Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Innerclock



Hi,

I'm fairly well informed on all this, as I make a competing product :)

First, some general facts - tight timing *is* possible with MIDI
clock. You just have to send the clock messages at tightly timed
intervals, *and* you can't be using the MIDI connection to send other
data (e.g. notes) at the same time, *and* the receiving device has to
respond in an appropriately timely manner.

The innerclock device works by sending an audio pulse via a regular
audio interface (which *is* tightly in time, down to audio sample
precision). In their hardware this pulse then triggers the generation
of a MIDI clock message.

It works well enough. It is, however, phenomenally expensive.

I make a number of products designed primarly for interfacing
computers to analogue (typically modular) synths, also using the
approach of going out via an audio connection. I also provide a
solution for sending absolutely tight MIDI clock, though my approach
is actually use the computer audio directly to generate the clock
signal, rather than using an audio-to-digital trigger.

Check out this video, which shows the resulting MIDI clock compared to
that from a standard USB MIDI interface. The difference is night and
day:
http://vimeo.com/30913010

Plenty of discussion on my forum:
http://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=35


cheers,
os.



On 16 January 2012 11:08, Per Boysen <perboysen@gmail.com> wrote:
> "MIDI Clock" is one protocol for synchronization. Another standardl is
> MIDI Time Code, MTC, known to be better and more often used in studio
> environments. "Outside the box" we have analog systems like CV, analog
> audio pulses sent through a cable (once favored by Vince Clark in
> sequencing for its "way better timing than MIDI". That's because MIDI
> is a linear protocol, meaning that if you send several notes played at
> the same time they will not arrive to the playback unit at the same
> time and this causes some other issues to deal with... the we can
> leave out for now). When synchronizing analog gear or to an absolute
> timeline, like for example a tape machine or film, the classic way is
> to use SMTPE (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers).
> It's simply a time code that measures absolute time and you copy this
> code to the master media (may it be a music recording or a film/video)
> and then you apply a piece of gear that listens to this time code and
> translates it to a musical time to be followed by the slaving devices.
>
> Maybe this Innerlock Systems specialize in the translating stage? I
> have to admit that I spontaneously gave up on their web site and never
> invested the fifteen minutes for picking up a clue...
>
> Greetings from Sweden
>
> Per Boysen
> www.perboysen.com
> http://www.youtube.com/perboysen
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Jeff Larson <jeff.larson@sailpoint.com> 
> wrote:
>> It's hard to tell because this is one of the most poorly designed web 
>> sites I've ever seen.  But from what I was able to read within the sea 
>> of distracting graphics it's a combination of a plugin and a hardware 
>> device that can be used to generate a much more stable MIDI clock than 
>> can be done in software.  I think rather than using a timer in the 
>> computer and sending MIDI through the computer, you send sync pulses as 
>> an audio signal from the plugin out through the audio device, the 
>> hardware then monitors this signal and generates MIDI clocks.  Besides 
>> avoiding the jittery environment within the computer this also allows 
>> the MIDI clocks to be generated with sample accurate positioning since 
>> the sync pulses are interleaved with the audio you hear.  I'm guessing 
>> you need a multichannel audio device, and you dedicate one channel for 
>> the sync pulses and use the others for audible signals.  I would 
>> imagine this would be useful for anyone that wanted to combine tracks 
>> in a DAW with patterns played by external hardware devices that follow 
>> MIDI clocks.
>>
>> There may be more but it took me 15 minutes just to get that far.  This 
>> is a textbook example of how NOT
>> to design web sites that market a product.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Per Boysen [perboysen@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 5:52 PM
>> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>> Subject: Re: Innerclock
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Phil Clevenger
>> <phil.clevenger@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Anyone have any experience using Innerclock products to better govern 
>>> MIDI clock sync?
>>>
>>> http://innerclocksystems.com/New%20ICS%20Products.html
>>
>>
>> How would that be possible? I mean, the problem with MIDI clock sync
>> is not how it's governed but that the protocol in itself isn't very
>> accurate, meaning the slaving device will have to play catch-up all
>> the time; either it is a bit too fast and needs to slow down or it is
>> a bit too slow and needs to speed up. If MIDI clock doesn't sound
>> tight enough for your application I would rather use something else,
>> like for example MTC or Rewire.
>>
>> Greetings from Sweden
>>
>> Per Boysen
>> www.perboysen.com
>> http://www.youtube.com/perboysen
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
os@collective.co.uk
http://twitter.com/expertsleepers
http://www.darkroomtheband.net/
http://www.expert-sleepers.co.uk/