Virtual MIDI Cables instead of CV

[Raveshaper]

This was in one of the feature request oriented threads somewhere recently; the idea of virtual midi cables instead of emulations of the older and more limited cv wires.

I love this idea, but I want to know what this would look like. How would it operate? What would you want to be able to send from A to B? Maybe some of the people who got on about this can elaborate or anyone who likes the concept can chime in with their thoughts.

[Gaja]

I'd say MIDI cables in addition to existing CV cables for backwards compatibility would be best.

[Raveshaper]

Yes, but what would they do, or do differently? For example, how would you define what gets sent from place to place? The idea is good, I just don't understand the way it would work if it was a real feature.

[Gaja]

Well I'd say they transmit MIDI data? Notes, velocity etc. you could have a throughput on every instrument device and use it to play multiple instruments at once and change multiple parameters at once (via cc). Maybe there could be more implementations.
I remember selig suggested it on the puf, as a way to implement MIDI out.

[Raveshaper]

I think there may be a way to create this sort of thing, although it would be somewhat on the fringe as it were.
The potential for this experiment excites me, but if my current project is any indication, it might be asking for a slice of hell.

[The Tone Ranger]

This doesn't make any sense. I think you don't really understand what MIDI and CV are. If you did you would realise Reason has always had both.

[Gaja]

This doesn't make any sense. I think you don't really understand what MIDI and CV are. If you did you would realise Reason has always had both.

Were are the midi cables?
Yes we can use midi and use the rpg8 to convert midi to cv, but being able to freely route midi through the rack would be a bit different, no?
And I'm not even suggesting we desperately need these, my main point was that I wouldn't want CV to be replaced by midi cables (so that my Reason 2.5 projects can still open without change) but would prefer midi to added on top of the existing CV cables.

[The Tone Ranger]

The MIDI cables in Reason are invisible. They're connected from the sequencer to the instruments. Also MIDI ports are really boring with just a single in/out for all note data and automation. What benefits do you get from seeing a cable for that?

[Raveshaper]

The concept I had in mind was creating a relationship between a surface-locked device and remote override assignments. More like a squid of wires branching from the source device with each line freely assignable to eligible controls on other devices. This is all theory, but I suspect it can be done.

[The Tone Ranger]

You're not explaining it very well. Have you got some examples of this in the hardware world?

[Raveshaper]

Hardware wise, I can only give analogies. It would be like having a midi controller where every control had its own cable that could be routed to specific destinations on other gear.

Software wise, it's reading values of the data within a rack device, then porting that data to other rack devices via remote overrides. From my research this looks feasible within the program as it is, no need for anything else running along side.

[avasopht]

Reason most certainly does not have both as you cannot send or receive polyphonic note data. Just try creating a single NN19 that receives polyphonic data from another Reason device.

[avasopht]

Hardware wise, I can only give analogies. It would be like having a midi controller where every control had its own cable that could be routed to specific destinations on other gear. Software wise, it's reading values of the data within a rack device, then porting that data to other rack devices via remote overrides. From my research this looks feasible within the program as it is, no need for anything else running along side.

Not really as a single CV cable can only communicate a single change per 64 frame batch according to my experiments, which at 44.1khz are 1.5 ms apart.

So yes in theory you can use cv to communicate data but your transfer rate is incredibly low. I've been looking into this for years as there are many interesting applications for something like full midi communication between devices.

Hopefully Propellerhead well change their stance on this but it does seem to fit their classic hardware metaphor

[Raveshaper]

Not cv, I mean direct reading of data live as it happens. The handshake between the map file and remote_set_state, parsed out into remote_process_midi as discreet pseudo wires of data spread out across several indexed items, even duplicates for simultaneous control of several entities.

[selig]

The MIDI cables in Reason are invisible. They're connected from the sequencer to the instruments. Also MIDI ports are really boring with just a single in/out for all note data and automation. What benefits do you get from seeing a cable for that?

Yes, the "MIDI" cables are invisible in Reaons, and making them VISIBLE is what I suggested a while back. It totally makes sense with the hardware approach since it's just like with REAL gear that has 1/4" audio jacks (and CV jacks in some cases) and MIDI jacks. That's what makes the omission just a bit odd to me, that the hardware paradigm wasn't carried out to the logical conclusion.

Benefits: 
Adding a MIDI Spider to the setup makes some of these benefits clear IMO, like being able to split one MIDI signal to many destinations without having to put things inside a Combinator. This opens the door to stacking Combinators too, something that can only currently be done by manually copying MIDI data from one track to another or using the Advanced MIDI prefs. You would have to be able to "flip" the sequencer (or add a module to the rack like with mixer channels) to gain access to the ins and outs there.

This also opens the door to MIDI FX like delay, live transpose from other MIDI sources, and intelligent harmonization to name a few. It would also allow devices such as MIDI phrase recorders or live MIDI loopers independent of the main sequencer, not to mention polyphonic step sequencers and polyphonic arpeggiators.  

[Raveshaper]

Yes, all good things and I wish that existed. But can't we homebrew a rough draft of that using the map > set_state > globals > process_midi chain? I admit I'll be a bit crushed if that isn't possible.

Edit: all I know is that if it can be displayed on an LCD, it can be parsed, stored, and rerouted somewhere else.

[tiker01]

The MIDI cables in Reason are invisible. They're connected from the sequencer to the instruments. Also MIDI ports are really boring with just a single in/out for all note data and automation. What benefits do you get from seeing a cable for that?

Yes, the "MIDI" cables are invisible in Reaons, and making them VISIBLE is what I suggested a while back. It totally makes sense with the hardware approach since it's just like with REAL gear that has 1/4" audio jacks (and CV jacks in some cases) and MIDI jacks. That's what makes the omission just a bit odd to me, that the hardware paradigm wasn't carried out to the logical conclusion.

Benefits: 
Adding a MIDI Spider to the setup makes some of these benefits clear IMO, like being able to split one MIDI signal to many destinations without having to put things inside a Combinator. This opens the door to stacking Combinators too, something that can only currently be done by manually copying MIDI data from one track to another or using the Advanced MIDI prefs. You would have to be able to "flip" the sequencer (or add a module to the rack like with mixer channels) to gain access to the ins and outs there.

This also opens the door to MIDI FX like delay, live transpose from other MIDI sources, and intelligent harmonization to name a few. It would also allow devices such as MIDI phrase recorders or live MIDI loopers independent of the main sequencer, not to mention polyphonic step sequencers and polyphonic arpeggiators.  

I would go with virtual UTP cables (MIDI over Ethernet ports) which could transport much more than conventional MIDI. But I would love to see it ASAP. BTW I think the sequencer doesn`t need real Midi ins they could be handled as a given Mix channel can be a Record source i.e. with invisible cables.

[Ostermilk]

DIY Method:

Use this on PC or on Mac set up the midi cable natively.

Drop an EMI in a combinator that's recieving midi data or connect it via CV, route that to the virtual midi port and setup a generic keyboard device to route that midi port back into reason.  Use several EMI's and Midi cables/generic keyboards if you if want to route several to many or several to one or one to several device(s).

You wont have the latency that's involved with audio loopbacks and you can convert the output from CV devices to Midi just by hitting record on the input track.

It's already simple and flexible enough in use that I wouldn't even notice if it was ever added as a 'native' feature by now...

[dflynn]

http://youtu.be/uRGhzXJOFUw

Is this on the right track?

[devilfish]

I'd say MIDI cables in addition to existing CV cables for backwards compatibility would be best.

Yes please !

The problem is:
Reason is damn old!! Midi wasn't never born in Reason. But the Props can born a new Age Synth (Parsec) without Midi
Sorry.. But something is wrong in the Rack xD
There is nothing in my virtual Studio with Midi. But every new RE Unit has oldscool CV (in2015)^^

Midicables/Splitter/Merger are really needed!!

[avasopht]

The problem with the loopback workarounds is that the devices only output CV, meaning there are a wide array of possibilities that just aren't available or are needlessly tedious. A simple MIDI cable between devices would have resolved that as well as opened the door for Rack Extensions that can filter and process input.

There are so many applications that are far too tedious with CV only options. Sure they can be done, but begrudgingly, and thus haven't.