I notice that the PSR 2000's MIDI timing is extremely precise (1920 pulses per quarter note, or ppq). From what I have seen, it seems that most MIDI software sequencers provide support for 960 ppq or less. Not more. Has anyone here tried to record live MIDI (not MIDI file) data from the PSR 2000 into a computer software sequencer? Have there been problems? Any input would be appreciated.

Hi MarcK.
That is a great question, are you using a PC or a Mac? I have a Mac and I`ve heard that MIDI timing is not that great on a Mac but if the 2000 is that efficiant, then this group is realy helping me decide to try another(I had a 2000, but return it, defective) Any let us know what you have for computer it would be a big help, What software are you using?
jedi

I'm using a PC, and I'm trying to decide which software to buy. Thanks.

This certainly is NEWS to me. I always thought midi timing on the Mac was better than the PC. Afterall, isn't Windows still basically still running over DOS?

Hi Scott,
I read that since Apple dropped the MIDI extension file, that you have to use OMS or Free MIDI (motu, I think) and load either of those programs prior to any other midi sofware. I haven`t tried it yet so you my be right!! It was just somthing I saw so I downloaded both so that when I find a KB and hook it up to my Mac I would have those on hand. If you are familiar with midi and Mac`s, any help would be great.
thank`s
jedi

Jedi: If you've got a Mac, I highly recommend going with 'Digital Performer' by MOTU. http://www.motu.com/english/software/dp/body.html
It's a VERY powerful program, yet very user friendly and has the most elegant design inteface of all the midi/digital audio sequencers out there. It uses FreeMidi. I only wish Digital Performer were available on the PC-Windows platform too. Logic Audio is another powerful choice as well, but be prepared for a STEEP learning curve. http://www.emagic.de/english/products/index.html


I recently switched from Mac (Logic Audio)
to Cakewalk-Sonar http://cakewalk.com
on the PC, primarily because Cakewalk is supported by such a large arranger keyboard user base, and as a result, supports more 'arranger keyboard model' patch lists (instrument definitions) than any of its competitors. With the recent release of Cakewalk-Sonar, I feel that the PC has finally become a viable alternative to the once Mac dominated world of professional midi music production. - Scott

Hi Scott,
Thanks for the advice, I`ll check it out.
I know what you mean, I used to have a PC and was using Cakewalk for sequenceing when I had a Yamaha X-4500, that was a long time >>> ago HOW LONG , well the X4500 only had a polyhpany of 8 notes. So having midi on a KB with 8 notes you needed to have an inline sound module (which I didn`t have) so I was getting "drop-outs" all over the place. With all this "talk" about the 2000, at least it has 64 note poly. It brings to mind that the construction of the X-4500 was super it was "the Sherman Tank" of portables, it actuly took 6-D cell battries or of course an adapter (pa-5) O` well that`s history now but very solid and big for a "portable" Anyway thanks for the tip I`m gone ~~~~surfing (the web!!)
jedi

Hi Scott,
WOW that is some software I guess I`ll be saving my pennies for that (499.95) at zZounds I guess isn`t that bad IF they give good support and free upgrades, or at least cheap up-grades!!!! O talk`n about Digital Performer--->>>> looks good<<<<
thanks
jedi