Replacing a hardware MIDI interface

[zxc890]

I am a bit confused with Copperlan.

My problem is the following, and I guess it is shared by a lot of people:

For several reasons, that are not important to mention here, I need to connect two computers, both with Windows 7 64 bit, via MIDI using multiple MIDI ports.

I am user of MOTU Midi Timepiece AV Parallel version and my problem can apply to many other parallel or serial MIDI interfaces of other manufacturers.

Due MOTU (and also other companies) dont provide 64 bit drivers for the Parallel models I am stuck in a 32 bit OS (Win XP / Win 7 x86).

The MOTU Midi Timepiece AV USB version is a real shit, and what´s worst it is the better shit between all the hardware MIDI interfaces of all marks in the market.

This means exactly that all USB MIDI interfaces are unusable due they can´t reserve for it´s exclusive usage an enough portion of bandwith and in consecuense suffer of latency, droputs, clock accuracy problems, etc when used concurrently with other devices.
The low latency and the time accuracy have been lost forever in the USB world.

The fail is not in the MIDI interface hardware drivers but in the USB bus of the computers itself, that it is not apropriate for to manage the MIDI asynchronic signals.

So I want to know if Copperlan drivers and the LAN T1000 bus can manage the MIDI information RESERVING a portion of the bandwith for its exclusive usage.

This means, even though having other devices connected to the LAN, to reserve a bandwith portion exclusively for MIDI usage, for to allow a better functionality than with the USB buses.

Due I am orchestrator my needs of MIDI channels are huge, what means that is comon for me to use more tha a hundred MIDI channels (multiple MIDI ports) that of course should have perfect and accurate timing plus all the aditional automation data.

Also I want to know if Copperlan drivers support MIDI Time Code, MIDI clocks, SMTE and other sync signals and how is supported System Exclusive messages in real time and in general the full MIDI protocol even using simultaneous multiple MIDI ports.

It would be fine the possibility of to have a MIDI Implementation Chart

[CopperPhil]

Hi,

To be clear CopperLan is a new communication framework, and MIDI usage is just there for backward compatibility. We do not enhance MIDI capabilities or change computer's MIDI handling for existing MIDI software/hardware, but we offer a way to patch any MIDI channel from any MIDI port to any MIDI channel on any MIDI port along the network, each MIDI IN port can provide a clock that can be sent to any MIDI out... You can get better performance than usual USB/MIDI devices using CopperLan native interfaces, such as Alyseum AL-88 or AL-22 products. These are respectively 8x8 and 2x2 MIDI <-> CopperLan bridges using Ethernet connectectivity instead of USB. It has been validated by numerous users in plenty of use cases, some configuration includes 8 AL-88 (total 64x64 ports), some users are dumping large sysex simultaneously on the 8 ports, others are using MTC, etc...

CopperLan is not just a pipe between A and B, it is a complete communication stack, ensuring delivery, network stability check, routing, plug & play at the whole setup level... A computer is able to manage tens of thousands of messages per second, the bottleneck is the physical MIDI port, not CopperLan.

CopperLan timings are very tight, and hardware CopperLan<->MIDI bridges offers very good performances (sub-millisecond latency/jitter). But we can't enhance the performance of existing MIDI gear & drivers.

The MIDI protocol is fully supported by CopperLan. We have fixed all issues related to exotic setups for years, so finally it's very rare to get a new issue report today.

Finaly, the best solution for you would be using several AL-88 (or AL-88c, lower cost but same performances). If you are using your computers only for MIDI/USB hosting, you can get the same result with a handful of AL-88 without needing a computer (except for the patching). CopperLan devices can run standalone on a network. Then you can add computers for sequencing/automation, but finally the traffic is diluted between the peers.