On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 10:25:23 +0100, Raphaël Mouneyres wrote: >You're right here. Len isn't just right with this. Len also explained why old faithful MIDI, even with it's drawbacks, is a very useful thing. I'm a MIDI guy from the beginning and I disliked MIDI much, but nowadays we seldom suffer from MIDI issues, usually we suffer from odd MIDI implementations. The most annoying issue IMO is that we don't get hard real-time nowadays. There's a big difference between computers from the 80s and 90s, providing hard real-time and the crap we get today. It always was possible to use more than just one MIDI interface. The first computers, such as the C64 suffered from bad resolution, but later computers, such as the Atari ST didn't suffer from this issue. The baud rate and other limitations are an issue, but the real big issue nowadays is the design of the hardware and software. Fortunately we are still free to use more than just a single MIDI interface, we still could use separated MIDI interfaces for each channel. SysEx data isn't real time data, but it can be treated as real-time data, assumed we use several MIDI interfaces and the rest of the hardware should be ok and the software should be ok too. For example, there's no need to send checksums with SysEx. SysEx "commands" often cause less traffic than Pitch Bend or After Touch does. When using MIDI, the KISS principle is the most important approach, but unfortunately it seems to be out of style. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
