RANT: Why can't middle C be standardized to be Cx??

[Bassballjg]

And there was me thinking C3 was middle C

This makes more sense IMO, if you think in terms of the full-length 88 note keyboard, where the lowest C is C0.

That's the reference I use, Middle C=C3, bottom C on 88 note keyboard=C0, but I deal with the discrepency every day in my work, because in WusikSND and thus ManyMapper, the low C on an 88-note keyboard is described as C1 but it is C0 in Sampletank and VSampler, among other apps I use. Even better, what comes out as C3 in VSampler is C5 as the Sound Forge MIDI Unity Note. I have to redo stuff all the time when I don't remember to keep this straight.

[SARcazm]

The problem is that you have the 2 major players, Yamaha:C3 and Roland:C4, that will stick to their guns forever. I don't think we'll ever have a standard unless one of those 2 goes under sadly.

Thx and good point. I need to do some research to see if these two were on the committee for MIDI implementation, as I can't see how such an elemental thing can be overlooked. Seeing as Roland and Cakewalk are holding hands now, it'd be interesting to see if SONAR adhere's to Roland's C4 (if they were not doing it anyway).

[Warmonger]

OK, I'll bite> what situations can require you, as a sound designer, to use C4 as anything other than Mid C that were not brought about by the apps themselves saying so, because their C4 is different from everyone else's??

In short, sometimes you want to do things with key tracking that require pitching up or pitching down. In a complex synth like Z3ta with a very powerful mod matrix, it's unnecessary, but most aren't that nice. It's hard to give a concrete example unless we're talking about a specific synth though. Name a free VSTi synth with key tracking, and I'll try to come up with an example demonstrating this problem. The point is, sometimes I want a patch that doesn't sound like mid-C when played at "C4", a.k.a. MIDI note number 64, so why should it matter what the sequencer calls it?

phattslagg has a much simpler example with the bass pitch.

Edit: I guess I should clarify my position. I'm not against the idea of a universal middle-C, but I just don't care, and I'm surprised anyone else does.

[SARcazm]

Anyway, as a sound-designer, I prefer to pitch bass sounds down by default, so that they automatically sound like bass patches when browsing - especially for those of us with small controller keyboards.

But then as a browser using different apps (or even the same ones in some cases), how can we know whether you have pitched down or not prior to playing?? If a C3 was always a C3, and all controllers had an octave LED, then simply lowering the octave on the keyboard would work for all apps.

[SARcazm]

OK, I'll bite> what situations can require you, as a sound designer, to use C4 as anything other than Mid C that were not brought about by the apps themselves saying so, because their C4 is different from everyone else's??

In short, sometimes you want to do things with key tracking that require pitching up or pitching down. In a complex synth like Z3ta with a very powerful mod matrix, it's unnecessary, but most aren't that nice. It's hard to give a concrete example unless we're talking about a specific synth though. Name a free VSTi synth with key tracking, and I'll try to come up with an example demonstrating this problem. The point is, sometimes I want a patch that doesn't sound like mid-C when played at "C4", a.k.a. MIDI note number 64, so why should it matter what the sequencer calls it?

phattslagg has a much simpler example with the bass pitch.

Edit: I guess I should clarify my position. I'm not against the idea of a universal middle-C, but I just don't care, and I'm surprised anyone else does.

Well I'd like to see if from your point of view, so a specific example would help. I don't use free synths in general anymore (too many VSTs to choose from), but can you demonstrate using Synth1 or Crystal?? Otherwise, I have Korg Legacy, Cameleon5k, FM7, Symptohm Melohman in my aresnal if that helps.

NOTE-> apologies for the number of posts in this thread, but, for some reason, I'm particularly verbose today; don't worry, it won't last!

[lfm]

What extra work? My ears do a perfectly good job of deciding whether an instrument is in the right octave for a certain part or not.

So you've never been in a situation where you have a midi track and decide that you want to use a different synth, only to find that the midi track is now sounding one octave lower than the original synth?? Either you use very few synths or are just luckier than me!

Well, that could be from one patch in that synth to another patch, depending on if you lower pitch and use suboscillators etc.

I think the question is bizzar.

It's so easy to transpose a miditrack anyway...

...if you use a good sequencer, that is!

A good sequencer can choose what is the midi base note(where does midi note no zero play), and for each track just choose the number of steps to transpose.

Invest in a good sequencer...

[SARcazm]

Well, that could be from one patch in that synth to another patch, depending on if you lower pitch and use suboscillators etc.

I think the question is bizzar.

It's so easy to transpose a miditrack anyway...

...if you use a good sequencer, that is!

A good sequencer can choose what is the midi base note(where does midi note no zero play), and for each track just choose the number of steps to transpose.

Invest in a good sequencer...

Woooosh!

Judging from your answer I can see why you might think the question bizarre

Last point to make on this, then I'll let the thread sink to the KVR depths.

The Cx issue is plain and simple an implementation bug. Let's say that Microsoft and Apple decide that documents crreated in their respective Word Processing Apps can be completely interchangable, but, for whatever reason, Apple decide to use different ASCII interpretation, so you end up having to convert the documents anyway. Everybody would cry "bug" and the companies would have to say they'll fix it in the next release. Eventually everyone's happy.

However, in the case of MIDI, no-one is creating a large enough fuss to fix issues like this, and the question I have to all of you, is why?? Many hundreds of thousands use MIDI every day, yet it is only an adequate solution, not an ideal one, but no-one is forcing the powers-that-be to fix the problems, as they would with software apps. Odd, neh??

[Sepheritoh]

.....it'd be interesting to see if SONAR adhere's to Roland's C4 (if they were not doing it anyway).

Sonar use Mid C = C5

[tony tony chopper]

only to find that the midi track is now sounding one octave lower

That just can't be. MIDI middle C *is* a constant, it's #60. What differs is the labelling, it can be *displayed* to the user as C3, C4 or C5. If have 2 sequencers, and their middle C, that is MIDI note #60, don't sound the same through the same device, one of them is broken.

The same way, importing a MIDI file in 2 sequencers will result in the same, nothing will be transposed. What will differ are not labels, they may show as in different octaves.

[René]

During MusikMesse, I had the same thought about the AC plugs. I was forced to craft a hand-made adaptor which would make Mc Gyver look like a hobbyst. It's damn 2006, couldn't we just all use the same AC plug?

Well, that won't happen it seems. Neither middle C. It happens that there's IPN (International Pitch Notation), sponsored by the American Acoustic Asociation, which defines middle C in the position where it has been for centuries. Then, there's the MMA which states that middle C is actually one octave above that. That wasn't happy, but has also been there for 25 years.

Let's just enjoy the world diversity


-René

[tony tony chopper]

But can you explain why a *label* would be that important? C5, C4 or C3, as long as it's the same note produced for this #60 MIDI note, universally, who cares?

It's 'middle C' and that's all that matters. MIDI #60 is where you instrument's middle C should be, and the octave is just a goddamn label that doesn't alter interchangeability & communication in any way.

MIDI note #60 could be called C666 that it would still not break anything.

[Kingston]

Oddly enough, having used innumerable different types of hosts, instruments, piano rolls and other editors, software and hardware, I just can't see what the problem is. I never even thought about it.



and I do arranging for living.