28 May
2005
28 May
'05
12:02 p.m.
hi all,
i'm currently working on a rather large project which i'd like to
fully support under Linux .. it requires, however, a functioning MIDI
sub-system. for this reason, i'd like to ask members of LAD to
report on their experiences with using professional MIDI interfaces,
such as (for example) the Motu MTP AV, Digidesign MIDEX-8, etc?
what is the 'easiest' MIDI interface to get working under the average
Linux kernel? what sort of experiences do folks have with getting
MIDI working (on a programming level) using API's such as (but not
limited to) ALSA, and MidiShare?
for me so far, MidiShare seems to offer the most direct and usable
approach .. while ALSA is wraught with complexity and dependencies
which often seem out of control. i'd like to know what your
experience, as developers, has been with getting a working MIDI
subsystem under Linux ...
--
;
Jay Vaughan
28 May
28 May
6:25 p.m.
what is the 'easiest' MIDI interface to get
working under the average
Linux kernel? what sort of experiences do folks have with getting
MIDI working (on a programming level) using API's such as (but not
limited to) ALSA, and MidiShare?
for me so far, MidiShare seems to offer the most direct and usable
approach .. while ALSA is wraught with complexity and dependencies
which often seem out of control. i'd like to know what your
experience, as developers, has been with getting a working MIDI
subsystem under Linux ...
i can speak up as someone who has avoided any interactions with the
ALSA sequencer for years because of a similar perception. i recently
converted Tim Thompson's KeyKit from its raw MIDI port-based
implementation under Linux to one that uses the ALSA sequencer (and
adding multiport support along the way). it was suprisingly easy and
obvious, given a simple example (in this case, the "ALSA sequencer
MIDI Port object" that someone contributed to Ardour). even more
gratifying was comparing the code to the keykit implementations for
win32 and CoreMidi. the ALSA sequencer one was smaller, more logical
and less bogged down in details.
i still think that the ALSA sequencer implementation has a serious
design issue by being located in the kernel, but the API for doing
what most people need to do most of the time seems relatively
straightforward, and the implementation seems efficient and
functional.
--p
6:25 p.m.
what is the 'easiest' MIDI interface to get
working under the average
Linux kernel? what sort of experiences do folks have with getting
MIDI working (on a programming level) using API's such as (but not
limited to) ALSA, and MidiShare?
for me so far, MidiShare seems to offer the most direct and usable
approach .. while ALSA is wraught with complexity and dependencies
which often seem out of control. i'd like to know what your
experience, as developers, has been with getting a working MIDI
subsystem under Linux ...
i can speak up as someone who has avoided any interactions with the
ALSA sequencer for years because of a similar perception. i recently
converted Tim Thompson's KeyKit from its raw MIDI port-based
implementation under Linux to one that uses the ALSA sequencer (and
adding multiport support along the way). it was suprisingly easy and
obvious, given a simple example (in this case, the "ALSA sequencer
MIDI Port object" that someone contributed to Ardour). even more
gratifying was comparing the code to the keykit implementations for
win32 and CoreMidi. the ALSA sequencer one was smaller, more logical
and less bogged down in details.
i still think that the ALSA sequencer implementation has a serious
design issue by being located in the kernel, but the API for doing
what most people need to do most of the time seems relatively
straightforward, and the implementation seems efficient and
functional.
--p
6:31 p.m.
On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 15:48 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
for me so far, MidiShare seems to offer the most
direct and usable
approach .. while ALSA is wraught with complexity and dependencies
which often seem out of control. i'd like to know what your
experience, as developers, has been with getting a working MIDI
subsystem under Linux ...
I don't know where you got this idea. The ALSA sequencer works great
and is well written.
Lee
28 May
28 May
6:39 p.m.
On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 15:48 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
i'm currently working on a rather large project
which i'd like to
fully support under Linux .. it requires, however, a functioning MIDI
sub-system. for this reason, i'd like to ask members of LAD to
report on their experiences with using professional MIDI interfaces,
such as (for example) the Motu MTP AV, Digidesign MIDEX-8, etc?
what is the 'easiest' MIDI interface to get working under the average
Linux kernel? what sort of experiences do folks have with getting
MIDI working (on a programming level) using API's such as (but not
limited to) ALSA, and MidiShare?
If your software is going to send or receive MIDI to and from any other
Linux software ALSA is _the_ standard.
--
Lars Luthman
PGP key: http://www.d.kth.se/~d00-llu/pgp_key.php
Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E
10 Jun
10 Jun
9:16 a.m.
If your software is going to send or receive MIDI to
and from any other
Linux software ALSA is _the_ standard.
The idea that there should only be 'one' option for MIDI under Linux
is ludicrous. Such thinking leads to cruft. I suppose there is only
'one' pthread lib too, eh? "Only One" libc?
--
;
Jay Vaughan
9:35 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Best-performing Linux-friendly MIDI interfaces?
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 13:09 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
there is certainly only one pthread API, and only one libc API (although
there are newer versions of each.
--p
If your
software is going to send or receive MIDI to and from any other
Linux software ALSA is _the_ standard.
The idea that there should only be 'one' option for MIDI under Linux
is ludicrous. Such thinking leads to cruft. I suppose there is only
'one' pthread lib too, eh? "Only One" libc?
13 Jun
13 Jun
6:04 a.m.
The idea that
there should only be 'one' option for MIDI under Linux
is ludicrous. Such thinking leads to cruft. I suppose there is only
'one' pthread lib too, eh? "Only One" libc?
there is certainly only one pthread API, and only one libc API (although
there are newer versions of each.
9:36 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Best-performing Linux-friendly MIDI interfaces?
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 10:00 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
whats the difference between "API" and "lib", Paul
an API:
void* pthread_create (pthread_t*, pthread_attr_t*, void* (func)(void*),
void*);
a library:
1 library would be linux threads, another would be NPTL.
the implementation of pthread_create() in each library is
very different. ditto for the rest of the pthreads API.
my point is that there is a big difference between saying there should
be a single API for MIDI on <platform> and a single implementation of
that API on <platform>. of course, the problem is that we don't have a
single API, even.
this will probably never be solved. if you look at the windows world,
there are several MIDI APIs in place, just as there are several audio
APIs in place. on OS X, there is only one, but CoreMIDI has been the
weakest received part of the whole CoreAudio-related package as far as I
can tell, and although it appears capable of a lot, it certainly can't
do what Rewire and/or JACK-midi can in terms of synchronizing MIDI with
audio at the sample level. And that's not just an implementation issue,
but an API one.
--p
The idea that there should only be 'one'
option for MIDI under Linux
is ludicrous. Such thinking leads to cruft. I suppose there is only
'one' pthread lib too, eh? "Only One" libc?
there is certainly only one pthread API, and only one libc API (although
there are newer versions of each.
9:59 a.m.
At 7:36 -0400 13/6/05, Paul Davis wrote:
my point is that there is a big difference between
saying there should
be a single API for MIDI on <platform> and a single implementation of
that API on <platform>. of course, the problem is that we don't have a
single API, even.
no, right, there are multiple MIDI API's on Linux and I think this is
a good thing. I favour MidiShare, because its older, well-proven,
cross-platform, and well and truly tested by its developers. I
cannot say that for the MIDI parts of ALSA. I never thought that
MIDI should've been treated the way it was in ALSA, either.
this will probably never be solved. if you look at the
windows world,
there are several MIDI APIs in place, just as there are several audio
APIs in place. on OS X, there is only one, but CoreMIDI has been the
weakest received part of the whole CoreAudio-related package as far as I
can tell, and although it appears capable of a lot, it certainly can't
do what Rewire and/or JACK-midi can in terms of synchronizing MIDI with
audio at the sample level.
MidiShare can, though ..
--
;
Jay Vaughan
10:10 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Best-performing Linux-friendly MIDI interfaces?
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 14:00 +0200, Jay Vaughan wrote:
How?
no, right, there are multiple MIDI API's on Linux
and I think this is
a good thing. I favour MidiShare, because its older, well-proven,
cross-platform, and well and truly tested by its developers. I
cannot say that for the MIDI parts of ALSA. I never thought that
MIDI should've been treated the way it was in ALSA, either.
well, there are lots of things about ALSA that would be done differently
if it was done again. i for one would immediately copy CoreAudio's
abandonment of interrupts as as source of anything more than
information, and use a DLL instead. i am sure MIDI could be overhauled
in many ways too.
this will
probably never be solved. if you look at the windows world,
there are several MIDI APIs in place, just as there are several audio
APIs in place. on OS X, there is only one, but CoreMIDI has been the
weakest received part of the whole CoreAudio-related package as far as I
can tell, and although it appears capable of a lot, it certainly can't
do what Rewire and/or JACK-midi can in terms of synchronizing MIDI with
audio at the sample level.
MidiShare can, though ..
30 May
30 May
6:29 a.m.
Jay Vaughan wrote:
i'd like to ask members of LAD to report on their
experiences with
using professional MIDI interfaces, such as (for example) the Motu
MTP AV, Digidesign MIDEX-8, etc?
what is the 'easiest' MIDI interface to get working under the average
Linux kernel?
The 8x8 interfaces from ESI (Miditerminal M8U), Edirol (UM-880),
M-Audio (Midisport 8x8), and Emagic (Unitor8, AMT8) work with ALSA;
the Emagic ones require the new ALSA 1.0.9. The Midisport is the only
one that isn't easy because it needs a separate firmware loader to be
installed manually.
for me so far, MidiShare seems to offer the most
direct and usable
approach .. while ALSA is wraught with complexity and dependencies
which often seem out of control.
Under Linux, MidiShare depends on ALSA anyway ... :-)
The problem is more that ALSA isn't very well documented.
Have a look at the programs in alsa-utils/seq/.
Regards,
Clemens
10 Jun
10 Jun
9:16 a.m.
Under Linux, MidiShare depends on ALSA anyway ... :-)
no it doesn't depende on ALSA, at all. you can run MidiShare without
ALSA. MidiShare -supports- ALSA (through the msAlsaSeq driver), but
it also supports plenty of other options ..
The problem is more that ALSA isn't very well
documented.
Have a look at the programs in alsa-utils/seq/.
The thing is, MidiShare rocks on all angles.
--
;
Jay Vaughan
10:12 a.m.
Jay Vaughan wrote:
The thing is, MidiShare rocks on all angles.
IANALAD but from the user's POV I must agree. MidiShare is a terrific
system.
Jay, if you're looking for cross-platform MIDI solutions there's also
PortMIDI which is being used as the primary MIDI system for Csound5.
And thanks again to Dr. Albert Graef for the msAlsaSeq bridge. That
little gem makes it possible to wire any MidiShare app to the ALSA
sequencer. Very cool to use Common Music to drive everything I can
connect to the ALSA sequencer.
IMO Linux MIDI is tasting mighty fine these days. :)
Best,
dp
8:42 p.m.
> The thing is, MidiShare rocks on all angles.
Yeah, especially the dynamic routing capabilities, without having to set
up special loopback devices.
Jay, if you're looking for cross-platform MIDI
solutions there's also
PortMIDI which is being used as the primary MIDI system for Csound5.
Yes, but last time I looked it didn't have standard MIDI file I/O yet,
whereas the SMF support in MidiShare is just great. That's an important
thing you'll need in almost any serious MIDI application.
Albert
--
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email: Dr.Graef(a)t-online.de, ag(a)muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de
WWW: http://www.musikwissenschaft.uni-mainz.de/~ag
13 Jun
13 Jun
6:04 a.m.
Jay, if you're looking for cross-platform MIDI
solutions there's
also PortMIDI which is being used as the primary MIDI system for
Csound5.
I'm actually not looking for cross-platform MIDI any more - MidiShare
does the job. What I am looking for is a way to use as very little
of ALSA as I possibly need to, while also maintaining a stable
MIDI/Audio subsystem.
And thanks again to Dr. Albert Graef for the msAlsaSeq
bridge. That
little gem makes it possible to wire any MidiShare app to the ALSA
sequencer. Very cool to use Common Music to drive everything I can
connect to the ALSA sequencer.
Its another example of how the MidiShare design really caters to this
sort of approach. The same position once held by the mighty
msRawSerial/msRawMidi drivers can be filled by .. any .. driver.
msInetDriver is pretty nice .. now if only i had the time to make it
talk to CoreAudio. :)
IMO Linux MIDI is tasting mighty fine these days. :)
It is pretty fine, I have to say, but then I've always thought so .. ;)
--
;
Jay Vaughan
7138
days inactive
7154
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
16 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Albert Graef -
Clemens Ladisch -
Dave Phillips -
Jay Vaughan -
Lars Luthman -
Lee Revell -
Paul Davis