> From: David Olofson
> These issues seem orthogonal to me. Addressing individual notes is just a
Not exactly note-pitch. That's a common simplification/myth.
MIDI uses 'key-number'. E.g. key number 12 is *usually* tuned to C0, but is
easily re-tuned to C1, two keys can be tuned to the same pitch yet still be
It's a common shortcut to say MIDI-key-number 'is the pitch', it's actually
an index into a table of pitches. Synths can switch that tuning table to
handle other scales.
A MIDI note-on causes a synth to allocate a physical voice. That physical
voice is temporarily mapped to that MIDI-key-number so that subsequent note
control is directed to that voice. The mapping is temporary. Once the note
is done the mapping is erased. Playing the same key later will likely
allocate a different physical voice.
The MIDI-key-number is therefore an 'ID' mapping a control-source to a
> Anyway, what I do in that aforementioned prototyping thing is pretty much
I agree that addressing notes unambiguously regardless of pitch (or any
other arbitrary property) is the ideal. I wish more sequencers were not
locked into a narrow 'western pop music' mode of operation.
But many MIDI alternatives have been proposed without looking deeply
enough to realise that MIDI already supports very flexible note control.
MIDI's significant flaw is it's grossly outdated 7-bit resolution, the
underlying voice model is sound.
> Virtual voices are used by the "sender" to define and
You have re-invented MIDI with different nomenclature ;-).
Linux-audio-dev mailing list