if you have the drum machine off. Ok, that's not so bad.

But the terrible thing about this is that even if you specify a tempo with the Tap Tempo before you record, IT STILL DOES THIS. In other words, you just TOLD it what the tempo was, but then it told YOU "uh, no."

There's no reason for this feature to HAVE to be there whenever the click track is turned down.

There's no reason for the Loop Quantize to not be available whenever the click track is turned down.

Current fixes include setting the drum machine volume to "1" and hoping nobody notices, or routing the drum machine track to the SUB output with nothing else there. This way it's there but not audible. But why neuter half my outputs just to create an option which really should exist already?

8) The ability to set loop longevity.

Right now, all loops play indefinitely until stopped. It would be cool if you could specify how many times a loop should be performed. Some people like to have the layers of the stack progressively come out of the bottom for this ever changing groove. I'm told there is some crazy way to make this happen with external equipment but I have no idea how. It would also be good if you could set the loop to either fade out of just disappear when it reaches its terminal repetition.

9) Go back to the Layout of the RC-50.

Some people might prefer the stop button layout of the RC-300, but to me it seems like a huge step backwards. Tap tempo and Undo are no longer foot buttons you can reach. Lame. Yes, you can undo by holding down "Rec" for two seconds, but that is not very easy to get to stop right when you want it to. This takes away the functionality of the undo button for when you want to add a temporary addition to a loop and then stop it at a specific time. It also eliminates the ability to undo work on a track while that track is not playing. These are enough to make me not want an RC-300 despite several improvements over the 50. Many of the songs I currently play on the 50 wouldn't work without these abilities.

10) Input "Thru" ability.

Right now, the looper will record anything and everything it hears, through any input, whenever you record. This is good if you want to record a vocal loop at the same time as a guitar loop, etc. It's bad if you want to record only your guitar but not your voice (unless you're happy never recording your voice).

There's a few workarounds to this. Mine is that my microphone is hooked up to an output switcher pedal. When I push a button it goes from going straight to my sound system to being routed through the Looper. This is a pretty good solution, but not a perfect one. It's bad because it means I need twice as many cables, and because things sound different going straight into my sound system than they do through the looper.

It would be nice if there were buttons associated with each input allowing you to easily set each input to "ON," "OFF," or "THRU." Even just ON and THRU would be ok, since we have volume controls for each input already.

11) The ability to send a BPM signal without recording.

The BPM START signal is tied to pressing record. It would be nice if you could send that signal without recording. I use a keyboard that pulses the sound based on the BPM information it gets from the looper through MIDI. But if I want to play something at the start of a song before I hit record, and have it be at that same tempo, I can't. Same goes for external drum machines.

We know this is possible because the internal drum machine on the looper already works this way. It has its own start button, and when you hit Record, it just starts again. Give us the ability to send this signal to other devices. This would also increase the functionality of the machine as a MIDI master even for those who aren't using its recording capabilities.

Hopkins

Hi Threeleggedyoyo, welcome to the forum!  That is a good list, and a couple of the items are already on the Feature Requests.  However, some are not and a couple of them I would like to test to see if I can work around them on the RC-300.  I will reply in more detail later, when it is not nearly 3am in the UK ;)

Regarding the physical layout, I'm inclined to suggest that it will never suit everyone.  I happen to like the RC-300 layout because it seems more geared towards composed performances, whereas I can see that the RC-50 may be better for improvisation.  Irrespective of this, the facility to add 4 other switches and make alternate assignments via the menus seems to be essential for anyone really trying to squeeze the most out of the unit.  I just have a saved search on eBay for the FS-5U which seem to command a daft premium second hand, but they are really nice switches...  Currently I have only 2!

Threeleggedyoyo

Thanks Hopkins! I have a two-person band built around just me and a drummer with this thing, so I'm really interested in every last thing it can and can't to. It's interesting writing songs around its abilities and limitations.

Yeah I figured some were mentioned but I wanted to chip in with what I wanted as a +1 if nothing else.

I'd be very interested to hear which of these are addressed with the RC-300. I've toyed with the idea of picking one up but I'm not sure if I will like it better or not. Looking forward to your response.

You mention external pedals - could you set one to be an immediate "undo" button like the one on the 50? How about tap tempo? Because that would eliminate my main concerns with the unit and might make me want one after all.

Regardless I still don't see the advantages of having separate "stop" buttons. This doesn't add much functionality. If you're in Single Mode (which I use 99% of the time), you never need to stop more than one Phrase at the same time anyway. Even in Multi mode, there is still the "all stop" button to stop all three. So the only thing you really gain is the ability to stop two at the same time if you stepped on both at the same time... I don't see anyone doing that though. What do you feel are the advantages of the new layout? Slightly less confusing, maybe, but less utilitarian IMO.


shawnb

#31
Welcome!!!!

Some specific notes. 
(1) Correct, it's fixed.
(2) Same as RC50 - Routing is good but not as flexible as you want.  You can send individual tracks or the INPUT or the RHYTHM exactly where you want them.  HOWEVER, you cannot route per input jack used (discreet input routing).  It's as if the 3 inputs are mixed together.   Headphone is not assignable as a discrete output.   
(3) See below...
(4) I dunno, I don't use Single mode a lot...   I THINK it behaves the same way as you describe below for the RC50, after a couple of quick tests. 
(5) Still an issue
(6) Correct, cannot expand memory
(7) Yep, addressed, see below...
(8) Correct, cannot specify longetivity   (yes that's a typo but I'm leaving it as-is!)
(9) No, you're stuck with the RC300 layout.   It saves some taps, that's why they did it (one tap to stop instead of two).  It's simpler.   
(10) No input 'Thru', interesting request!
(11) I believe this is addressed, see below...

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 06, 2012, 06:14:06 PM3) Better slave ability.

Right now the unit makes a good master, but isn't the happiest MIDI slave. Not a big issue for me, but potentially troublesome.
Recently I noticed a very interesting passage in the manual under Troubleshooting on page 41:
Can't synchronize two RC-300 units via MIDI?   
Are the assignment source "SYNC START/STOP" (p. 23) and assignment target set correctly?
If you want to use start/stop for synchronization, you must specify "ALL PLAY/STOP" or "TR1–3
PLAY/STOP" as the assignment target for the assignment source "SYNC START/STOP" on the slave
unit.


Hmmm...   So...  If you want to sync two RC300s, you need to setup ASSIGNs yourself to let it know what you want it to do upon receipt of Sync START/STOPs...  That's worth playing around with - with other gear.   I haven't attempted this yet, but this might be a clue to get it acting properly as a slave.   (If anyone tries it, please report back! ;))

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 06, 2012, 06:14:06 PM7) The ability to leave Loop Quantize on with the Drum machine off.

Why this option does not already exist is baffling.

Right now the 50 has a "feature" that will attempt to detect your BPM based on the length of the phrase if you have the drum machine off. Ok, that's not so bad.

But the terrible thing about this is that even if you specify a tempo with the Tap Tempo before you record, IT STILL DOES THIS. In other words, you just TOLD it what the tempo was, but then it told YOU "uh, no."

There's no reason for this feature to HAVE to be there whenever the click track is turned down.

There's no reason for the Loop Quantize to not be available whenever the click track is turned down.

Current fixes include setting the drum machine volume to "1" and hoping nobody notices, or routing the drum machine track to the SUB output with nothing else there. This way it's there but not audible. But why neuter half my outputs just to create an option which really should exist already?

The RC300 addresses this.  With Rhythm on & volume set to zero, I get the same behavior with Rhythm on & volume set non-zero - and under both circumstances, recording a new loop does NOT change the tempo of the RC300.   The tempo stays constant until a new tap tempo.   This is an area where the RC300 is much much cleaner than the RC50.   (Did you see my RC300 First Day Notes thread? https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=5240.0)

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 06, 2012, 06:14:06 PM11) The ability to send a BPM signal without recording.

The BPM START signal is tied to pressing record. It would be nice if you could send that signal without recording. I use a keyboard that pulses the sound based on the BPM information it gets from the looper through MIDI. But if I want to play something at the start of a song before I hit record, and have it be at that same tempo, I can't. Same goes for external drum machines.

We know this is possible because the internal drum machine on the looper already works this way. It has its own start button, and when you hit Record, it just starts again. Give us the ability to send this signal to other devices. This would also increase the functionality of the machine as a MIDI master even for those who aren't using its recording capabilities.

I believe the RC300 addresses this.   Whenever I tap the tempo, the RC300 sends the tempo (BPM) down the MIDI bus to my GR55 & VG99.   Whether or not I'm recording. 

Or do you mean MIDI START? 
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

Threeleggedyoyo

#32
Thanks shawn! Very helpful post.  :D

I didn't mean MIDI START, no. Right now it needs the MIDI START signal to send BPM at all, and the start signal is tied to the Rec/Play signal. So yes, what you said would solve the issue. That's good.

Glad to hear most of these issues are addressed with the 300.

By the way, looking at the manual, it would appear that you CAN set external pedals to perform the Tap Tempo and UNDO functions.  I still think it's annoying that I'd have to have an external pedal to do this, but at least it can be done, so it's not a total dealbreaker. Also you can supposedly use any of the STOP buttons as Tap-tempo when the unit is not playing.

I see how the new layout might be better for Multi Mode. But for Single (where I spend 95% of my time), it never takes me more than one tap to stop as it is. So this just means not only a lot of wasted buttons, but the need to remember which of THREE buttons I need to press when before I only needed one. Not huge, but it does make my life slightly more complicated.

Sounds like the 300 might be a better option for me than I thought... looks like I'd be trading more annoyances for fewer, different and usually less significant annoyances.

Oh, money, why can't we be friends?

In short...

1) Fixed
2) Not improved
3) Probably better
4) Not Fixed :(
5) Not improved
6) Improved
7) Fixed (though I had workaround)
8) Not improved
9) Worse for me but not terrible
10) Not improved (though I have workaround)
11) Fixed

That's not too shabby.


Threeleggedyoyo

#33
Here's another question for you. The manual says this: For each phrase memory, you can assign the function of the RC-300's pedals and any connected external pedals (EXP pedals, foot switches: p. 24). You can also make assignments for control change messages received from an external MIDI device (e.g., FC-300).

Does this mean I could assign, say, the "All Start/Stop" pedal to be a Tap Tempo or Undo button? Because I'd never use that button in Single mode anyway.

If I could assign the three STOP buttons to UNDO, Tap Tempo, and ALL STOP, I'd basically be back to the RC-50 layout, just rearranged a little.

Also, it looks like it saves separate Redo information for each Phrase (the most recent on any can be undone/redone). That's kind of cool. The RC-50 can only do the most recent from any location.


Hopkins

Glad shawnb jumped in there - he has used the RC-50 but I have not!  I still intend to play around with issue (4) to see if I can hack together some sort of work around.  I also haven't used Single Mode in anger.

As mentioned, button assignments are very flexible.  Shawnb mentions his first day notes thread above, and you should specifically check out his full listing of function and button assignments in the second post of that thread.  Although you can only make 8 total assignments on the unit (actually, increasing the number of assignments would be a good request), you can still do a lot.  For the track I am working on at the moment, for example, I have assigned the effects button also to "Play/Stop" of track 2, so that I can toggle track 2 on and off in conjunction with the effects on and off (which are are set to apply only to track 2).  Then I have two external pedals which are assigned to Play/Stop of two tracks at a time.  This means I can start/stop two tracks simultaneously with one button press, and I actually use it for toggling them, i.e. when one of the two tracks is already playing, hitting the external button will stop it whilst simultaneously starting the other, with no interruption to the loop.

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 06, 2012, 09:47:06 PMRegardless I still don't see the advantages of having separate "stop" buttons. This doesn't add much functionality. If you're in Single Mode (which I use 99% of the time), you never need to stop more than one Phrase at the same time anyway. Even in Multi mode, there is still the "all stop" button to stop all three. So the only thing you really gain is the ability to stop two at the same time if you stepped on both at the same time... I don't see anyone doing that though. What do you feel are the advantages of the new layout? Slightly less confusing, maybe, but less utilitarian IMO.

The separate stop buttons work very well with the way I am writing music at the moment.  I will be playing a riff and I "punch in, punch out", i.e. I record a section and then stop recording without any looping and without interrupting my playing.  Then that riff is stored for use later as a harmony part or similar.  I cannot use the All Start/Stop because this stops everything and would send a STOP midi signal to the drum machine - disaster!  (You may note that I have already requested more control over MIDI start/stop messages.)

shawnb

#35
Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 07, 2012, 01:06:38 AM
Thanks shawn! Very helpful post.  :D

You're welcome!

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 07, 2012, 01:06:38 AM
3) Probably better

I would count (3) as 'Not Improved'.   

I actually experimented with that last night, trying to get the RC50 & RC300 to talk, & got no results at all.   They're both very bad at being slaves, so I can't get them to talk to each other at all, not even tempos.  Can't get start/stop to work between the two. 

Further, in the past I've tried similar control with a DAW and I couldn't get any control beyond what is very explicitly doc'd (PCs, CCs).   


*** EDIT:  I've since had much better luck with using the RC50 as a slave.   See this post:
    https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=6763.0

I'm tempted to hookup MidiOX to see what they're really doing...  I'm sure they're using RPNs or maybe even NRPNs to accomplish greater control, e.g., between two RC300s. 

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 07, 2012, 01:06:38 AM
That's not too shabby.

It's really an impressive unit! 

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 07, 2012, 01:31:42 AM
Does this mean I could assign, say, the "All Start/Stop" pedal to be a Tap Tempo or Undo button?

Yes, you can add additional functionality to the button.   I'm not sure you can disble its primary function, though...   That would take more experimentation to confirm.  I keep it around as a panic button... 

I really think you're going to want a FS-6.   

Quote from: Threeleggedyoyo on August 07, 2012, 01:31:42 AM
If I could assign the three STOP buttons to UNDO, Tap Tempo, and ALL STOP, I'd basically be back to the RC-50 layout, just rearranged a little.

You CANNOT reassign the STOP buttons!   
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

Hopkins

Quote from: shawnb on August 07, 2012, 08:22:17 AMYes, you can add additional functionality to the button.   I'm not sure you can disble its primary function, though...   That would take more experimentation to confirm.  I keep it around as a panic button...

I also haven't tested, but the All Start/Stop appears by default as one of the 8 pedal assignments (Assign 7), so I think you can un/reassign it there.  The FX button works differently though: as a system setting you can choose to have it either do Effects On/Off plus an assignment, or only an assignment.  Bear in mind that these assignments are per phrase memory, so your settings can be completely remapped between tracks!

Quote from: shawnb on August 07, 2012, 08:22:17 AMI really think you're going to want a FS-6.

I will stick my oar in and suggest that, unless you want an LED next to the buttons, buy FS-5Us instead of FS-6s simply because the FS-6 units require either a battery or a PSU!  The FS-5Us are passive and also slot together neatly.

shawnb

Hopkins - you are right on the FS-5Us.   I liked the lights on the FS-6s, but found that they don't really help at all.  Even when config'd properly for the unit, they only light when the pedal is depressed, and they do NOT stay lit for toggle functions.  So the lights are useless.   

Further, I don't use it a hell of a lot and the battery JUST ran out after only a few weeks.   

So I'll take your advise on this going forward & go with the FS-5Us for future purchases...   
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

shawnb

#38
BTW - since we KNOW the RC300 can drive another RC300, we KNOW the RC300 can become a MIDI slave.  Further, we know the RC300 is sending enough info for someone, even if only another RC300, to act upon play/stop commands, etc.   So we also know it can become a much better master.   

Oh, if only there were a magical tool to map MIDI events...   

I'm curious if anyone has used one of these non-powered MIDI Event Processors to solve such problems.   I'm certain with the right information, and one of these devices, you can accomplish what you want:
http://www.midisolutions.com/prodevp.htm



Interesting that not all devices can power the unit, and very specifically on their list of non-supported devices is the Roland GR-55....   

Anyway, I bet the solution for having the RC300 drive other gear or act as a slave is out there...   
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

Elantric

QuoteInteresting that not all devices can power the unit, and very specifically on their list of non-supported devices is the Roland GR-55...


MidiSolutions sells a special power adapter for those situations where the Host MIDi device lacks sufficient supply current.

http://www.midisolutions.com/prodpwr.htm

Hopkins

Quote from: shawnb on August 07, 2012, 12:33:13 PMBTW - since we KNOW the RC300 can drive another RC300, we KNOW the RC300 can become a MIDI slave.  Further, we know the RC300 is sending enough info for someone, even if only another RC300, to act upon play/stop commands, etc.   So we also know it can become a much better master.   

Oh, if only there were a magical tool to map MIDI events...

Yes, good point, and that device looks like it might meet the requirements.  It sounds like you could filter out the START/STOP messages, and trigger them via control messages instead.  It would be quite an expensive work around for something that I hope BOSS will consider improving...

At the moment, I do not have a PC midi interface set up - I would need to resurrect and old desktop for that - but there are some free software monitoring options:

http://obds.free.fr/midimon/
http://www.midiox.com/

Not exactly a portable solution for mapping on the fly like the MIDI Solutions thing, but fine for investigation.

Actually, this sounds like a good idea for an application to write for the new Raspberry Pi computers...  Sadly, I do not have the time to do this myself!

Elantric

Quotebut there are some free software monitoring options:

See this thread for many good concepts on "MIDI Monitor" to debug MIDI communication streams

https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=2975.msg18004#msg18004

Hopkins

Ah, thanks, I will have a good read through that thread!

Threeleggedyoyo

Ok, here's another question.

On the RC-50, you can use an expansion pedal to put a phrase into reverse. (see manual page 71).

On the RC-300, I'm not seeing this listed in the list of assignable functions (see manual page 23).

Am I missing something, or was this function removed? I barely realized this exists on the 50 and was excited about it.  :-\

Hopkins

Seriously, read shawnb's post :P

shawnb

#45
Specifically this thread talks about a lot of the strengths of RC300 vs the RC50:
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=5240.0

Within that thread, I point out that the assignment list within the RC300 manual is very, very incomplete.   I provided the full list in that thread here:
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=5240.msg35867#msg35867

And yes, you will see that you can create an assign for 'Reverse'.   You will also see in the manual that there is a track setting for 'Reverse'.   

One issue brought up numerous times in these threads is that many of these settings CANNOT be changed during performance.   And many cannot be changed once the phrase has been recorded for that track.   Whether you can do exactly what you want to do with the assignment would require some experimentation - but there are a couple of ways to invoke reverse.   
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

shawnb

OK, I gotta bee in my bonnet...   I want to play with one of these:



I'm going to experiment & confirm whether I can make the RC300 be a better midi master/slave.   They do some proprietary stuff so it works with their gear but not others...   If I could xlate their custom MIDI codes to something more generic, I could get more out of the RC300.   

Also, on a lark, I'm going to see if I could filter some crazy MIDI input from the GR55 to an external synth (soft or hard) to make the sound more stable.   Gotta be a way to de-glitch it a bit; it it works, external MIDI gear may even perform better than the GR55 itself.   

Too busy for this, but looks like a couple of fun projects...   And I won't know until I try!
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

shawnb

#47
The good news - MidiOX rocks!

The bad news - the RC300 pairs most messages (eg start and tap tempo) with sysex messages.   
This might be a tad more involved than I thought...    However, these messages don't have a lot of variability....   Doesn't look like they vary with tempo or recording length....    It appears to be just a simple sysex message that means "I'm an rc300 and I said START"....   
Address the process rather than the outcome.  Then, the outcome becomes more likely.   - Fripp

Threeleggedyoyo

Quote from: shawnb on August 08, 2012, 10:56:19 PM
The good news - MidiOX rocks!

The bad news - the RC300 pairs most messages (eg start and stop) with sysex messages.   
This might be a tad more involved than I thought...    However, these messages don't have a lot of variability....   Doesn't look like they vary with tempo or recording length....    It appears to be just a simple sysex message that means "I'm an rc300 and I said STOP"....   

You might be able to get the RC-300 to send MIDI on a specific channel and separate its commands for conversion that way?

Hopkins

This all sounds fascinating.  Sadly (!) I am off on holiday in a couple of days for a week, and I doubt I will have time before then to try to get things up and running!  However, Google's first hit for "midi sysex" is this rather useful page:

http://www.2writers.com/eddie/TutSysEx.htm

Good luck with your reverse engineering!