This seems to be happening with General Music + TEchnics KN7000 .

dano

For casual listening situations, MP3s may be minimally acceptable, but for creating pro sounding music . . . . NO WAY !

I'm NOT willing to compromise my arr kb sound (either during live perfomance or recording) to MP3 (compresssed) backup tracks or MP3 format auto accomp loops. MP3s were primarily developed to reduce the size of audio files in order to more easily share music over the internet. Unfortunately MP3 files also remove much of the subtle musical nuances present in the original recording (WAV CD quality files). If General Music, Technics, or any other arranger manufacter plans to replace their current midi format auto accomp patterns/sequences with MP3 format audio loops/files, it will be definitely be a SAD turn of events for arranger keyboard. Just my STRONG opinion of course. - Scott

I agree with Scottyee that the difference between MP3 and CD is discernable. However for most live situations and audiences the nuances lost due to MP3 would not be audible anyhow. Studio - no contest!

In my live situation I'm playing back Midi files off floppy. Certainly in terms of operation this is very similar to playback of MP3's.

The good thing about MP3's (and backing tracks in general) is that you can use the full power of sampling and audio processing to create the track, inculding such luxuries as backing singers that are in tune!

The good thing about Midi files is that you can transpose / remix / mute / transpose on the fly. You can put the lyrics into the file (lifesaver for me with my otherwise chaotic filing system). Harmoniser capability can give you those backing singers to an extent (although I don't use this; one copy of my voice is more than enough)

I see it as a "horses for courses" situation. I use an arranger keyboard for it's flexibility in a live situation. Well produced MP3 can give quality results but less flexibility.

There is a new mp3pro format. It is truly amazing. It's 128kbs but the file size compared to standard 64 kb, is less than half.

So it sounds 2x's as good at less than half the size.

I would expect before it goes into a board, they will come up with even better quality and a fourth the size.
Terry

The difference in a CD or an MP3 after it comes through a comercial PA is so minute that I would never loose sleep over it. If a midi file is recorded at a quality level and converted to MP3 and played back on good gear ... the result will be VERY, very good. Will it be the same? maybe..... maybe not.
Some of my backing trax that I made for "production" numbers include backing vocals and sound so much fuller and better than any of my midi files. It is a case of the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.....or some analogy like that.

I have been using MP3 and WMA files from my laptop for years now ... and given the choice of lugging a case of CD's around or just hitting the "enter" key ....hmmmmm, lemme think about THAT one for a sec. Nope ... in my situation ... the MP3's provide a viable alternative to having a rack of gear and a roomfull of singers.
Some of my really high bitrate MPs' sound everybit as good as CD's through a PA ..... remember, it's not a perfect, studio setting on the job. The difference is SOOOOO soooooo slight, and almost nonexistant. If you hear a big difference, than you should RE-RECORD your MP3's cuz mine sound awesome.
If the initial recording is good ... end result will be good too.

Using MIDI live is really a question of how much you use MIDI live in the first place: if you're just using it for playing back backing tracks then it may not make that much difference if you use MIDI or MP3's. Besides providing accompaniment, MIDI can be used to control lighting, mixers, harmonizers and more not to mention that it can be used to store data for outboard devices such as programmable EQ's. I like being able to control the mix and tempo of my backing live, which MIDI allows. Also, it's still a very cost-effective medium and you'll be able to store far more MIDI files than MP3 files on hard drives or floppies.

I know people who are using both MIDI and audio together for stage use by using a program like Sonar on a laptop. This allows them to have vocal and instrumental audio tracks provide backing while keeping MIDI for stage control of lights. But it requires a very healthy laptop to do this and personally I don't like having anymore expensive hardware at risk on stage than necessary.

Mp3 will not replace midi sequences for the simple facts that
(a) you cannot edit an mp3 file as you can with a midifile, change voices, transpose etc.
(b) You won't get many mp3's on a floppy disk!
(c) I'd rather download midi's any day!
(d) A midifile will play back on a keyboard as true as the original performer

Mp3s allow you to hear other equipment that you do not own, whilst midifiles allow you to hear other players on your equipment!!

Simon


------------------
________________________
Simon G.K. Williams
simon@svpworld.com
Creative Music & Multimedia
http://www.svpworld.com
________________________

obviously you lose some control and other things (being able to look up the melody track etc) of a midi. But you can sync an mp3 with the board sequencer for control functions.

but I think the question is more along the lines of playing along either with a midi file with melody muted or mp3 recorded without melody. Here I don't see that much difference in that with neither are you controlling an arrangement with your left hand, you are playing with a fixed accompaniment. So if you take that as a premise an mp3 of real string or brass orchestra will always sound better than any midi file, even taking into account mp3 compression etc.

The same midi file sounds different on different boards because it depends on the gm sound set. An mp3 sounds the same, and no board will ever sound as good as a recording of a real string orchestra surely?

Nice feedback from everyone .



dano