MOTM

This is probably a RYFM (read your flamin' manual) question, but I'll ask if 
there are any pointers someone could share...  How does one synchronize 
tracks that are recorded at different times?  That is, MIDI track #1 is sent 
player-piano style to the MOTM.  The audio produced is recorded onto computer 
hard disk.  Now, MIDI track #2 is sent player-piano style to the MOTM.  The 
audio produced is recorded onto computer hard disk in a different file from 
track #1.  (Will mix 'em down later.)  If the composition is long, the sync 
will be horrible.  What is the "right way" to fix this?  What if the 
"recorder" computer is a different computer than the "Sonar" (MIDI 
player-piano) host?  CPU clocks are way different!

Assume the following:

8 MIDI tracks exist under the auspices of Cakewalk "Sonar" on a Wintel 
computer
MIDI-CV (for MOTM) interfaced to computer via MOTU "midi express"
MOTM system only large enough to realize one quality MIDI track at a time
Hard disk "recorder" is another, separate Wintel machine

Without some sort of "master clock", the tracks will invariably get out of 
sync with each other.  The longer the piece, the worse the sync-loss will be. 
 Am not certain if I have the correct hardware to eliminate this problem.  
All product manuals yak on and on about sync, but no single manual accounts 
for the pieces of equipment I have and how they should be tied together to 
minimize minor timekeeping differences.  Is there a "standard" by which this 
is done?  The MIDI standard has been around for a long time.  There MUST be 
some "Musical Instrument Synchronization Interface" standard, isn't there?

I am completely ignorant on the subject of syncing so if someone knows of a 
suitable primer, I'd be overjoyed to read it.

Many thanks in advance.

Cheers!
Tom Farrand (in blissful ignorance)

> Assume the following:
>
> 8 MIDI tracks exist under the auspices of Cakewalk "Sonar" on a Wintel
>computer
> MIDI-CV (for MOTM) interfaced to computer via MOTU "midi express"
> MOTM system only large enough to realize one quality MIDI track at a time
> Hard disk "recorder" is another, separate Wintel machine
>
> Without some sort of "master clock", the tracks will invariably get out
>of >sync with each other. 
>
> I am completely ignorant on the subject of syncing so if someone knows of
>>a suitable primer, I'd be overjoyed to read it.

I don't have the time to go into this in detail.  The simplest solution is
to put your MIDI sequencing and audio recording on the same machine running
the same program for both applications.  Since you already have a hard
drive, interface, software, and peripherals, you can build a new Wintel
machine powerful enough for less than $500.

If you insist on syncing one machine to the other, which is almost
guaranteed to be a huge @#$%&* PITA, you first have to find out which sync
standards are supported by your MIDI software, your hard disk recording
software, and your MIDI interface, then add an interface to your hard disk
recorder that supports that standard.  It's fairly easy to convert SMPTE to
MIDI Time Code.  Worst case scenario, you might have to stripe your hard
disk recorder and buy two new interfaces.  Also, do not confuse MTC with
MIDI beat clock (used to sync sequencers and drum machines) which is not
suitable for syncing audio.  If I were you, I would do web searches for
SMPTE, MTC, Cakewalk Sonar, MOTU MIDI Express, and whatever hard disk
recorder you are using.

Yes, you could use a stand-alone master clock with both word clock and
SMPTE and slave everything else to it.  That is the very best solution if
you have to deal with a number of different boxes or different types of
media, but it is also the most complicated and the most expensive.

Make your life easy.

Record it back to the Sonar computer. Record it in mono - cuts the 
computer's work in half. If your computer can't handle this, spend 
$150 bucks and get it upgraded to a decent processor.

Because Sonar would be triggering the MOTM, it will stay in sync. 
Your audio tracks may be slightly delayed from the MIDI, but they 
will be consistently delayed. You can shift the audio tracks to the 
left after they're recorded in Sonar, if necessary.

Good luck with it, & post some MP3's!






--- In motm@y..., mbedtom@a... wrote:
> This is probably a RYFM (read your flamin' manual) question, but 
I'll ask if 
> there are any pointers someone could share...  How does one 
synchronize 
> tracks that are recorded at different times?  That is, MIDI track 
#1 is sent 
> player-piano style to the MOTM.  The audio produced is recorded 
onto computer 
> hard disk.  Now, MIDI track #2 is sent player-piano style to the 
MOTM.  The 
> audio produced is recorded onto computer hard disk in a different 
file from 
> track #1.  (Will mix 'em down later.)  If the composition is long, 
the sync 
> will be horrible.  What is the "right way" to fix this?  What if 
the 
> "recorder" computer is a different computer than the "Sonar" (MIDI 
> player-piano) host?  CPU clocks are way different!
> 
> Assume the following:
> 
> 8 MIDI tracks exist under the auspices of Cakewalk "Sonar" on a 
Wintel 
> computer
> MIDI-CV (for MOTM) interfaced to computer via MOTU "midi express"
> MOTM system only large enough to realize one quality MIDI track at 
a time
> Hard disk "recorder" is another, separate Wintel machine
> 
> Without some sort of "master clock", the tracks will invariably get 
out of 
> sync with each other.  The longer the piece, the worse the sync-
loss will be. 
>  Am not certain if I have the correct hardware to eliminate this 
problem.  
> All product manuals yak on and on about sync, but no single manual 
accounts 
> for the pieces of equipment I have and how they should be tied 
together to 
> minimize minor timekeeping differences.  Is there a "standard" by 
which this 
> is done?  The MIDI standard has been around for a long time.  There 
MUST be 
> some "Musical Instrument Synchronization Interface" standard, isn't 
there?
> 
> I am completely ignorant on the subject of syncing so if someone 
knows of a 

> suitable primer, I'd be overjoyed to read it.
> 
> Many thanks in advance.
> 
> Cheers!
> Tom Farrand (in blissful ignorance)