The "middle C" issue

[MichaelBenjamin]

so you want to have a standard for midi to hz, so that all vstis that adhere to this standard output some 440 hertz base freq when midi note 60 is triggered? problem with this is that there are different tunings and scales other than 12 steps, these then would be non-standard, right?

i think it is rather beneficial to have midi notes 0-127 as undefined, and completely user-mappable, but it would be nice to see the base_hz currently played in some readout on the gui.

[tulamide]

so you want to have a standard for midi to hz, so that all vstis that adhere to this standard output some 440 hertz base freq when midi note 60 is triggered? problem with this is that there are different tunings and scales other than 12 steps, these then would be non-standard, right?

i think it is rather beneficial to have midi notes 0-127 as undefined, and completely user-mappable.

No. I want a standard naming. With middle C == C4 and midi key 69 the tuning key. Why do people only read what they want to read, not what I actually wrote?

[MichaelBenjamin]

ah, you want a standard naming for what "middle c" represents as a midi note.
but since that "standardised middle C" midi note then would adhere to no further standard, since midi 0-127 is undefined, of what use would it be when "middle C" is always 69?

it makes no sense to define any midi notes, since they are just integers to access some range of 128 steps, so where the "tuning freq A 440hz" is may totally differ.

[tulamide]

ah, you want a standard naming for what "middle c" represents as a midi note.
but since that "standardised middle C" midi note then would adhere to no further standard, since midi 0-127 is undefined, of what use would it be when "middle C" is always 69?

it makes no sense to define any midi notes, since they are just integers to access some range of 128 steps, so where the "tuning freq A 440hz" is may totally differ.

WTF??? You start it again and put words in my mouth. I never said anything about middle C being key 69. You just don't get it, that's fine. But don't read just what you want to read, that's bad.

All others, please read what I really want in my first post, before this thread was heavily derailed. Thanks!

[RJHollins]

probably a mis-spelling.

C key 60, A-440 key 69

[tulamide]

As there is often confusion about "middle C" and octave numbers, pretty much every plugin and DAW goes their own way. This should stop, as it is annoying. We need a standard, that all apply.

1) MIDI standard
Although it doesn't help much, it is necessary to know, that the MIDI association standardized midi key 60 as "middle C". This enables us to recognize a range (10 1/2 octaves). We also have a direction, as key 72 is one octave above "middle C" and key 48 is one octave below "middle C", etc.

2) ISO norm
ISO stands for "International Organization for Standardization", and at the same time is derived from the greek "isos", which means "equal". That's why the organization is called ISO anywhere in the world, no matter the language. I think this shows how serious ISO is about standardizing. ISO replaces the American ANSI and the German DIN. ISO standardized octave names and midi notes to define other standards of this group as follows.
The MIDI standard of middle C was of course adopted.
Additionally, they adopted the scientific pitch notation with midi key 69 for A440 tuning (so, the A above middle C refers to 440 Hz). The octave naming is based around middle C being C4. So the range of octaves goes from C-1 to G9

The ISO standard makes sense and is easy to understand. For example, a grand piano, following the standard (incl. tuning), has only 3 notes below octave 0, A-1, A#-1 and B-1. Pretty much all of the time you will be within positive octave numbers.
As most musicians, I'm used to middle C = C3, as this is what most DAWs implement as default. And who has ever changed the default of that? I didn't even know, that most DAWs offer options to change it!
But ISO is the only international standardization organization, and as such I pledge to follow their standard!

As they say: "ISO standards are internationally agreed by experts. Think of them as a formula that describes the best way of doing something. "

(Linking to the ISO standards is impossible, as they are hidden behind a paywall. But at least the front page of the A440 tuning is here: https://www.iso.org/standard/3601.html)

[adamszabo]

Guys tulamide just wants to have a standard that is applied by all. In FL Studio the piano roll goes from C0 to C10. In Cubase it goes from C-2 to C8. In other DAW it goes from C-1 to C9. I agree its a complete mess and should be standardized. For example A4 should be A4 in all of the DAW, and not 1 octave above or below.

[MichaelBenjamin]

ah i see, ok i'm all for it, but at the same time these kind of octave numbering schemes come from classical music, and i've never given much attention to it, since what counts is the hz-frequency, and not some ancient terms from the middle ages.
currently i'd set c0 at 8 hz and "middle c5" would then be at 60 with 281 hz at 440 tuning.
so what's your proposition for a standard?

[tektoog]

ah i see, ok i'm all for it, but at the same time these kind of octave numbering schemes come from classical music, and i've never given much attention to it, since what counts is the hz-frequency, and not some ancient terms from the middle ages.

Aaaaaaaaaaaah.... 440....
You meant High C...
Middle-C... middle age... very funny!

[tulamide]

Guys tulamide just wants to have a standard that is applied by all. In FL Studio the piano roll goes from C0 to C10. In Cubase it goes from C-2 to C8. In other DAW it goes from C-1 to C9. I agree its a complete mess and should be standardized. For example A4 should be A4 in all of the DAW, and not 1 octave above or below.

At least there ARE people who understand my posts! Thanks Adam, that's exactly my point.