3 ms·

MIDI support seems like feature bloat to me...

• reaperducer 9y ago
  bt and hundreds of thousands of other musicians would disagree. (Actually, let's hope that bt can afford something better than Audacity, but the point remains that MIDI is still a hugely popular protocol.)
  • tomc1985 9y ago
    It's not that. MIDI != PCM or any kind of audio data really Midi looks like (imagine someone playing two notes: a C then a D): C4 127 On C4 127 Off D4 127 On D4 127 Off (not literally, but that is the essence of MIDI) MIDI support means synthesizer support, which means VST support, which means now you need some sort of MIDI data editor, which means now you've got to work out all the weird timing shit with MIDI, and by this point you are better off with LMMS or FLStudio or Pro Tools or what-have-you. Use the tool most fit for purpose
  • blt 9y ago
    I don't understand your point. Of course MIDI is a popular protocol, I'm just saying that a basic multitrack audio editor doesn't need midi support.
• da_chicken 9y ago
  Kind of depends to what extent MIDI is supported. Many instruments output MIDI. If they're slowly adding MIDI playback support, they may begin adding MIDI recording support.
  • tomc1985 9y ago
    Audacity is for audio data. If you want MIDI use a DAW
• harrumph 9y ago
  >MIDI support seems like feature bloat to me... Totally agree, but you know how it is. I really have always seen Audacity as a swiss army knife for PCM audio files, but I am always surprised to see what people do with swiss army knives.
  • blt 9y ago
    True. I guess it's like Photoshop incorporating basic 3D and video editing features. It will never be a tool for serious practitioners, but if you only need to do something simple, it's nice when to have it within your "comfort zone" software.