Tim E. Real wrote: > On February 19, 2010 10:17:12 pm Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote: > >> As PD said, the MIDI spec requires That MIDI Clock (0xF8) >> pulses be sent out at a rate of 24 clocks per quarter note. >> Meanwhile, a MIDI Tick (0xF9) is sent out at a rate of 1 >> tick per 10 ms. The difference is whether you are syncing >> time or tempo. Sounds like you want tempo (MIDI Clock >> 0xF8). >> >> There's a pretty good MIDI reference here: >> >> http://www.blitter.com/~russtopia/MIDI/~jglatt/tech/midispec.htm >> http://www.blitter.com/~russtopia/MIDI/~jglatt/ >> >> FWIW, using MIDI clock you can effectively sync tempo. >> Synchronizing down-beats is more difficult... since there is >> never a signal that says "this clock pulse marks a beat." >> >> Hope this helps! >> >> -gabriel >> > Good stuff. Thanks. Had no idea that 100Hz tick was for time-based sync. > Meaning we could use it for audio... > > Interesting, MTC full frames are 12Hz (@ 24fps) and quarter frames @ 96Hz. > (Correct my rusty reviewing). > > But Paul said that it can be 'quite bursty', I assume he meant the > quarter frames - and I think I also read one should not trust the full frame > to occur precisely 'where it should be'. After all, it is a sysex... > > So I Wonder if 'tick' is a more stable, straight forward, and faster option > for basic uses vs m...@24fps > > Still curious, someone said he had this 'tick', which app sends it? > > Imagine. Midi clock, active sense, tick and/or MTC all on the same line...
There must be a misunderstanding. IIRC Paul said that MIDI clock can become an issue. I was using SMPTE for a long time and it's absolutely usable for every sync situation. I guess that MTC is equivalent to SMPTE. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
