1
Votes
Undo
  1. Happy
  2. MIDI Specifications
  3. Sunday, 12 January 2020
  4.  Subscribe via email
Since MIDI 2.0 only support USB (for now), will MIDI 2.0 need a new or updated OS class driver for the 32/64 bit universal packet interface and device descriptor for devices ? Page 16 of the USB MIDI class driver spec defines support for 1,2 or 3 bytes transfers only, not 4 or 8. How will this have to be implemented by MIDI USB device manufacturers and well as on the Mac, Windows and Linux OSes side ? Treat it like an Sysex packet ? that would be inefficient and cause processing code overhead. How will Windows Win32 API support the packet interface . AFAIK Microsoft does not plan to make changes to the Win32 MIDI API anymore but only for Windows UWP. so MIDI 2.0 is only for MIDI UWP applications , that would mean most DAWs are left out in the cold, How will this impact Linux ALSA ? Many folks may not have the funding for an annual MIDI membership like larger companies, but like me, many may have these questions and some clarification for this would help. There seems to be no information on the MIDI website to address any of such concerns. P.S Would the first byte of the message with b7=0 not confuse the driver of running status ? Why going through MIDI-CI protocol negotiation if a new descriptor or drivers is needed that could just indicate 2.0 capabilities ?.
Comment
There are no comments made yet.
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
0
Votes
Undo
MIDI 2.0 uses a Universal MIDI Packet (UMP) format for MIDI 1.0 Protocol messages and MIDI 2.0 Protocol messages.
There is a Version 2 of the USB Device Class Definition for MIDI Devices in development to support the UMP format. It will require new class drivers.
All of the major OS vendors are aware of the progress. I think the ALSA team is also aware.
Comment
There are no comments made yet.
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
1
Votes
Undo
Some more questions

1. Will Microsoft revise the win32 API or only going to support MIDI 2.0 UMP for the UWP API or will there a totally new MIDI API with WIn32 MIDI API backward compatibility ?
2 . How will Chrome support MIDI 2.0 for the WebMIDI ?
3. Will this mean a change of MIDI USB device descriptor for MIDI USB devices
4. Will this be a totally new class or just some added flags/field in the current header?
5. and is the descriptor definition part of the MIDI specification ?
Comment
There are no comments made yet.
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
0
Votes
Undo
Some excellent questions, Happy.

I look forward to receiving some answers.

Meanwhile I shan't be holding my breath for MIDI 2. It seems years away.
Comment
There are no comments made yet.
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
0
Votes
Undo
Hello Mike
Last week I sent a PM to you if MIDI.org could get into contact with the ALSA team to work out the issues that should enable the Linux ALSA development community to implement MIDI 2.0.. The primary ALSA contact was provided in there.
P.S It seems that low level drivers should be able to send and receive MIDI UMP packets but the higher level API may need changes.
if that is true, then why a new USB class and changes or is this Microsoft/Apple specific ?
Thanks.
Comment
There are no comments made yet.
  • Page :
  • 1


There are no replies made for this post yet.
Be one of the first to reply to this post!