On 3/4/12, J. Liles <malnourite@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> I personally don't think that the way notes are encoded is the primary
> limitation imposed by MIDI. A note is a frequency, an attack/decay
> modulation, and a duration.
apparently you're forgetting or have not been a part of the many
debates with the music technology community about how to define "a
note". personally i'm happy with what you wrote, but i know several
people who have made cogent arguments that defining notes in terms of
frequencies completely misses one of the most musical semantics.
> The way OSC is used, and in libmapper in particular, is to say things
> about the input device, not the music, which, as far as the input
> device is concerned, doesn't exist.
as as receiver of OSC, i'd be entirely happy with such a standard. the
problem for users is that it leaves the mappings unspecified, and
although there are some clever solutions for this (several of them),
from a user's perspective it always adds an extra layer of complexity.
contrast with MIDI, where almost all the messages that most people
will generate have a defined meaning even from the sender's
perspective (though sure, the receiver can still map it to something
else if it wants to).
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Mar 4 16:15:02 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Mar 04 2012 - 16:15:02 EET