[[email protected]]

I have a Yamaha keyboard that I connect to the computer
using a USB cable. I appears as its own MIDI device.
I could also connect it via MIDI if I desired, going
into the audio interface that I record with.

Is there any reason to prefer one method over the other?
Are the clocks that control the audio and the MIDI tied
together in some way, or is it just the same as using the
MIDI device through the USB cable?


Thanks,


Toby

[geoff]

On 10/11/2016 3:53 p.m., wrote:
I have a Yamaha keyboard that I connect to the computer
using a USB cable. I appears as its own MIDI device.
I could also connect it via MIDI if I desired, going
into the audio interface that I record with.

Is there any reason to prefer one method over the other?
Are the clocks that control the audio and the MIDI tied
together in some way, or is it just the same as using the
MIDI device through the USB cable?


Thanks,


Toby

The USB stream is potentially more 'interruptible' by other USB
devices than a simple MIDI link, but the data rate is orders of
magnitude faster, so in reality probably not an issue unless you have
other things heavily using the same USB controller.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
I have a Yamaha keyboard that I connect to the computer
using a USB cable. I appears as its own MIDI device.
I could also connect it via MIDI if I desired, going
into the audio interface that I record with.

Is there any reason to prefer one method over the other?
Are the clocks that control the audio and the MIDI tied
together in some way, or is it just the same as using the
MIDI device through the USB cable?

It's just bits. In the end, the MIDI buss is really just a fancy serial port.

However, you can use the MIDI buss to control a number of instruments with
one cable, which is frequently of benefit.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Neil[_9_]]

On 11/9/2016 9:53 PM, wrote:
I have a Yamaha keyboard that I connect to the computer
using a USB cable. I appears as its own MIDI device.
I could also connect it via MIDI if I desired, going
into the audio interface that I record with.

Is there any reason to prefer one method over the other?
Are the clocks that control the audio and the MIDI tied
together in some way, or is it just the same as using the
MIDI device through the USB cable?

Whether to use one or the other depends on the bigger picture of how
you're going to use them. As has been pointed out, the USB buss may have
other traffic on it that could affect timing.

If the "audio interface that you record with" provides other functions
that you use, such as an internal synth or use multi-midi channels, I'd
use that one for simplicity.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/10/2016 12:06 PM, Neil wrote:
Whether to use one or the other depends on the bigger picture of how
you're going to use them. As has been pointed out, the USB buss may have
other traffic on it that could affect timing.

Although he didn't say, his audio interface is probably also USB. It
makes no difference where MIDI data is converted to USB format - in the
keyboard itself or in the audio interface.

The one thing that might make a difference if there are a lot of USB
devices connected to the computer is whether or not using the USB output
of the keyboard will allow you to spread the MIDI data between
independent USB controllers or root hubs. If this is a Windows computer,
there's a free program called USBView that displays all of the USB
controllers and their branches. You can get a copy he

http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/...shtml#download

But honestly, it's probably a trivial issue with today's blazingly fast
CPUs. This was more of a concern with the 4.7 MHz 8088 PC than with one
with a 2.5 GHz or faster processor. Since it's simple enough to try both
configurations, do what's most convenient. Using the MIDI In on the
interface if it works without glitching (which it will probably do)
leaves you with one extra USB port on the computer that will eventually
get used for something.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Neil[_9_]]

On 11/10/2016 1:53 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 11/10/2016 12:06 PM, Neil wrote:
Whether to use one or the other depends on the bigger picture of how
you're going to use them. As has been pointed out, the USB buss may have
other traffic on it that could affect timing.

Although he didn't say, his audio interface is probably also USB. It
makes no difference where MIDI data is converted to USB format - in the
keyboard itself or in the audio interface.

Very true...if the piano is used by itself. It may still be better to
use the interface if there is also audio feeding it, since that reduces
the load on the USB buss and may allow for better sync of the piano with
the audio.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/10/2016 7:04 PM, Neil wrote:
Very true...if the piano is used by itself. It may still be better to
use the interface if there is also audio feeding it, since that reduces
the load on the USB buss and may allow for better sync of the piano with
the audio.

I'm not going to study this very hard for you, so I haven't thought it
out fully, but I'm not sure that if there's anything to be gained, it
would be synchronization between the audio and MIDI. The interface acts
like a USB hub with one port fed by the audio output of the A/D
converter, and another port fed by the MIDI-to-USB converter. They both
go through the same "funnel" - the USB output port on the interface.

MIDI contains so little data that it its contribution to the USB stream
is negligible. However since it goes through the same port as the audio,
if the USB stream gets interrupted by another CPU process, the MIDI is
just as likely to glitch as the audio. As far as synchronization goes,
if the MIDI stream gets re-clocked to the same clock as the interface
uses for the audio, that, in theory, might lock them together better,
but I think that the difference would be to small to be heard.

I could make the argument that either approach (using the MIDI In on the
interface or another USB port direct from the keyboard) could be better.
If there's a difference at all, it would be dependent on the particular
computer, and maybe how the interface's driver handles MIDI.


--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Trevor]

On 11/11/2016 11:44 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
I could make the argument that either approach (using the MIDI In on the
interface or another USB port direct from the keyboard) could be better.
If there's a difference at all, it would be dependent on the particular
computer, and maybe how the interface's driver handles MIDI.

Bingo. The best person to decide which works better, if there is any
difference at all, is the OP. He can soon see if there are any driver
issues, or anything else to worry about. Not us.

Trevor.

[Neil[_9_]]

On 11/10/2016 7:44 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
MIDI contains so little data that it its contribution to the USB stream
is negligible.

Well, the amount of MIDI data depends on what the OP is doing. I know he
_said_ "piano", but some MIDI "pianos" play multiple instruments via
MIDI, and it can get pretty busy with 16 instruments (i.e. one MIDI
interface) plus audio. I don't know what the OP expects, so I'm hoping
that a discussion of the potential issues helps him out a bit.

--
best regards,

Neil

[JackA]

On Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 7:04:42 PM UTC-5, Neil wrote:
On 11/10/2016 1:53 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 11/10/2016 12:06 PM, Neil wrote:
Whether to use one or the other depends on the bigger picture of how
you're going to use them. As has been pointed out, the USB buss may have
other traffic on it that could affect timing.

Although he didn't say, his audio interface is probably also USB. It
makes no difference where MIDI data is converted to USB format - in the
keyboard itself or in the audio interface.

Very true...if the piano is used by itself. It may still be better to
use the interface if there is also audio feeding it, since that reduces
the load on the USB buss and may allow for better sync of the piano with
the audio.

--
best regards,

Neil

Buss? Now that's one confusing word. Some use Buss to describe a current carrying bar. Some use Bus. I always thought of Buss as a fuse manufacturer. If you look up the definition of Buss, it is a kiss.

Carry on! :-)

Jack

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

wrote:
I have a Yamaha keyboard that I connect to the computer
using a USB cable. I appears as its own MIDI device.
I could also connect it via MIDI if I desired, going
into the audio interface that I record with.

Is there any reason to prefer one method over the other?
Are the clocks that control the audio and the MIDI tied
together in some way, or is it just the same as using the
MIDI device through the USB cable?


Thanks,


Toby



I don't actually know, and I don't own any keyboard that uses "MIDI
over USB" to find out ( and that would be specific to that device ) but
what I'd do is:

- Run a 1/4 note click track at fairly fast tempo ( 180 - 240 ) and
record it both ways, multiple times.

- Examine the result.

- If you can't tell, it doesn't matter.

The chance of you having an ostensibly MPU401 equivalent interface
depends on you having PCI, which is largely extinct.

If I run "five-pin-DIN" MIDI off my Scarlett, it's still USB - to the
Scarlett. But at last that way the drivers and hardware run in the same
physical path.

--
Les Cargill