BT Talks about MIDI timing inaccuracies...

[Homebelly]

Wow,,
What a very cool thread.

I have nothing really to add, except that from my perspective i really don't see OSC becoming any thing more than what it already is. A specialized protocol that can be adapted to meet unique needs. To that end it answers a lot of the problems addressed by MIDI at this point, but if adopted would also have to comply with 20 years worth of investment into MIDI hardware.
It's very important to realize that MIDI isn't just used to controle note on note off messages,,, it is also used to control light rigs,,, syncing sound to video in a live situation,,, communication between lots of very different specialized hard ware to control every aspect of music, theater and film production,, lots of money has been spent on the MIDI standard.
The MMA has acknowledged the short comings of MIDI for along time and are also working at extending it's abilities, this is where HD-MIDI comes in,, it will offer much broader band width which, in turn, will allow much faster through put and no bottle necks or data loss. Most importantly,, it will be backwards compatible and will also use reliable and existing cross platform hard ware and technology.

[Angstrom]

different thing really.
the issue you are laking about there relates to the difficulty in finding the root harmonic in a complex audio signal, and doing it quickly.
The issue there isn't the midi, but the audio to pitch analysis methods

That's my understanding.

But, I mean, it's f'ing 2007! Get on it scientists!

It's not a hard problem concerning analysis, with the exception of the higher the pitch, and the more variations, the faster CPUs you need to do it. Until now embedded systems have not had that fast CPUs due to cost issues, but it has changed during the last 2+ years or so. That's why MIDI tracking devices have become much better compared with the early days. I.e. it would have been tough to cram in an Intel chip inside a MIDI pick up until now .

--Kent

Makes sense - although handling hammer-ons and that sort of fiddly playing style stuff, that used to send the tracking wild and must still cause issues eh?
Although I think the last one I actually tried myself was an Arp Avatar, so I'm hardly up to date on the technology. I kid you not.
This ain't premature balding I got goin' on here.

[nebulae]

so what's new, fellas?

[kent_sandvik]

Wow,,
What a very cool thread.

I have nothing really to add, except that from my perspective i really don't see OSC becoming any thing more than what it already is. A specialized protocol that can be adapted to meet unique needs. To that end it answers a lot of the problems addressed by MIDI at this point, but if adopted would also have to comply with 20 years worth of investment into MIDI hardware.
It's very important to realize that MIDI isn't just used to controle note on note off messages,,, it is also used to control light rigs,,, syncing sound to video in a live situation,,, communication between lots of very different specialized hard ware to control every aspect of music, theater and film production,, lots of money has been spent on the MIDI standard.
The MMA has acknowledged the short comings of MIDI for along time and are also working at extending it's abilities, this is where HD-MIDI comes in,, it will offer much broader band width which, in turn, will allow much faster through put and no bottle necks or data loss. Most importantly,, it will be backwards compatible and will also use reliable and existing cross platform hard ware and technology.

Yes, the problem is that it's not the first time someone has tried to upgrade the MIDI standard, and it has not resulted in anything. Hopefully HD-MIDI will finally take off, it has not even been fully spec:ed out, yet.

The problem with OSC, then again, is that it's not maintained by a standards organization (like MIDI, actually), so it's somewhat floating.

My biggest gripe with MIDI long time ago was that if they just added in a couple of features that made it infinitely scaleable, such as most comms protocols, then this whole issue would not be there any longer. Fixed speeds, fixed amount of channels, and so on, and a lot of workarounds have been done to go around such problems. It is a very successful protocol, that's for sure, but it's really halting along now, and we don't get the explosion of musician-centered controllers that most of us would like to get now. --Kent

[ethios4]

Are softsynths controlled with internal MIDI? It doesn't seem like softsynths suffer from the same problems as MIDI based gear.

[kent_sandvik]

Are softsynths controlled with internal MIDI? It doesn't seem like softsynths suffer from the same problems as MIDI based gear.

In the case of MacOSX, Core Audio is taking over any MIDI related internal handling, so a lot of functionality missing, timing, and so on, is fixed or handled inside Core Audio. --Kent

[Angstrom]

I have often thought that the 'problem' with OSC is revealed in the differences in the way it and MIDI have been developed promoted.

MIDI was an industry developed item, presented to AES by Dave Smith with the backing of Roland (I think) and then taken forward with all the key hardware players of the time. While OSC has come out of an education project at Berkeley and is much less 'pushy'

I think if we draw a comparison to the VST project and the way competitors to Steinberg have reluctantly had to adopt it ... just imagine what might have happened if the OSC project had been backed by some other big DAW player .. perhaps then OSC would have more of a chance.

there is a hidden suggestion buried in this post, can you tell what it is.

[Darwinist]

It would be cool if Ableton were to be the pioneer of OSC - but it´s a double-edged sword. Ableton is not the biggest player in the market. Someone like Steinberg could push VST because they were the big kid on the block - if Ableton "adopted" OSC, chances are the competitors would fancy their chances at getting rid of this upstart and gear up for a format war by adopting another standard. And I hate format wars.

[Angstrom]

I doubt that
is there any alternative to OSC that they could adopt?

[electrolee]

I think everyone knows BT is very good musician who looks, behaves silly, immature, thinking he makes himself look cool. it is his problem but how better is your comment ?
I just see somebody bitter, full of complexes for lack public recognition, envious about someones else success,
trying to make himself taller by cutting heads of others,, hair in this case.
I am no BTs friend, neither fan but it is pathetic how low you go in your comment. I hope for you , you were drunk or too tired.
Regarding the midi matter, there is nothing "semi true " about it, whoever does not know, see, hear it and take into consideration while producing, needs some serious studies. He is emotional about it, his right to feel say what he wants, most people simply live with it, what else can we do except using all possible ways to correct, rectify.
If someone thinks it applies only to old school hardware-wrong, it is even worse with computers, and Live midi is worse then of nearly any apps. I wouldn't be surprised that the reason was frustration of the developers to be forced to work on something so ridiculously obsolete, Perhaps when Ableton started, everyone though by 2005 midi will be dead, it must be frustrating for any intelligent developer to be forced to work with this pathetic protocol, it is against all they studied and common sense as well.

wow, against very heavy competition you have won Most Pompous Prick on this board - quite the achievement. now go do some yoga and see if the increased flexibility allows you to extract your bald head from your arsehole

this guy is really friendly and helped me out a great deal
and you only talk shit, baggytits
and hey, i see you've been voted Idiot#1 on this board, so whatever

Now now kids!

Can't we all just share information and opinions?

[electrolee]

Are softsynths controlled with internal MIDI? It doesn't seem like softsynths suffer from the same problems as MIDI based gear.

In the case of MacOSX, Core Audio is taking over any MIDI related internal handling, so a lot of functionality missing, timing, and so on, is fixed or handled inside Core Audio. --Kent

Well Im using live on OSX. What I am curious about though is would I be better of arrging all my beats in audio within the arrangement view (something i do sometimes) to gain rock solid timing? Or would the timing of impulse triggered via MIDI be just as rock solid?

I think timing inaccuracies is very very important if you talking about beats especially if your making stuff like breaks and drum and bass where tight timing is crucial to how the beat sounds.

I dont know but it would probably be quite important to R'n'B also.

Can somebody shed some more light on this? Arranging beats in audio in arrangement bypass's this problem I take it?

[sweetjesus]

Are softsynths controlled with internal MIDI? It doesn't seem like softsynths suffer from the same problems as MIDI based gear.

In the case of MacOSX, Core Audio is taking over any MIDI related internal handling, so a lot of functionality missing, timing, and so on, is fixed or handled inside Core Audio. --Kent

Well Im using live on OSX. What I am curious about though is would I be better of arrging all my beats in audio within the arrangement view (something i do sometimes) to gain rock solid timing? Or would the timing of impulse triggered via MIDI be just as rock solid?

I think timing inaccuracies is very very important if you talking about beats especially if your making stuff like breaks and drum and bass where tight timing is crucial to how the beat sounds.

I dont know but it would probably be quite important to R'n'B also.

Can somebody shed some more light on this? Arranging beats in audio in arrangement bypass's this problem I take it?

i personally feel its as solid as a diamond.

most of this discussion is geared toward external hardware and the amount of time it takes from when u press a piano note till the controller translates that message into midi info and a sound module responds to it etc..

[electrolee]

In the case of MacOSX, Core Audio is taking over any MIDI related internal handling, so a lot of functionality missing, timing, and so on, is fixed or handled inside Core Audio. --Kent

Well Im using live on OSX. What I am curious about though is would I be better of arrging all my beats in audio within the arrangement view (something i do sometimes) to gain rock solid timing? Or would the timing of impulse triggered via MIDI be just as rock solid?

I think timing inaccuracies is very very important if you talking about beats especially if your making stuff like breaks and drum and bass where tight timing is crucial to how the beat sounds.

I dont know but it would probably be quite important to R'n'B also.

Can somebody shed some more light on this? Arranging beats in audio in arrangement bypass's this problem I take it?

i personally feel its as solid as a diamond.

most of this discussion is geared toward external hardware and the amount of time it takes from when u press a piano note till the controller translates that message into midi info and a sound module responds to it etc..

I wonder why I hear of so many big name producers arraging all their beats in audio these days then.

So you feel that the timing is rock solid thats good to hear. I wonder what other people think around here.

Im getting to the point where I think its just easier to arrange beat in audio anyway.

Does anybody else around here arrange their beats in audio within live?

Sometimes I feel live isnt the best program for this kind of work.

[Angstrom]

I arrange my beats in midi at first, to get my own 'breaks' ... and then I render that to a selection of audio files and cut it up like that on the arrangement timeline into a bazillion little slices.

I have my reasons.
#1 being I enjoy doing it like that.

[sweetjesus]

Well Im using live on OSX. What I am curious about though is would I be better of arrging all my beats in audio within the arrangement view (something i do sometimes) to gain rock solid timing? Or would the timing of impulse triggered via MIDI be just as rock solid?

I think timing inaccuracies is very very important if you talking about beats especially if your making stuff like breaks and drum and bass where tight timing is crucial to how the beat sounds.

I dont know but it would probably be quite important to R'n'B also.

Can somebody shed some more light on this? Arranging beats in audio in arrangement bypass's this problem I take it?

i personally feel its as solid as a diamond.

most of this discussion is geared toward external hardware and the amount of time it takes from when u press a piano note till the controller translates that message into midi info and a sound module responds to it etc..

I wonder why I hear of so many big name producers arraging all their beats in audio these days then.

So you feel that the timing is rock solid thats good to hear. I wonder what other people think around here.

Im getting to the point where I think its just easier to arrange beat in audio anyway.

Does anybody else around here arrange their beats in audio within live?

Sometimes I feel live isnt the best program for this kind of work.

yeah a LOT of big name producers work like this lately.

mainly because.. it's all there.. you dont have any weird guessing of whats going on in a synth and where some particular sound may be coming from since you can see it in front of you.

editing becomes easier then.. instead of having to hone into midi clips and then find a hit and adjust it then to back to the top level then go into another midi clip etc.. you just move what you want when you want.