On Monday, June 14, 2004 8:48 PM [GMT+1=CET], Chris Grigg <xxxgmpi-public@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> MIDI just does not map to some of these things. You can force it to map >> by futzing with pitch-bend, but even that is not perfect. I want to be >> able to control a number of parameters per-voice. I just can't do that >> in MIDI without setting up a channel for each voice. > > So set up a channel for each voice. What's the problem, since your > objective isn't prohibited, just slightly cumbersome? Why go to the next city by car, if you can go there by foot?!? >> > could be supported using some other protocol than MIDI. That doesn't >>> mean MIDI should no longer be supported. >> >> Why put MIDI into every plugin? Why not let the hosts be *REALLY* good >> at MIDI and let the plugins just not worry about it. Every plugin gets >> simpler by that little bit. > > That work has already been done by what, hundreds of plug developers, > so for them there is no savings. You'd have to do work to take it > out. Is that so? Personally, I wouldn't use the MIDI protocol directly in my code. Sure, I would have the concepts of "note start", "note update" and "note stop", but that's basically it. All the rest is one of these with attached properties. And of course, in a host program (of today, hopefully not the future ones), the incoming and outgoing MIDI messages are converted to this system. I would think that surely most commercial developers have a system like that too, no? Koen ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not redistribute anyone else's words without their permission. Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe