MIDI 2.0

CheapEdge said:
Well, have a look at this and you get an idea of what we may expect.
https://www.midi.org/articles-old/t...industry-amei-announce-midi-2-0tm-prototyping

Cheers, Rob
Click to expand...

Yeah. I looked at that. This seems to be what they’re going to do besides the 2.0 logo.

“The MIDI 2.0 initiative updates MIDI with auto-configuration, new DAW/web integrations, extended resolution, increased expressiveness, and tighter timing ”

I don’t know what the auto configuration is. That might be interesting. The DAW/web integration sounds like an expanded sound set. As far as the extended resolution, increased expressiveness and tighter time, it seems that’s part of most DAWs already.

I’d be interested to hear what others think what these features will enable us to do.

Or I’ll just wait...
 
So, this means MIDI 2.0 talks about the extension of the MIDI protocol specification only. The hardware interface is not discussed in this context because the assumption is that most devices are connected via USB. The usage of the old 5-pin DIN connector is considered legacy, future h/w implementations will more likely be based on Ethernet like connections once transport protocols have been defined.
 
ChristThePhone said:
The usage of the old 5-pin DIN connector is considered legacy, future h/w implementations will more likely be based on Ethernet like connections once transport protocols have been defined.
Click to expand...
I could get behind RJ-45 being the spec, although if that's the route we're going I'd prefer they work out some licensing deal for etherCON.

If 5 pins is enough and they just want to get away from the 5-pin DIN MIDI uses now, there's also a 5-pin XLR connector.
 
deathbyguitar said:
Dear god, they better not be. The current USB situation makes no sense. USB 3, USB C, Thunderbolt, ect. What the hell were they thinking?
Click to expand...

USB-C is the only way to go now. Over one connector you get speed up to 40Gbps and almost any kind of data (not just USB).
 
I have been a MIDI user for a long time, and honestly, I don't know it continues to exist. Yes, it's simple and easy to implement, but if I have to use a physical cable to connect anything, I'd much rather use a communications protocol that is hot-pluggable, supports more complex messages, and can carry higher power to peripherals. My laptop has USB-C, which has some great things going for it, although it means some of my existing peripherals require adaptors.

I am using USB-C for almost everything that is connected via a cable, and I am very satisfied with it. For stage use, I currently connect my AxeFX III to a Mastermind MMGT10 via 7 pin MIDI, which carries power. That requires a cable long enough to reach from the front of the stage to my rack, I have a 30 foot cable. I'd use Faslink via XLR if my MMGT supported it, but alas, it does not. In a better scenario, I would like a reliable wireless comms protocol between my AxeFX and its controller pedal, with a rechargeable battery pack for the board. The messaging protocol doesn't matter, as long as it works. Consider this an official wish list item for Fractal :)

MIDI 2 includes some interesting enhancements, but I currently can't think of any significant gaps that it needs to fill. If it's designed to extend the base messaging and data exchange capabilities, then perhaps it just becomes a new library for any messaging network. However, my laptop is connected to a monitor, high-speed NAS, digital audio interface, gigabit network, and a dozen peripherals - and has a SINGLE USB-C cable plugged into it, which also provides power to everything other than monitor. The only MIDI cables that I own at this point are my 7 pin cables for my MMGT (a primary cable, and a backup cable). Once someone sorts out the wireless wish list item, it just comes down to choosing between (1) non-powered wireless comms, likely with lower data density, and (2) physical connection that can carry power and high-density comms.

Just my $0.02
 
Sleestak said:
I have been a MIDI user for a long time, and honestly, I don't know it continues to exist. Yes, it's simple and easy to implement, but if I have to use a physical cable to connect anything, I'd much rather use a communications protocol that is hot-pluggable, supports more complex messages, and can carry higher power to peripherals.
Click to expand...
MIDI continues to exist because it's universal. Every piece of gear is born speaking that language. Any new and improved standard will first have to make the leap from proprietary to universal, and that'll require adoption by many manufacturers. And no matter how good that new standard is, it'll leave 40 years' worth of incompatible products in its wake. MIDI will put up quite a struggle before it succumbs.
 
I don't know if anyone here can answer this but I have a question regarding the speed of MIDI over Bluetooth. Currently I can use a Roll Seaboard with MPE via Bluetooth and it works fine. I know MPE will be/is part of the MIDI 2 spec. What I'm wondering is if, with the improved timing and higher resolution of controllers in MIDI 2, will MIDI over Bluetooth still be possible. I know it will probably be okay for recording purposes but I'm wondering about using it in real time.
 
Well I have been using midi since the late 80's and still use it today quite a bit. Never any issues about slow for my uses. So, iow, I don't care! Hah! I also agree with Matt, talks been around for a long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom