How much MIDI do you use live?

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Prague:

A computer doesn't need Ethernet, either. It is simply an interface...

Your computer can, for example, use HTTP and TCP/IP without Ethernet--just run a Web server on it. (Ethernet resides at the OSI data link and physical layers.) Moreover, you can open a HTML file without HTTP or TCP/IP...

[soundscape]

The point is that MIDI exists as data, or it exists as a complete interface including electrical representation (or as MIDI over Firewire or USB.)

 

While I'll bet that what's going on internally has very little to do with the lower layers of MIDI, I'll bet the actual data is closely related to MIDI (note on, velocity, note off, etc.) such that translating to MIDI and vice versa is not a big deal. Roughly, this is MIDI in terms of the 'event list' that you can view in any sequencer, not the exact binary representation of that data, much less transport layer or electrical considerations.

 

For example, if I remember correctly from the Kurzweil manual, all parameters are represented as either -1 to 1 or 0 to 1 (presumably floating point) internally. So it's quite possible that the 7-bit MIDI values (0-127) are actually mapped to that internal floating point representation.

 

Here we go, from p533 of the K2661 Musician's Guide in PDF format:

 

"Well return for a minute to the notion that the K2661 is an integrated system consisting of a MIDI-driven sound engine and a MIDI-driven effects processor. The sound engine responds to MIDI messages received at the MIDI In port and from the front panel, as does the effects processor.

"The K2661s control sources use their own internal signal format for interpreting control messages and communicating them to the sound engine. Every control source sent from your MIDI controller to the K2661s sound engine is translated to a value in the range from -1 to +1. This consistency enables the sound engine to process control source signals very efficiently.

"Conversely, the K2661s internal control source signals are translated to MIDI values before being sent to the MIDI Out port."

[dp2]

Originally posted by Prague:

It's like, "When a tree falls in a forest, and no one hears it, does it make a sound?". No, it makes no sound. It produces sound waves, but an ear converts these into sound.

 

Does an unconnected battery "produce" electricity? No. There is no current, so there is no electricity.

 

Since a MIDI In port provides the load (interpretation) for a MIDI Out port, the actual data is not produced until it is received. So, it doesn't exist until received.

 

 

... maybe. Heavy, man ....

Using that style of arguing, which your argument uses the 'ad ignorantium' logical falacy; one could justify that theft is only wrong when the thief gets caught. This kind of argument ignores the fact that whether or not the thief gets caught, that there is a victim.

 

Most forrests with trees are inhabited by creatures--whether human or not--with timpanic membranes, so the fallen tree would generate an audible sound that would be heard by those creatures.

 

Whether or not a battery produces electricity, it still has potential energy (that can be used later).

 

Whether or not data gets received/sent, if it exists then it exists. If the data didn't exist, then it could never be received/sent.

 

"If the glove doesn't fit, then you must aquit!" ;-)

[Prague]

My thinking uses my thinking.

 

I guess, so far, I agree with Sven. No big deal, though. It's mind over matter. If you don't mind, I don't matter.

[dp2]

Originally posted by Prague:

My thinking uses my thinking.

 

I guess, so far, I agree with Sven. No big deal, though. It's mind over matter. If you don't mind, I don't matter.

A lot of people in Galilio's day disagreed with him too, but that lack of agreement still doesn't change the facts.

 

If the data exists in any form on the keyboard--which you know that it does on the K2600 (revisit soundscape's comment [where he also quoted from the manual] if you doubt this)--then it has to get manipulated[/b] internally at some point if it's sent.

 

You're correct: it's no big deal. You're also wrong: data can't only exist in transit. Outbound data has to be stored or generated internally. As I've mentioned over and over before, outbound data (by its nature) has to get manipulated internally somehow as a function of routing it out of the keyboard. Similarly, inbound data also (by its nature) has to get manipulated internally somehow as a function of routing it where it needs to go within a keyboard.

 

There's absolutely no wiggle room here; these points are indisputable. This is basic Electrical/Computer/Software Engineering 101 stuff.

 

By the way, FYI: data doesn't only exist in a binary state within computers or embedded systems (like the keyboard in question). Ever heard of fuzzy logic? Electrical (and electronic) systems traditionally describe the high and low voltage states as 1s and 0s respectively. However, in systems that incorporate fuzzy logic, they also describe several intermediate states inbetween the high and low voltage states. Thus data sent/received in these systems don't only exist as 1s and 0s; rather, the intermediate states can be mapped parametrically (typically using floating-point values) depending upon the number of intermediate states.

 

I suspect that the ribbons, faders, wheels, and alpha dial on the K2600 all map their data using some variant of fuzzy logic.

[Prague]

Go get 'em, tiger.

[Sven Golly]

Damn, how far afield are you (dp2 and soundscape) going to go, completely ignoring the original point?

 

The statement that Soundscape made was that, internal to the Kurzweil K2600, MIDI was used to transmit keyboard input to the tone generator. THE KEY WORD IS "MIDI". Get it?

 

Your superiority complex based on your "Musician/IT" dual role is completely flawed as well... not only do I share a similar background, I also possess my B.Sc. in Electronics Engineering (although, admittedly, it's been a decade since I practiced within that discipline). So you can get off your high horse any time now.

 

This discussion need not broach the subject of electronics anyway. A simple statement was made, I countered it, and thus far nobody has refuted my argument... merely skirted around it.

 

So have fun roaming far afield. Should you ever want to come back to the actual discussion that we were having, I'll be happy to read it.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

Damn, how far afield are you (dp2 and soundscape) going to go, completely ignoring the original point?

 

The statement that Soundscape made was that, internal to the Kurzweil K2600, MIDI was used to transmit keyboard input to the tone generator. THE KEY WORD IS "MIDI". Get it?

Where on earth did I say that?

[dp2]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

Damn, how far afield are you (dp2 and soundscape) going to go, completely ignoring the original point?

 

The statement that Soundscape made was that, internal to the Kurzweil K2600, MIDI was used to transmit keyboard input to the tone generator. THE KEY WORD IS "MIDI". Get it?

 

Your superiority complex based on your "Musician/IT" dual role is completely flawed as well... not only do I share a similar background, I also possess my B.Sc. in Electronics Engineering (although, admittedly, it's been a decade since I practiced within that discipline). So you can get off your high horse any time now.

 

This discussion need not broach the subject of electronics anyway. A simple statement was made, I countered it, and thus far nobody has refuted my argument... merely skirted around it.

 

So have fun roaming far afield. Should you ever want to come back to the actual discussion that we were having, I'll be happy to read it.

Sven, you've got me totally wrong. I'm not high and mighty; it's not in my nature. I know I'm no better nor worse than anyone else, and I know that the moment I'd think such a thing that a catastrophic fall would for me would be imminent.

 

It seems you've completely missed my point. I got your point; I focused narrowly on 2 words of your statement: only "exists". I never questioned your background; I assumed you had a strong, technical background (and figured you were an EE, physicist, or CE) due to some of the comments I've seen you make in this and many other threads.

 

Here's a slightly edited portion of my reply and your response:

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

Originally posted by dp2:

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

MIDI data only "exists" when you connect two instruments to one another.

Actually, I don't think that's 100% accurate. . . .

Based on your statement, it would appear to me that you are misunderstanding what is meant by MIDI data. Are you familiar with the structure of the MIDI data stream? . . .

I only mentioned my background, because you dismissed my comments as ignorant and uninformed. You accused me of not understanding MIDI; I never attacked or even questioned your knowledge of MIDI.

 

If you'd stop being so defensive for a moment, and if you'd actually pay closer attention to that which I've written, then you'd see I never intended to refute your point. If you had carefully read and pondered what I wrote, then you should have noticed that I actually agreed with about 95-99% of what you wrote.

 

Believe it or not, I actually think you're usually pretty cool, and I normally enjoy reading your comments. However, sometimes--especially whenever someone makes a reply to one of your comments that you don't like--you can be a little heavy-handed in your rebuttals. Perhaps it didn't come across in what I wrote, I actually have learned quite a few things in this thread that I didn't know.

 

Nevertheless, my comment (which you might still perceive as a tangent--and that's perfectly fine with me) was not wrong, and I'll always stand my ground--politely (at least I hope that the tone of my replies came across politely) and firmly.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

Damn, how far afield are you (dp2 and soundscape) going to go, completely ignoring the original point?

 

[snip]

 

This discussion need not broach the subject of electronics anyway. A simple statement was made, I countered it, and thus far nobody has refuted my argument... merely skirted around it.

OK... let's back up a bit here... this all started with:

 

Originally posted by soundscape:

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

I assume your question refers to the actual use of midi cables and not just the use of midi per se. Everytime I press a key (on my stage piano) I am using midi.

Depends on whether the 'internal' data representation (i.e., from the keyboard to the tone generator) is actually MIDI, doesn't it?

Which, in fact, says that it might not be MIDI. You replied to this, and I wrote:

 

Originally posted by soundscape:

Yep, that's exactly what I was suggesting.

So... I'm not exactly trying to "refute your argument."

 

I'm just going through all the stuff that makes up what we call "MIDI," and also find out what I can about what's going on "inside" keyboards. Hence the above post that quotes from the Kurzweil manual. My hope is that this stuff would be informative--both to fill out any gaps in my knowledge and for anyone reading this thread.

[Sven Golly]

Okay, I will apologize to Soundscape, as I attributed the post "I don't think that's 100% accurate" to him. My bad. He and I are on the same page.

 

DP2, if I came across as defensive, I apologize. I probably shouldn't have replied to this thread at 3am, after a gig and a 1-hour drive home.

 

That being said, however, you still seem to be missing my point. I'm not saying that data does not exist with the keyboard; I stated that the data that exists within the keyboard is not MIDI.

 

I'm confused as to why this point has been ignored? What am I missing? I got 5 hours sleep this morning, so I don't think I'm misreading anything?

 

Prague seems to understand what I'm saying, so I know I'm not babbling incoherently...

[dp2]

Don't worry about it. I'm sure we've all been there (or will get there relatively soon).

 

I believe I also understand what you meant. I believe you were thinking of MIDI data as the data being transfered over the wire (aka the MIDI stream data [a signal]). I didn't ignore that point; rather, I simply tried to point out that there is MIDI data (which doesn't necessarily have to be a signal) that exists within the keyboard. However, I probably should have been a bit clearer too, because I didn't intend to infer or imply that both forms of MIDI data are exactly the same.

 

I was thinking of things more in terms of data travelling between multiple layers of the MIDI application stack. I think soundscape saw and framed what I was trying to say more effectively than I did. Additionally, Prague presented a rather interesting point, basically, posing the question of when to call that data, MIDI data. I was simply trying to help enrich the discussion by expanding the idea of MIDI data to also include data that's not in the same form as the data passing over the wire.

 

You know it's one of those hardware/software things. Ask an EE, CE, and SE what a computer is, and you'll get a million different answers: all of them wrong (from a certain viewpoint) and all of them correct (from another viewpoint).

[Sven Golly]

dp2... please, please, please... understand that MIDI data is a very specific formatting of signals.

 

By saying that you "didn't intend to infer or imply that both forms of MIDI data are exactly the same" you're implying that there is more than one "format" of MIDI data. There is only one form of MIDI data; change the message packets to 16-bit, and it's no longer MIDI data. Represent aftertouch with 12 bits, it's no longer MIDI data. It stops being MIDI data when it no longer conforms to the specification.

 

That is the point I've been (repeatedly) trying to make. To label something as "MIDI" is incorrect, unless it conforms to the very specific set of rules that define what MIDI is, and what it is not. Pass a 16-bit message representing velocity, that ain't MIDI. Pass a voltage representing a controller position, that ain't MIDI.

 

Just because an animal has 4 legs, a tail, and is brown, doesn't make it a dog.

 

You've been playing fast and loose with the terminology; previously you stated that there's no "wiggle room." Well, you've gotten yourself completely wedged in here, I'm afraid.

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with one person's perspective for 'right' and 'wrong'. This is completely black and white.

 

I'm really hoping this is becoming clearer, for everyone reading.

[steadyb]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

Just because an animal has 4 legs, a tail, and is brown, doesn't make it a dog.

And 7 or 8 drinks in 45 minutes doesn't make...

[steadyb]

it become clearer.

[steadyb]

Sorry... I

[steadyb]

have the hiccups.

[burningbusch]

Originally posted by dp2:

I was thinking of things more in terms of data travelling between multiple layers of the MIDI application stack.

Multiple layers of the MIDI application stack. Where did this fabrication come from?

 

Busch.

[burningbusch]

Maybe Dave Bryce could ask Dave Smith to comment on how and where MIDI is generated in a Poly Evolver and we can get beyond all this conjecture.

 

Busch.

[Sven Golly]

Bah, what does Dave Smith know about MIDI?

 

 

Hiya, Busch.

 

(please, dear God in heaven, nobody miss the absolute sarcasm and tongue-in-cheekness that pervades this post... )

[soundscape]

Originally posted by burningbusch:

Originally posted by dp2:

I was thinking of things more in terms of data travelling between multiple layers of the MIDI application stack.

Multiple layers of the MIDI application stack. Where did this fabrication come from?

 

Busch.

I think he means...

 

http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/18/t/020749/p/2.html#000043

[Jazzed]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

dp2... please, please, please... understand that MIDI data is a very specific formatting of signals.

In other words, MIDI is a standard.

 

Anyone can clonk here to read about the actual specifications required for something to be "MIDI", right from the MIDI Manufacturers Assocation themselves (no, I have NOT read all of it myself). Edit: someone's already posted from midi.org...I should have read this whole thread first.

 

Basically, Sven's right.

[Sven Golly]

Originally posted by Jazzed:

In other words, MIDI is a standard.

I was certain I'd phrased it that way earlier in this thread, so I decided to be more specific... but yes, absolutely correct. Thanks for the help, Jazzed.

[Jazzed]

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

I was certain I'd phrased it that way earlier in this thread, so I decided to be more specific... but yes, absolutely correct. Thanks for the help, Jazzed.

Eee...note to self, read entire thread before posting.

[Sven Golly]

Originally posted by Jazzed:

Originally posted by Sven Golly:

I was certain I'd phrased it that way earlier in this thread, so I decided to be more specific... but yes, absolutely correct. Thanks for the help, Jazzed.

Eee...note to self, read entire thread before posting.

LOL... no worries, this one has had some pretty lengthy entries to digest... but restating the core argument can't hurt.

[steadyb]

Does anyone know how they got that cool keyboard sound in

"Won't Get Fooled Again"???

 

Was that MIDI???