Trautonium II

[Martin Czech]

> >> One question remains: how could we emulate the manual.  How could we do
> >> this with MIDI? Is it possible that MIDI of 1999 can not give the same
> >> performance then a 1935 Trautonium ?
> >> 
> >> I fear so.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> m.c.
> >> 
> >IMHO the answer is probably no for emulating the manual with MIDI, since
> >MIDI only gives you 128 discrete pitches and the manual is a
> >continuous-pitch device.  You don't have to use MIDI of course.  A
> 
> I'm afraid I haven't followed this very closely, but what is the problem
> with using the wheel channel (+/-8192 steps of resolution)? This runs
> independent of the note-on/note-off stuff. You may want to use the note
> channel as a gate/trigger, but ignore the actual value. Obviously this
> would give the folks at the IMA a fit, but it already exists in the spec,
> so you could use existing MIDI software for sequencing/recording.

Yes, but now the problem is that you have a 14 bit value for each
note, and you can't deal with that in a sequencer, in a way that means
ccomposing things on the computer and then let go. You can play something
and record it, however, that's true. But Sala uses leather wrapped metal
"keys" over the string as well, to hit the right tuning places at once.
Perhaps one can combine usuall midi note on information with 14 bit pitch
bend somehow.  Maybe a special sofware preprocessor or even sequencer
would be needed to combine both information in a clever way, to make it
usable, ie. typing note ons will be displayed at once as 14 bit value and
vice versa, so both representations of pitch could be used simulteneously.

This is not the case in todays midi tools.

I think, this sticking to the usuall keyboard idea is one of the most
sinfull things of the midi standard, but it can be that the road was
allready taken when Dr. Moog presented his first system (Buchla had also
other means of control).  Thus we are restricted to fixed frequencys,
like some 400 years ago, when the first organs appeared.....


m.c.