Funny,I'm not the least bit interested in discussing MIDI,so I  didn't 
get onto the thread.My message had in fact nothing to do with MIDI.

> I abhor MIDI for it's obvious stupidity /crudeness...
See the little "I" in there ?
Stupid/crude to ME, for the way I want to approach the art/science.That's 
all I was stating.
It doesn't mean it's bad in itself and I absolutely do not discount in 
the least anyone else's success in using it.I've used MIDI  and made some 
decent noises myself.

Dave Phillips wrote :
>Attempting to use the wrong tool for the job hardly defines the tool as
>stupid & crude. It does say something about the user though...
Uh,Dave,it's not like there's a whole lot of choice as far as this tool 
is concerned.
Last I heard  is that it's the lone standard  supported for years ,in 
infinite wisdom,by almost all manufacturers of electronic musical 
equipment.And there's a rumor they don't all implement it the same way or 
even to the same degree.

You don't like Toyotas ?,try a Ford,or any of a zillion others .You don't 
like MIDI ?, good luck to you .Or,find a way around it,which is what I'm 
trying to do.

Ken Locarnini wrote :
>Jeez I guess all the volumes of music Bach wrote for harpsicord and
>clavicord alone are crude.  We now have every sound in the known and unknown
>universe at our disposal and its still not enough, even with "crude" midi!
Apples and Oranges,Ken,you're missing the point.When I play guitar,I have 
to worry about inadequately represented  parameters in case my fingers 
slip.Other than that it handles audio with floating point precision,and 
it's digital ,:-)

I'm still interested in what I actually asked about.

Later,
Drew