13 Apr
2010
13 Apr
'10
11:13 p.m.
A string of note-ons following each other all for the
same pitch n without
any intervening note-offs for pitch n, IS PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE provided
they are INTENTIONAL and NOT accidental.
No.
MIDI note-on represents a key press. Note-OFF - key release.
There is no logical way a key can be pressed a second time without first
releasing it.
It might be *technically* possible for a MIDI stream to contain two note-ons
(for the same key)...but it's SEMATICALLY incorrect to launch two voices
because you have no unambiguous way to turn just one instance off.
Back to your question.
a) Nothing, the note is already on.
b) Re-trigger, the voice is reset and the note gets played from the top.
c) Trigger, a new voice is assigned and will play simultaneously to previous
voices.
Given that it does happen accidentally. 'a' and 'b' are reasonable.
'c' is
wrong because with MIDI a key is either 'ON' or 'OFF', it can't be
'ON'
twice.
Anyone deliberately wanting the same key on twice must resort to using two
MIDI channels. Anyone wanting the same pitch twice must either resort to
multiple MIDI channels or to MIDI microtuning commands.
Best Regards,
Jeff
14 Apr
14 Apr
12:04 a.m.
New subject: successive note on midi events
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Jeff McClintock <jef(a)synthedit.com> wrote:
There is no logical way a key can be pressed a second
time without first
releasing it.
Jeff - I'd respectfully disagree with you here. It is true that the
MIDI specification offers no guidance on what a synthesis engine
should do when it receives two note on's with the same note number and
no intervening note off. But this is why so many real world
MIDI-driven synth engines offer various choices about how to handle
the situation, because people realized early on that it wasn't that
difficult to make it happen, and that a useful way of handling it
would be better than pretending it wasn't possible.
8:22 a.m.
New subject: successive note on midi events
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 22:04 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
MIDI-driven synth engines offer various choices about
how to handle
the situation, because people realized early on that it wasn't that
difficult to make it happen, and that a useful way of handling it
would be better than pretending it wasn't possible.
But .. In my book it is still a bug, deliberate or not.
Accidents can happen and therefore we have airbags. But this doesn't
mean that we are endorsing reckless driving as an acceptable method of
minimizing the time taken for commuting.
As for the problem presented by OriginalPoster, send a note-off
immediately after each note-on and be done with it. Then use
sustain-pedal for playing several identical notes as a chord.
10:38 a.m.
New subject: successive note on midi events
Jens M Andreasen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 22:04 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
Full ACK. There are some drum sample players that have problems when the
duration between note on and note off is to short and there ... there
are several reasons when not sending a note off might be nice, similar,
for some equipment it is nice if running status could be disabled, some
old sequencers can do this etc. pp. ... somebody wrote that one note off
would finish all note ons of the same number, this must not be true all
the time. Especially old MIDI equipment can behave very unusual. Anyway,
I'm using MIDI since it was on the market and even if there might be
some advantages when not sending a note off, there will be on
disadvantage, the most negative thing I know about MIDI, the "hanging
note". Or is it "frozen note" on English? The note that never will end
;). In case of doubt for MIDI we shouldn't think about advantages for
computer equipment, but how it would be for a natural instrument. I
guess on that list we found out, that every natural instrument will turn
a note off before the same note could be played again.
MIDI-driven synth engines offer various choices
about how to handle
the situation, because people realized early on that it wasn't that
difficult to make it happen, and that a useful way of handling it
would be better than pretending it wasn't possible.
But .. In my book it is still a bug, deliberate or not.
Accidents can happen and therefore we have airbags. But this doesn't
mean that we are endorsing reckless driving as an acceptable method of
minimizing the time taken for commuting.
As for the problem presented by OriginalPoster, send a note-off
immediately after each note-on and be done with it. Then use
sustain-pedal for playing several identical notes as a chord.
9:19 p.m.
New subject: successive note on midi events
On Wed, April 14, 2010 13:38, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Jens M Andreasen wrote:
that makes three of us who don't know what i'm talking about..
the case of the missing note offs within a string of same-pitch note-ons,
i'm having difficulty classifying as accidental or intentional. these
missing note offs occur because of the design concept - you don't need to
have a working program to prove it. unfortunately it's a design i wish to
implement. the separation of rhythmic data (position + duration) from
pitch + velocity data, and the method of generating the pitch+velocity
data does not mean that note-offs are never sent, it only increases the
likelihood of note-offs being absent when the rhythmic data overlap each
other, and the same pitch is generated in sequence due to the
pitch/velocity generating algorithm. it would be an error if this error
did not arise in these circumstances. i'm beginning to formulate ideas for
solving it, but there is no absolute solution. the end.
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 22:04 -0400, Paul Davis
wrote:
Full ACK. There are some drum sample players that have problems when the
duration between note on and note off is to short and there ... there
are several reasons when not sending a note off might be nice, similar,
for some equipment it is nice if running status could be disabled, some
old sequencers can do this etc. pp. ... somebody wrote that one note off
would finish all note ons of the same number, this must not be true all
the time. Especially old MIDI equipment can behave very unusual. Anyway,
I'm using MIDI since it was on the market and even if there might be
some advantages when not sending a note off, there will be on
disadvantage, the most negative thing I know about MIDI, the "hanging
note". Or is it "frozen note" on English? The note that never will end
;). In case of doubt for MIDI we shouldn't think about advantages for
computer equipment, but how it would be for a natural instrument. I
guess on that list we found out, that every natural instrument will turn
a note off before the same note could be played again. MIDI-driven synth engines offer various choices
about how to handle
the situation, because people realized early on that it wasn't that
difficult to make it happen, and that a useful way of handling it
would be better than pretending it wasn't possible.
But .. In my book it is still a bug, deliberate or not.
Accidents can happen and therefore we have airbags. But this doesn't
mean that we are endorsing reckless driving as an acceptable method of
minimizing the time taken for commuting.
As for the problem presented by OriginalPoster, send a note-off
immediately after each note-on and be done with it. Then use
sustain-pedal for playing several identical notes as a chord.
5370
days inactive
5371
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
James Morris -
Jeff McClintock -
Jens M Andreasen -
Paul Davis -
Ralf Mardorf