Talk:MIDI/Archive 3

Journalism on demise of archaic standard
It maybe prudent to start taking note of how the standard is slowly making its way into a waste basket. It's only reason for staysis is based on dinosaurs in the industry. As they age and die. Computer protocols based on arduino and other setups will be the norm (a non standard, with more diversity) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.136.111.246 (talk) 01:23, 18 November 2017 (UTC)


 * - Citation needed? With MIDI Polyphonic Expression (MIDI MPE), I'd claim that MIDI got back its pertinence with modern musical instruments. The comparison with Arduino doesn't make sense to me given Arduino is hardware and MIDI is a communication standard. Both can and do work well together. In any case, claims of the demise of the MIDI standards should be backed by studies. Makes sense? -- Alex Lordsatri (talk) 14:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)


 * For standards, it is irrelevant whether they may be "archaic" from a technical perspective. The only thing that matters is that the use of the MIDI standard is widespread. Most electronic keayboards have a MIDI capability, Windows supports MIDI, and the internet is full of MIDI files. Advanced applications may need more functionality, but that is a minority. Rbakels (talk) 09:19, 28 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I would not say that MIDI is fading away at all. On the contrary, it's the studio industry standard to record and playback in musical notation. All major DAWs—Logic, Pro Tools, Studio One, Cubase, Live, REAPER to name a few—have MIDI implementations, software virtual instruments use MIDI, and virtually all hardware synthesizers have a MIDI interface (except the ones manufactured before the 1980s). Lion-hearted85 (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Archived page
This page got to be unnavigable again, so I archived it. Any unaddressed issues from before are noted in the form of inline comments throughout the article page. A major overhaul of the article is going on, so if you see something that you think needs fixed, you may want to hold off for a while. You may find yourself "improving" a section that's already targeted for deletion, so if you have any concerns, best to address them here. Some sections will be cut drastically, particularly the ones that currently lack references. I haven't cut them only because I don't yet have references for replacement material. You'll know the overhaul is complete when the article has no more tags or empty sections, and the edit history gas gone a month or so without constant activity. The article will be submitted for Good Article Review at that time.

I understand the concern about article length, but the subject really is that big, and has many subtopics with pages of their own. I'm trying to use subsections and a more logical topic layout to make it easier to navigate, but it may take 10,000 words just to give a brief summary of all the various subtopics. Once it's complete, it will be submitted for GAR and Peer Review, which should provide some feedback on the appropriate length. Dementia13 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Is this overhaul complete now? -—Kvng 16:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * There are a few sections that still have traces of the personal observation-type material. Some other sections are still lacking in detail. I worked the article up to a certain level and then withdrew from Wikipedia editing altogether, except for occasional participation in the copy edit drives. It's an awful lot of unpaid work. Dementia13 (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

14-bit
Something should be added to address the 14-bit nature of the pitch-bend command, either in the special section on pitch bend or in general.Senobyte (talk) 07:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

connector
The image of the connector is useless for identifying the pin numbers - it does not indicate whether you are looking into the end of a male or a female connector. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.106.190 (talk) 21:47, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Revisited image
There are revisited version of an image used in the archive of this talk page and, once upon a time, used in this article.

If you want to leave any comment, I invite you to do this on my talk page at de.wikipedia, as this will be visited far more frequently.

-- Pemu (talk) 21:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

MIDI Overview?
I have had several people mention they have come to this page to find out about MIDI and feel bogged down in details about the signals. I remember, as a kid, this was what MIDI was all about. I believe MIDI has come to embrace much more than the interface details. It has evolved into a paradigm to make electronic music, how the MIDI interfaces interact. I would like to try to tell people how to get started thinking about MIDI, and I am not sure it is the details of the electronic signals. But I need help, any help would be appreciated. Thank you in advance. John (talk) 05:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

RAfael Rafael Parker (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Is there a difference between a "knob" and a "rotary encoder"?
Buttons, sliders, and knobs are the most common controllers provided, but rotary encoders, transport controls, joysticks, ribbon controllers, vector touchpads in the style of Korg's Kaoss pad, and optical controllers such as Roland's D-Beam may also be present.

14:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)WithGLEE (talk)


 * Yes. A "knob" (strictly a pot, but the term is commonly used) has a restricted range of rotation, usually less than a full turn, and so can have a pointer attached to it. A rotary encoder rotates freely, turn after turn. This also means that it can't have an attached scale. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:24, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

"MIDI and digital audio contrasted"
This section notes that the distinction between the two might be missed by newbies, but doesn't actually explain the difference? It seems like someone made a rare attempt at clarity but gave it up halfway through 173.2.30.177 (talk) 16:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Good catch. This section was introduced on 2015-10-13T22:31:05‎ and never modified after. Definitely not a clear description. &minus;Woodstone (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

velocity should be here
I'm not being WP:BOLD because I'm a complete newb about MIDI. But if someone clicks the link for "velocity" in this article, they probably don't want information about dynamics in general. And if they type "dynamics" into the search bar, they probably aren't looking for the fact that MIDI "velocity" is a 7-bit number that's supposed to represent how fast a piano key was pressed. (That info shows up only in a .png and its caption, and doesn't appear to have a source cited for it.) --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 01:11, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on MIDI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110151234/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar01/articles/pcmusician.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar01/articles/pcmusician.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111225043650/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun03/articles/creamwarescope.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun03/articles/creamwarescope.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320113908/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/dec01/articles/tcgmajor.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/dec01/articles/tcgmajor.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121023090423/http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tutr/gm.htm to http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tutr/gm.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120501165134/http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tutr/history.htm to http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tutr/history.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120212181214/http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/mtc.htm to http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/mtc.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121127041205/http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/mmc.htm to http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/mmc.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121205031732/http://www.sweetwater.com/expert-center/glossary/t--MMC to http://www.sweetwater.com/expert-center/glossary/t--MMC
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121205041728/http://www.sweetwater.com/expert-center/glossary/t--MTS-MOTU to http://www.sweetwater.com/expert-center/glossary/t--MTS-MOTU
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111225130148/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/oct02/articles/pcmusician1002.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Oct02/articles/pcmusician1002.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://home.roadrunner.com/~jgglatt/tech/sds.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MIDI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120928230435/http://www.emusician.com/gear/0769/the-electronic-century-part-iv-the-seeds-of-the-future/145415 to http://www.emusician.com/gear/0769/the-electronic-century-part-iv-the-seeds-of-the-future/145415
 * Replaced archive link x with https://web.archive.org/web/20121707010600/http://www.midi.org/techspecs/midituning.php on http://www.midi.org/techspecs/midituning.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MIDI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Replaced archive link x with https://web.archive.org/web/20121707010600/http://www.midi.org/techspecs/midituning.php on http://www.midi.org/techspecs/midituning.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Bold deletions
In a single bold edit, had, "Removed unimportant uncited statements" throughout the article. I'm all for WP:BOLD and for streamlining a bloated article but I'm not convinced that all of the removed statements were unimportant. I have rolled these changes back. I'd like to have time to review these individually. ~Kvng (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I support the deletion. In cases where articles are stuffed with uncited, original research, I think a slash-and-burn approach can be advantageous, especially when stuff has been sitting around for years without anyone coming along and fixing it. Popcornduff (talk) 15:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay looking at this. I now see that this edit is associated with the GA review. I'm surprised this article has been nominated. There's a lot of work to be done to bring this article to those standards. It currently has a C rating and I'd think we'd want to try to bring it up to B as a first step. I appreciate that a GA review can be a catalyst for significant improvements but the review has been open for 5 months and there has been little progress.


 * Here are the specific deletions that I think went too far in the edit under discussion:
 * MIDI also enables other instrument parameters (volume, effects, etc.) to be controlled remotely. Important information and should not be difficult to verify.
 * These tools allow composers to audition and edit their work much more quickly and efficiently than did older solutions, such as multitrack recording. Helpful context motivating described features.
 * The SMF specification was developed and is maintained by the MMA. Credit where credit is due. Should be possible to verify or delete/improve if not.
 * The sequencer allows each channel to be set to play a different sound, and gives a graphical overview of the arrangement. A variety of editing tools are made available, including a notation display that can be used to create printed parts for musicians. Tools such as looping, quantization, randomization, and transposition simplify the arranging process. Useful summary detail that supported in Music sequencer.
 * Other controllers include drum controllers and wind controllers, which can emulate the playing of drum kit and wind instruments, respectively. Useful summary detail that is supported in MIDI controller.
 * SysEx messages can include functionality beyond what the MIDI standard provides. They target a specific instrument, and are ignored by all other devices on the system. Crucial information here is devices ignore unknown SysEx. I don't see that explained elsewhere.
 * A specific MIDI Implementation Chart is usually published for each MIDI device within the device documentation. This should not be hard to establish or can be reworded so as not to require citation. The useful purpose of the statement is to let readers know where these charts can be found.
 * MIDI's flexibility and widespread adoption have led to many refinements of the standard, and have enabled its application to purposes beyond those for which it was originally intended. This is a summary of what follows and should be allowed to stay. If it is not accurately summarizing, it should be improved.
 * Neither standard has been adopted beyond its creator, but both are commonly supported by music software titles. Reference for other information on this topic is from 1995. This is an attempt to give some updated information. This effort should be improved on, not deleted.
 * Mac OS X Core Audio, and Linux ALSA Sequencer. We have a list magnet going here. Deleting half the list is arguably an improvement but probably not the best way to address this.
 * In addition to the original 31.25 kbit/s current-loop transported on 5-pin DIN, other connectors have been used for the same electrical data, and transmission of MIDI streams in different forms over USB, IEEE 1394 a.k.a. FireWire, and Ethernet is now common. Some samplers and hard drive recorders can also pass MIDI data between each other over SCSI. This is a summary of what follows and should be allowed to stay. If it is not accurately summarizing, it should be improved.
 * No new mLan products have been released since 2007. Supported by MLAN. Useful context. No need to delete. Or delete the whole mLAN discussion if not considered significant in historical perspective. ~Kvng (talk) 16:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Anything you think is worth re-adding, by all means find a good source and add it. The fact that it was removed and now you have taken the time to go through it piece by piece looks like a healthy process to me. Popcornduff (talk) 17:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe all this stuff is still in the article. I was just justifying my revert of the edit that removed it all. ~Kvng (talk) 14:47, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I misunderstood. That's disappointing. I don't think restoring a whole bunch of uncited claims is a good idea. The burden is on you to source stuff before re-adding it. See WP:UNSOURCED: All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Popcornduff (talk) 14:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe all the stuff I mention above is verifiable (WP:V requires a citation be available, it doesn't necessarily require that a citation be given). In many cases, there are citations in articles linked in or in the vicinity of the disputed material. There was a minority of stuff in that single edit that was deleted that probably deserved to be deleted. I'm sorry I did not have the time to do a partial revert. I am in the process of reviewing this article and will likely address that as I get there. ~Kvng (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Just a heads up: the article review will likely be closed as Fail. I was unable to retrieve citations as requested by the reviewer. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

the "midi sequencers" picture
is of a mk2 latronic notron (fair enough) & a roland 606 drumatix drum machine. not a sequencer, not midi.

there are lots of hardware midi sequencers to choose from; if the issue is of finding a suitable royalty-free picture, I'll provide one myself. but that 606 has to go. ridonculous.

duncanrmi (talk) 01:15, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I've taken your word for it and removed the photo. If you'd like to provide a replacement photo, please do! Popcornduff (talk) 04:11, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Protocol details deleted
has deleted tables describing protocol details citing a shotgun full of policy (WP:NOTMANUAL, WP:TECHNICAL and WP:INDISCRIMINATE). I don't see this as an improvement but I've had limited success resolving such issues directly with Popcornfud in the recent past. I'm wondering how other editors feel about it. ~Kvng (talk) 12:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

"Pop" or "Popular"
The context is of music that is popular, not of music that falls into the genre of Pop. Jarre may not be a Pop music producer, but he certainly is a popular music producer. This is why the source is named as such. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, there is no claim that "that those who found MIDI appealing were solely pop producers" - it is you who is applying that synthesis. The statement is that originally the appeal was to producers of popular music. This is a completely different statement, despite the similarity of wording. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you're right here; there is a difference between pop music and popular music. We also have a duty to WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE. (It would be useful if someone could provide a quote from the source here so we can make sure we're reflecting it faithfully.) Popcornfud (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been bold and added a link to Popular music to hopefully clarify further. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)