DSP Robotics Support

As there is often confusion about "middle C" and octave numbers, pretty much every plugin and DAW goes their own way. This should stop, as it is annoying. We need a standard, that all apply.

1) MIDI standard
Although it doesn't help much, it is necessary to know, that the MIDI association standardized midi key 60 as "middle C". This enables us to recognize a range (10 1/2 octaves). We also have a direction, as key 72 is one octave above "middle C" and key 48 is one octave below "middle C", etc.

2) ISO norm
ISO stands for "International Organization for Standardization", and at the same time is derived from the greek "isos", which means "equal". That's why the organization is called ISO anywhere in the world, no matter the language. I think this shows how serious ISO is about standardizing. ISO replaces the American ANSI and the German DIN. ISO standardized octave names and midi notes to define other standards of this group as follows.
The MIDI standard of middle C was of course adopted.
Additionally, they adopted the scientific pitch notation with midi key 69 for A440 tuning (so, the A above middle C refers to 440 Hz). The octave naming is based around middle C being C4. So the range of octaves goes from C-1 to G9

The ISO standard makes sense and is easy to understand. For example, a grand piano, following the standard (incl. tuning), has only 3 notes below octave 0, A-1, A#-1 and B-1. Pretty much all of the time you will be within positive octave numbers.
As most musicians, I'm used to middle C = C3, as this is what most DAWs implement as default. And who has ever changed the default of that? I didn't even know, that most DAWs offer options to change it!
But ISO is the only international standardization organization, and as such I pledge to follow their standard!

As they say: "ISO standards are internationally agreed by experts. Think of them as a formula that describes the best way of doing something. "

(Linking to the ISO standards is impossible, as they are hidden behind a paywall. But at least the front page of the A440 tuning is here: https://www.iso.org/standard/3601.html)

Even the A-440 standard .... is not.

Won't even mention the 'standard' wiring for Balanced line .... US different than Europe.

Rules are nice. Standards are nice ... yet they are broken or changed.

RJHollins wrote:Even the A-440 standard .... is not.

It is. Just because other tunings exist, doesn't mean A440 wouldn't be the standard.

RJHollins wrote:Standards are nice ... yet they are broken or changed.

That's my point! Stick to the standard! It's up to us. ISO have done their job, now it's up to us not ignoring it.

tulamide wrote:

RJHollins wrote:Even the A-440 standard .... is not.

It is. Just because other tunings exist, doesn't mean A440 wouldn't be the standard.

RJHollins wrote:Standards are nice ... yet they are broken or changed.

That's my point! Stick to the standard! It's up to us. ISO have done their job, now it's up to us not ignoring it.

Well sure ... it would be nice if 'Standards' were .... standard use.

But take the new standards for audio streaming services ... some are at -14 LUF, others at -12 ... and then others at -16 LUF. And to keep it fun, they are STILL making changes to that. So us 'Users' have to make the best guess.

Wiring Color codes should be standard ... plenty examples their not. So ...

Tuning ... not sure of the issues there. Europe Symphonies [example] can tune to a different standard than US.

Another example. Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side of the Moon' ..... tuning A= 432 . Spent a decade #1 Billboard ... who's gonna tell them they used the wrong Tuning Reference.

You brought up MIDI. I remember the 'discussions' back in the 80's when this was all being purposed. [discussion being the polite way to put it].

To this day ... Middle-C still is questioned [why?] ... probably why the let the User set the Octave.

Anyway ... that's the way of the World .... I think they do it JUST to give Engineers/Musicians reason to drink

RJHollins wrote:

tulamide wrote:

RJHollins wrote:Even the A-440 standard .... is not.

It is. Just because other tunings exist, doesn't mean A440 wouldn't be the standard.

RJHollins wrote:Standards are nice ... yet they are broken or changed.

That's my point! Stick to the standard! It's up to us. ISO have done their job, now it's up to us not ignoring it.

Well sure ... it would be nice if 'Standards' were .... standard use.

But take the new standards for audio streaming services ... some are at -14 LUF, others at -12 ... and then others at -16 LUF. And to keep it fun, they are STILL making changes to that. So us 'Users' have to make the best guess.

Wiring Color codes should be standard ... plenty examples their not. So ...

Tuning ... not sure of the issues there. Europe Symphonies [example] can tune to a different standard than US.

Another example. Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side of the Moon' ..... tuning A= 432 . Spent a decade #1 Billboard ... who's gonna tell them they used the wrong Tuning Reference.

You brought up MIDI. I remember the 'discussions' back in the 80's when this was all being purposed. [discussion being the polite way to put it].

To this day ... Middle-C still is questioned [why?] ... probably why the let the User set the Octave.

Anyway ... that's the way of the World .... I think they do it JUST to give Engineers/Musicians reason to drink

You still don't understand. You mentioned tuning once again, although I already cleared that up. It is not about wrong or right, it is not about what's better. It's about having a common ground to work on. Imagine if every country in the world had its own math or physics! In Germany we would define "2 + 2 = 6", whereas Australia defines "2 + 2 = 3"
Neither of them are wrong, because in both their maths they get to logical results. Yet, the mathematicians couldn't work together on a thesis, because their maths are incompatible!

There is no big boss who tells us what to do when. We are people. We decide. We just have to decide to use common grounds for the better of our progress. I for one will do so. And ISO is the only international standard we have.

https://jakubmarian.com/the-432-hz-vs-440-hz-conspiracy-theory/

tulamide wrote:You still don't understand. You mentioned tuning once again, although I already cleared that up. It is not about wrong or right, it is not about what's better. It's about having a common ground to work on. Imagine if every country in the world had its own math or physics! In Germany we would define "2 + 2 = 6", whereas Australia defines "2 + 2 = 3"
Neither of them are wrong, because in both their maths they get to logical results. Yet, the mathematicians couldn't work together on a thesis, because their maths are incompatible!

There is no big boss who tells us what to do when. We are people. We decide. We just have to decide to use common grounds for the better of our progress. I for one will do so. And ISO is the only international standard we have.

https://jakubmarian.com/the-432-hz-vs-440-hz-conspiracy-theory/

Hey T .... I very much understand. Been a Recording Engineer for near 40 years.

and I'm not much into conspiracy-theory.

We had a thing called 'Vari-speed' on the 24trk Tape Machine. Many sessions had pitch/tempo changes [in Cents]. When the need was determined ... we would alter the tempo/pitch.

We did not give a damn to those with perfect pitch either.

Lastly ... I'm not dis-agreeing with what you're stating ... I'm just commenting on the realities I seen, heard, and dealt with.

I like 'standards' just as much as others. I also know there can be several 'standards'. As long as I know up front ... not a problem.

Although ... I do recall a 'pitch correction' session with the Tech from Synclavier [well before Auto-Tune was even around], for a Session I engineered for Steve Cropper. When they plug the Synclavier into the PatchBay ... it shorted out one of the internal Cards. Turns out ... the Brits had a different wiring 'standard'.

I was concerned. The unit cost $160,000. [80's price]. Fortunately he had a spare card, and we wired it into our US 'standard'.

Today, I'm too old to get worked up about stuff like that. I just deal with it.

RJHollins wrote:I like 'standards' just as much as others. I also know there can be several 'standards'. As long as I know up front ... not a problem.

I don't know how else I could make my point clear. There is only one international standard, and it's set by ISO. And except for music production every industry sticks to the ISO standards! We can only chat here, because the manufacturers of motherboards, chips, power supplies, programmers, etc. stick to the ISO standards. The car industry, furniture, electric and electronic devices, even something simple as bed sizes or window blinds - everything sticks to the ISO standardization!

But music gear producers and users are like "I don't care, I set midi key 60 to whatever I like, I don't care about the frustration and irritation I produce. International standard? F**k it!".

tulamide wrote:

RJHollins wrote:I like 'standards' just as much as others. I also know there can be several 'standards'. As long as I know up front ... not a problem.

I don't know how else I could make my point clear. There is only one international standard, and it's set by ISO. And except for music production every industry sticks to the ISO standards! We can only chat here, because the manufacturers of motherboards, chips, power supplies, programmers, etc. stick to the ISO standards. The car industry, furniture, electric and electronic devices, even something simple as bed sizes or window blinds - everything sticks to the ISO standardization!

But music gear producers and users are like "I don't care, I set midi key 60 to whatever I like, I don't care about the frustration and irritation I produce. International standard? F**k it!".

I think the issue is perpetuated with the, often music advice, there are no rules.

I've always been of the thought ... First learn the Rules before breaking them. That requires understanding [study/learning/experience].

But that is not the comments I read from others giving advice to beginners.

Maybe that comes from from Education. We had to take Electrical Engineering, Calculus, Physics, as well as all the Music Major courses of Theory, Ear Training, Orchestration, Arranging ... as well as a Principle Instrument and Secondary [I did Piano].

Then we had the 4 years of Recording Courses.

You did not touch the Console until you passed all the required training and testing.

That meant you had memorized Console Signal Flow, outboards, Microphones ... even the wrapping/unwraping of Cables. Calibration.

oh ... did I leave out Acoustics .... and Design ...

And that was just some of it. It was very disciplined. We were required to learn the foundational basics of all operation.

Then, after years in the business ... I slowly learned how to 'break those Rules' ... because I understood/learned the fundamentals that were established .

Today the mindset seems .... just wander off into the land of 'creative'. No need to follow 'Rules' .... hell ... no need to even understand what the Rules might even be.

Tell a young 'engineer' today about 'Gain Staging', or levels to Track and Mix at ... or Microphone technique. They give you the glazed over eye look.

About the only 'Live' instrument they record, is a Vocal track .... but them can't wait to 'fit it to a grid', along with the rest of the grid, or quantized tracks .... and go straight to the 'auto-tune'.

Desktop Plublishing ... copy/paste .... and then see how many Limiters and Clippers they can run simultaneously ... while clipping the converters.

It's a 'square wave' ...... and then you want them to consider DITHERING.

See .... I told you none of this bothers me really .... it doesn't

ISO Standards wrote where 'Middle-C' is.

Apparently, for many, Reading AND comprehension is optional. quite sad

That said ...

This is why Flowstone, and the Community of People, here are my temp escape.

I'll never be a 'Programmer'. I did self learning GFABasic for the Atari computer. Wrote a few needed programs that generally did what I [and a Studio] wanted. I 'enjoyed' it [in a strange way] ... never wanted to do just that for a living, but always hoped to get a little better at it. There's a structure to it, like building a House in a way ... or writing .... even building a Mix. [i bet I could correlated to my earlier work in Television Production ... but that was an entire lifetime ago].

That's why I try to follow along on the FS Forum. I'm not interested in building a synthesizer, or a compressor ... but I look on with interest. And some of the conversation is both entertaining ... and educational. [and sure ... some ridiculous], but it a way for me to step back from my immersion of Sound and Music. [hey ... all of our playing jobs have been cancelled to this point .... ]

sorry for going outside topic .... I've been in ISOLATION ................................

I once asked which was the best octave number for Middle C (on Facebook I think).

If ISO says C4 then I accept that’s the standard. But like tulamide I prefer C3 because I think it’s the most common and it was what pipe organ makers used, in a similar way to “8 foot”, which we now call A=440.

So ages ago I decided to give the user the option, as in the attached schematic.

I think C-3 is what I used back in my daze with MIDI. Arn't we the 'Rule Breakers'
[i don't mind .... in fact, i think Women prefer Men that work just outside the Law].

Spogg ... not sure you posted the intended schematic.

This one is 'Windows Style Menus with separaters'