[LAU] MIDI or OSC?

[Ken Restivo]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 09:47:23AM +0100, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
> On Wed, April 11, 2007 09:03, Ken Restivo wrote:
> >
> > I'm playing around with hacking together a custom softsynth. In this case
> > I'm building it out of "pre-fab" parts using a HLL (ChucK), but I think
> > I'd be asking this question regardless of the level at which I was doing
> > this or the language I was using.
> >
> > My question is: should I use MIDI or OSC as the control interface? OSC
> > seems a lot more flexible, and more modern, and I've already found a few
> > things that would be much cleaner in OSC. But I'm worried about latency
> > in going from MIDI to OSC, or any other gotchas that might be awaiting.
> > Then again, this is 2007, and byte-oriented protocols are so 1980's, and
> > maybe I'm over-worrying this.
> >
> > But, surveying the Linux softsynth landscape, I see OM/Ingen and
> > LinuxSampler and maybe a few others using OSC as their control interface,
> > and everything else using MIDI. And I have to wonder if there's a reason
> > for that other than just history.
> >
> 
> Since when has been linuxsampler OSCified ? Nope. I'm pretty sure is has
> no OSC support whatsoever. Linuxsampler certainly uses MIDI for input
> control.
> 
> Confusion must come from that it uses some dedicated administrative and
> control protocol, LSCP, which runs on straight client-server fashion, on
> top of bare TCP sockets (and not UDP as in OSC, I think).
> 

Thanks. I was indeed confusing LSCP with OSC. Sorry about that.

- -ken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGHaDve8HF+6xeOIcRAmtmAJ91N1wTWKqRERq/0gNqBaV4fTHjkQCfVICt
PX9CG3jQcm2/7y/O1yL2kXw=
=3PBK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----