There is already a thread that has MIDI 2.0 Capability Inquiry in its title, so given the specificity of that title I thought I would start another one for this other side to MIDI 2.0.
This is the first pairing of apps I’ve heard of that support the new higher resolution messages and the successor to MPE that MIDI 2.0 brings. WoodTroller and WoodSynth:
I havent had a chance to try them yet. I will. Anybody else with suitable Apple hardware taking a look at these?
is there an mpe controller which supports this yet?
I cannot think of controller that supports midi 2.0…
if we start to get a few synths / daws that support it, I’ll definitely consider adding it to the Eigenharp… as its internal data stream is already 32bit, so would benefit from higher res.
will it feel better?
depends on the synth, if done well I think it will…
for years, Ive used Aalto over T3D (32 bit osc) with the Eigenharps, and its much better than using MPE (7bit)… though it does also publish full touch message in ONE message, rather than a stream, which I think is also pretty important.
but we will see
as wolfsynth… 90 euros - ouch… I’ll think about it… not really bought/used any vsts lately, and its does seem that interesting as a synth.
as for listing midi 2… we could create another wiki page ?
Im not sure we have enough synths/hardware quite yet.
also Id probably want to have some ‘guidelines’ on what to include.
- expressive support only
(this is the sites focus, we don’t just want to list everything that supports midi 2.0)
- midi 2.0 implementation.
not those that are ‘midi 2.0 ready’ , which is kind of marketing buzz wording.
the other possibility is, we take our existing topics (hardware and software), and start noting those with MIDI 2.0 support.
I could see broadening that topic possibly being a better idea, so we only have one place to look.
after all, midi 2.0 (and daws etc) are backwards compatible. so we can see MPE/Midi 2.0 as features.
also its require minimal changes to those wiki pages.
title change, and splitting into groups ?
MPE only , MIDI 2.0 only (?) , MPE + MIDI 2.0
whats nice about this approach is… presuming MIDI 2 gets widespread adoption, for many synths/hardware we will simply just ‘move it’ from MPE only (default for now) to MPE+MIDI2
I’ve got WoodSynth on the ipad where I believe it was much cheaper. As for controllers, I guess I’ll use WoodTroller for that for initial testing, since its one of those virtual control surfaces for ipad that already supported MPE and now supports the higher res MIDI 2.0 equivalent.
If I could get my head around the required coding, I might be tempted to make a MPE+ (from Osmose etc) to MIDI 2.0 converter, mostly just for early experimentation purposes.
I havent got thoughts about the wiki yet, no rush I’d say.
The new Korg keyboards got officially announced now too (were leaked earlier) but the primary marketing focus of their MIDI 2.0 stuff at this stage looks to be the auto-mapping side of things, which isnt surprising.
PS. As far as I know Windows MIDI 2.0 support isnt quite available yet, its coming, so I focus on Apple for now. Havent yet looked into what the checkbox in Logic that enables MIDI 2.0 actually does yet, and dont know my way round Logic well at all.
Section 14.17 of the WoodSynth manual is essential reading when trying to make stuff work, and for existing limitations and test example of it working (ios to mac MIDI over network apparently converts back to MIDI 1.0, MIDI from DAW setting in WoodSynth uses JUCE and doesnt work):
yeah, that could work, pretty straightforward too … it would be interesting see if its feels any better.
for the eigenharp, Ive already got MPE+ , so very easy to move that over (without a translation layer)
I could also do something with the Embodme Erae Touch using their API, but I need to check the touch resolution to see if its actually going to make any difference.
edit: ok, api is 32 bit , and they mentioned midi2 internally… so should be high res, well better than 7 bit
all the above, assumes that WoodSynth is
a) a good references implementation of midi 2
b) its sound engine is good enough for us to really ‘feel’ the difference between MPE/Midi2
I’ve not got a modern iPad, so thats not viable for me…and Im not really interested in virtual surfaces etc… Im mostly interested if it feels better… thats where my hope lies (based on my T3D experience)
cool, ok important part is…
“Note : currently Midi V2 is only implemented in the direct connection to the OS midi system so
switch off “Midi from DAW” when running WoodSynth in a DAW.”
so, on Mac, we have to go via core midi … not a big deal, but good to know.
If I decide to do this, I might reach out to the developers.
(who appear to have the longest domain name in the world )
Thanks for your thoughts on this so far.
I’ve successfully done the most basic test on ipad using WoodTroller and WoodSynth in direct communication with each other, and the examples they gave in the manual.
Beyond that I’m mostly thwarted so far because there is a lack of info about what MIDI 2.0 features Logic actually supports. And for MIDI 2.0 I lack the usual sort of troubleshooting and checking tools such as a decent MIDI Monitor. So I dont even know if Logic is currently supposed to support 2.0 per-note pitch bend, either in the timeline or in any of its own instruments that do support MPE. And I cant fully establish whether a direct USB ipad to mac virtual MIDI connection supports 2.0 or falls back to MIDI 1.0, suspect the latter but cannot evaluate fully. Might have to knock something up myself to help check, eg perhaps I can get a MIDI monitor going using MIDIKit if its touted 2.0 support is actually working and I manage to stumble around Swift enough for this task.
I mentioned this overall topic on the audiobus forum today and the WoodSynth developer has now been in touch there if you are interested. I doubt they’ve had much in the way of 2.0 stuff by other companies with which to check whether they’ve got everything right at this stage. See this post onwards: WoodTroller by Woodman's Immaculate Maple Syrup Studio - Page 4 — Audiobus Forum
Given their longstanding MIDI 2.0 support, series of documented updated that further improved and added to this, and support for mixing this with MPE, CLAP plugins etc, I might need to consider investing in Multitrack Studio if I want to be a 2.0 early adopter.
eg here are their release logs:
Started messing around with Apple sample code, on the mac initially as its more convenient:
Have been able to see MIDI 2.0 messages coming from WoodTroller on mac to the sample receiver app.
Dropdown list in Apples sample sender app confirms that even the USB C direct wired ipad to/from mac connection is limited to MIDI 1.0.
yeah, unfortunately midi 2 really needs a bit more inertia…
I think most of us are tempted to wait until we get Midi 2 support on windows,
this is when 3rd party libraries like Juce/PortMidt/RtMidi will likely add to their apis.
as a dev Im kind of reluctant to start adding macOS specific code, rather than using abstractions that will deal with Mac/Windows and Linux.
so really, doing this is more out of idle curiosity more than anything else
(though in fairness, I do alot for this reason… so its not unusual)
Yes. I’m only looking now because those Wood apps added some initial MIDI 2.0 support. And because I’ve barely bothered to learn anything about the actual implementation details of MIDI 2.0 so far, just the higher level concepts, and want to gradually start to fill in some gaps in my mind. The sort of ‘barely a programmer at all’ programmer I am means I’m especially reliant on third party libraries to do most of the heavy lifting.
Thinking about some of the high resolution possibilities made me realise in the last day or so quite how little attention I’ve paid to this side of thing in DAWs and software synth plugins in the past, more broadly speaking in terms of parameter resolution beyond 7 bits in general, let alone anything 2.0 specific. The last time I did anything involved trying to see if I could spot the difference between MPE and MPE+ from the Osmose using someones VCV Rack module that had MPE+ support. I wasnt convinced I could tell the difference very strongly, and then we get into issues about how much synths already slew/smooth signals, at which point my attention drifted elsewhere.
I have got back into computer->CV stuff very recently (got a Behringer Kobol this week) so I suppose thats another area I could use to explore resolution advantages beyond the polyphonic expression context.
Another non-MPE (and so drifting off-topic for this forum) test project I might consider would be conversion of hardware encoders to MIDI 2.0 high res messages. eg I could convert some 14 bit midi CC hardware MIDI output messages to MIDI 2.0, or hack around with my own program that can use the Ableton Push encoders and screen to store and adjust banks of high res parameters. Again just as a 2.0 learning exercise really, rather than anything that I expect to be a vast improvement over the currently available non-2.0 options. I think I’d be more likely to try this now if one of the DAWs I already liked using had some MIDI 2.0 support, I still havent decided whether to invest in MultitrackStudio. At a minimum I will evaluate the desktop version of WoodSynth running standalone, and see if it inspires me to take any of this stuff further sooner rather than later.