[gmpi] Re: 3.15 MIDI
- From: "Martijn Sipkema" <m.j.w.sipkema@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:45:52 +0100
> This is fine with me. I certainly agree with excluding MIDI.
Excluding MIDI would be a big mistake IMHO. All existing hardware
uses it and a lot of the arguments against MIDI are not valid.
> I just want to re-state that these messages should have better musical
> semantics than MIDI.
>
> For example, the NOTE ON message should use a float for the key number
> (Pitch) so that pitch bends and microtones can be communicated in this
way,
> or variant tuning systems.
You say that you want "better" musical semantics than MIDI. The example
you give just has different semantics; note on/off commands are meant to
communicate keys on an instrument being pressed/released and it wouldn't
make sense to index keys using a floating point value.
The CV like behaviour that you want isn't what MIDI is particularly good
at; You could use note on/off in combination with pitch bend (14 bit
resolution) and channels in mono mode to achieve something similar or it
could be supported using some other protocol than MIDI. That doesn't
mean MIDI should no longer be supported.
Personally I would add MIDI in the form of a timestamped raw MIDI
byte stream.
--ms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Other related posts:
