TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- New MIDI standard?

New MIDI standard?

It seems to me that with today's computing power, it would be possible to create a new MIDI standard that allowed for a much greater number of values than the possible 128 (or 256?). It could be increased to 1024 or 2048 or something. Wouldn't this allow softsynths, for example, to have a much smoother, less "steppy" motion on things like filters and volume curves?

I'm guessing the reason that this hasn't been done is it would just be too inconvenient...

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Seems there was an announcement back in 2005 that an upgrade to the MIDI standard was being considered:

http://www.midi.org/newsviews/hdmidipr.shtml

I don't see that anything has happened since then, though.

I haven't heard anything about it really (apart from just reading that link), but it's inevitable that at some point it will be "upgraded" or even replaced.

OSC maybe?

Either way I'm sure a much greater number of values will be welcomed by all.

128 is enough for me, i cant hear steps when automating my filters. well actualy that aint all true, when adding a special kind of reverb i hear some ticks in it when panning, its nasty. i dont need more numbers but a soft-transition option somehow.

some more here btw: http://www.midi.org/news/hdmidi.php

I have noticed the stepping on two effects only. Modultating a vocoder, and a ring modulator.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Seems there was an announcement back in 2005 that an upgrade to the MIDI standard was being considered: http://www.midi.org/newsviews/hdmidipr.shtml I don't see that anything has happened since then, though.

Very interesting indeed. I think im going to put in some research of my own into this now. Ive noticed stepping especially with cutoff modulation.

From what I know no new standards where agreed to even though a couple where presented. Probably because it's just too much work. Nowadays it will matter less and less anyway since a lot of new synths have their own USB connector now for audio and automation.

there are in fact new standards, how ever no standard have made it on a broad front yet.

I'd say tho that the closest one to taking over in the future is the OSC, OpenSound Control

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sound_Control

It's used by units and applications as the Jazmutants Lemur, NI Reaktor, MaxMSP, CSound etc.
It has some real advantages over the older standard MIDI so I really hope it takes over some day

The old standard would still need to be maintained. Think how many classic hardware tools have standard MIDI connections. Maybe a convertor for "new MIDI" to "old MIDI".

I haven't read the article, it probably mentions that.

Midi2Usb connector.

I use one.

As derail points out - the rub is in backward compatibility. Very few people would be willing to invest in a MIDI controller if it can't talk to the other $50,000 worth of devices in the studio. And media production just isn't a popular enough field to rely solely on the early adopters.

It's a lot of work, and would cost a lot of money, and some people will invariably be dissatisfied with the results (back-compat is never perfect, just ask Microsoft). Personally, I don't think we're likely to see anything new in this field for at least another 10 or 20 years - maybe not ever.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut As derail points out - the rub is in backward compatibility. Very few people would be willing to invest in a MIDI controller if it can't talk to the other $50,000 worth of devices in the studio. And media production just isn't a popular enough field to rely solely on the early adopters. It's a lot of work, and would cost a lot of money, and some people will invariably be dissatisfied with the results (back-compat is never perfect, just ask Microsoft). Personally, I don't think we're likely to see anything new in this field for at least another 10 or 20 years - maybe not ever.

Yep, that was basically what I figured. Too difficult to get everything to gel with a new standard after everything has been based on the old one...

I also forgot to mention software support. Even if they manage to surmount the compatibility hurdle, the new technology would be all but useless until all of the major developers (Apple, Steinberg, Digidesign, etc.) implemented it. And considering the track record of some of these companies and the glacial place at which they deploy new releases, that seems like no small obstacle in and of itself.

I mean, it took Steinberg how many releases just to fix the stupid MIDI timing issue in Cubase? And some people insist that it's still flaky! I can't even imagine throwing a whole new instrumentation protocol at these guys right now. But I guess you never know, and stranger things have happened in the tech world.

Everyone should just get behind OSC IMO. Once software implements it, its just a matter of the hardware releasing a firmware update to run OSC over the USB connection rather than MIDI.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips Everyone should just get behind OSC IMO. Once software implements it, its just a matter of the hardware releasing a firmware update to run OSC over the USB connection rather than MIDI.

True but that leaves the 10's of 1000's of non-usb MIDI gear incompatible. It would have be a system that incorporates standard MIDI and the new form (only 3 conductors are used on the MIDI din, out of the 5).

One thing that would be nice is to not have to be at the midi trigger-on for the note to play. Meaning it could start at any point in the note. Not crucial, it would be nice, though.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN True but that leaves the 10's of 1000's of non-usb MIDI gear incompatible. It would have be a system that incorporates standard MIDI and the new form (only 3 conductors are used on the MIDI din, out of the 5).

Keyboard aready have midi out as well as usb out. No reason you can't run both standards at once.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips Keyboard aready have midi out as well as usb out. No reason you can't run both standards at once.

No reason? Do you really not realize how difficult a proposition that is? Unless the new standard is perfectly 100% backward compatible (which it already isn't if it uses USB instead of MIDI), it effectively doubles the cost and quadruples the development time to support two standards at once.

Eh?

What I'm saying is: Most people run midi into their computers from a master keyboard over USB. Its easy to make this an OSC connection.

Often, MIDI is then run back out to modules. This could be done by setting up the keyboard to simply continue putting out midi on the midi ports, as most keyboards already do.

For newer hardware, it could send OSC out using a seperate jack.

Supporting MIDI isn't hard given that all the work's already been done. Most development time in interfaces is making sure that the device is ergonomically viable. Supporting OSC would be the same I would think?

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips Often, MIDI is then run back out to modules. This could be done by setting up the keyboard to simply continue putting out midi on the midi ports, as most keyboards already do.

First of all, MIDI is not just computers and keyboards. Outside the amateur production world, those account for maybe 5% of the total usage.

Even for just a keyboard, there are still all sorts of problems. The only times you tend to see multiple protocols supported on a single device are when the protocols are trivial to convert, like USB<->Serial, S/PDIF<->TOSLINK, VGA<->DVI, etc. You know that it's trivial because you can also buy a $10 adapter to do the conversion. When it's anything more complicated - like, say, the switch from parallel ports to USB on printers and scanners, or from PCI to PCI-E, or from RCA composite to HDMI, or from Compact Flash to Secure Digital, or from cassette to CD - it's not common at all to see crossover devices.

The crossover devices do exist, but think about it: the manufacturing period for these things was about 6 months in the computing and entertainment industries where the turnover rate (that is, time to obsolescence) is on the order of months if not weeks, and early adopters are plentiful because you're marketing to an audience of tens/hundreds of millions. And they were still expensive anyway. The audio industry moves at a glacial pace; crossover devices would have to be manufactured for years and years before anybody would be able to stop making the old stuff. And a lot of people probably still wouldn't buy them, because they'd see that the format wasn't widely supported anyway.

It's trivial to support multiple formats in software because code is effectively free. Hardware isn't. You have to pay for the circuitry and you also have to find space for the ports. That in turn increases the footprint of the device, so you not only have to pay for the additional electronics but also additional design and manufacturing. On an audio interface costing $1200, sure, it's pocket change, but on some inexpensive $50 MIDI device it's cost-prohibitive.

Everything about design and manufacturing seems simple when you're just the end user. Why can't Microsoft prevent those pesky blue screens? In reality it just isn't that simple.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut

Nice sig.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Why can't Microsoft prevent those pesky blue screens?

+1

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.