Moseph

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).

I've had the same issue with other VSTs. If you only need to bend one direction, you can double the range by starting the note bent to one extreme (with the note itself placed a whole step off from where it actually sounds, obviously). If you need even more range, a kludgy way to do it is to bounce part of the pitch bend to audio, transpose it, and edit it into whatever you're doing.

Hey, that's the Wilhelm scream! Actually, maybe that's a bad example, since it seems to have a cult following.

Bump. THE MOUSE ITSELF IS THE BUTTON!!!!1111

Looks like it would be done with the event editor. This looks like it shows how to edit a VST's MIDI control values, which is what you want to do.

Has anyone ordered from audiomidi.com before this, and did it seem correlated with the amount of time it took to get your code/confirmation? I ask, because my code was sent immediately, and I had made an (expensive) purchase from the site earlier this year.

I think I did, too, but I've been busy and haven't installed yet so I don't know what that's about.

You should be able to do it without a controller. Somewhere in your DAW, you can draw in data curves with the mouse to control the mod wheel value.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't GPO use the mod wheel (CC 1) for volume control? You should be able to draw curves for the CC 1 value to control volume without retriggering a note (probably accessible somewhere in the piano roll view, but it likely depends on what DAW you use).

The only Garritan samples I've used are the orchestra samples that came with Finale 2006. Compared to VSL, which is what I'm using currently, they're a little, I don't know, dense-sounding. VSL seems much airier. They're not bad samples, though, but since they're tied to Finale I was never able to properly use them in a DAW. Also, regarding reverb: If you can find decent impulse responses for it, use a convolution reverb unit (SIR 1 is free). I haven't used anything else since I downloaded it, and the impulse responses I'm using aren't even anything special.

Bumpity bump. Apologies for taking so long to respond. I've had a hectic week, and I've only just now gotten the time to give this the attention it deserves. Form Analysis: Not a lot to say here beyond what you've said. AA'B, although I do think the fact that the music is designed to loop is an extremely significant formal point. It generally doesn't come up in analysis, because most pieces eventually end, but when you're dealing with something like this, the question isn't "When and how does it end?", it's "When and how does it continue?" I think the subject of non-resolving cadences in a looping context would make an extremely interesting study. As I mentioned a while back, Green Hill Zone does this, too, and I'll bet you could find other music that does it. (Tangentially, I'm going to the Society of Music Theory conference at the end of this month, and I'm really excited that there are a lot of papers on popular music being presented. It's great that people are starting to take these sorts of things seriously instead of saying, "Oh, it's just pop music".) Motivic Analysis: I know you're not taking rhythm into account with the motives, but it may be worth pointing out that the way the descending motive is used in the B section creates eighth-notes in the melody on the downbeats of many of the measures, which never happens in the A section. Combined with the continuous eighth-notes in the accompaniment and the harmonic deviation, it helps drive things forward. Melodic/harmonic analysis: You've got a lot of interesting stuff here. The only thing I really object to is the notion of bitonality. I'll try to explain my approach here. A SECTION I don't think the A section makes much harmonic sense if it's analyzed in F. Excluding mm. 1-3, mm. 4-8 look in C like a pretty clear vii - I - diminished(passing) - ii7 - V7, which is standard harmonic motion and completely reflects what the melody does. Placing it on a secondary harmonic level (having it end on V/V in F) implies a departure from the original harmonic region (mm. 1-3) that I'm not hearing. At issue here, of course, is the question of whether the starting sonority is better analyzed as a IVM7 or a IM7, the former causing us to remain in the key in the second half of the A section and the latter implying some kind of harmonic departure in the second half. A bitonal reading like you use has to concede that even if the melody and harmony disagree in mm. 1-3, they come into agreement in mm.4-8, where we have normal harmonic and melodic motion leading to a dominant. In fact, it is only the FM7 chords that seem to disagree with the melody. Rather than calling these FM7 harmonies bitonal, I would look at them as legitimate subdominant chords within the melody's key. I think a key factor in establishing them as non-tonic is their juxtaposition with diminished chords that are foreign to the key of F. The diminished chords imply resolution to C major, resolution which in fact occurs in m. 5. The behavior of these FM7 chords, then, is exactly what we would expect from subdominants -- progression to dominant, then tonic. Your point about harmonic disagreement between the melody and harmony at the opening of the A section still stands, but I think calling it bitonality exaggerates its effect. If it were truly bitonal, the melody and harmony would each tend to progress toward different tonal centers, whereas I hear them both moving toward a C major center, although they may both be in different positions in their progress towards that goal at any given time. I will address the implications of beginning a phrase on the subdominant after I talk about the B section. B SECTION I'd agree that this makes more harmonic sense in F than in C, although the harmonic motion isn't strongly directed -- for the first four measures, it simply steps down from the subdominant with root position harmonies (your reading of the second B section chord as I65 doesn't account for the prominent G, which sounds like a 7th to me rather than a 9th in the chord because the chord is arpeggiated in the accompaniment the same way as the other seventh chords in the B section -- I'm inclined to call it iii7 and view the melodic F as an accented neighbor tone to E). Even though it's weak harmonic motion, there's a nice parallel to the IV - I harmonic motion in the A section. I rather like your analysis of the B section melody in C and the resulting large-scale relations to the melodic trajectory of the A section, but I don't see bitonality in it. The B section melody doggedly avoids the B/B-flat distinction that would push it toward one key or the other; while it can be analyzed in C, it's easier to hear it in F, since F is suggested by the immediate harmonies, and C is only plausible with an appeal to the far-flung melodic construction. So how about going from the B section back to the A section? I think it's significant that the non-repeating intro establishes CM7 (i.e. tonic in the key) as a point of stability for the A section before the main body of music begins. Coming from CM7 reinforces my inclination to hear the FM7 that begins the A section as a subdominant harmony rather than a tonic harmony. On the repeats, coming from the B section, this FM7 is approached with a Gm - C (essentially ii - V of F), which works as a modulation back to C major through the brief tonicization of C's subdominant. Although this subdominant of C is acceptable as a harmonic goal, the melodic dissonance and subsequent vii in C establish that C, in fact, is the proper key and not F. The fact that this modulation occurs across a cadence like this is somewhat odd, and it is this contrast between cadence and modulation to which I would attribute the simultaneous tension and release that you mention. So within the context of the entire piece, there is never a clear-cut cadence that results in a stable harmony. My assumption is that this is because the music loops and reaching a stable position would be heard as an ending of sorts. Regardless of the reason for it, the effect of beginning a phrase mid- harmonic progression (as in the A section), whether coming from the tonic chord of the intro or from the modulation out of the B section, is one of instability and forward motion.

Actually, maybe I can help with the words. My Latin skills are limited to pronunciation, so I don't know if this actually makes any grammatical sense, but an online translator at least claims that these are all actual Latin words. This is what it sounds like to me: Est tollis palola parichi forta que paluis est forta. (The translator says, "Is to lift up to wander to pay perhaps and marsh is perhaps.")

Definitely sounds like Latin, and there's at least in the game that uses Latin (at the very end; language confirmed by a Wikipedia entry). I can't help with the textual content, though.

It seems to point to http://((int)(dollars*100)) % 100/, judging by what the quoted version links to. Did you accidentally not copy the address properly and it pasted what was already in the clipboard?

EDIT: Never mind, was going to link to it but then realized Luke already did and the link wasn't colored for some reason. EDIT 2: Oh, it's not colored because it's broken -- unbroken version

Shut up. The best way to make music is by writing audio files by hand, in binary. On napkins.

Is this supposed to be an AABB rhyme pattern? I cannot tell.

My little brother just told me about a freeware program called Linux MultiMedia Studio (which is also available on Windows despite the name) that I'd never heard of before. It apparently doesn't record audio but has some sort of VST capabilities. I haven't tried it out, but it looks sort of like a poor man's Reason.

3) ??? 4) Profit!

VSL has a nice feature that lets you kick unused samples out of memory for any instrument, so once you get the part for that instrument programmed, it may be possible to reduce its RAM footprint from (say) 120 MB to 10 MB without freezing the track. I have VSL, although I haven't used it for any major orchestral projects yet, and I'm running on a three-year-old Core 2 Duo (laptop) with 2 gigs of RAM, with the samples on a Firewire drive rather than an internal one. I haven't had any issues with it.

Or, barring that, they could hire someone (ahem, for $12k) to hit them with a shovel every time they try to log on.

He should have come to me. I'd have helped him with his Internet addiction for only $12k.

To connect to a notebook, you'll need a MIDI interface that will let you go from MIDI cables to a USB connection. Something like one of these.