MP3 vs MIDI

[Tim Meyer]

I am no way near the point to be concerned with this, yet, hell I don't even have my first controller but was wondering if anybody uses MIDI files to do their sequencing vs the MP3 files? If so why? Were do you get your MIDI files? How can you convert your MP3 files to a usable MIDI that does not sound like just one instrument playing a tune that is not even close to the original? I was wanting to try using MIDI files because I thought it may help me to do the sequencing a lot easier. Any info would be appreciated, thanks

[George Simmons]

I've personally never heard a MIDI file that I was interested in sequencing - they seem to sound too artificial for my taste. And I can't say that I personally know of anyone who uses them, although the law of averages says there's gotta be someone who uses them. LOR supports MIDI files (the MIDI wizard) and there have been a couple of threads about MIDI's in the past, so a search might help you a bit. Many people recommend using WAV files. I personally use MP3 files without any sequencing issues or problems. However, if you're using MP3, do make sure that it has a constant bitrate.

[Tim Meyer]

George Simmons wrote:

I personally use MP3 files without any sequencing issues or problems. However, if you're using MP3, do make sure that it has a constant bitrate.

Thanks George. I thought as much the same thing but since S2 had the MIDI Wizard I had to ask the question. I have searched the forums, not finding much info on the use of the MIDI Wizard. I'll continue to practice the sequence editor with the MP3 files and I am sure it will begin to get easier, not that it is all that hard to figure out now, at least until I get my first controllers. Then I will be able to plug it in, set it up, plug in a few lights and see it work.
Thanks again.

[Guest guest]

If you're using a LOR1602MP3 show director I don't think it will recognize midi or wav files. So if you wanted to run it off one of those you'd still need to convert your midi files to an MP3 format. And the only way I have found to do that is to use two programs simulataneously, one for playing the MIDI file and the other to record the midi into and then save it out as an MP3 file.

Also the best rate, according to what I've read in the LOR manuals for MP3 is 128kbps. Also makes for smaller files and I haven't really noticed much loss in quality from converting those MP3's I have from 320kbps, 192kbps to the 128kbps format.

And I've really not seen much difference in the waveform in the Sequence editor from a Midi I converted to an MP3 either, but I have seen a little improvement in the sound, mainly due to I export the midi I recorded into a musical editor out as a stereo 128kbps MP3. It helps a little to enhance it, but not as much as a CD track or even a stereo wav file converted to an MP3.

[terrypowerz]

I think midi was kind of grandfathered in to the original software since it is a standard interface protocol still in some musical instruments.
The quality of a midi file can sound decent with the right hardware behind it, but since a midi on a PC uses the voices on the chip on your sound card it alas is going to be somewhat limited and like mentioned before most midis do sound "artificial" and dry.

With all the tools available in S2 now, I can't imagine sequencing would be that much easier using the midi wizard... but since I have never tried using it I could be wrong about that!

Good to see another "Hoosier" catch the "bug" Tim!

[bob]

I think the only real advantage to MIDI is the MIDI Wizard. You can use it to quickly do some pretty neat things, such as having individual notes for individual instruments assigned to individual channels - e.g. whenever the saxaphone plays a C, this string of lights lights up; whenever it plays a D, that one does.

The MIDI Wizard also allows you to quickly define things like chase patterns or tree rotations that can be changed on the fly (direction or speed or pattern) as the song is playing.

Other than the MIDI Wizard, I think that WAV and such are clearly superior to MIDI - MIDI can't have vocals, MIDI often (but not always) sounds kind of cheesy, et cetera.

[Tim Meyer]

Thanks everybody. I was just curious to see if anybody had tried using the MIDI wizard and if it was really worth the time trying to learn to use. MIDI's do sound really cheesy and NO great desire to use them in a show. What all of you have said is what I thought from the beginning but had to ask Thanks for the replies.

[Guest guest]

bob wrote:

I think the only real advantage to MIDI is the MIDI Wizard. You can use it to quickly do some pretty neat things, such as having individual notes for individual instruments assigned to individual channels - e.g. whenever the saxaphone plays a C, this string of lights lights up; whenever it plays a D, that one does.

The MIDI Wizard also allows you to quickly define things like chase patterns or tree rotations that can be changed on the fly (direction or speed or pattern) as the song is playing.

Other than the MIDI Wizard, I think that WAV and such are clearly superior to MIDI - MIDI can't have vocals, MIDI often (but not always) sounds kind of cheesy, et cetera.

Wow Bob, it'd be cool if some of those "easy to generate MIDI effects" could be incorporated into the MP3 style. Then maybe sequencing the song(s) wouldn't require as much time as they currently do. So in that retrospect, it makes the MIDI options sound like a lot more fun and easier to sequence.



But I guess we can't have everything.