I would like to be able to do this :

No, the CHANNEL statements are there just for 2 reasons : 
- they make your code much more readable, as you clearly see to which device you are sending each command
- they make it easy to change the MIDI channel to which a certain device listens, for instance when you add more gear to your setup : just change the MIDI channel value in the "CHANNEL" definition line, instead of modifying all commands throughout the setup
I don't see much practical use in a dynamic MIDI channel definition - a MIDI device normally listens to 1 (or multiple) configured channels, this normally doesn't change once configured.

    It is  requested primarily for code reuse. I  want to be able to use the same code preset to send to a different MIDI channel depending on the device I have selected.

Instead of

switch($device)
{
case "Hammond":
 SendMidi HAMMOND ProgChange 1
 break
case "Nord"
 SendMIDI NORD ProgChange 1
 break
default:
 break
}

I would like to do this:

SendMidi $Device ProgChange 1

You don't think this adds value?  No switch statements and just 1 line of code.

ok, that makes sense.

Don't get me wrong. I think Uno2 is amazing!  Just thinking of ways to improve it and make it even better knowing the limitations of the FCB1010 memory.

I assume the less code you have to write, the less memory will be consumed on the device. Maybe not always a good assumption as I'm not sure how the code uses memory. I'm still experimenting since I've only had Uno2 for a few weeks.

The one thing which still amazes/frustrates me most with the FCB1010 : Behringer could very easily replace the current 2KB setup memory with a 32KB chip without changing anything in the design or production process - it's fully pin compatible, it would raise the product cost with an amazing 15 cents (memory would cost around 0.25USD instead of 0.1USD), but what a difference it would make in what you could achieve with that same hardware. It's a shame... 

I agree. I think it is still amazing what you are able to accomplish with a 20 year old piece of hardware.

Also, I would think it would not be that expensive to make it USB class compliant.  

Right now my favorite competetor is the Nektar Pacer that has quite interesting capabilities:

• 24 Banks of 10 switches - Plus 4 externnal switches and 2 external expression pedals. 
• Can dynamically assign switch activities with another switch
• Can use any switch to go directly to another bank
• Has LED feedback (via USB only)

I use the Nektar to control different apps on my PC.  Voicemeeter Potato and OBS Studio for audio/video switching


I use Uno2 for my MIDI music setup. I also still have Uno 1.0.4 on a different FCB1010.  I have a Eureka Prom that I like for IO mode only but it sits on a shelf right now. It would be nice to be able to install multiple proms and switch between them. I have no stomach for adding other hardware MODs in case I want to sell on of my FCB1010s.


It would have been nice if Nektartec had incorporated 2 expression pedals like Behringer and Roland FC300

The FC300 is nice but programming is only available with pushing footswitches.  No Editor.
It also has a nice 2 line display if you don't mind looking at your feet while switching.