Bill Pirkle wrote: >What does the list think of MIDI technology? Two of the 127 MIDI voices are >choir oohs and choir aahs. This means that who could hear a Bach two part >invention without injury to the choir. But beyond that, most classical >music is now available in MIDI format at websites on the Internet. This >means one can get a classical music collection for free. It is at least >worth hearing if for no other reason than to see what is wrong with it. >We learn from the bad as well as from the good. I think in general, that it's better than nothing, but much worse than the real thing. I haven't been able to get any clear idea of texture when I hear the midi arrangements of pieces. >The question is, for example, how well does a Beethoven sonata sound in >MIDI format to music experts? Feh. It's fun for the person DOING it, but not for the listener. I wouldn't (for example) BUY a midi performance of anything, or go across the street to hear one, unless that were the only way I could hear that particular composition ... and even then I'd have my reservations. I would not be able to tolerate hearing Beethoven. >I have heard the Beethoven violin concerto in MIDI and is sounds OK. >(MIDI allows putting many nuances into to music for fidelity). UGH. I am prejudiced, of course. I used to be a fiddle player. >Any comments. See above. Fun for the programmer, perhaps. Hell on wheels for the music lover. NUANCES? You gotta be kidding. Mimi Ezust, arch musical conservative.