Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] Another stupid question: Linux & MIDI Interfaces
From: Pieter (pieter.palmers_AT_student.kuleuven.ac.be)
Date: Sun Jan 13 2002 - 11:41:07 EET
Referring to the thread I spawned about unix-friendly hardware (well
I actually named it open-source like hardware), I want to ask you the
following:
If I were to design a midi interface for the linux community, what should
it be capable of? i.e. number of channels, hardware
routing/filtering/merging,
etc...
You know, if I start the design, all options are open. The choices made
during
the design determine the limits of the device. That doesn't mean all options
should
be implemented. I just want to say that you have to design the hardware so
that all
wanted functionality CAN be implemented. (If the MB of your PC is designed
to handle
512mb RAM, you can't possibly put 1Gig in it.)
So I need to know what is wanted.
Remark: The hardware complexity doesn't get that much bigger if you add
lot's
of options. The embedded software (=firmware) complexity does get a lot
bigger.
For example:
the internal processor speed determines the amount of MIDI data it can
process.
If I choose a faster processor it would be possible to implement e.g. a hw
sequencer.
That's up to the firmware writers. If I want it to be possible to write a HW
sequencer
for the device, I'll have consider the following:
- use a bigger processor (or make it possible to upgrade)
- add plenty of memory (or again make it upgradeable)
- provide some sort of 'generic user-interface' like buttons, LCD, etc...
- .....
Not that I think a MIDI interface should also be a HW sequencer. The point
I'm trying
to make is: 'Let me know what YOU think a MIDI interface should be capable
of'.
I have lot's of moments I'm thinking 'I wish the damn thing could do this'.
I assume everybody has them.
Anyway, I hope I'm not irritating anybody with my HW nagging on a software
list.
(let me know if I do)
Pieter
>
>
> >If you really need an 8x8 interface
> >you're probably doing something wrong.
> >Use less gear and more general purpose computer.
>
> i can't go for that. i have a 16x15 MIDI patch bay at home, and a
> 16x16 matrix router in the studio. the home wiring looks like:
>
> slot gear
>
> 3 Kawai K5000
> 4 Oberheim Matrix 6
> 5 Alesis Quadraverb
> 6 DrumKAT
> 7 Prophet 5
> 8 Doepfer MAQ 16/3
> 9 Trident 4D-NX MIDI port
> 10 Tropez+ external MIDI port #1
> 11 Peavey PC1600X
> 12 Roland Handsonic
>
> thats not that much gear, and the thing is already getting pretty
> full. thats 9 slots just for the keyboard/computer guy. if i played
> with a MIDI-friendly guitarist, for example, we could overflow this
> system.
>
> studio wiring:
>
> 1 Mackie D8B
> 2 computer system
> 3 Eventide harmonizer
> 4 ADAT M20 rack
> 5 lexicon reverb
> 6 akai mpc
> 7 open keyboard connection for control room
> 8 waves ultramaximizer
> 9-12 routed to studio for session hook ups
>
> BTW, i vastly prefer an external MIDI patch bay. i know that a
> software solution is cheaper, but being able to run the MIDI gear
> without the computer being turned on is often a big plus. its too bad
> that only miditemp in europe makes them anymore in a reasonable size
> (but sadly, not at a reasonable cost).
>
> --p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jan 13 2002 - 13:30:37 EET