5 ms·
Why it is important in one paragraph: “The MIDI 2.0 initiative updates MIDI with auto-configuration, new DAW/web integrations, extended resolution, increased e
by kensai 8y ago
Why it is important in one paragraph:
“The MIDI 2.0 initiative updates MIDI with auto-configuration, new DAW/web integrations, extended resolution, increased expressiveness, and tighter timing -- all while maintaining a high priority on backward compatibility. This major update of MIDI paves the way for a new generation of advanced interconnected MIDI devices, while still preserving interoperability with the millions of existing MIDI 1.0 devices. One of the core goals of the MIDI 2.0 initiative is to also enhance the MIDI 1.0 feature set whenever possible.”
- mastazi 8y agoThis is fantastic news, I can’t wait to have CC parameters with more than 128 levels. Does anyone know what the new resolution for CCs will be?
- shagrath 8y agoThey wrote 32 bits on the website (against 7 in the current spec)
- phkahler 8y ago32 seems excessive.
- mastazi 8y agoI know right? I was expecting 16 bit tops for CC.
- boomlinde 8y agoPlenty of potential applications of control change messages where 16 bits would be insufficient, for example precision seeking through recorded audio.
- mastazi 8y agoInteresting, you're right for this type of things "MIDI" controllers usually had to resort to HID (e.g. platters on most DJ controllers), I'm curious to see how people will use MIDI 2
- peterlk 8y agoThen you're not being creative enough. Digital turntables are extremely precise. I once hooked up my ns7 (1) to an old windows laptop, spun the turntable, and crashed the computer. I think that highly precise applications like this could find valid uses for 32 bit control
- lightedman 8y agoWait until you start applying pitch shifting/note bending. You'll want that 32-bit resolution.
- filoeleven 8y agoWith this spec, my LFO can be on a separate device and spit MIDI to modulate sample-accurate playback of an entire season of a TV show (assuming that it can be loaded into memory) recorded at 96000k. Talk about future proofing. No complaints here.
- lightedman 8y agoPitch shifting of any waveform introduces audible problems. You need very high resolution and sample rate, about 350x your highest sampled frequency.
- TheRealPomax 8y agoWhy? 64 bit chips are dirt cheap these days, if anything it's surprising they went for 32 bit instead of just going for 64 to buy the protocol one or more decades of "no one's going to run into the limitations of that". Don't design it for what humans expect, design it for what the machines that need to talk to each other operate on. In that sense, 32 bits is the bare minimum you want in a new spec.
- chillingeffect 8y agobecause the intent of a CC is to emulate a knob on a synth . A synth knob turns a little less than 360 degrees. While 7 bits doesn't give quite enough resolution to have one degree per code, 32 bits would give 11 million codes per degree. Even a thousand codes per degree would suffice... but 11 million? There would also be no analog to digital converter that could measure much more than 24 bits with any accuracy whatsoever. And if you were to use your proposal of "just going to 64" it would multiply the space between the existing 11 million values between every degree on a knob by 4 billion. That would have 44 trillion variations of knob control. No one can sense that. if the knob was used to modulate e.g. LFO speed, it could send changes that wouldn't even be heard for millions of years.
- boomlinde 8y ago> because the intent of a CC is to emulate a knob on a synth . The intent of CC is to facilitate control changes. Higher range means greater flexibility in what exactly this means. Just off the top of my head I can think of at least one realistic application where 360000 discrete steps simply wouldn't suffice but a higher range control protocol would be useful: precision audio seeking, because recorded audio used in music is often longer than 360000 samples.
- phkahler 8y agoBecause MIDI has very low bandwidth. People in complex environments doing complex things saturate it already. The new version may somehow allow higher bandwidth but it wants backward compatibility as well. We'll see, I'm sure this version will be better and I hope it becomes more popular again.
- aasasd 8y agoOpen Sound Control has that, but support for the format is very selective.
- mastazi 8y agoGood point, OSC is pretty good I should invest some time looking into it
- jcelerier 8y agoif you want to check out a nice OSC project I invite you to test https://ossia.io https://ossia.io the OSC sequencer I'm developping
- PascLeRasc 8y agoIf you're looking for information on OSC, I'm currently in a computer music class and we have a section on it: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/cmsip/slides/06-networks.pdf http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/cmsip/slides/06-networks.pdf
- leoc 8y agoAny chance there'll be a way to get a few channels of audio into the same container stream as MIDI 2.0, or at least down the same cable?