What features of MIDI 2.0 are you looking forward to seeing implemented?

Sound Explorers Corner Free speech
#1

The topic of MIDI 2.0 can be a hot minefield when discussing what people want. I know that there have been a number of owners of past Arturia KeyLAB controllers who were disappointed that the latest MK3 doesn’t support MIDI 2.0 and some of the features that were not included.

A post that I saw was about MIDI 2.0 1. High resolution data instead of only 128 values - for example very fine Velocity response and smooth no stepping parameter tweaking.

This got me wondering what people are excited about or were wanting to see in upcoming hardware. For me the idea of High resolution data is near the bottom of the list of something that I see wanting for new Firmware for the MK3 or future hardware. So I figure it would make sense to explain my reasons or rationality.

Currently we have 127 levels inside midi. How they came up with that number I don’t know but for the most part it’s been fine to live with for me. I don’t believe that the average or even the above average person can differentiate between adjacent step values that currently are used. This is something easy to test with a DAW and the current hardware/software you own. If you create a midi region and put into is a series of notes with a +/- 1 or 2 on the velocity entered to the prior note, on playback most if not all would have a hard time distinguishing any change. Especially if done blind, or better yet double blind. It would become even harder if you tried the same with instead of the same note, you changed each tone of each note. I have tried this with different trained musicians and they found it more a chance of luck rather than definitely knowing. I found it wasn’t until you get to +/- 6 or 7 that you perceive there is a change happening but its not until the +/- 10 to 12 that you definitely tell that the notes more or less emphasized.

So to me that says that yes, on paper that having a higher resolution looks better, but in practical terms its rather redundant if most people can’t tell the difference with a 1/127 step increment from quietest to loudest, then what benefit does having a 1/1024 step?

But we are not just talking about keys, this will also go to the encoders and faders too. Again, the challenge is pull up MCC and (on the Mac) hit command+M. Now turn your encoder wheel and look at the value output. How much of a turn did it take to get the value to change by 1. Same with the fader. I have seen posts on other sites that complain that the faders are just too small (strike distance) to be able to get the accuracy of the current midi 127 step accuracy. they are buying larger 100mm faders so that they can get the 1/127 accuracy on the fader. Now I will be in full agreement that some of the advanced fader control surface midi devices would get lots from midi 2.0 as some of those have a 150-200mm throw. but not on a KeyLab as there just isn’t the room for a long throw and we don’t need it.

Am I missing detals or reached a totally wrong conclusion. Please, I would love to hear a reason or rationalization for why higher resolution data is needed in the KeyLAB or likely even any of the arturia instruments.

1 Like
#2

I don’t know enough about MIDI 2.0 to have any opinion on features, but as far as the original 0-127 range goes, here’s a quick explanation I found on reddit:

MIDI is based on a series of bytes, grouped together to form MIDI messages. A note is a 3-byte message where the first byte denotes the MIDI channel and status (e.g. ”Note On”) and the next two bytes are for note and velocity. The left-most bit of each of these bytes is required to be 0, leaving 7 bits for the parameter value, hence a 0-127 range.

#3

Hi @innovationsinm ,

I don’t understand. The topic ask a question. Your first post does not reflect this question. What do you want? No midi 2.0?

Are you interested in what people want from midi 2.0 or interested in technical arguments?

It seem to me, that you say many people have spend decades of work in midi 2.0 for nothing or for scam. Time will tell.

A main thing about midi 2.0 high resolution is to reduce or perhaps eliminate stepping. Stepping is something many complain about.
Both the sending and the receiving unit need the resolution to respond properly.
High Resolution is also about getting a analog feel.

I have actually also thought about starting a topic with the question you ask in the header. But to me the technical side is another matter.
I don’t know for sure, but i assume you can find lots of technical informations and tool downloads on midi.org , if you are interested.

I have mentioned this 5 things about midi 2.0 in a none prioritised list:

  1. High resolution data instead of only 128 values - for example very fine Velocity response and smooth no stepping parameter tweaking.
  2. Number of midi CC’s
  3. Very low latency midi - Also tighter midi sync/ better timing
  4. Two way communication
  5. No need for MPE that’s based on Midi 1.0 - MPE was probably none excisting if midi 2.0 excisted then.

There are more that some people might look forward to be implemented.

Time will tell how it all will work, and how much will be implemented widely and used.

3 Likes
#4

It WILL benefit people such as e-drummers, classical and Jazz pianists, EWI players etc.
As an ex drummer myself, and someone who uses the services of an e-drummer on occasion, capturing the ‘groove’, particularly with styles like Funk and Reggae which derive their groove in large part from ‘imperfect’ timing; it’s HIGHLY attractive.
Then there’s the issue of dynamics, 127 is pretty limiting in many types of music, Jazz and Classical being the obvious examples.
‘Ghost notes’ on a snare drum never sound quite right, as do ‘drags’, there’s always something just a bit mechanical if you listen critically.
It would do away with the need for ‘articulations’ such as ‘drags’ then.

3 Likes
#5

I am looking forward to higher resolution controller data > using 14 bit data rather than 7, making them equal in resolution as pitch bends, NRPNs and RPNs…

#6

and this is the cool bit about sharing experience. Getting to expand your knowledge, challenge your beliefs and become a better musician in our case out of it.

2 Likes
#7

Indeed!

(Ten characters)