The BBC shared this video, from 1990, that offers a vintage look at MIDI and what it meant for the future of music-making.
MIDI was introduced in 1983, and was initially used as a standard for connecting hardware devices. But, as the video highlights, musicians were quickly connecting computers to hardware, via MIDI, which would lead to decades of innovation in how music is recorded, arranged and performed.
Video Summary:
“Kate Bellingham explores the exciting possibilities afforded to electronic music fans by MIDI – Musical Instrument Digital Interface – which can connect together a whole host of electronic instruments and audio devices through a computer.
MIDI enables a single person to play, record and edit entire musical compositions. Composer Clive Williamson is an avid user of the technology, and demonstrates his setup – a synthesiser hooked up to an Atari ST computer running the Notator sequencing software. With a bit of arm-twisting, Chris is able to convince Kate and Techno co-presenter Mat Irvine to pick up an oboe and guitar and accompany him for a live performance.
Clip taken from Techno, originally broadcast on BBC Two, 5 March, 1990.”
a pox on computers; i wrote a MIDI sequencer in Forth on an ST. big whoop.
I would agree with john in casting a pox on computers, except for one small thing: the alternative is usually tape. Multitracking that way comes with a load of hassles. Sure, you can manage it, as I once did. You can focus things so you record to SD cards, too.
OTOH, the computer has its own hassles, but it makes recording far easier. That’s where a lot of my instruments live, as well as astounding effects. I’m plenty happy with things like a *stable* Memorymoog and 6 kinds of compressors. Going the hardware route is, well, kind of convoluted. Software is mostly my buddy. Mostly!
i use a Zoom 2-track; simple to use, easy to record with. if i make a mistake, i just hit record again. it’s only a couple of extra takes at the most. for me, playing is only really important part of music. i have no use for a personal computer other than coding new models to play on Prologue, or updating firmware; stuff you *have* to do to play these days. wifey won’t let me have a piano :0( no room.
I certainly have enjoyed many of the fruits of the digital age:
Digital Sampling Workstations
MIDI Sequencing
Digital FX
Computer-Based DAWs
Plugins
Sharing audio remotely
Streaming Media, etc. etc.
But there are certainly downsides.
MIDI 1.0 was an incredible human achievement. Most gear, especially current gear, doesn’t live up to the promised feature set of v1.0
MIDI 2.0 does have some remarkable potential, which, I expect, will be only partially realized in tiny steps over the next few years, as humanity caterwauls toward oblivion.
There are a few challenges with regard to MIDI and digital tech generally.
Perhaps the biggest is that the tech drives the user to some degree perhaps more than the user drives the tech. Any software will have low-hanging-fruit that is the result of the specific workflows of that (G)UI and the feature-set. The out-of-reach fruit might be equally compelling, or perhaps even more rewarding, but you have to maneuver through a slap-gauntlet of steps & workarounds to make some of that happen.
The other is that music itself is complex, and developers have to distill that complexity– and that distillation requires some sacrifices. Front of mind is how tempo has all but been thrown out the window. It is arguably one fo the most important features– but most software and users settle for fixed tempo.
Much of the above criticism is not the fault of MIDI 1.0– just human nature, I suppose. MIDI 2.0 provides more keys, but the doors won’t budge until manufacturers and developers start to think bigger. And as long as end-users don’t show much interest in higher levels of complexity, well– stuff will stay pretty boring.
Ah, the Casio MG-510, I still have one today, and it’s still a great guitar in it’s own right!
those were the days my friend …