Aaron, the areas in jOrgan where MIDI Specifications (software to make hardware work), and Metadata (software to make GUI-virtual elements work) transcendence of them, diverge or cooperate to achieve a goal are probably fairly few.
I have often wondered what the specific, detection capability of âInterceptâ with respect to MPL messages is. In particular, with âDetect Range,â the implication is that the physical hardware of the organ console, being fitted with MIDI, is âdetectableâ by MIDI in jOrgan. Is this a reality? One of the problems I see regarding keyboard compass is the differences between settings in Customizer and the Transpose (+or- so many semitones) for couplers or footages which are derived from a concert pitch or 8â rank. If the compass (range) is set in Customizer, nothing below the fixed, lowest key number will sound and nothing above the fixed, highest note will sound. This will affect the transposition (octave, +12, and sub-octave -12 or â24). This needs to be taken into consideration.
When I first began to make soundfonts based on organ footages, I thought about the need to have the sub-octave and octave areas below MIDI note #36 and above MIDI note #96 included in
the compass of the Instrument. So I started my wave files at MIDI note #24 and went to #108. This allowed for playback in MIDI sequencer programs using transposition of track data for footages above and below concert or 8â pitch. It also allowed for the transposition settings of stops derived from 8â ranks in jOrgan.
I think there is a tendency to want more flexibility than standardization. I guess my thinking tends to the more conservative because of the fact that MIDI is referred to as âThe MIDI Standard.â I tend to see it as specified limitations on what can be done, and how it must be done, in order to achieve what is not achievable otherwise. Obviously, my ignorance regarding
the possibilities of âMetadataâ as a capability to transcend some of these limitations is the reason for questions regarding it. My thought is that the greater the non-adherence to the MIDI Standard is, the more Metadata we need to compensate for that non-adherence. This does not pertain to the compass of the keyboard (MIDI 0-128), jOrgan, generally, #36-#96 Manuals and #36-#67 Pedals, as much as it does to Soundfonts, in particular. The fact is that, without standardization, we do not have Musical Instrument Digital Interface. We have merely keyboards which can play the note-on/note-off messages from other keyboards, without the ability to recognize or equate the same sounds which are used ( or intended to be used by a composer) in any
piece of music. The fact is that flexibility exists apart from the MIDI standard, based on natural, creative individuality. While we may perceive of this as a kind of âfreedom,â it imposes a limitation on interchange or exchange of performance files (standard midi files).
Since so much of classical organ is based on the music of J.S. Bach, and the knowledge of what stops are used to play that music is something which is passed from organist to organist with very little written information concerning it, it is surprising that recordings of it are remarkable for the similarity or sameness of stops used in the performance of it, as if it is âstandardizedâ
by education. I think it is an expression of logical intellectual curiosity to ask âwhat stops are supposed to be used in performing this piece of music?â
John Beach
From: Aaron Laws
Sent: Friday, June 9, 2017 8:58 AM
To: jorgan-***@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [jOrgan-user] Customize Record?
A suggestion I received is that instead of saying "Record" when setting the compass of a keyboard when customizing a disposition, it should say "Detect Range" (or perhaps the suggestion was just for "Detect"?). I fully agree, and have made the change on my machine: http://imgur.com/Ip56PkPl.png
Does this seem reasonable?
In Christ,
Aaron Laws
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
