[sdiy] MIDI output current and MIDI-driven gadgets

[Michael E Caloroso]

Because there are too many cooks in the kitchen.

MIDI originally specified inexpensive components which add about $25 to the
BOM cost (1983 economy).  It was also the easiest solution to prevent
interface problems.

The biggest barrier to acceptance of MIDI was getting the manufacturers in
agreement and on the same page.  Adding a UART to a new protocol would
invite all kinds of complications.  A UART-based protocol would not only
invite disputes on low level programming algorithms, there would be an
endless dispute over which UART.  Or which microcontroller or CPU with
onboard UARTs.  Not only are UARTs not inexpensive components, but they go
obsolete.  The MIDI organization mandated the components that will not go
obsolete while mandating the optoisolator but not the specific type (the
spec does not mandate 6N138/9 or PC900).

In 1983 at the birth of MIDI, there were about 10 member manufacturers on
the MIDI committee,  Today there are over a hundred of them (
https://midi.org/partners).  The organization would have to get tenfold
more members to agree on any UART-based proposal, which is a very very tall
order  Dave Smith had said even getting ten to agree back in 1983 was a
major headache that he cares not to repeat.

Ain't gonna happen.

MC

On Thu, Jun 4, 2026 at 9:31 AM Benjamin Tremblay via Synth-diy <
synth-diy at synth-diy.org> wrote:

> Why can’t we just develop a new protocol based on cheap UARTs and passive
> components that runs I dunno 25x faster and works like patch cords instead
> of hubs, isn’t gated by some consortium, and is backward compatible if you
> add a cheap adapter?
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20260605/30d6274d/attachment.htm>