29 Mar
2006
29 Mar
'06
10:52 a.m.
Hi
I'm a bit confused about midi note numbers:
1) am I right that the midi note number goes from 0 to 127?
2) which note name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
3) which would be the correct range (in note numbers) from a 88 note
keyboard?
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk
29 Mar
29 Mar
11:32 a.m.
1) am I right that the midi note number goes from 0 to
127?
Yup
2) which note name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
I think the octave names are arbitrary - at least according to this:
http://www.harmony-central.com/MIDI/Doc/table2.html
I've seen middle C called both C4 and C5 by different software (though
I don't know whether to trust it).
3) which would be the correct range (in note numbers)
from a 88 note
keyboard?
Um, I guess it depends on what a piano can do... A up to C, isn't it?
12:14 p.m.
James McDermott wrote:
I googled that on myself. And the reason I ask is I trust people on this
list more than harmony-central...
Yes.
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk
2) which note
name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
I think the octave names are arbitrary - at least
according to this:
http://www.harmony-central.com/MIDI/Doc/table2.html 3) which would
be the correct range (in note numbers) from a 88 note
keyboard?
Um, I guess it depends on what a piano can do... A up to C, isn't it?
12:58 p.m.
James McDermott wrote:
Not after I'm finished you won't ;)
I have room in my killfilter :-)
My real point is: I believe the octave names to be
arbitrary.
Then, if I'm writing an application and want to conform to the majority
of apps, what do you and others here find the most usual. Let's take
midinote 60 (sits on the middle of my evolution keyboards), what would
you call that? C5?
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk
1:22 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 05:57:15PM +0200, Atte Andr?? Jensen wrote:
>My real point is: I believe the octave names to be arbitrary.
I've read once it's one octave difference between some brands.
Someone on #lad said yamaha is one octave off from about everyone
else. I guess that would be one octave up. Depends on if the first
octave is 0 or 1(?).
Then, if I'm writing an application and want to
conform to the majority
of apps, what do you and others here find the most usual. Let's take
midinote 60 (sits on the middle of my evolution keyboards), what would
you call that? C5?
My Korg M1 and GEM S3 deem it a C4.
AFAIR, so does Cubase.
Cheers,
Thorsten Wilms
1:49 p.m.
On Wednesday, 29. March 2006 18:22, Thorsten Wilms wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 05:57:15PM +0200, Atte Andr??
Jensen wrote:
On my Yamaha S30 it's C3. So the range of a piano is A-1 to C7.
This is also the notation used by rosegarden and muse...
Dominic
>My real point is: I believe the octave names
to be arbitrary.
I've read once it's one octave difference between some brands.
Someone on #lad said yamaha is one octave off from about everyone
else. I guess that would be one octave up. Depends on if the first
octave is 0 or 1(?).
Then, if I'm writing an application and want
to conform to the
majority of apps, what do you and others here find the most usual.
Let's take midinote 60 (sits on the middle of my evolution
keyboards), what would you call that? C5?
My Korg M1 and GEM S3 deem it a C4.
AFAIR, so does Cubase. 
3:26 p.m.
On Wednesday 29 Mar 2006 17:45, Dominic Sacré wrote:
On my Yamaha S30 it's C3. So the range of a piano
is A-1 to C7.
This is also the notation used by rosegarden and muse...
The octave number range is configurable in Rosegarden (just to make
things more confusing). The default of 60 = C3 is probably because at
least one of the developers started out with Yamaha equipment.
Chris
1:40 p.m.
Atte André Jensen schrieb:
Let's take
midinote 60 (sits on the middle of my evolution keyboards), what would
you call that? C5?
To the best of my knowledge, the MIDI standard just says note number 60
is "Middle C". It´s completely arbitrary where this middle is. Some
manufacturers take C4, so the lowest note is C-1, others, most notably
Yamaha, take C3, so you can go down to C-2.
Klaus
--
3:58 p.m.
Klaus Kosten wrote:
Atte André Jensen schrieb:
That's right. According to the MIDI Detailed Spec (version 4.2) on page
10, MIDI note 60 is Middle C.
This is the fourth C on the piano, and traditionally known as C4 (261Hz)
on the piano. However, I've seen apps refer to middle C as C3, C4, and C5.
Crazy.
--
*Brad Fuller*
+1 (408) 799-6124
*Sonaural Audio Studio*
See Us At GDC 2006
<http://www.cmpevents.com/GD06/a.asp?option=C&V=11&SessID=1954>
Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com <http://www.sonaural.com/>
See me on O'Reilly <http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2184>
Let's take midinote 60 (sits on the middle of
my evolution
keyboards), what would you call that? C5?
To the best of my knowledge, the MIDI standard just says note number
60 is "Middle C". It´s completely arbitrary where this middle is. Some
manufacturers take C4, so the lowest note is C-1, others, most notably
Yamaha, take C3, so you can go down to C-2.
Klaus 
30 Mar
30 Mar
6:04 a.m.
Hallo,
Brad Fuller hat gesagt: // Brad Fuller wrote:
That's right. According to the MIDI Detailed Spec
(version 4.2) on page
10, MIDI note 60 is Middle C.
This is the fourth C on the piano, and traditionally known as C4 (261Hz)
on the piano. However, I've seen apps refer to middle C as C3, C4, and C5.
Crazy.
Well, being a saxophone player (in the past) it doesn't sound *that*
crazy to me. Why? The sax (usually) is a transposing instrument. Tenor
or soprano sax are tuned in Bb, alt saxophones are tuned in Eb. If you
put your fingers in the "C"-position, the actual frequency coming out
would correspond to a Bb or Eb on the piano, depending on sax model.
And of course with tenor and soprano sax the same finger settings
also result in a completely different octave.
Now what should midi do about it? Remember, there are not only midi
keyboards, there also are midi wind instruments, midi guitars etc. and
there are keyboards with various numbers of keys.
It sounds sensible from a keyboard point of view to just put 60, which
is about the middle of 0-127 as the middle C key. Where this middle C
key is, of course depends on the keyboard model.
For a software synthesizer you don't have a real middle key, you only
have frequencies. It makes sense to spread out the available 127 pitch
numbers so that they span most of the pitches that are musically
useful. The lowest "C" that is useful seems to be the one at about
8Hz. The C below that would be at about 4Hz which is not perceived as
a pitch anymore. You get to use the ~8Hz as lowest C if you define
pitch 69 as corresponding to 440Hz.
On the other end of the scale you get about 12500 Hz for a midi pitch
of 127. This is about half of the nyquist frequency at 44.1kHz
samplerate so there still would be a bit of headroom. However there
won't be a lot of headroom: You will pass a 22.05kHz Nyquist at a
pitch of 137 if you interpolate the midi formula for 69=440Hz this
way: mtof(137)=22350.6
So using "69 midi pitch := 440Hz" in a software syntesizer as default
range makes a lot of sense.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
8:04 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:58:57AM -0800, Brad Fuller brad-at-sonaural.com |LAU| wrote:
That's right. According to the MIDI Detailed Spec
(version 4.2) on page
10, MIDI note 60 is Middle C.
This is the fourth C on the piano, and traditionally known as C4 (261Hz)
on the piano. However, I've seen apps refer to middle C as C3, C4, and C5.
Crazy.
I believe it depends on the instrument. On the piano, C1 is the first
C, which makes middle C C4. On a pipe organ, however, which generally
has 61 notes on each keyboard, C1 is the first C on the keyboard, which
puts middle C at C3 which an 8' stop, which is the standard footage
when counting notes. I guess from what others have said, Yamaha uses
the pipe organ numbering (which makes sense on most synthesizers with
five octave keyboards), while others are using the piano numbering.
Chuck
31 Mar
31 Mar
1:19 a.m.
Chuck Martin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:58:57AM -0800, Brad Fuller
brad-at-sonaural.com |LAU| wrote:
Well... I was really going to say "pianoforte", but decided against it
as I figured people would figur I was too anal ;-)
--
*Brad Fuller*
+1 (408) 799-6124
*Sonaural Audio Studio*
See Us At GDC 2006
<http://www.cmpevents.com/GD06/a.asp?option=C&V=11&SessID=1954>
Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com <http://www.sonaural.com/>
See me on O'Reilly <http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2184>
That's right. According to the MIDI Detailed
Spec (version 4.2) on page
10, MIDI note 60 is Middle C.
This is the fourth C on the piano, and traditionally known as C4 (261Hz)
on the piano. However, I've seen apps refer to middle C as C3, C4, and C5.
Crazy.
I believe it depends on the instrument. On the piano, C1 is the first
C, which makes middle C C4. On a pipe organ, however, which generally
has 61 notes on each keyboard, C1 is the first C on the keyboard, which
puts middle C at C3 which an 8' stop, which is the standard footage
when counting notes. I guess from what others have said, Yamaha uses
the pipe organ numbering (which makes sense on most synthesizers with
five octave keyboards), while others are using the piano numbering.
29 Mar
29 Mar
1:37 p.m.
I'm a bit confused about midi note numbers:
1) am I right that the midi note number goes from 0 to 127?
2) which note name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
3) which would be the correct range (in note numbers) from a 88 note
keyboard?
I have created a SVG showing the relationships. If it contained errors,
I'd be glad for "bug reports":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NoteNamesFrequenciesAndMidiNumbers.svg
Best regards
ce
3:16 p.m.
On 3/29/06, Christoph Eckert <ce(a)christeck.de> wrote:
It sure would be nice if all apps were consistent, but IIRC even seq24
and specimen don't agree.
Just like how some apps use MIDI channels 0-15 and others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
Why can't we all just get along?!
I'm a bit confused about midi note numbers:
1) am I right that the midi note number goes from 0 to 127?
2) which note name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
3) which would be the correct range (in note numbers) from a 88 note
keyboard?
I have created a SVG showing the relationships. If it contained errors,
I'd be glad for "bug reports":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NoteNamesFrequenciesAndMidiNumbers.svg
Best regards
ce
4:16 p.m.
Just like how some apps use MIDI channels 0-15 and
others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
Not only apps, even midi hardware. Most devices agree to count
controllers starting by 1, but what a mess with program numbers!
A000 - A127. Huh? Since when did we start counting at zero?
Best regards
ce
5:48 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 21:17 +0200, Christoph Eckert wrote:
Computers count from zero. Always have, always will. MIDI is the
oddball here in counting from 1.
Lee
Just like how
some apps use MIDI channels 0-15 and others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
Not only apps, even midi hardware. Most devices agree to count
controllers starting by 1, but what a mess with program numbers!
A000 - A127. Huh? Since when did we start counting at zero? 
6:15 p.m.
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:10:26 +0200
Christoph Eckert <ce(a)christeck.de> wrote:
There are 10 types of people in the world...
Those who understand binary and those who don't :)
--
F
Computers count from zero. Always have, always
will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ?
Best regards
ce
6:23 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 23:10 +0200, Christoph Eckert wrote:
Well, 1. But an array of size 1 has only one element - array[0] ;-)
<rant>
I agree with you that programmers are terrible at interface design.
It's the main reason I refuse to get a cell phone, because I have yet to
see one that shows any sign of having been through a usability program.
I can pick up a random cell phone and usually find a jaw-dropping,
laugh-out-loud usability bug within a minute (most often a screen with
no obvious way to get out). It's as if they just have the coders design
the interface.
I am looking forward to the Apple iPhone...
</rant>
Lee
Computers
count from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ?
6:59 p.m.
New subject: User interface design (was: Re: [linux-audio-user] midi note numbers)
Lee Revell wrote:
Well, 1. But an array of size 1 has only one element
- array[0] ;-)
I held a talk about linux audio usability issues at last years LAC (2005
or even year[2004] ;-), and one of the points was counting things.
[...]
It's as if they just
have the coders design the interface.
In the open source world the coder usually is the UI designer as well.
Meanwhile I have started to learn a bit coding and I immediately
understood why some interfaces look as they do.
This it not an offense at all, I can deal with it. But if a coder gets
interested in usability things users will benefit for sure.
Glad to cu@LAC,
ce
1 Apr
1 Apr
6:12 p.m.
Lee Revell wrote:
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 23:10 +0200, Christoph Eckert
wrote:
Well, 1. But an array of size 1 has only one element - array[0] ;-)
<rant>
I agree with you that programmers are terrible at interface design.
what are you talking about! one look at vi proves otherwise :-)
erik
Computers
count from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ?
7:15 p.m.
I agree with
you that programmers are terrible at interface design.
what are you talking about! one look at vi proves otherwise :-) 
2 Apr
2 Apr
6:37 a.m.
On Saturday 01 Apr 2006 23:16, Christoph Eckert wrote:
well, the vi-team surely includes a usability expert ;-) .
vi really is simple to use; the user only needs to learn some simple
commands:
x
i
ESC
:wq
and last bur not least
:q!
I get a feeling there's supposed to be some irony here, but I don't know what
it is.
/Robert
I agree with you that programmers are terrible at
interface design.
what are you talking about! one look at vi proves otherwise :-) What do we need more :) ?
(+;
--
http://spamatica.se/musicsite/
11:02 p.m.
Robert Jonsson wrote:
I think we're all 100% serious here :-)
(just in case you don't know about vi - it's an editor with interface
that is an absolute heaven if you know how to use it but a total hell
for any novice, I mentioned it as an example of an interface done by
programmers for programmers)
erik
On Saturday 01 Apr 2006 23:16, Christoph Eckert
wrote:
>>> I agree with you that programmers are terrible at interface design.
>> what are you talking about! one look at vi proves otherwise :-)
> well, the vi-team surely includes a usability expert ;-) .
>
> vi really is simple to use; the user only needs to learn some simple
> commands:
>
> x
> i
> ESC
>
> :wq
or shift-z-z (much faster)
and last bur
not least
:q!
I get a feeling there's supposed to be some irony here, but I don't know what
it is. 
11:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] midi<>vi keymappings
(just in case you don't know about vi - it's
an editor with interface
that is an absolute heaven if you know how to use it but a total hell
for any novice, I mentioned it as an example of an interface done by
programmers for programmers)
huh? its an interface most everyone here is familiar with. check out this nifty diagram:
http://www.viemu.com/vi-vim-cheat-sheet.gif
;
A
3 Apr
3 Apr
4:35 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] midi<>vi keymappings
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:27:45 +0000
carmen <ix(a)replic.net> wrote:
Nope. Took one look at it a couple of years ago and ran away screaming.
--
F
(just in
case you don't know about vi - it's an editor with interface
that is an absolute heaven if you know how to use it but a total hell
for any novice, I mentioned it as an example of an interface done by
programmers for programmers)
huh? its an interface most everyone here is familiar with. check out this nifty diagram:
http://www.viemu.com/vi-vim-cheat-sheet.gif
;
A
30 Mar
30 Mar
8:19 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 11:10:26PM +0200, Christoph Eckert ce-at-christeck.de |LAU|
wrote:
That doesn't matter. It's the difference between cardinal and ordinal
numbers. Even in computers, cardinal numbers (those designating a
quantity) use 0 for none and 1 for, well, 1. Ordinal numbers (those
that number things sequentially) always begin at 0 for the first item,
as far as the computer is concerned.
Chuck
Computers
count from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ? 
13 Apr
13 Apr
10:33 a.m.
Christoph Eckert wrote:
It's not a question of number, it's a question of counter position. Yes
it does my head in too, but when was the last time you counted from 1 on
a ruler?
This thread has explained to me why I'm constantly confused as to the
location of 'middle C'. I would also like to point out to anyone writing
software that uses a MIDI keyboard that, while A=440 is a sane
default, there are musically appropriate reasons for variations in the
range of A=415 to A=446+ - allowing a slightly greater range of
variation (say 400 - 450Hz) could also be useful. I tend not to use
software that does not allow this.
cheers,
tim hall
Computers count
from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ? 
2:08 p.m.
On 04/13/2006 01:33 PM, tim hall wrote:
Christoph Eckert wrote:
It's not a question of number, it's a question of counter position. Yes
it does my head in too, but when was the last time you counted from 1 on
a ruler?
Indeed. I find it amusing that there is a suggestion that
counting from '0' is unintuitive in a forum where things we call
'notes' are counted in sets from 'A' to 'G', but starting at
'C'. :-)
--
Frank Wales [frank(a)limov.com]
Computers
count from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the machines
have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ? 
4:48 p.m.
On Thursday 13 April 2006 08:33, tim hall wrote:
Christoph Eckert wrote:
It's not a question of number, it's a question of counter position.
Yes it does my head in too, but when was the last time you counted
from 1 on a ruler?
This thread has explained to me why I'm constantly confused as to the
location of 'middle C'. I would also like to point out to anyone
writing software that uses a MIDI keyboard that, while A=440 is a
sane default, there are musically appropriate reasons for variations
in the range of A=415 to A=446+ - allowing a slightly greater range
of variation (say 400 - 450Hz) could also be useful. I tend not to
use software that does not allow this.
cheers,
tim hall
Some basic thoughts on note numbering.
a Note is a Frequency; ie A440
A880 is the A note an octave above A440 ie frequency doubles
On a piano, the lowest note is an A; often piano players call it A1
In that case, A1 (name) is A55 (frequency).
Notice that the frequency description of a note sounded is not
arbitrary; a plucked string has a fundamental frequency, which
we use to describe the sound.
Western music notation is based on the idea of note names; ABCDEFG
A1, A2, ... are octaves apart. Note that 1 2 3 ... in these names
are arbitrarily assigned. We could (and I think some do) call
A440 A0. In that case the A an octive below would be called A-1, and
it would make prefect sense as long as folks knew what A0 was.
In brief, the numbers in note names are arbitrary and based on a
logarithmic scale of frequencies. Where the zero point is on that
scale is where the midi note numbering confusion arises. And the
confusion exist for instrument players in general.
Computers
count from zero. Always have, always will.
yes, of course, I know.
But it is possible to hide this in user interfaces. IMHO the
machines have to serve the humans, not the other way around.
How many mails are you reading right now, 0 or 1 ;-) ? sane default, there are musically appropriate reasons
for variations
in the range of A=415 to A=446+ - allowing a slightly greater range
of variation (say 400 - 450Hz) could also be useful. I tend not to
use software that does not allow this.
I strongly agree. Isn't that just saying that an instrument should be
tune-able. Horns have tuning slides; guitars have pegs. My soundcard
has the capability; software that claims to support it should have a
tuning slider, peg, widgit, command or something.
Marv in Lexington, KY with blue skys, trees in bloom, mid 70s F.
7:09 p.m.
M P Smoak wrote:
Note that 1 2 3 ... in these names
are arbitrarily assigned.
Since I was the original poster I'll speak up.
I know noone claimed otherwise, but my point was not so much (at least
after a few posts) "what's *the* name of midinote 60, but rather "what's
the *most common* (in computer world) name for midinote 60. I was
writing a program and might as well choose the most commenly known name
for notes rather that picking something out of the blue, which would
confuse more people...
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk
http://www.atte.dk/gps
7:18 p.m.
On 04/13/2006 10:08 PM, Atte André Jensen wrote:
I know noone claimed otherwise, but my point was not
so much (at least
after a few posts) "what's *the* name of midinote 60, but rather
"what's
the *most common* (in computer world) name for midinote 60. I was
writing a program and might as well choose the most commenly known name
for notes rather that picking something out of the blue, which would
confuse more people...
Might I suggest that, since there is genuine variability in what
people name it, that you make this a configuration option, with
a sensible default (e.g., A4)? This will fend off complaints from
future users who want it to be 'A3' or 'A5', although those
who call it 'Monty the Middle Note' might have to lump it.
--
Frank Wales [frank(a)limov.com]
30 Mar
30 Mar
4:12 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
"Paul Coccoli" <pcoccoli(a)gmail.com> writes:
Just like how some apps use MIDI channels 0-15 and
others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
I was just thinking about this these days (as I started to write a
simple midi editor for some of my gear). First I used 0-15, then
I saw that all my midi related books and documents use 1-16 so I
changed it, but now I see that I don't like it...
I don't know what is better.
Robert Epprecht
5:41 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 09:05:12PM +0200, Robert Epprecht wrote:
"Paul Coccoli" <pcoccoli(a)gmail.com>
writes:
I think there used to be a draft of the MIDI spec around on the
internet that you could get (instead of paying the $50+ to get it from
the MIDI people). I printed it out, don't know where it is, and I
can't find the file now. Sorry.
I believe the standard actually specifies that the human readable
version of the channel numbers would be 1 based (1-16), even though
the binary version is 0-16. I thought that also applied to program
numbers, etc. But currently available online documentation says this
wasn't so.
If it was me, I'd display both the Channel numbers and the Patch /
Program change numbers as 1 based (1-16 and 1-128, respectively),
because I know my two synths (Roland and Ensoniq) agree with this.
Have you seen http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/midispec.htm (a
rephrase of the info in the official MMA MIDI spec), or
http://www.gweep.net/~prefect/eng/reference/protocol/midispec.html
(seeps to be the same text)?
Also, there's this early one from the days before General Midi, that
MAY be what I was remembering as the draft spec.:
http://www.ibiblio.org/emusic-l/info-docs-FAQs/MIDI-doc/MIDI-Primer.txt
And, getting back to the original topic of note numbers there's this:
http://www.harmony-central.com/MIDI/Doc/table2.html
found in:
http://www.harmony-central.com/MIDI/Doc/doc.html
(I know I'm not the only one here who knows how to use google, but
thought I'd send the links as long as I already found them.)
--> Steve
--
Steve Wahl steve(a)pro-ns.net
If it's not stuck and it's supposed to be, duct tape it. If it's
stuck and it's not supposed to be, WD-40 it. If it's not broken--keep
me away from it!
-- eldavojohn on Slashdot
Just like how some apps use MIDI channels 0-15
and others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
I was just thinking about this these days (as I started to write a
simple midi editor for some of my gear). First I used 0-15, then
I saw that all my midi related books and documents use 1-16 so I
changed it, but now I see that I don't like it...
6:03 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
Oops, a followup to my own message:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 02:41:22PM -0600, Steve Wahl wrote:
If it was me, I'd display both the Channel numbers and the Patch /
Program change numbers as 1 based (1-16 and 1-128, respectively),
because I know my two synths (Roland and Ensoniq) agree with this.
I also note that the General Midi specification lists the sounds as
1 - Acoustic Grand ... 128 - Gunshot. So there's another argument for
being 1 based for program change.
And, getting back to the original topic of note
numbers there's this:
http://www.harmony-central.com/MIDI/Doc/table2.html
That table says it comes from the Midi Manufacturers association, but
it can't be right, can it? OK, note 60 is suposed to be middle C, aka
C4 (iff you chose that designation for middle C). But note 57, three
half steps down, is in the A column on line 3, which would mean you'd
call note 57 A3 while calling note 60 C4. Surely you normally switch
the octave number when going between G and A, right?!?
'nother words, trust that table about as far as you can spit, if that.
--> Steve
--
Steve Wahl steve(a)pro-ns.net
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who
understand binary and those who don't. -- Unknown
7:19 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
el Thu, 30 Mar 2006 15:02:57 -0600
Steve Wahl <steve(a)pro-ns.net> escribió:
That table says it comes from the Midi Manufacturers
association, but
it can't be right, can it? OK, note 60 is suposed to be middle C, aka
C4 (iff you chose that designation for middle C). But note 57, three
half steps down, is in the A column on line 3, which would mean you'd
call note 57 A3 while calling note 60 C4. Surely you normally switch
the octave number when going between G and A, right?!?
no, you switch octave numbers at C's.
7:32 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 07:16:11PM -0300, luis jure wrote:
el Thu, 30 Mar 2006 15:02:57 -0600
Steve Wahl <steve(a)pro-ns.net> escribió:
Wow, I'm daft then! Oh, well, it's music. It's art, not science, it
doesn't have to make sense. :-)
Ran into this while verifying what you said:
http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/appendix/octaveregisters/octaveregi…
It gives different octave numbering systems. ALL of which switch at
C. The two midi systems it gives are Note 0 = C-2, and Note 0 = C0,
giving middle C options of C3 or C5, omitting entirely the possibility
that C4 is middle C.
Sounds to me like the old wonderful thing about standards, that you
have so many to choose from, is REALLY in play here.
Anyway, thanks for coorecting me, Luis!
--
Steve Wahl steve(a)pro-ns.net
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who
understand binary and those who don't. -- Unknown
That table says it comes from the Midi
Manufacturers association, but
it can't be right, can it? OK, note 60 is suposed to be middle C, aka
C4 (iff you chose that designation for middle C). But note 57, three
half steps down, is in the A column on line 3, which would mean you'd
call note 57 A3 while calling note 60 C4. Surely you normally switch
the octave number when going between G and A, right?!?
no, you switch octave numbers at C's.
1 Apr
1 Apr
3:08 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
Steve Wahl <steve(a)pro-ns.net> writes:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 09:05:12PM +0200, Robert
Epprecht wrote:
I couldn't find that yet. Would be very interesting though.
"Paul Coccoli"
<pcoccoli(a)gmail.com> writes:
I think there used to be a draft of the MIDI spec around on the
internet that you could get (instead of paying the $50+ to get it from
the MIDI people). I printed it out, don't know where it is, and I
can't find the file now. Sorry. Just like how some apps use MIDI channels 0-15
and others 1-16.
Totally irritating.
I was just thinking about this these days (as I started to write a
simple midi editor for some of my gear). First I used 0-15, then
I saw that all my midi related books and documents use 1-16 so I
changed it, but now I see that I don't like it... I believe the standard actually specifies that the
human readable
version of the channel numbers would be 1 based (1-16) [...]
Yes, I think this is the case.
If it was me, I'd display both the Channel numbers
and the Patch /
Program change numbers as 1 based (1-16 and 1-128, respectively),
because I know my two synths (Roland and Ensoniq) agree with this.
I think I make that the default, with the option to switch to 0-15
if I ever have midi gear that displays it this way. Displaying names
instead of numbers would also be an option (i.e. XY-Synth Z-Synth)
Thank you for the very nice links you gave us.
Robert Epprecht
29 Mar
29 Mar
5:37 p.m.
Christoph Eckert wrote:
I have created a SVG showing the relationships. If it
contained errors,
I'd be glad for "bug reports":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NoteNamesFrequenciesAndMidiNumbers.svg
Very nice graphic!
Thanks to all who joined in. I learned a lot, and decided that my app
will call 60=C4, since it seems to be the most common case.
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk
2:19 p.m.
Hallo,
Atte André Jensen hat gesagt: // Atte André Jensen wrote:
1) am I right that the midi note number goes from 0 to
127?
Yes.
2) which note name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
I don't know note names, I'm a computer musician, however generally
midi note 69 is supposed to be 440Hz which is something with the
letter "a" in it, in whatever case.
I don't know, if this is in the Midi spec, but it's a convention that
is followed in at least Max, Pd, Csound and everything else I know.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
2:32 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
2006/3/29, Frank Barknecht <fbar(a)footils.org>rg>:
Then it is A1 speaking in musical terms. The octaves above (freq*2)
would be A2,A3,A4 and the octaves down (freq/2) are a,A(, Kontra-A
?)...
I don't know the midi terms but they always irritated me as a
musician. And as a sound engineer I think in frequencies, not so much
in midi-notes...
Arnold
--
visit http://dillenburg.dyndns.org/~arnold/
---
Wenn man mit Raubkopien Bands wie Brosis oder Britney Spears wirklich
verhindern könnte, würde ich mir noch heute einen Stapel Brenner und
einen Sack Rohlinge kaufen.
2) which note
name corresponds to 0? C0? C-1?
I don't know note names, I'm a computer
musician, however generally
midi note 69 is supposed to be 440Hz which is something with the
letter "a" in it, in whatever case. 
4:01 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: midi note numbers
A2 is 220Hz ( think toot toot !)
A1: 110, A3: 440 etc p
regards p
--
<=>
6800
days inactive
6815
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
43 comments
24 participants
participants (24)
-
Arnold Krille -
Atte André Jensen -
Brad Fuller -
carmen -
Chris Cannam -
Christoph Eckert -
Chuck Martin -
Dominic Sacré -
Erik Steffl -
Folderol -
Frank Barknecht -
Frank Wales -
James McDermott -
Klaus Kosten -
Lee Revell -
luis jure -
M P Smoak -
Paul Coccoli -
polly -
Robert Epprecht -
Robert Jonsson -
Steve Wahl -
Thorsten Wilms -
tim hall