Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] OSC vs MIDI
From: Jens M Andreasen (jens.andreasen_AT_chello.se)
Date: Sat Sep 04 2004 - 10:38:48 EEST
On lör, 2004-09-04 at 01:41, Dave Robillard wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-09-03 at 02:52, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> > On ons, 2004-09-01 at 21:26, Dave Robillard wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 07:48, martin rumori wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:31:01AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:03:18 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > > > > > so if I'm writing a osc sequencer, is the best plan to leave the
> > > > > > mapping open for the user to modify?
> > > > >
> > > > > I would say so yes, its possible that an OSC schema spe will be
> > > > > standardised at soem point that would make it easier.
> > > >
> > > > not to mention the microtone-capabilities of your osc sequencer and
> > > > the sophisticated envelope control functions, which are hard to cover
> > > > with pure midi... :-))
> > >
> > > Imagine a sequencer where, instead of little straight bars representing
> > > notes, the 'piano roll' just allowed you to draw a line to represent
> > > frequency.. with any angle, straight or curved (bezier), etc. Wow..
> > >
> > > Control could be like that too, with overlay and everything, but having
> > > that for pitch would be amazing.. has something like this ever been done
> > > before?
> > >
> > Isn't this very similar to drawing the midi-pitchbend? EditTrack did
> > that in the 80's. You could also draw values for volume and controllers
> > if you wanted sophisticated envelopes.
>
> Way, way, way too tedious to be practical. It's of course possible to
> do pitchbends, but it's not the same.
Is not the same as what?
>
> > IIRC mouse-dragging in the piano-roll would "spray paint" notes all over
> > the place ... Combine that with a synth patch with very closely spaced
> > notes and we are getting pretty close to what you are talking about.
> > Perhaps with a bit of portamento to smooth out the rough edges
>
> Not really at all... like you said, it would be a whole whack of "spray
> painted" notes, not one continuous note.
In monomode, with sustain pedal down, it would be continous ..
> ... The point was it would be nice
> to be able to break out of the limitations of MIDIs notes.
OK. Then we are back to modifying pitcbend and controllers which *will*
give you unlimited continous control of a note. If we stick to the
intended use of midi, that is still a 16 voice part. My point being that
it can be done in OSC or MIDI, the protocol is not an issue. The problem
lies in presenting and manipulating the data which will be tedious
either way.
>
> You could write a MIDI sequencer that abstracts this and uses noteons
> and pitchbend to do it of course, but it doesn't exist right now (in the
> free world anyway) AFAIK
>
You wouldn't need any noteons (ok, perhaps one to get started) if volume
was a continous controller. If you want to break out of the limitations,
you can do that today. These are not the noteons you are looking for ...
/jens
> -DR-
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Sep 04 2004 - 10:45:30 EEST