I wouldn’t without adding some essential ingredients.
Look at the list of ops in my last post, and consider how to do those in MIDI. Is there even a ‘variable’ ?
MIDI is a format for communications.
Well MIDI CCs are variable.
Also I do believe there are MIDI to CV modules and therefore you can use MIDI to control CV values…
Whatever !? I’m out with this.
Something that varies is not a (programming) variable.
Apples n oranges my friend. But not from a music gear user perspective, we ll give you that. But think of the low level essence of each and you might see why, in the scope of this discussion, they re not quite comparable.
I am sorry but I think that MIDI is very comparable to CV (though I don’t think either equates to computing).
Both can be used to programme synth patches and both can be used to real time control synth parameters. The mere fact that some synths can be controlled by either MIDI and/or CV shows the similarities between the two.
Nope. Not at the fundamental level we re talking of here. CV, in other words analog signals, let you process/compute directly at that analog voltage level, with analog circuits.
For doing anything with MIDI you need a microcontroller or other computer to do to do the digital processing.
At a higher level, of course, CV and Midi are comparable. Depends on the perspective taken.
2 Likes
I thought that the subject of this topic is coding and sorry but I don’t see that CV has any more relevance than MIDI to this topic.
CV is simply a variable voltage, it is not processing or computing anything. It is simply allowing you to control something that responds to variations in voltage. A light dimmer switch is yet another example of CV.
You’re kind of missing the point though. MIDI is a communications protocol, that requires a computer to be read or written. MIDI sends data through a wire, as in encoded data, in a very specific format, to allow digital devices to communicate with one another. For that to be possible, those devices need to parse that data. That is at least an order of magnitude more complex than a simple CV signal, and generally it relies on machines running binary systems to work. The more apt comparison here is binary vs CV, which is really what was being discussed. It’s much lower level.
So coders use CV?
I think @Jukka was just trying to illustrate how CV, at a very fundamental level, is essentially an analogue means of computation. Patching with CV is using voltages to make calculations rather than binary transistors, and the underlying logic is the same; you can perform all kinds of logical operations with a CV signal.
2 Likes
I don’t think that you can perform many logical operations with just a CV signal.
As you pointed out, a MIDI signal needs something at the other end which can recognise and react to the MIDI data. CV is no different, it also needs something at the other end which will respond to various voltage levels and to perform all kinds of logical operations that something will need to be reasonably complex.
I don’t think you’re getting this. A modern computer uses transistors to perform computations. This means that all the crazy things that computers can do, including facilitating this conversation, can be boiled down to a series of simple on/off switches. That’s literally all it is; binary code; on or off; 1 or 0. CV can absolutely do that. Not only that, but CV can actually do a hell of a lot more, as it can describe a near infinite number of points in between. At a base level, CV can communicate more information in any given state than a binary transistor. Why then do you believe that it can’t perform many logical operations?
Exactly. To do the digital Midi protocol, at the lowest level, you need… CV.
I am sorry but by itself CV cannot perform any logical operations. Just as in your modern computer, the CV will also require transistors, resistors, capacitors etc to create a logic circuit, just as my dimmer switch needs a lightbulb at the other end.
Obviously. No one is contesting that.
1 Like
Well as its name suggests, CV is simply a control voltage, it is not processing or computing anything.
Equally MIDI data is control data, the data itself is not processing or computing anything.
CV, when applied in synthesis, is akin to programming in that you can perform operations on an input and produce a different output, in a way that is repeatable. That’s the only argument anyone made.
To liken it to midi is to ignore the fact that midi is alreadya digital communication protocol that must be encoded and decoded at either end by individual processors, and is therefore not analogous to cv.
1 Like
Mylar Melodies did a good video some time back on the elements that can be used in doing generative music.
Lightbulb moment: A VCA Is a multiplier.
That along with this video from Loopop who uses some different methods (he does stuff in the box too).
MIDI is not just a communication protocol, it provides a series of values which can be utilised by the receiving device to control various parameters. CV also provides a series of values that can be used in a similar manner.
When you apply MIDI data to synthesis you can also perform operations on an input and produce a different output in a way that is repeatable.
Note that using patch cables on modular is much the same as using the modulation matrix on a digital synth.
Yes, but it s not doing it at the elektron-flow level like CV.
Been saying this since we started discussing: depending on the point of view taken they are similar or not. Top-down, yes midi and cv are comparable. Bottom-up, no they re not.
From your top down perspective, yes you re right. No need to argue it further.
Bottom up perspective is equally valid though.
1 Like