Re: [LAD] automation on Linux (modular approach)

Nick Copeland wrote:
> [snip, because you sent your reply off-list, but I guess this should
> be send to the list too]

If my broken English doesn't fool me, than the more I learn about cv,
the more I guess it's a bad idea to import it to Linux.
Fons: "Another limitation of MIDI is its handling of context, the only
way to do this is by using the channel number. There is no way to refer
to anything higher level, to say e.g. this is a control message for note
#12345 that started some time ago."
I don't know how this will be possible for cv without much effort, but
assumed this would be easy to do, than there would be the need to record
all MIDI events as cv events too, right? Resp. Linux than only would
record all events as cv events and apps would translate it to MIDI.

I'm asking myself, if cv has advantages compared to MIDI, what is the
advantage for the industry to use MIDI? Ok, when MIDI was established we
had another technology, e.g. RAM was slower, more expensive etc., today
we e.g. have serial buses that are faster than parallel buses, so
thinking about reforming MIDI or of having something new is suitable.

HD protocol? RTP-MIDI? USB-MIDI? Some keyboards do have new ports, e.g. USB.

For the proprietary software on MacOS and Windows there are some
advantages that are needed for Linux too. Now you coders say that this
is true, but it's better to realise it in a different way, so Linux
would get advantages compared to the proprietary software, but won't
have disadvantages any more.

Sounds nice in theory, but in praxis I don't believe that this is true.
There is fierce competition between proprietary software developers, why
don't they use cv for their products? Because they are less gifted than
all the Linux coders?

I hope the Linux coders don't lose sight of hardware mainly based on
MIDI. If I buy keyboards, effect processors etc. this hardware is
compliant to industry standards. It doesn't matter if those standards
are good or bad, I need to be able to use affordable equipment. At the
moment Linux on my computer and on computers of around 30 other people I
know can't use hardware MIDI equipment because of MIDI jitter. On the
same machines there is less jitter for Windows, so using Windows would
solve this problem for most of them. For musicians not having this
jitter issue, there are still other issues, e.g. if you loop play a
passage again and again the events send internal Linux and the events
send to external hardware diverge in the timeline, for standard play
everything is ok.

Even if this is a PITA for me, I stay at Linux. Musicians now need to
know which way Linux will go? Are coders for Linux interested to take
care of such issues, or do they want all musicians to buy special Linux
compatible computers, instead of solving issues like the jitter issue
for nearly every computer? Are they interested in being compatible to
industry standards or will they do their own thing? An answer might be,
that Linux coders will do their own thing and in addition they will be
compatible to industry standards. I don't think that this will be
possible, because it isn't solved now and the valid arguments are time
and money right now, so how would implementing a new standard defuse the
situation?

It seems to be, that Rui will enable automation by using MIDI and saving
the automation to MIDI files for Qtractor, at least this was an idea he
has outspoken about it. Isn't this a good idea?

Having cv additionally is good, no doubt about it. My final question,
the only question I wish to get an answer is: Even today MIDI is treated
as an orphan by Linux, if we would get cv, will there be any efforts to
solves MIDI issues with usual products from the industry? Or do we need
to buy special mobos, do we need to use special MIDI interfaces etc. to
still have less possibilities using Linux, than are possible with usual
products of the industry?
We won't deal with the devil just by using the possibilities of MIDI.
Today Linux doesn't use the possibilities of MIDI, I wonder if having a
Linux standard e.g. cv would solve any issues, while the common MIDI
standard still isn't used in a sufficient way.

I do agree that everybody I know, me too, sometimes do have problems
when using MIDI hardware, because of some limitations of MIDI, but OTOH
this industry standard is a blessing. Networking of sequencers, sound
modules, effects, master keyboards, sync to tape recorders, hard disk
recorders etc. is possible, for less money, without taking care from
which vendor a keyboard, an effect, a mobo is. Linux is an exception, we
do have issues when using MIDI. But is it really MIDI that is bad? I
guess MIDI on Linux needs more attention.

Internal Linux most things are ok, but networking with usual MIDI
equipment musicians, audio and video studios have got still is a PITA.
Cv would solve that?

2 Cents,
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Mar 24 12:15:02 2010