Nick Copeland wrote:
English isn't my native language ;).
I guess people like to control automation by hardware similar to this one:
I don't know this hardware, it's just an example, because it's very cheap.
What we need in addition are SysEx editors for hardware synth that can
be controlled by MIDI "control change" hardware controllers and soft
synth need to be able to receive data from such hardware controllers too.
When soft synth and soft mixers are controlled by cv, there is the need
to have a bridge MIDI to cv and cv to MIDI, assumed that some more
expensive hardware controllers are motorized.
IMO this doesn't make much sense, especially because cv isn't really
analog on Linux. As Nick said "recognise that
in the current digital world 'analogous' is floats/samplerate".
Please make some tests. 14 bit = 16384 steps recorded and played by
sequencer ticks. This is smooth. Special needs, e.g. like what Fons said
"Another limitation of MIDI is its handling of context, the only way to
do this is by using the channel number. There is no way to refer to
anything higher level, to say e.g. this is a control message for note
#12345 that started some time ago" could be done by using SysEx. There's
no problem with having several MIDI ports when using the regular 31.25
kBaud (31250 bits per second) or to make MIDI internal Linux faster.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list