Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Repeater and sync from midi in

At 08:06 AM 7/19/2003, Paul Sanders wrote:
> > At 12:51 PM 7/18/2003, Paul Sanders wrote:
> > > > The repeater will interpret any midi notes received on it's 
>channel to
> > > > be pitch messages.
> > >
> > >I wonder if there is a way around that the developers should have 
> >
> > no, they did it right. You should have your drum machine on a different
> > midi channel from the repeater. clock is global, so it doesn't matter 
> > channel the devices are on for sync to midi clock.
>I don't consider that *right*. The RIGHT way to do it would be to develop
>such that this like this wouldn't cause obscure problems for people who
>don't happen to know.

no, the right way is to follow the midi spec and the standard practice 
every other company follows. If you don't understand basic aspects of how 
midi works, that is something for you to correct by learning about it so 
you can use midi equipment properly. Electrix shouldn't have to deviate 
from the spec just to follow your own particular misunderstandings.

>What about the case where a person is sending MIDI
>program changes to the beat box via a MIDI foot controller that only
>supports one midi channel

that person should not be trying to control two devices with that 
controller. That's basic. The whole point of the channels in midi is that 
each device gets its own channel.

If you are going to use such a low end controller you can't expect it to 
work for very many applications.

>(like the multitude of FCB1010 users might be
>doing, and I would be doing if I hadn't taken the 1010 back)? They are 

the FCB1010 can transmit on different midi channels. It does have 
limitations, but that is not one of them.

>Yes, it WORKS, and there's somewhat of a justification for NOT dealing 
>this, if for no other reason, COST, but since they chose not to do this 
>should have plastered an unmissable caveat in the manual about it!

there is no issue of cost. It's not clear to me what you think they should 
have done other than follow the midi spec. What would they write in this 

"Hi! We followed standard practice in our midi implementation. If you have 
developed your own personal understanding of how midi works that differs 
from the MIDI standard, it is possible the Repeater will not work the way 
you expect."

>This is the perspective of a guy who's been a software developer in a 
>where things have to work correctly and robustly (high end commercial Unix

So how come when I use Unix I have to remember all these arcane commands? 
always forget them. The designers of unix clearly did it wrong. I should 
able to type in whatever I think the command is and unix should know what 
meant and do the right thing. Those guys must be idiots.


Kim Flint                     | Looper's Delight
kflint@loopers-delight.com    | http://www.loopers-delight.com