Casio CZ/ VZ/ FZ - Pro Series

On 22 Aug, 2013, at 10:30 PM, steve_the_composer wrote:

> I am not sure I saved or bookmarked the MMA document that says that  
> midi as a vehicle of communication is not limited to 31.25 kbps. I  
> will look for it.

You are right. As I have mentioned, it was SCI who used in some of  
their machines faster MIDI.
>
> In case its not clear, I am not saying "Bullshit."

Nobody said it was you :-)

> Rather, I am agreeing that >>in the past<< gear makers (and hackers)  
> used the 31.25 kbps as a convenience so that 5-pin din midi gear  
> could communicate with all other 5-pin din midi gear.

This is how MIDI was designed.
>
> However, this is not to say that future midi gear couldn't be  
> designed and implemented with different connectors, perhaps faster  
> opto-isolators (if they exist)--or even micro-processors with built- 
> in serial devices, and considerably faster speeds. Rates could even  
> be selectable.
>
> And there could be step-down devices so that older gear works with a  
> newer system and is thereby not made obsolete.

While still years ago this idea was offered I don't think anybody  
today will lose time with thinking about this. There's no reason to  
try to improve MIDI. There's nothing to improve, because if we improve  
it, lot of old devices will become incompatible and obsolete. There  
are only some small addition to MIDI standard from time to time, but  
basic idea is the same as 30 years ago. And even older because MIDI  
was based on older standards.

So if really there's a need for improvement, then some new standard  
should be invented. But I don't see any reason for it. With modern  
multiple output MIDI interfaces and powerful computers there's hardly  
any problem with controlling huge MIDI system. Recently I have 672  
MIDI channels connected to 10 years old Mac G4 PPC with OS 9 Classic,  
and can use maximally 512 MIDI channels at once due limitation in soft  
sequencer (Opcode Studio Vision Pro). Until now I have used maximally  
about 100 channels for orchestra emulation...

There can be some latency, but when we are aware of it, we can live  
with it and compensate it by clever programming.

  And of course some bridge between modern standard and MIDI - this  
will be necessary. But it exists - USB/MIDI interface is good example.

> With the arduino --> serial usb-midi bridge --> midi-ox --> e-mu 2x2  
> usb interface test I did, clearly something performed the step down.  
> I am guessing it might well be the e-mu 2x2 (and its drivers), but I  
> cannot think of a way to test that.

Definitely it's USB/MIDI device. It must convert fast USB protocol to  
slow MIDI protocol, and change data format.
>
> I suppose I could buy 1x1 usb-midi interface "cable" and run the  
> same tests. If I find that sysex doesn't work properly but note and  
> other data does, then it might not be the interface doing the  
> stepping down. However, if the 1x1 fails, that would lead me to  
> conclude its in the interface.

Of course it's in interface.
>
> Anyone want to subsidize the research? How about try to replicate it?
>
> Steve

Daniel Forro