|
|
|
|
|
by nutate
4039 days ago
|
|
One could argue that it places necessary limitations on musical expression that allowed it to flourish. Defining scales, etc in the protocol left some issues w/ microtonal stuff. The timing protocol is a bit squidgy for beat matching, but if you look at OSC everyone creates their own namespace and instead of one protocol you have a bunch of devices with different mapping conventions. I would say the 0-127 range of controls hurts midi more than anything, if someone just bumped midi to osc's range most people would be happy. HD MIDI does that and may end up usurping OSC before OSC even gets traction: http://www.midi.org/aboutus/news/hd.php |
|
But the beautiful thing about MIDI is how plug-and-play it is, because of the one standard. You can plug one keyboard into another and boom, you have an instant controller. I can't see that functionality in OSC's future.
0-127 is really limiting though - I've tried using faders where 0 is no volume, and 127 is max volume, and it just doesn't feel like there is enough resolution to fine-tune things.