Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: >> I have a branch (from a few years ago) where I changed LilyPond's MIDI >> microtonality from using Pitch Bends (which is a bad idea when using >> chords) to using MIDI 1.0 tuning information. This works fine IIRC as >> long as you don't construct chords containing really close notes >> (e.g. c and c+5 cents). > > Sounds great. Given that MIDI 2.0 is still rather new it probably > makes sense to go this route.
Well, to put LilyPond into a bit more of a perspective, we are at GM1 level. Supporting GM2 would mean fast-forwarding all the way into the distant year 1999 (for GM2 v1.2a, even to 2007). I actually use MIDI devices regularly that don't do GM2. MIDI 2.0, in contrast, is from 2020. It would be overoptimistic to expect the average established musician to work with devices developed as recent as that. And it's not unreasonable to assume that many of those interested in using the kind of workflow LilyPond offers would pass as "old-school" and have a leaning towards old-school devices, regardless of what biological age their ID might pronounce. So in my book, offering support for GM2 _and_ other instrument/patch schemes beyond GM1 would be more of a priority over going MIDI 2.0. -- David Kastrup
