linuxaudio.org

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 2:34 PM, torbenh  wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 02:18:54PM +0300, alex stone wrote:

>> I will clarify here that i'm talking about a user experience, before

>> the discussion gets into jousting with white papers.....

>

> ok. so you basically say that midi channels are annoying ?

> how about several CC controllers flowing through the same midi connection ?

> you think thats bad too ?

>

> i mean for complex synths this could quickly end up in 20 CV lines

> controlling one voice.

>

>

>>

>> :)

>>

>> Alex.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> www.openoctave.org

>>

>> midi-subscribe@openoctave.org

>> development-subscribe@openoctave.org

>> _______________________________________________

>> Linux-audio-dev mailing list

>> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

>

> --

> torben Hohn

> _______________________________________________

> Linux-audio-dev mailing list

> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

>

We have midi for automation or controlling synths, plugins, etc,

because that's been the malnstream path for development. As far ease

of use, midi is inefficient is certain use cases.

I don't doubt that with great implementation, midi could do better

than it does, but i've yet to see that.
Again, this a personal user experience, based on all the previous

years of having to use midi for such tasks, and the refreshing change

to CV in a software format, that has saved me hours of time already,

and ongoing.
Alex.
--

www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe@openoctave.org

development-subscribe@openoctave.org

_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-dev mailing list

Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev