[LAU] Open Sound Control: Is it still a thing?

[robertlazarski]

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 12:26 PM Paul Davis <paul at linuxaudiosystems.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 3:52 PM robertlazarski <robertlazarski at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Still, I also work a lot with udp for high volume applications and
>> despite its shortcomings I would choose udp over MIDI if I had a choice. I
>> get frustrated with midi often due to lack of universal MTC/MMC
>>
>
> This seems odd to me. There's no single OSC message you can send that will
> have anything like the result of *supported* MTC/MMC in more than one OSC
> receiver.
>
> Yes, MTC and MMC are far from universally supported, but when they are,
> MTC and Level 1 MMC (at least) will Just Work (TM). That's simply not the
> case for OSC.
>
>
>
Going forward, I have more hope in OSC support in hardware compared to
MMC/MTC. If each OSC server defines its own payload format, for example,
it's still an improvement as I see it compared to a midi device that has
nothing but midi clock to sync on (all my gear).

The only hardware recorder I know of that supports MMC/MTC is the Joeco
blackbox. The only new hardware sequencer that supports MMC/MTC is the
Cirklon - with a 1 year waiting list.  Using my Korg Oasys to send midi
note data to my Jomox 999 drum machine, for example, requires me to
implement my own code with a note_map_t,

With control voltage for 1 volt per octave pitch and zero to +5VDC for gate
on/off, every analog piece of gear I own supports it. Every analog
sequencer will accept and send the same gate signal or can be adjusted to
do so.

I am just saying that OSC is another option where nothing else is
available, to complement midi and CV - not replace it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/linux-audio-user/attachments/20210430/f8efe015/attachment.html>