Why MIDI? (was Re: Why DIY? (was Re: [sdiy] Another new hard to find part....))

[Glen]

At 07:46 AM 7/8/04 , cheater wrote:

>Anything non-extensible is proprietary to me.
>Anything not being developed anymore, that is an anachronism, and that is
>slowly becoming useless but *not* obsolete because of corporate backing
>is proprietary, to me.

I'm sorry, but none of those things fit the definition of the English word
"proprietary".

As for "non-extensible", that isn't entirely true. There is always the
possibility of using system exclusive messages, for one thing. There are
also continuous controller messages that not reserved for any definite purpose.

As for not being developed anymore, that isn't entirely true either. The
hardware specs, for all practical purposes, are frozen for now; but the MMA
is practically constantly adding more to the software side of the spec.

As for being an anachronism, that's an exaggeration. I would use that term
only for a spec that no longer had any practical and useful purpose. MIDI
certainly has some practical and useful applications, even today. Could we
have something better? Of course. Is MIDI currently useless and abandoned,
(as the word anachronism would imply to me), of course not.

As for slowly becoming useless, that happens to almost everything in
existence.  ;)

As for it not becoming obsolete due to corporate backing, you are correct.
Is there a real problem with manufacturers continuing to support a standard
that so many people currently use and appreciate?


I would like to see continued MIDI support, but I would also like to see
the emergence of new audio and synth communication standards that co-exist
with MIDI. That way, we would always have the option of connecting an old
MIDI synth to the newer gear. We would also have the option to connect two
or more pieces of newer gear, using the new interface standard, and enjoy
advanced features that MIDI cannot accommodate. I haven't looked at the
specifics of mLan, but it probably fills most of the "holes" in MIDI. I
just wish something like mLan was more universally implemented by all the
manufacturers. In time, I suppose it probably will be.

I agree that MIDI is limited. I agree that new interface standards should
be developed. I just don't think the MIDI itself should be tossed out just
yet, because of the great mass of current instruments that only communicate
via MIDI. I also don't think that MIDI is proprietary, because anyone can
get the details of the interface and associated protocols, and start
building equipment or software with a MIDI implementation.


later,
Glen