[LAU] Replacing/enhancing MIDI, and OSC
Harry van Haaren
harryhaaren at gmail.com
Mon Feb 16 17:36:42 UTC 2015
There are two things to keep in mind here:
1. Are events handled sequentially in time?
2. How many events can be transmitted in a unit of time?
If events are handled sequentially in time, then it is not possible to
play a chord of multiple notes at _exactly_ the same time.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Jonathan E. Brickman
<jeb at ponderworthy.com> wrote:
> 1. Is MIDI-over-USB as constrained in timing, as MIDI-over-DIN?
No, the MIDI "cable" baud rate is 31250, while MIDI over USB runs at
112500. Its faster - but there are still limitations.
Regarding the above:
-Sequentially handled: yes
-Bandwidth: lots better than DIN-cable MIDI, but limited
> 2. I had not heard of MIDI-over-OSC.
Yes - almost everything is possible with OSC - any form of data can be
passed around as a "blob" of binary data, timestamps are available to
be used for timing, and "bundles" can be used to have multiple events
be processed at exactly the same time.
Sequential handling? Yes - unless in a bundle.
> 3. Is JACK MIDI constrained in the low timing resolution of original MIDI, or is it more flexible?
JACK MIDI is sample accurate - and multiple events can be written on a
single audio frame (internally in JACK graph).
Sequentially: No - except on playback to hardware devices
Bandwidth: configurable (at compile time IIRC), but "lots".
Not much techie stats online available - http://www.nerds.de/en/ipmidi.html
No details easily found on how it actually works -
Another list of MIDI over IP projects:
To sum up - JACK MIDI is awesome - its widely used, it is
sample-accurate within the JACK graph, and events can occur at exactly
the same times. With the QMidiNet project, broadcasting JACK MIDI over
the network is possible,
I've not extensively used / or concidered-using the others - there's
too much choice, and the advantage over JACK MIDI is minimal to
More information about the Linux-audio-user