Do you need Aftertouch?

[bmrzycki]

I've tried aftertouch on several recent model midi keyboards and none really appealed to me. To be fair, I've never tried some of the 80s synths where people swear by their keybed for channel pressure response.

With that said I'm more interested in ideas like this:
http://createdigitalmusic.com/2011/11/m ... d-playing/

With intelligent software you could do all sorts of per-note expression and learn to play pieces that would be difficult with current midi keyboards.

[Axis1~SL61]

Example of good MIDI AT -- my Novation ReMote SL = Excellent AT
Example of shitty MIDI AT -- my Roland Axis-1 (and most other Roland keyboards, judging by what others have said).

[mkastrup]

Example of good MIDI AT -- my Novation ReMote SL = Excellent AT
Example of shitty MIDI AT -- my Roland Axis-1 (and most other Roland keyboards, judging by what others have said).

+1

[maxmace]

The Problem with Poly aftertouch is that it overloads the midi bandwidth so is dodgy. Otherwise it would be a wonderful tool.

I'm not sure what "midi bandwidth" is, but I would take a look at your setup. 1986 called and wants its processing capability back.

No one would stand for "mono velocity". Its sheer nonsense.

So I don't see why mono aftertouch is likewise tolerated. Its the same musical paradigm.

[ontol]

[pdxindy]

The Problem with Poly aftertouch is that it overloads the midi bandwidth so is dodgy. Otherwise it would be a wonderful tool.

I'm not sure what "midi bandwidth" is, but I would take a look at your setup. 1986 called and wants its processing capability back.

No one would stand for "mono velocity". Its sheer nonsense.

So I don't see why mono aftertouch is likewise tolerated. Its the same musical paradigm.

Midi is a very slow protocol... the resolution is low and so is the bandwidth... entirely out of date and ridiculous that it is still the standard. But so it goes

[bmrzycki]

Midi is a very slow protocol... the resolution is low and so is the bandwidth... entirely out of date and ridiculous that it is still the standard. But so it goes

Not true. MIDI over USB or IP runs at a very low latency and very high speed. It's only when you convert MIDI to/from serial connectors (the 5-pin DIN cables) that you drastically lower the speed down to a paltry 31250 (or even worse 9600) bits per second.

A good native USB MIDI chip can run MIDI close to the 12 MBit full-speed rate. If your MIDI keyboard has a USB port (and has a good chipset) it's a very fast and reliable transport.

MIDI Resolution is also just fine -- look up RPNs and NRPNs with 14-bit controller range. It's a shame so few devices use them and stick to the older 7-bit CC range. The MSB/LSB CC groupings hack helps this but at a cost of halving the total number of CC message types per channel.

[chilly7]

What about poliphonic aftertuch? Is is o much cooler!!!

[chilly7]

The Problem with Poly aftertouch is that it overloads the midi bandwidth so is dodgy. Otherwise it would be a wonderful tool.

I'm not sure what "midi bandwidth" is, but I would take a look at your setup. 1986 called and wants its processing capability back.

No one would stand for "mono velocity". Its sheer nonsense.

So I don't see why mono aftertouch is likewise tolerated. Its the same musical paradigm.

Midi is a very slow protocol... the resolution is low and so is the bandwidth... entirely out of date and ridiculous that it is still the standard. But so it goes

I think it is becuse too many stupid people are there and they are lazy anought to let any changes even though that a new and better technologies already exist.

1. Audio cd standart ( no multichnel, not 24bit playback so on) while DVD-A or Audio Blurays already exist for years
2. Vector audio is suppoused to give a true life like sound wich can give u a true analog sound with no digitalness what we have to day, but no major DAW support Vector audio format nur any consumer media players can play back that....

P.. In this world there are to many stupid people who make the big dessigions and does not let the progress even thought that much more better technologies already exist....

[pdxindy]

Midi is a very slow protocol... the resolution is low and so is the bandwidth... entirely out of date and ridiculous that it is still the standard. But so it goes

Not true. MIDI over USB or IP runs at a very low latency and very high speed. It's only when you convert MIDI to/from serial connectors (the 5-pin DIN cables) that you drastically lower the speed down to a paltry 31250 (or even worse 9600) bits per second.

A good native USB MIDI chip can run MIDI close to the 12 MBit full-speed rate. If your MIDI keyboard has a USB port (and has a good chipset) it's a very fast and reliable transport.

MIDI Resolution is also just fine -- look up RPNs and NRPNs with 14-bit controller range. It's a shame so few devices use them and stick to the older 7-bit CC range. The MSB/LSB CC groupings hack helps this but at a cost of halving the total number of CC message types per channel.

Ahh... thanks for the clarification... Midi on my setup is rather old and clumsy then

And looking at RPN's and NRPN's it seems like they are something of a hack to get around the basic limitation. But I have no experience as neither my keyboard nor my host can do RPN/NRPN data.

[justin3am]

From what I understand, poly-aftertouch would require custom keybeds and lots of ADC. This would effectively double the cost of a MIDI controller, just for this one feature. That isn't to say this will always be the case but current implementations are prohibitively expensive for mass production.

Channel aftertouch is easy to add to most spring-loaded/weighted keybeds, not so easy on hammer action keys but it is do-able.

I'm not much of a keyboard player but I like to use aftertouch for synth patches. Any controls that can be used as an offset (as opposed to changing a parameter value directly) are very useful for bringing patches to life.

[hersoot]

MIDI aftertouch appears to be on the decline. Most of my presets to date make use of aftertouch... but maybe I should rethink?

Why should you rethink? It really doesn't take any effort to assign some function to aftertouch, and it's nice to use aftertouch when you've got it. Aftertouch is convenient, often duplicating the function of the mod wheel or some other MIDI controller. And if you didn't use aftertouch in your presets, would you actually reassign its intended function to some other MIDI CC? -- probably not.

That being said, I don't need aftertouch but I do use it. BTW I'm talking about channel AT; I never used a keyboard that had poly AT, but I'd like to.

[TwoToneshuzz]

Midi is a very slow protocol... the resolution is low and so is the bandwidth... entirely out of date and ridiculous that it is still the standard. But so it goes

Not true. MIDI over USB or IP runs at a very low latency and very high speed. It's only when you convert MIDI to/from serial connectors (the 5-pin DIN cables) that you drastically lower the speed down to a paltry 31250 (or even worse 9600) bits per second.

A good native USB MIDI chip can run MIDI close to the 12 MBit full-speed rate. If your MIDI keyboard has a USB port (and has a good chipset) it's a very fast and reliable transport.

MIDI Resolution is also just fine -- look up RPNs and NRPNs with 14-bit controller range. It's a shame so few devices use them and stick to the older 7-bit CC range. The MSB/LSB CC groupings hack helps this but at a cost of halving the total number of CC message types per channel.

Ahh... thanks for the clarification... Midi on my setup is rather old and clumsy then

And looking at RPN's and NRPN's it seems like they are something of a hack to get around the basic limitation. But I have no experience as neither my keyboard nor my host can do RPN/NRPN data.

I had not delved into the world of poly aftertouch as I don't have a controller that can generate it. With any keyboard that generates Channel aftertouch I could set up a per note filter and channelize each note range so it would enable a type of poly aftertouch over a range of 16 notes, or a per three note filter that would enable polyaftertouch over 4 octaves... But then I would have to use 16 instances of Diva set to 3 note polyphony. Setup ups that combined one or two cotaves with the workaround poly aftertouch with 2 octaves of regular aftertouch could be pretty quick to setup in my chosen host Numerology pro 3, and could be an interesting doorway into the world of polyafter touch..

Aside from this work around setup the main issue is the hardware isn't available at a price I can afford to do this the easy way. So it's possible if you have the money, then the advice above about RPN's and NRPN's will be able to be put to good use. Or the usb midi spec would likely be supported in a modern polyphonic aftertouch enabled keyboard like the VAX 77 at it's 2400 usd price.

Monophonic playing of course doesn't need polyphonic aftertouch. Mono Aftertouch for big pads is also quite effective. So maybe polyphonic aftertouch really is just toys for rich boys, that in the final analysis is just too clunky to implement well as yet for me to really lose much sleep over it.

[SJ_Digriz]

MIDI aftertouch appears to be on the decline. Most of my presets to date make use of aftertouch... but maybe I should rethink?

Please do not rethink ... AT is a huge bonus for expression while playing. Vibrato, filter sweeping,glitching,tiny pitchbends etc.. As others have stated, I wouldn't buy a keyboard without AT.

FWIW, I love your patches!

[Teksonik]

Hope that helps.

It did.

Unfortunately, there's some serious misinformation on that site.

Such as? It defines Aftertouch pretty well.......is there technical information that's incorrect? I found the link in a hurry and am at work now so no time to go over it in detail.