This year marks the 30th anniversary of MIDI and any keyboard musician who's been around for a while knows that MIDI revolutionized music making, opening up new ways of doing things that continue to evolve today. You could make a convincing argument that MIDI was largely responsible for ending the stranglehold that record companies had on the recording industry, by making digital recording in small studios easy and affordable.

I think of it like open source software, which tries to level the playing field dominated by giants like Microsoft and Apple. MIDI makes it possible for someone in a home studio to create a totally professional end product, and it makes interfacing of old and new gear possible for live musicians as well.

Since MIDI became a standard, and up until recently, every keyboard that wasn’t a total toy had standard MIDI connectors. But recently, most manufacturers have decided to drop standard MIDI connectors in favor of USB MIDI on many of their less expensive instruments. Many of us in the music community feel this is a mistake.

While USB MIDI is great for interfacing with a computer, it’s not compatible with standard MIDI devices without adding an expensive, hard to find interface, such as the iConnect Midi (recent US price: $179) that requires more wires and an additional AC adapter. On the other hand, standard MIDI devices easily interface with each other, and an adapter to hook up a computer costs less than $10, and is powered by USB.

It would make a lot of sense to include both types of ports, and would be inexpensive for manufacturers to implement. Yet, using weighted digital pianos as an example, Yamaha instruments with both ports start about $999, and Casio’s start about $799. The less expensive models for the most part leave out standard MIDI.

Personally, it’s hard for me to avoid the conclusion that manufacturers are attempting to force musicians to spend significantly more money just to get something that’s been a standard on keyboards and other equipment for years. But perhaps I’m wrong about their motivation. I do think that continued customer goodwill is essential for any business to remain viable, and that it makes sense for musical instrument manufacturers to be aware of and responsive to our needs.

MIDI has been a great equalizer. Like open source software, MIDI levels the playing field. I don’t think that’s the case any longer when full MIDI functionality isn’t available on less expensive instruments. What’s your opinion?

Well USB MIDI has gained in popularity largely because of tablets and iPhones. A lot of people are moving in this direction when replacing a home computer and sales of PC's have weakened because of tablets and smartphones. Unless you need to connect to other gear, USB MIDI will work fine for some people. Yes it would be nice to have both on any keyboard, but as you say manufacturers are only giving both options on higher priced gear. I imagine this will be the case going forward.

Very timely, post Michael. We are discussing this very issue in a few sports - the new Yamaha P105 ($999) does not include a 5-pin MIDI I/O, and the Roland RD-64 has a 5-pin MIDI OUT, but no in! Strange days, indeed!

I understand everything is going computer, but for the gigging musician who wants to use a weighted 88 as a controller, the added hassle and expense of getting another box set-up is a PITA.

All the more reason to research every aspect of a product before buying.

The manufacturers are assessing the market and, it seems, the low-end market doesn't need both MIDI ports and USB.

"I dislike it" doesn't translate to "Everyone dislikes it".

Very true. I'm guessing a lot of younger players or those with no older MIDI gear will ever even notice.

True, not everyone dislikes having only USB, but many people do.

And what defines a 'low end market'? I'd think that that would include anyone who would buy less expensive instruments that met their needs.

That would include musicians who don't want to pay for features they don't need, and who would go for simpler, less expensive alternatives- for instance a Casio PX150 if it had standard MIDI, rather than a more expensive PX350 or PX5S which has both.

Like me lol.. I've no idea what to do with an midi port.. Sorry

If I remember rightly, part of the original 5-pin DIN MIDI standard was the use of opto-isolators, which is rather unusual. Perhaps that's the expense that the manufacturers are trying to get around.

Fewer people these days are going to need more than the USB midi connection. This is all you need for computer recording, playing software instruments and filing up/down loads, so it makes sense to fit USB first and DINs as a second option.

But I really agree with Michael H in that midi was a great enabler for the independent musician and that it was, from the beginning, remarkably effective and efficient. From being a means for linking two keyboards for layering sounds in 1983 to enabling home studio musicians to record pretty elaborate multitrack arrangements by 1986 was an amazing advance. The DIN standard may well outlast USB so I would be very reluctant to buy a piano or synthesizer without proper midi DIN sockets on the back of it.

One thing I saw recently that surprised me was BOTH a type B AND a type A USB socket on a Yamaha MM6 keyboard.

I'm not sure what the significance of that was, but it could be that the MM6 accepts USB MIDI signals from keyboards that have type B sockets using a standard USB cable.

If a day ever comes when all gear can interconnect by USB that would be pretty cool, although 'vintage' gear will still need standard MIDI.

And of course there may be a totally new standard by then if, for instance, wireless becomes stable and widespread. Maybe they'll call it greentooth..

Well even my humble and not very up to date Roland has type A and type B USB connections. One of them is for computer host (type B) and the other is for downloading files & things to a memory.

But I've used the ordinary midi sockets until today - I'm seeing if the direct USB midi works as well as the original DINS (last time I tried the USB route, it wasn't good but that was to do with the hub set-up I had).

But it would certainly be an obvious move forward to accommodate universal MIDI (instrument to instrument etc etc) into USB as you suggest. It's very probable, now that you mention it. Then the DINS will be pretty obsolete, yes.

Yes, as Toddy pointed out - the square USB "B" is to connect to a host, or computer. The USB "A" is to connect to a flash drive to store performance settings and songs.

The new trend is to be able to record and play back .wav files onto the flash drive from the USB A port - which is a very nice feature.

Right, I had forgotten about the flash storage option. And I have a Nord that uses the B-type USB for it's Sound Manager application.

Isn't it true that both sockets have two-way communication? If so, I imagine it might not be a big deal to get keyboards, etc to talk to each other this way too.

I'm not an expert on this, but from what I understand is you need some hardware in between to act has a host. So hooking up a USB cable to two keyboards will not work like hooking up a MIDI cable.

To get a DP like the Yamaha P105 to control a MIDI keyboard without a computer to act as host, you need something like the iConnectivity iConnect MIDI4 or the original Iconnect MIDI... the MIDI2 will not work for this unless you have a computer hooked up.

USB was designed to be directed. You shouldn't encounter USB cables with the same termination at both ends. This is because USB hosts might be supplying power; USB targets don't supply power; so if the rules are followed you won't get both ends trying to supply power. Generally, having both A and B USB sockets means that the device can use peripherals or be a peripheral.

Thanks for the explanation. If I understand you correctly, does it follow that, as an example, at some future time, one keyboard could be a peripheral to another keyboard, and the same for other MIDI devices?

Nope. You cannot connect two pianos together using USB.

When using the USB-to-host port, the piano is a peripheral to a computer. The computer is the bus master, and the piano is the slave/peripheral.

When using the USB-to-device port for a thumb drive, the piano is a controller over that thumb drive. The piano is the master, and the thumb drive is the slave/peripheral.

There are no other operating modes.

Deleted

Yes, I understand that it's not being done right now. I'm just curious whether or not keyboard to keyboard communication via USB might be feasible in the future.

Yes - USB is much faster than MIDI.

I do have a another question: If I have 2 USB only keyboards and want them to "talk" to each other via MIDI, would connecting them to a USB hub work or would a external interface/computer also be needed? I don't think a USB hub would be considered a "host".. but then again I am still learning!

Thanks guys - this has been a stimulating and educational thread!

Then maybe every midi device (or at least the more substantial ones such as keyboards) could be equipped with two usb sockets (one for each type) and could be capable of behaving as client or server....or slave/ master or what ever it is.

If you plug into the type one socket, it'll be master, if you plug into type two, it'll be a slave. Then they can get on with the peer-to-peer type relationship that they would have done through ordinary midi DINs.

To Michael H and to Plinky88: If you were able to connect two keyboards so that they could "talk" to each other, what would they "say"? What would be the purpose?

LMAO - I don't think they would talk about the weather... MIDI stuff.. note values, program changes, controller data.

It would say, for example, 'c4, velocity 87, msb-04 lsb-54 program 02'......in other words, it would 'say' the same kind of thing that midi has always dealt with.

Why have two keyboards "talk" through a USB connection? This scenario:

. . . I want to play _two_ P105's (with their various tones) from the keyboard of one of them.

I think the only way to do that is to run each of their USB connections into a computer. And then to use MIDI-Ox (or something like that) to "connect" the "virtual MIDI ports" that the USB drivers implement.

I, too, am old enough to remember "before MIDI", and mourn its passing.

. Charles

The pianos already talk in MIDI. But the question is: What would you accomplish?

Pianos (and other MIDI instruments) send MIDI code to a computer (or other dedicated device) so that the data can be:
- Played as an instrument (with much better quality than the native keyboard sounds)
- Recorded
- Mixed with other tracks to produce a performance
- etc.
So the piano is an OUTPUT device.

Yes, pianos can accept midi INPUT, and play the sounds just as though you were playing manually. But even that is rather pointless. The tones on most pianos are poor compared to what a computer can produce. Better to feed the keyboard MIDI output to the computer/controller.

If you wish to play two P105 keyboards from a single keyboard, many pianos can already do that ... using just one keyboard. I don't know what the P105 can do, but my piano allows me to select two voices simultaneously. I don't need two pianos to accomplish that.

I have 2 USB keyboards - I want to layer a sound on one with a sound on the other and only play one keyboard to do it. No computer. Possible with just an external USB hub or would an interface/computer be required?

You'd need a computer to do that.

On the USB bus, a piano is a slave. Slaves communicate only with a master ... such as a computer.

Two slaves cannot communicate with each other. A hub makes no difference ... a slave is a slave, regardless.

There we go... thanks. The reason I ask is with more and more USB only keyboards coming in this will become a very common question. It may not make sense to some, but connecting one keyboard to another without using a computer is something that is done very often in a live setting - and even in some home studios. Thanks again, Mac.

Well... to get back to the original point of this thread, 'standard' DIN MIDI has been communicating back and forth between devices, whether instruments or computers for 30 years now. No big deal to do it, an extremely easy to implement interface, tried and true.

It just seems to make sense to keep standard MIDI readily available. Nothing is ready to take it's place yet, but of course if someone is never going to need full MIDI functionality and compatibility USB will do nicely.

For anyone interested, this box plus a USB should make everything talk nice to each other - USB and/or old school MIDI.

http://www.iconnectivity.com/iConnectMIDI4plus

Yes, but my question was: Why should one of the keyboards not be a computer? You say that slaves will only talk to a master. Well then, call keyboard 'a' 'computer'. Then keyboard 'b', module 'c' would agree to talk to it and, of course, vice versa.

Keyboards aren't programmed that way - you need a box like the MidiConnect4 or a computer to act as a host.

Yes, but what I was trying to get at was that the DP could be programmed that way.....or maybe they couldn't.....just a thought.

Isn't this is more to do with identity than complexity?

I gotcha.. sure they can be made that way. Would be great to just be able to plug and play in that manner... but I'm not holding my breath!

They may reconsider (see article quoted below)... considering that USB is up to USB 3.5 now, and among the lower-numbered USB standards there are so many various flavors of 'fast' and 'slow,' 'to-host/ to-device,' no power/some power/more power/ or set-the-studio-on-fire power. (I could not help but think of poor Michael Jackson with his hair set on fire in the Pepsi commercial.) It is not a simple matter to keep up--- unless you just ignore it, which I think they're pretty much counting on--- as I learned in my 'pleasure reading' of even the very streamlined articles in WIKI on the USBs (and FireWire, and Thunderbolt/ Light Peak, and Ethernet, and Power over Ethernet.) And of course, oldie-but-goodie, but forgotten, Wireless MIDI.

Seriously, MIDI Over WiFi has a lot to offer, since most MIDI devices would not care as much about getting power in a single wire, as they would about a new MIDI standard that is faster and gets around the Old MIDI's limitations. Anyway, even in the old 5-pin DIN connectors two pins are unused; there must be some unused data- or power-carrying capability there, besides which Ethernet is already invented, so why reinvent it. And why hunch over your computer, tethered to a 3-foot cable--- that is how it's going to be for a lot of musicians.

"...The future of MIDI..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIDI#USB

"A new version of MIDI tentatively called "HD Protocol" or "High-Definition Protocol" has been under discussion since 2005, when it was announced as "HD-MIDI".[27] This new standard offers full backward compatibility with MIDI 1.0 and is intended to support higher-speed transports, allow plug-and-play device discovery and enumeration, and provide greater data range and resolution. The numbers of channels and controllers are to be increased, new kinds of events are to be added, and messages are to be simplified. Entirely new kinds of events will be supported, such as a Note Update message and Direct Pitch in the Note message which are aimed at guitar controllers.[119][120] Proposed physical layer transports include Ethernet-based protocols such as RTP MIDI and Audio Video Bridging.[109] The HD Protocol and a User Datagram Protocol (UDP)-based transport are under review by MMA's High-Definition Protocol Working Group (HDWG), which includes representatives from all sizes and types of companies.[120] Prototype devices based on the draft standard were shown privately at Winter NAMM 2013 using wired and wireless connections.[119] It is currently not known if and when the new protocol will be picked up by the industry..."

Also worth mentioning:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_2.0#USB_2.0

"...MIDI"

"Digital musical instruments are another example where USB is competitive in low-cost devices. However Power over Ethernet and the MIDI plug standard have an advantage in high-end devices that may have long cables. USB can cause ground loop problems between equipment, because it connects ground references on both transceivers. By contrast, the MIDI plug standard and Ethernet have built-in isolation to 500V or more."

But I have to put in my favorite, as long as we're speaking of disinhibition:

"...Some non-standard USB devices use the 5 V power supply without participating in a proper USB network, which negotiates power draw with the host interface. These are usually called USB decorations[citation needed]. Examples include USB-powered keyboard lights, fans, mug coolers and heaters, battery chargers, miniature vacuum cleaners, and even miniature lava lamps. In most cases, these items contain no digital circuitry, and thus are not standard compliant USB devices. This may cause problems with some computers, such as drawing too much current and damaging circuitry..."

I have been playing with this a little... I have Alchemy on my iPhone and play it wirelessly with a USB keyboard using a handy free program called rptMIDI.

http://www.tobias-erichsen.de/software/rtpmidi.html

Very interesting stuff, Jeff!

As far as the 'decorations' I hate to think that a cooling pad with fans might do more harm than good, but I guess it's possible..

But I've GOT to have my coffee mug warmer

And I REFUSE to give up my USB Whack-a-Mole!

Awesome!

I was just made aware of another device that is useful for adding standard MIDI to Class Compliant USB-only keyboards.

http://www.kentonuk.com/products/items/utilities/usb-host.shtml

Yes, I noticed the Kenton device too. So there are two, maybe three devices in all that will convert USB to standard MIDI. Of course, the problem is that they're each quite expensive compared to the few cents it would cost manufacturers to put the MIDI jack back in keyboards. HELLO!

And each of these devices needs wires and an AC adapter as well, which means more that can go wrong.

I always find it amazing the bonehead ideas that get adopted. MIDI jacks only on more expensive instruments? Could it be an attempt to make musicians spend more? No, of course not