MIDI - What does it mean to you?

[TechMouse]

MIDI is a pretty impressive protocol, given that it was invented 24 years ago and hasn't changed much since. It "just works", and every man and his dog in the digital audio business builds it into their devices.

A true victory for open standards.

However, having got quite into the nuts and bolts of it (I wrote a software synth for my dissertation) it's a bit of a headfuck and has some rather severe limitations. I mean, the fact that you can only get 16 channels down a cable is pretty crap in this day and age!

Unfortunately part of it's strength is that it works on everything, and if you start trying to add extra functionality you'll break everyone's existing setups.

What would be interesting would be great would be if all the manufacturers could get together and agree on a new standard which was backwards compatible with MIDI but added the kind of functionality you might expect in an audio networking technology in 2007... that would be amazing.

There have been some efforts to do this kind of thing using TCP/IP as the protocol, which would be sick. Sadly it's nowhere near as ubiquitous as MIDI.

It's a double edged sword. It's great! Everyone uses it so it's everywhere and it works. But it's crap! You can't improve it because then it wouldn't work everywhere.

Good topic Chris ;)

[stjohn]

great topic !!

well midi is something that is overlooked totally in alot of software setups. of course a midi track is using midi, but only really a fraction. now with a semi hardware setup, ive been reading up and im amazed about how much depth the protocol has. channels, message types etc... ive since totally maximised the way my UC33 works by re configuring hte midi messages.

heres to more learning ....

[dirty_bass]

great topic !!

well midi is something that is overlooked totally in alot of software setups. of course a midi track is using midi, but only really a fraction. now with a semi hardware setup, ive been reading up and im amazed about how much depth the protocol has. channels, message types etc... ive since totally maximised the way my UC33 works by re configuring hte midi messages.

heres to more learning ....

Hate midi, but spent my life using it.
I heard there would be a new protocal, years ago.
It never happened, mores the pity.

[Jay Pace]

Only just getting into MIDI, and only because I've got hardware which needs it.

[ERROR404]

must admit i've never really understood Midi to a depth to be able to use it contructively, its just kind of 'been there'.

Efforts i have seen to try to explain it in laymans terms fall very short in my expectations.

[xfive]

Hate midi, but spent my life using it.
I heard there would be a new protocal, years ago.
It never happened, mores the pity.

Ye old miser! :D

[machina]

I've been using midi for years, and i understand why people hate it or have problems with it - BUT i think the key is to not think about it too much... i have horribly complex midi routings - 12x12 with merging and crap happening everywhere, but have never had any problems...

just logically plug things in and midi is great - as soon as you think about what is actually happening - disaster nearly always ensues

machina

[Farnesol]

Nevermind Mlan!!

Osc is already supported by Reaktor, PD, Supercollider ,jazz Lemur etc.

Nevermind the hardware. Osc is Midi for todays software computing environment.

Sensor based instruments. Trust me :)

[RDR]

Nevermind Mlan!!

Osc is already supported by Reaktor, PD, Supercollider ,jazz Lemur etc.

Nevermind the hardware. Osc is Midi for todays software computing environment.

Sensor based instruments. Trust me :)

Can we have some links to this please?

Thanks.

[TechMouse]

Osc is already supported by Reaktor, PD, Supercollider ,jazz Lemur etc.

Nevermind the hardware. Osc is Midi for todays software computing environment.

Sensor based instruments. Trust me :)

I agree, it's very interesting.

The problem with OSC is that it's not supported everywhere, like MIDI.

It's a bit defeatist to say "nevermind the hardware"...

I'm not saying you can't make good music with software, I'm just saying it would be nice to have the choice if you want it.

[Farnesol]

What would be interesting would be great would be if all the manufacturers could get together and agree on a new standard which was backwards compatible with MIDI but added the kind of functionality you might expect in an audio networking technology in 2007... that would be amazing.

Well OSC is next generation MIDI imho. Its built for networking.

And you can wrap up MIDI within osc.

http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/ICMC97...ndControl.html
Its gonna open up a whole new world of sensor based instruments to boot.

[TechMouse]

Well OSC is next generation MIDI imho. Its built for networking.

And you can wrap up MIDI within osc.

http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/ICMC97...ndControl.html
Its gonna open up a whole new world of sensor based instruments to boot.

Yeah, I know.

There's Yamaha mLAN as well.

The problem is that everyone will probably just create their own little protocols and there will be no ubiquity.

[RDR]

Yeah, I know.

There's Yamaha mLAN as well.

The problem is that everyone will probably just create their own little protocols and there will be no ubiquity.

As an Ex-User of mLAN i can't see it going anywhere... yamaha bought steinberg and initiated their studio management shizzle and it went no-where.. the driver releases for mlan stuff has been ridiculous and there have been terrible offset problems.