Re: MIDI conjunction device
- From: "Michael R. Kesti" <mrkesti@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:17:07 -0800
"ahmed.sharifi@xxxxxxxxx" wrote:
Is it better to wait and read in 3 bytes for a full midi command and
then process on a command basis, or is is better to process each byte
of the midi command ?
One has no choice. A situation that a merger must handle is when
overlapping messages are being received its inputs. If one
processed and transmitted each of the messages' characters individually,
then those characters would be intermingled at the output and the
messages' meanings would be altered or even rendered meaningingless
I had, earlier in this thread, said that a merger will, by its nature,
introduce a delay of the message duration plus the time it takes to
process the message. This is true only when non-overlapping messages
are being received. When overlapping messages are being received,
an additional delay of as musch as one message duration, depending on
how much the messages overlap, will be introduced. This is still
musically negligible.
--
========================================================================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mrkesti at comcast dot net | - The Who, Bargain
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- From: Paul Keinanen
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- References:
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- From: ahmed.sharifi@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- From: Michael R. Kesti
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- From: ahmed.sharifi@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: MIDI conjunction device
- Prev by Date: Re: MIDI conjunction device
- Next by Date: CoolRunner 2 CPLD
- Previous by thread: Re: MIDI conjunction device
- Next by thread: Re: MIDI conjunction device
- Index(es):