[sdiy] Re: Why MIDI? (was Re:

[Rainer Buchty]

> Not when you have to configure 1000 things just to get it going - I
> think we all know what I'm talking about here.
>
> Akai samplers anyone?

What does this have to do with MIDI? Go bug Akai.

If, for instance, a synth does only understand controls via SysEx then
it's not the problem of MIDI -- but the manufacturer, because he didn't
care about $Bx messages.

> I don't know what MCS is; and I shouldn't need to.

Then don't complain about a *protocol* where you only have a vague clue
about, didn't bother to inform yourself (although simple googling after
"MIDI Specification" would have given an instan hit), and base your
argumentation on a rather eccentric definition of "proprietary" and an
obviously defective or just crappy MIDI2CV converter.

> Btw, I shouldn't have to care about what UART is.

You don't need to. Just as you don't need to know a bit about the MIDI
protocol, its timing, or what MCS is. You just connect the cable. All you
need to know is how to assign channels to tracks/machines, which is
somewhat inevitable unless you're not demanding that everyone worldwide is
using the same setup.

I think we all agree here that there's plenty of room for improvement of
the original MIDI standard (and as Paul showed there's an alternative
which should satisfy your needs); but I can't fight the feeling that
you're viewing MIDI from an entirely wrong angle.

Kinda like bashing strollers for their bad off-road and underwater
performance.

Rainer