RE: Midi standards

["Hogan, Greg" <GHogan@lexicon.com>]

Hi Kim,

It seems like the answer is no, the MIDI spec does not imply that MIDI   
program change messages are ONLY for program changes.  I don't think that  
 
it would take up a lot of space in the document for it to imply so   
either!

I agree that we might need new controls and new definitions for new   
technologies and/or non-traditional uses of old technologies.  However if  
 
we had to wait for such standardization for these tools they may never   
get put to market or even created.

I can not answer all of your questions as to exactly how Lexicon made the  
 
decision to control the JAMMAN via program change messages.  I do know   
that we did not break any rules in this regard and I feel that your   
charge of being unethical is unfair.  My suspicion is that the decison   
was based on the fact that it was an easy and cost effective way to give   
our customers the most amount of control over the machine.  Lazy?  Maybe.  
 
 Bad judgement?  Perhaps, but I don't think so.  Unethical?  Absolutely   
not!

Is Lexicon impeding the evolution of the MIDI standard by this action?  I  
 
don't see how.  Should Lexicon or anyone else wait for the standard   
evolve before implementing any non-traditional uses of these controllers?  
 
 I don't believe that anybody would want to wait for innovations to be   
standardized.  Isn't part of creativity the the bending or breaking of   
tradition in order to push the boundaries further?

Finally, I fail to see how this would prevent you or anyone else from   
developing the looping tool of the future.

I am not here to defend Lexicon right or wrong.  You stated that our use   
of program change messages in regard to the JAMMAN was unethical and I   
found your statement a bit hard to swallow.

Once more I do thank you for this forum.

Best regards,

Greg Hogan
Lexicon Customer Service
Phone 617-280-0372
FAX 617-280-0499
email: ghogan@lexicon.com