i got a conductive labs mrcc that also would do the distribution job, but the clock sending out perfectly synced clocks to multiple midi ports is basically what i expect from a midi clock (since there is no lock like on other studio or broadcast clock systems).
By this, i could clock the mrcc, drum computers, the OXI and daw parallel in perfect sync and not serial.
Since you have an MRCC simply send the clock from the CS:M to all the OUT ports. That’s what I do.
ok, that’s serial again, but since this is your setup:
does using the clockstep instead of the mrcc’s internal clock really make an audible difference? I thought the mrcc’s clock is quite ok already.
I guess it might be useful to ask what you’re trying to accomplish?
If the MRCCs clock is doing what you need, why add another device to the mix?
I personally use the CS:M in combination with my MRCCs because:
The idea would be to distribute a single MIDI Clock signal via a splitter or router.
You do want to avoid too much serial routing, this is true, especially when using “soft thrus”. However, a good MIDI router will add around 1ms of latency, and then all of the router’s outputs are on the same footing from there while also affording the opportunity to reroute signals between all the connected gear selectively (and possibly even add filtering if needed).
So, if the question is about the design philosophy behind CS:M, I believe first of all that most MIDI set ups contemplating this sort of clock will still ultimately resort to the use of a MIDI router no matter how many MIDI OUTs are on the clock device itself.
Then second is the matter of size. And third would be the matter of cost.
Along with that was an overall goal to build a device that bridges various clock protocols in an effective way (MIDI, CV, Audio). You can see on CS:M that CV and Audio play just as important of a role as MIDI. (I don’t mention this often, but CS:M can also do DinSync, you just need to right kind of cable)
However, I would definitely contemplate getting a clock device with lots of MIDI outputs if I needed several compartmentalized MIDI clock signals (not just the same MIDI Clock in parallel), but that’s a different kind of use case not covered by CS:M.
I’m sure the MRCC sends its own clock just fine. You can get lots of gear to send a MIDI Clock stream that works fine as such. I hope it’s clear that CS:M is made for doing more than that.
Thank you both pmags and jmkmusic for your excellent and helpful answers!
I’ve taken a brand new approach to sync with the latest firmware update. If you ever wanted a MIDI clock/sync signal to follow a live drummer in real-time, you will want to check this out.
This is great stuff! For ages I’ve been looking for ways to sync MIDI to a vinyl DJ setup, as I often play records that have fluctuating BPM (e.g. disco with a live drummer) that I’d like to add some beats or basslines to.
After trying many options the best I could find is the live beat tracking on the TX-6, but that’s an expensive device with controls made for ants, only does MIDI over USB and has a lot of other features I don’t need.
Would the Clockstep work for such scenario, or is it really only intended for syncing MIDI to a live drummer with a feedback loop? If it does, this could be an additional use case to market to. That said it would be very useful if a future update would have a display showing BPM.
I have that use case in mind, but for right now the mode was made specifically to adapt to a live drummer playing a kit.
What you are saying is technically possible now, but probably not so practical. The main thing is, you have to touch off the clock at the same tempo of the music initially and match the downbeat … which you can easily by first using tap tempo and them having good execution of the start command. That assumes that the material itself has peaks that can be detected and everything is calibrated for those peaks.
I’ll probably try to demonstrate that at some point with this firmware, but I feel like there’s a better path to follow with special programming for that mode, so I’ll be looking into it more.