Moseph   Members

Yeah, I knew how to do multiple tracks. I meant that anything I switch to also needs to be able to do it. Using the track view to to automate CC values, however, had not occurred to me, and it may prove to be quite helpful. Although it does kind of negate the usefulness of the layered piano roll since you have to use track view with inline PRV turned off to even see the curves. I wonder why you can't do it in the piano roll. EDIT: My issues with drawing the values in the piano roll view are 1) if I want to insert a smooth level adjustment at an arbitrary point, I need to know exactly what the last value set was so I know what level to start at (which using vectors avoids) and 2) trying to do detail work is hell because the handles on all the nodes get in each others' way if the curve is too dense. Also, as far as I know, you can't assign a keystroke to switch the CC value displayed in the lower piano roll pane which means moving the mouse to a small, out-of-the-way button and clicking twice every time you want to change the CC displayed (although I think Sonar 8 lets you open multiple panes).

I use VSL SE Plus and Sonar 6. I'm beginning to hate Sonar, though. I do a lot of CC automation, and it's a headache dealing with individual nodes. I really need something that can do vector-based automation curves and also has a multi-track layered piano roll. I know FL has vectors, but it doesn't have the layered piano roll. Does anyone know of something that has both? EDIT: SIR 1 for reverb with this or this providing the impulse response, harmonic exciter on the whole mix to make it sound more live, transient smoother to mellow it out just a bit.

Yes, modulation is almost always a good idea if you're writing music of any length, unless you have a pressing reason to remain in one key (e.g. certain film score situations, etc.). Do it when you feel the key you're in has become boring. Use any key you want. Generally, keys that are closely related -- that is, have a similar number of sharps or flats -- will provide the smoothest transition, while distant keys will be more jarring. A smooth transition is not always better. It depends on what you're trying to do with the music. Regarding rules, it just has to sound good. That's the only rule you really need, unless you're specifically trying to imitate [insert composer or style here]. There are principles, certainly, that can help you achieve certain effects or prevent you from doing things that some people might regard as odd, but there are no rules. Just a thought, but if you're having trouble with large-scale organization, it might help to plan out some basic things before you start writing. How long will the piece be? What keys will you use, and where? How will you approach those keys? Maybe come up with a few melodic ideas and decide where you want to introduce them (e.g. for the first 16 measures I will use x idea as the basis for my melody, then for the next 8 measures I will use y idea, then I'll modulate to G and use x idea again). If you can make some large decisions before you get lost in the details, it may help you keep things going.

Since you mention education, I have a bachelor's degree in music technology and am working on a master's in composition, and it still happens to me. I spent my entire first semester of graduate school writing things just to throw them out a week-and-a-half later. Most of my pieces go through three to eight dramatically different forms before I find something that actually works. Just keep writing. If nothing else, you're discovering what doesn't work, and that knowledge may prove useful in future attempts even if it isn't right now.

http://www.native-instruments.com/en/specials/synthsgiving/?utm_source=synthsgiving&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=synthsgiving-newsletter Reaktor 5 Absynth 5 Massive FM8 So, yeah, if you want one, go buy it.

bpm = (beats * 60) / seconds So if you count the number of beats in a segment of the song, multiply that by 60, then divide by the exact length in seconds of the segment, you'll get the exact tempo of the song in bpm. (If you're still set on stretching it, you can rearrange the equation to figure out how long you should stretch the sample to produce a specific bpm.) EDIT: This equation assumes the tempo stays the same. As Patrick points out, if the tempo fluctuates (like if it wasn't recorded to a click track) then you just have to follow it as best you can

I was just today thinking that I needed a new reverb plug-in.

A workaround that would have about the same effect as CC1 automation would be to just automate the level fader for the entire track. I don't know if GPO gives you different samples at different CC1 levels, but if it does, you wouldn't get that by automating the track level. It would better than nothing, though. EDIT: 4:16 in may solve the problem. There should be a mod wheel on the GPO interface that controls the level. If you automate that as per the video, it should give you the volume control you want.

I'm positive FL can do this somehow, but I don't actually use the program so I can't troubleshoot it. Any FL users have the correct procedure?

The thing that jumps out to me immediately is that the sustains in the violin melody have no shape to them. The melody's volume on these sustains needs to be automated with MIDI CC1 (see my post here for links on how to do it in FL if you don't know how). Meteo's clip was a good example of how string sustain ought to sound. Even apart from the violin sustains, the instruments sounds like they're playing a continuous mezzo forte -- there's no shape or detail to the overall loudness of any of the instruments except for a blanket level reduction at 2:00. This can be fixed with note velocities (if GPO recognizes those, and I'm not sure it does) or, again, with CC1.

I don't use Live, but yes, that's what it does. Live Lite is free if you want to try it out, and there are trial licenses for the retail versions.

Anecdote time. Very frequently, when I am editing together multiple takes from a recording session, the splice point in the audio will sound weird and unnatural to me. When I go back to the unedited takes, though, it often turns out that one or both of them sounded like that to begin with, and I only hear a problem because I'm trying to hear a problem.

Then what's the problem, exactly? I don't hear anything wrong with the samples, and the mix is passable. What specifically are you comparing it to?

The problem here is definitely not samples, and it isn't really even the processing (although there are a couple minor issues here, which I'll get to). It's mostly the orchestration. That's either a bad thing or a good thing, depending on how you look at it. You're using a string section in a dark, emotional context, but all you have going are 1) a bass pedal, 2) a rising line (cello range) that is never doubled or harmonized, and 3) a sporadic violin solo. This sparsity wouldn't be bad if the music eventually built to something, but the distribution of lines and instruments remains static through the length of the excerpt. The strings need to be beefed way up, either everywhere or as an additive process over time, if you want this to sound like idiomatic orchestra writing in the style that I think you're going for. You can easily have 5 - 10 simultaneous lines going on in an orchestra string section. You don't necessarily need any exciting new melodies; you may just need to fill out the harmonies for what you already have and double some of the lines at octave displacements to fill the texture. Also, low strings should be panned toward the right if you're trying to imitate a standard orchestra. Google for an orchestra seating chart and pan things based on that. The strings are the interesting thing here. I don't think the harp and the piano are even necessary. They're just playing the same arpeggiation over and over, distracting me from what the strings are doing. They're also too loud and too close to the "microphones"; moving them back and bringing the level down might reduce the distraction, but I really think you should rethink the lines. If you've never looked at any honest-to-God orchestra scores, it would be a good idea. It's easier to figure out how the pros orchestrate by looking at their work than it is by hearing it. IMSLP.org has orchestra scores by the boatload. tl;dr: The upshot of all this is that there's more to writing for an orchestra than just the samples. EDIT: The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that it's the harp and piano that are the biggest problem here. Nothing says amateurish like the orchestra equivalent of a Garage Band loop.

Just for kicks, someone (I, if I ever find the time) should put together some comparison audio files that demonstrate how reverb, EQ, panning, and skilled use of articulations affect the sound of a sampled orchestra

Bumping this because I finally got a chance to try out the beta. I've been extremely impressed. I'm using it right now on a stereo piano and violin recording (real-world use for me) and I haven't run across any wrong notes yet in either instrument that it hasn't been able to fix. In one case, it found a piano note that I thought had been omitted by the pianist. Turns out it had just gotten lost in a chord, and I was able to slide it to the correct time. I'm looking forward to seeing how well it handles tempo editing. The only downside I've seen so far is that it's extremely sluggish on my system. There's a lot of interface lag, and it took about half an hour to calculate the editing data for my 8 minute file (the interface lag isn't related to the filesize; it behaves the same way for smaller files). On the bright side, even though it frequently freezes up while it's thinking, it hasn't actually crashed on me yet.

This is not really related, but my family used to have a music box (a ceramic haunted house, actually) that played the Ghostbusters theme. Also, this site will do customization for $400 plus the cost of the box.

I'm thinking about writing a piece in which a computer is used to record an acoustic ensemble as it plays and then blends the playback over loudspeakers (with effects and such) with the ensemble -- conceptually, it's basically a glorified loop pedal. All done live, of course. I know that this sort of thing is not uncommon in popular music, but I was wondering if anyone's aware of any people who are doing this specifically in a classical or art music context. I'm looking for examples to pattern my own work after, and I'm drawing a blank.

Cassiodorus (6th century AD) defined music as "the knowledge of proper measurement."

If I knew of anyone who was making truly innovative music, I'd be rushing off to study with him instead of throwing darts at a board to figure out where to continue my schooling. So. Yeah.

Probably more a case of some of the marketing people loving the show but the bigwigs not agreeing.

Mario 3 Jump on turtles. They die. threesentencelimit 5/5

If you want to use Finale with a DAW, you can always export as MIDI from Finale and then import it into into the DAW. If you have stuff already in Finale format that you want to realize as an audio file, this is probably the easiest way to get started (although you may have to touch up note timings and velocities to humanize the performance). When writing concert music, I prefer to write in Finale and generally only move over to a DAW when I need a high-quality audio mock-up. I only begin in a DAW when I'm writing something that will never need a printed score (or for which DAW-based editing is essential to the composition -- e.g. pieces that include a "for tape" component).