So here we are in 2009, still using midi 1.0. Does that mean it is good enough?

[Umbra]

 

Why would you want that?

So multiple events can really happen at the same time. Going faster with serial is just a crutch for what we really want. If were going for a change lets start with what we really want.

 

Also you can get more than 7 bit through midi by using multiple sysex bytes or whatever that other one is called NRPN(that's the 10 bit one if I remember correctly).

 

 

Any synth could have at least a basic ID of sorts that's more than an arbitrary number, so you could recognize it with more ease (already named, by the way).

It would be nice if the manufacturers would first come up with a real standard spec on control data in the first place. Some midi, some NRPN, some sysex, some multi-byte sysex (which makes most midi controllers useless for acting as a controller), some with check bits, some without, incomplete published midi specs, etc. Then we could work on standardized names for synth features. After those you might be able to get meta data that might makes some sense across devices.

 

I've always just lowered the density of my controller data when it gets to be a problem but I almost never bother to use synths multitimbral since very few multitimbral synths can handle effects properly when running multitimbral.

[evildragon]

I still don;t understand for the life of me why they don't just up the buad speed. The recieving device if its capable will have no problems with this. Actually its fiarly easy for a recieving device to decode the incoming signal and determine what the message is simply by looking at the message header bytes.

 

That's baud speed. For the first two times I have thought it was an accidental typo. But now, you're going over the top, mister!

[poumtschak]

It's not like there were no attempt of evolution around :

All of these are proprietary and none became a standard, so I would'nt hold my breath.

 

HD-MIDI ? Like we need another standard.

[xpander]

i think it's funny that with Volta i can now get more accurate timing from sequencer-to-synth using my 1974 CV-controlled minimoog than i could get with a better MIDI-controlled synth. that kind of software also opens up the ability to create arbitrary temperaments.

 

the way i see it the most interesting synthesizers coming out today are either CV-controlled analog modulars or purely software; neither of these things require so much as a single midi cable.

[girevik]

Seems like in 2005, a midi 2.0 spec was defined, but it never caught on? So really, is there a need for midi 2.0 with the modern DAWs and work flow?

 

If you haven't reached the limitations of your MIDI 1.0 based system, you have nothing to worry about.

 

Ableton Live, the resurrection of control voltage, and OSC are among the things people are using to get around MIDI 1.0's limitations.

 

The VAX-77 controller implemented higher than 7-bit resolution Velocity, but by all accounts was a "fail" in the keyboard feel.

[Yoozer]

 

So multiple events can really happen at the same time.

 

You really want 128 cables for each note alone, and say, 500 for good measure for every possible knob, slider and parameter?

 

Unless I'm understanding you incorrectly.

[urbanscallywag]

For notes that are "played" with a controller of some sort, I'd argue there is no such thing as "really" at the same time, with fine enough granularity no two events happen at the same time.

 

For sequenced data I would opt for time stamps to make events happen "really" at the same time, but again perhaps my synth/sampler can't actually trigger 2 notes at the "really" same time anyway. (doesn't OSC use time stamps?)

 

Go low latency high speed serial.

[Yoozer]

Hell, keyboard scanning mechanisms aren't even "at the same time". Worse if it's a lowly Z80 doing all the work, -and- the interface -and- the display.

[kooki_sf]

how bout instead of inventing yet another interface manufacturers just start supporting OSC.. its really not that difficult..

 

-it doesn't require special drivers.

-the cableing is cheap (yay for cat-5!)

-its not proprietary.

-it has all that pipe dream stuff everyone on here has been asking for

 

and since its all built around UDP, its not like the synth manufacturers would have to spend a lot on R+D...

 

ps- yes, it uses time stamps. you can also have message bundles if you need things to happen precisely at the same time.

[Umbra]

You really want 128 cables for each note alone, and say, 500 for good measure for every possible knob, slider and parameter?

Yah, that's it...

[The Real MC]

MIDI 1.0 is fine.

 

Most MIDI problems are between the computer and the chair.

[midi]

I MIDI

[evildragon]

OSC should take over, yes.

[kennychaffin]

Pretty much good enough. I'm sure there are things that could be enhanced, like speed, greater/higher resolution than 128 levels, but yeah, basically it works as far as I know.