MIDI vs MP3

[klassicblak]

Hi everyone
Gee I dunno, In my duo, we both sing lead and harmony, I play a 1961 Maton acoustic electric, but nothing fancy. When I get a midi from midimart, I re-write it the way we want it. I take out what we dont want, put in what we do want, change the volumes of various instruments and when I have "the midi" sounding the way we want it, I convert it to MP3 and send it to our data base in our lap top PC. of which we have two on stage, just in case one PC has a spack attack. The quality of the sound is superb and we really do pump it out. We are a full on, rock classic duo and need to be good. My experience is, the combination of a good midi, good "tweaking" as some of you call it, then convert it to an MP3, play it through a good mixer and sound system, you cant go wrong. Having it all in a lap top is quick, easy and sounds awsome. Having said all that, each to his own, whatever works for you as long as you are working well, wowing the crowds and doing what you love to do, "entertain."
Chris (from Down Under)

[pdiroma]

Midi gives me flexability, MP3 does not.

[levi2]

860tombarry said:

I record all my sequences to mini disc for live jobs..

same here before that i used a yamaha mdf midifile player linked to a yamaha tg100

[thingyy]

I agree with pdiroma,midi more flexability for loading, not having to keep to a strict playlist,on the spot key change, ability to cut and paste.

[jackothescot]

Definetely MIDI for me! All my guitar processors, lighting and vocal effects are controlled by MIDI - it also feels more ROCK'N'ROLL! There is, however, a program that lets you control lights, ect using MP3's called Alien Appararus, that might be worth investigating.....

[860tombarry]

I hav been using mp3 back up the past few years. I used midi files for several years however and liked them better than the mp3's because I could quickly change keys for guest performers.Best thing about mp3 though is no stuck notes.