I think because he is saying that imiporting as static and then converting gives a different and in his view superior result. This all comes from his observation that the apparently most important line in a midi file he imported, the accordian, was changed almost unrecognizably.
Is it possible to get a rich and musical phrase for the accordion ? ..easy A professional arranged midi phrase by musicians ..can this easy be improved if this sounds bad in Synfire ?
So, no I don't want a simple midi player. I want an intelligent one that can take a rich and complicated phrase and be able to massage it in an editor and then reharmonize it in the context of other instruments.
the beauty of synfire is that you can take some midi as inspiration and useing synfires magic, produce something that's both original and good. For me its the difference between playing cover songs or being inspired to create something original ( with a lot of help from synfire)
Ok that's true , but i am not convinced if i massage the imported midi accordionthat i get a musical pleasing result as the static midi is for the accordion
Cognitone advertising is : whatever you do with your phrase: it sounds always good
Ok ive had a big think about this and a little play around. Im guessing here, only andre knows for sure whats going on...
When the accordian track is imported static and the rest of the song as auto (or whatever) synfire interprets the other tracks and tries to get the meaning of the song. When you then turn those static notes blue, the 'learned meaning' somehow influences the conversion from static to blue.
When you do that with all static, that meaning is not there or is different. So they convert to blue with less influence from the other tracks. Maybe when you post the blue notes into the original arrangement it some how overides or minimised the influence from the other tracks as its already been converted to blue.
There are some other options in the import screen, think one of them is independant. It might be worth playing around with that to see if that has an influence. Alternatively your workflow albeit more involved seems to be a sucessful work around for your problem. I might try it out in my next project which is a remix so Im going to need to keep some parts of the original phrases.
Thanks Janamdo for persevering with this, till I understand it a bit more (at least in my head i have an idea that seems to fit). I know English is not your preferred language so it must be extra hard to make some one like me see sense and understand, a lot of people would have just given up. Thanks again.
Thanks Janamdo for persevering with this, till I understand it a bit more (at least in my head i have an idea that seems to fit). I know English is not your preferred language so it must be extra hard to make some one like me see sense and understand, a lot of people would have just given up. Thanks again.
Yes! Language challenged or not, Jan is the 'Pit Bull' of this forum.
I might speculate that the import behavior is a protection for Cognitone against copy right infringement complaints.
So, maybe we should go 'sub rosa' with Jan's discovery.
One reason, the import changes sometimes with undesireable results, is SFP is looking at (all?) tracks to calculate a chord, If your accordian is missing important notes you might want to add some more passing chords into the track, so that SFP can pick one of them...
Like a lot of times the band is playing in G major, but piano player is going C=C-G hence SFP interprets the chord differently.. I start importing static, and then one by one interpret the parts, cause usuallly I start song in Logic, and I want SFP to accomodate that.. If I'm not getting desireable results, I finish in SFP as best i can, and in Logic, I 'fix' the notes SFP got wrong rather than playing with all kinds of chord substitutions..
Other times SFP comes up with some fine stuff without me interferring.
A while back Supertonic mentioned what to do to give SFP the most latitude of notes, and not be so concerned with strict adherence to chords.. Also another method I use is to let SFP create multiple passes of a phrase, (as different instruments).. I go back to Logic and chose phrases and notes between the original and the mutations SFP made..
I'm also doing a similar idea by hand in Logic now.. I take a phrase from an instrument in a certain place,, and paste it into a different track at a different place.. I then tweak the notes into a proper sounding phrase.. If your careful with the 'ands' of 8ths and the final 'a' of 16th notes. You can get away with a lot. Just lower the velocity and shorten duration of those 'discordant notes' and damn, it sounds like a real player..
Mark and others. Take a look at this video and learn why Jan is so frustrated about not being able to use his shiny new Halion 5 fully with SFP/E.
Warning! Watching this may make you jealous of Cubase users!
In essence, instead of automation being on the channel so it effects all note horizontally in the timeline ... as in chords, parameters of volume, pan, pitch, tone and 'emphasis' can be programmed on the basis of a single note. I can take a long note, say a bar, and have the volume swell, the tone change from dark to bright, glissando up a fifth or octave and trill. But it's just one note! Even better, if I move or reposition the note, all the parameter tweaking stays with the note.
This is entirely different from the improved key switching and dynamics also in VST Expression2. Have a look at the video at about 1:20 seconds if you don't want to spend much time.
More than anything I want a version of SFP/E with essentially two features and no audio engine and no devices. All I want is the current GM set up and the ability to name a GM type instrument and assign it quickly to any available port/ channel available.
I don't mind paying for all the extra wonderful ideas so others can use them. I just want a simple midi output system with the wonderful SFP/E prototyping features.
Why would it be so hard to provide a 'stripped down' midi only version of SFP/E for users?
This all comes from his observation that the apparently most important line in a midi file he imported, the accordian, was changed almost unrecognizably.
When janamdo said, that the accordion loses 'liveliness' I thought that eventually the expression controller is not imported correctly. Therefore I made this test, but expression is imported correctly. Also all dynamic and timing informations are identical to the original. The only difference is that the melodic line of the accordion is not exactly the same, but that's a normal thing when the MIDI notes are converted to dynamic phrases. If you want to have the original melody then you need to import it as static and you can harmonize it then at Synfire's harmonizer. But the melody will remain static then.
I simply have different expectations when I'm importing a MIDI file. I do not expect to get exactly the original music but I expect to get material to create new compositions. It would even be counterproductive if I just would hear the original after the import. For me, these changes that occur after the import are the first source of inspiration.
And by the way: The changes in the melody after the import are for me also the first step on the way to get rid of copyright issues. Presumably, the composer who composed this accordion melody is not yet 70 years dead. So, it anyway can't be used as it is. The melody must be changed anyway. At least if you want to publish your composition (of course things are different if you doing it only for fun). So, the changes that occur to an imported melody are not a real issue to me. The opposite is true. I see it as a source of inspiration.
Mine is a little different. I wouldn't import a midi file if there was not something in it that inspired me. Therefore I would like to have that 'inspiring' thing to mold in SFP using SFP's tools and harmonic palettes.
Many types of music have highly stylized melody lines ... think ethnic dance music like reels and jigs or some of the wonderful Columbian Vallenato music. The timing of notes and note values are integral to those type of compositions. I want to have phrases that adhere to those musical forms ... not something vaguely similar but lacking the specific genre 'flavor.'
How many notes must be changed before something is no longer in copyright? Two 1/16th and a 1/16th rest to a dotted 1/8th?
I want the specific musical line in SFP/ E not as a final melody line, but as a point of departure to experiment with ... and when successful to add to the phrase pool.
When janamdo said, that the accordion loses 'liveliness' I thought that eventually the expression controller is not imported correctly. Therefore I made this test, but expression is imported correctly. Also all dynamic and timing informations are identical to the original. The only difference is that the melodic line of the accordion is not exactly the same, but that's a normal thing when the MIDI notes are converted to dynamic phrases. If you want to have the original melody then you need to import it as static and you can harmonize it then at Synfire's harmonizer. But the melody will remain static then.
I did this (by accident )on a another way..
I don't care also to get the original melody back, but with copy and paste i get a nice musical result, and i am wondering if it is the same as the original melody, because it is now processed again by the musical AI of Synfire (or not ?)--> the notes notated for a phrase are not the same anymore as they are played. I think this is the best approximation of the original midi you can get, because it fits well with all other tracks.
Chance one note in the melody and there are no copyright issues anymore (only when it stay sounding musical ofcourse :)), but the audio output counts and if Synfire changes the midioutput from the accordion, than the original accordion melody is not present anymore. Nothing to worry about copyright issues and there are enough free Midifiles to arranged by professional musicians ( yamaha )
Suppose i want to compose more with a accordion .. i can store the phrases in the library and use this to come up with a another melody
Yes, it is serious affair ..copyright, but in the case of synfire with the accordion..synfire's musical Ai has translated the melody notes to other ones
Synfire has not yet a feature to see the midi output, but HAlion5 has a keyboard where all played notes of the accordion melody can be seen as a pressed keys. So if you are afraid of copyright..you can check it there. I think the only strong point are the written notes and not judging it on ear: person x claims this melody and person y also..what notes they are playing than?
Mark and others. Take a look at this video and learn why Jan is so frustrated about not being able to use his shiny new Halion 5 fully with SFP/E.
To aspect that Synfire is capable to perform the same notes treatment as in Cubase (note expression) is probably too much asked, i think that you must accept that..correct ?
Note expression comes on top of the expression maps for articulated instruments..awesome The livelyness of midi notes in Synfire is a issue..at least i could bring back some livelyness with copy and paste, otherwise i should become depressed from this. :)
Yes it is some food for thoughts and it is not that complicated to give up and indeed the language is a barrier.
Thanks Janamdo for persevering with this, till I understand it a bit more (at least in my head i have an idea that seems to fit). I know English is not your preferred language so it must be extra hard to make some one like me see sense and understand, a lot of people would have just given up. Thanks again.
I am curoius if it helps you ( copy and paste) in your project to preserve a original melody line as much possible ..or even better in combination with the other tracks .
I hope that at least ...drawing easy a accurate expression automation line (vector) will be possible in Synfire. To be able to get some control about a sort of expression ( volume control per track ) ( see my other post and concern about this )
Synfire Express is limited without some articulations for modern instruments and the difficulty to express ( expression cc ) accurate and easy at least the volume for a track ( the professional expression curves form the yamaha midi have i in mind )
When janamdo said, that the accordion loses 'liveliness' I thought that eventually the expression controller is not imported correctly.
You should be able to setup the articulations in the instrument definition. Think synfire supports around 10 midi cc expressions (But that's from memory). Those are available in the express version but it is missing keyswitches. Assign them to a controller knob and record them in real time overdubbing the figures as they play. You should be able to achieve better, smoother, more natural expression than drawing them manually on a sequence, although you can do that too.
I looked at the video, yes, the Halion is very impressive... Does the AU version work in Logic work as good?
One thing that slightly bothers me, is Halion is 'hijacking' the MIDI standard format. This has been done numerous times in the past.. But it forces other companies to match it, or like Apple, they will make their own propriatory method, that other manufactors must pay a royalty for. Hence it makes a lot of headaches for 3rd part parties to accomodate things.
These things eventually works out.. If one company comes out with a great idea, eventually the other companies will be forced to 'catch up'.
I understand Jamando's dilemma. Did you try splitting the notes up and treating as seperate instruments in SFP? Not the ideal set-up, but I think it would work.
If Cognitone is going to play 'catchup' with each new sound library, virtual instrument, or hardware, that uses something not called for in the midi spec. This will probably require the use of sysex commands, that will only address the proper instrument. I don't know about the rest of you, but 'sysex' is beyond the scope of my intelligent IQ.
Logic and I imagine most DAWS can accomodate it.
Then we get back to the old story of 'is SFP going to be a DAW?. How many and which features, will they have to accomodate.
"More than anything I want a version of SFP/E with essentially two features and no audio engine and no devices. All I want is the current GM set up and the ability to name a GM type instrument and assign it quickly to any available port/ channel available."
Yes Prado, I totally agree with you.. except I want MSB/LSB/Prog. After spending two years with SFP, I still don't fully understand the private, shared, midi, etc.. I've got a method that works for me..
Just like in Logic,, I'd rather look over to the instrument info, and assign port, patch, channel etc.. Its much more direct.
As I mentioned before,, I already have Logic templates, with control sequences to set up the desired parameters.. All I need to do is select the MSB/LSB/Prog, if a want a different sound.
Jügen ... Of course I understand that it is not that simple.
I made that statement simply to illustrate that it isn't that simple or clear, and that there is some vague and somewhat arbitrary line between what is an original melody and what is a plagiarized one.
Anything that must be left for a court to decide is obviously unclear.
To aspect that Synfire is capable to perform the same notes treatment as in Cubase (note expression) is probably too much asked, i think that you must accept that..correct ?
You mean 'accept,' not 'aspect.' But, yes, of course, it is too much to expect.
And this is again why I always expect to bring the production of SFP/ E back into Cubase or another DAW. There will always be midi editing tasks that a DAW can do that SFP/E will be unable to accomplish.
One thing that slightly bothers me, is Halion is 'hijacking' the MIDI standard format. This has been done numerous times in the past.. But it forces other companies to match it, or like Apple, they will make their own propriatory method, that other manufactors must pay a royalty for. Hence it makes a lot of headaches for 3rd part parties to accomodate things.
Let me clarify and then give my opinion.
1. First, the VST 3.5 standard that includes what Steinberg calls 'Note Expression2' requires a capable instrument, such as Halion 5, and also the Cubase DAW.
So, no. The AU version of Halion would not give you Note Expression capabilities in Logic. But I believe it would give the advanced articulations and dynamics.
2. While the use of all the features of VST Exression2 is limited to the Cubase platform, the development of instruments is not. VST has always been an open standard and any company can produce using that platform. Besides Cubase themselves, many other instrument developers including Vienna Symphonic Library offer VST 3.5 instruments.
3. This development does not change the GM standard, it is simply built upon it. Steinberg is not trying to undermine it, but to improve it with full backwards compatibility. That is, all VST 3.5 instruments will still play fine on any DAW using the VST platfrom and will be controlled in the normal manner by GM. But their advanced VST 3.5 features will be unavailable.
What Halian is doing is ground breaking. I completely agree with companies making advancements. What I object to is they are doing it with their own priority software. .. That was the reason Apple created Audio Units, cause at the time they were more stable (or so they claimed.. And they wanted to stiff it to Cubase, Then came DTM, RTAS, and AAX. Each of these companies ulterior motive, to make you bound to their platform.. And after 10 or more years, one is very reluctant to jump ships because of the large 'learn time' to get back to running status.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very interested in Halion 5. I wish there was a two week demo, so I could hear the sounds. I might just buy it anyways. In general I prefer hardware synths, I like moving the knobs in realtimes, and they have a less. The new libraries, with round robin assignments are getting more realistic all the time..
What I'm saying is Halions new features, are going to have to force the other manufactors to incorporate their counterpart into it,, I was working at Voyetra, in the 80's and Voyetra was the 6th company to go online supporting the Midi Spec.. They had no idea how the MIDI spec would grow and create variations. They are changing the MIDI standard, from the original specs, but those are so ancient by now.. Yamaha is mega company and can force their influence onto the synth, DAW market..Other companies will be forced to join..
When re-wire came out, propellar - head quickly copryrighted it,and became the standard, and other companies were forced to pay royalties. Microsoft,and now Apple have become the kings of this. They are constantly patenting any idea they can think of so that when a future company comes up with a suitable idea. The lawyers are at the gates..
I'm all for improvement. What has been benificial is these large companies bought up smaller companies to incorporate those features into their products. So with any of the affialated programs with a Cubase, Logic, or Protools. It's gonna work, and you don't have to waste time, trying to get things to work..
The truth Cubase is changing the functions of the MIDI spec. But it has been changed numerous times thru the years. The MIDI spec made set aside a lot of blank areas, sysex excluse data. which will only communicate with one particular piece of hard or software.. So cubase system exclusive data going to a Tryros will be ignored by a Roland module. Perhaps with sysem exclusive messages, SFP could be able to deal with this other factors.. But does it want to? At some point, Andre has to stop rewriting the program, and focues on videos,
Right now Cognitone is suffering the consequences, of some of this. Andre has to reverse engineer a DAW's feature, and figure out a way to implement it, without violating copyright infringements.
Band-in-a-Box, has been largely the same for many years..I've been using it over 20 years, They do add new features, but the programming looks like an ugly DOS interface.. The front panel, is totally littered with commands, seemingly with no logic to where they were put.. Situation is as ugly as it's interface is, it does function..
With Synfire we are looking for polish, and sophistication, and the ability to do deal with all the idiosyncrocy of individual programs.
What I feel about it, doesn't really matter, cause the mega companies are gonna force their methods onto the buyer.
The way I see it, the midi standard is unchanged and great as ever. It is the DAW that is advancing. Most of the major DAWs are owned by big corporatiions ... Acid Pro/ Sony, Cubase/ Yamaha, Sonar/ Roland, and Logic/ Apple.
These companies and their shareholders are competing. So are the 'little guys' like Reaper. One offers an innovation the other doesn't have to keep old customers and lure new ones. If they weren't competing there would be no reason for them to innovate. It is no different than deciding to buy a Ford or Chevrolet. The parts of one do not fit in the other.
So buy or don't what appeals to you. If you can afford it, get both a Ford and a Chevrolet.
When I started getting into Cubase, I didn't really have a clear idea of what it could do at the time or what it might do in the future. The more I learned to use it, the more valuable it became. It's just dumb luck that I happen to have bought into it and it now has this great feature. It's probably also just dumb luck that many MAC users fell into learning Logic, another great program.
Personally, I enjoy keeping on top of all these innovations ... whether I have them or not. I've spent the last 6 months investing in and diving into Pro Tools. I want to learn it because whatever it has feature wise, it is the professional standard DAW. I've been please to discover it has many fabulous features not available in Cubase or Reaper, the other programs I own. I also just got an upgrade for a very low price on Ableton. I haven't used it yet, but it too has features none of the other DAWs have.
Just like an engineer might choose one compressor or eq over another one in a studio depending on what he was trying to accomplish, there is no reason not to think that if you are fortunate enough to have them, one DAW can do something special no other can do ... at least for a few editions till the others catch up.
Anyway, I'm rambling, but I want to see innovation continue and I think it only arises in the market place.
I have checked out the Halion, looks very nice. However they have 'bended the midi standard format, to incluce expression on each note in a one midi track.. There is no way any other program is going to intrepret that but to apply expression and CC' to all notes on that midi track. Which defeats the Halion VST 3.5. advantage.
To me it looks, like you would have to sepereate each note and assign to a different midi track.. because even three voices all assigned to Halion Midi 11, are going to be affectted by the data on each chanels going to that midi track of that instrument,, Hence it's going to sound wrong, discordant or worse.
I'm not sure if Andre is willing to write code to accomodate that.. Cause eventually every synth manufacture is going to have a slightly different procedure so as to avoid copyright infringement,,
PS.. This is my limited perspective interpretation of what I read and corresponded with Cubase.. They told me those featurea would not be able to work on Logic. Only Halion, cause it has this new VST 3.5 spec.
Apple like Microsoft does not give in to 3rd parties, althering theire protocol methods. Apples decision to use AU's was not so much on stabilty,but to draw a line in the sand, and force individuals to cross and become part of that family.. Pro-tools did the same do..
Enough with all these priotory convenctions,, it' the user who suffers.. Like one car manufactorure to put the gas pedal on the steering column and windshield washer on floor, cause it suited their need, and forced the hand of their customer base.
They told me those featurea would not be able to work on Logic. Only Halion, cause it has this new VST 3.5 spec.
Mark, you are confusing the standard with the platform. Halion is a VSTi that incorporates the VST 3.5 standard. That standard includes 'Note Expression.' VST 3.5 is an open standard which any virtual instrument manufacturer can utilize. There are other instruments from Steinberg/ Yamaha that also incorporate VST 3.5. One othe example is Halion Sonic.
To take advantage of VST 3.5 you need the correct platform. At present this is only available on Cubase (and I imagine also on the flag ship, Nuendo).
As an instrument, Halion will work perfectly well in Logic or any other DAW. You won't have to worry about problems with the Note Expression feature, as you wouldn't be able to create midi tracks incorporating it in Logic. The instrument simply won't have that capability exposed to the user. If unexposed, there is nothing you can do to create problems of wrong sounds, CC articulations, etc.
There are some real questions about the future of Logic. Apple seems to have focused everything on the consumer, not on the professional. Look at the latest iteration of the MAC Pro, which is well-spec'd for video, but without any internal card slots is clearly not geared towards pro audio. The amount of these units sold is infitesimal in the larger scheme of Apple products and accordingly seems to be fading off the corporate radar.
Cubase and Halion seems to me interesting combination Mark for composing, but try this first out and than you can decide to buy it somewhere : used or for a low price. But as you are a vivid logic user and own a fantastic tyros composerkeyboard..the chance is there that if you like Cubase it is coming under dust. But you can use Tyros still in Cubase (= yamaha ) for musical ideas. Recently i installed my humble Yamaha piano keyboard for study more pianomusic to get more insight in the piano, together with the new mastering boxes..great piano sound.
The basic standard is still there, but what is becoming rapidly apparent is how various companies, are 'pushing the envelope'... I'm all for that. The Tyros 4 itself scans the keyboard and applies AI to accomplish what it does, It has Articulation 2! file type voices, when certain fingerin techniques and articulation buttons are used new samples are substituted 'on the fly' to achieve it's realism.
It has mega voices, that are only meant to be used by the Tyros style generators. In the megavoice, each note takes into account every individual note velocity between 30 - 127. It is humanly impossible to maintain that kind of accuracy. (also probably technically impossible for the keyboard to generate that much accuracy, (just the difference in the springs for each note, would overide perfect response on whole keyboard..
Halion uses its own genious of processing in it's 3.5 VST. Many years ago, drum companies had their GM format, but they also had their own individual mapping, making it a painstaking process to shift from BFD drums to Superior or Addictive drums.. Often after completing a song, I go back, and revoice individual drums. Some companies will put 8 different snare articulations mapped over the keyboard or mapped to one note and make use of velocity.. I do all the revoicing, but then want to make a standard GM score, so it could in the future be performed by a real drummer.
We have no standards for articulation, each company using various extra low or extra high notes to achieve their magic.
We have scripting, where entire passages of note samples are swapped out for something else to accomade a particular style of playing, especially for strings..
The General Midi standard as accomodations for manufactor specific data, with it's sysex.. so a Korg won't go bonkers' when it reads a Yamaha midi file with sysex controlling.
I'm all for this growth, don't get me wrong.. but it's removing the 'portability' of the song, that Andre is trying to achieve, which in turns make SFP more complex and is also a means by which a company keeps it's customers 'hooked' on their products alone..
Like I said before, when I create a part that uses some form of articulations to modify the notes,, I consistantly want to hear that accross different program platforms, because it effects what you are going to play or manipulate on your later tracks..
I'm sure many of us here recognize, that building music is like a house of cars, or Startrek's 'Kalto' game.. One change in one track, can result in you have to rephrase, re-record sometimes several other parts to make the song 'whole'.
Changing one track, can make a whole song sonically 'disintergrate' in front of you. Same is true, if the key track loses it precision articulation, the whole song can suffer, and become lifeless.
Thu, 2013-09-12 - 23:45 Permalink
Yes, exactly
Is it possible to get a rich and musical phrase for the accordion ? ..easy
A professional arranged midi phrase by musicians ..can this easy be improved if this sounds bad in Synfire ?
Thu, 2013-09-12 - 23:47 Permalink
Ok that's true , but i am not convinced if i massage the imported midi accordionthat i get a musical pleasing result as the static midi is for the accordion
Cognitone advertising is : whatever you do with your phrase: it sounds always good
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 00:05 Permalink
Ok ive had a big think about this and a little play around. Im guessing here, only andre knows for sure whats going on...
When the accordian track is imported static and the rest of the song as auto (or whatever) synfire interprets the other tracks and tries to get the meaning of the song. When you then turn those static notes blue, the 'learned meaning' somehow influences the conversion from static to blue.
When you do that with all static, that meaning is not there or is different. So they convert to blue with less influence from the other tracks. Maybe when you post the blue notes into the original arrangement it some how overides or minimised the influence from the other tracks as its already been converted to blue.
There are some other options in the import screen, think one of them is independant. It might be worth playing around with that to see if that has an influence. Alternatively your workflow albeit more involved seems to be a sucessful work around for your problem. I might try it out in my next project which is a remix so Im going to need to keep some parts of the original phrases.
Thanks Janamdo for persevering with this, till I understand it a bit more (at least in my head i have an idea that seems to fit). I know English is not your preferred language so it must be extra hard to make some one like me see sense and understand, a lot of people would have just given up. Thanks again.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 00:17 Permalink
Yes! Language challenged or not, Jan is the 'Pit Bull' of this forum.
I might speculate that the import behavior is a protection for Cognitone against copy right infringement complaints.
So, maybe we should go 'sub rosa' with Jan's discovery.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 00:21 Permalink
I just realized that some may not understand my reference to Jan as a Pit Bull as the compliment it is intended to be.
So ... a Pit Bull grabs on to something and never lets it go until he is satisfied.
We have another similar but not as evocative phrase in American English: 'dogged determination.'
And while I'm being pedantic, Jan please look up the diffence between 'aspect' and 'accept.' I think you have been confusing them. ;)
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 04:43 Permalink
One reason, the import changes sometimes with undesireable results, is SFP is looking at (all?) tracks to calculate a chord, If your accordian is missing important notes you might want to add some more passing chords into the track, so that SFP can pick one of them...
Like a lot of times the band is playing in G major, but piano player is going C=C-G hence SFP interprets the chord differently.. I start importing static, and then one by one interpret the parts, cause usuallly I start song in Logic, and I want SFP to accomodate that.. If I'm not getting desireable results, I finish in SFP as best i can, and in Logic, I 'fix' the notes SFP got wrong rather than playing with all kinds of chord substitutions..
Other times SFP comes up with some fine stuff without me interferring.
A while back Supertonic mentioned what to do to give SFP the most latitude of notes, and not be so concerned with strict adherence to chords.. Also another method I use is to let SFP create multiple passes of a phrase, (as different instruments).. I go back to Logic and chose phrases and notes between the original and the mutations SFP made..
I'm also doing a similar idea by hand in Logic now.. I take a phrase from an instrument in a certain place,, and paste it into a different track at a different place.. I then tweak the notes into a proper sounding phrase.. If your careful with the 'ands' of 8ths and the final 'a' of 16th notes. You can get away with a lot. Just lower the velocity and shorten duration of those 'discordant notes' and damn, it sounds like a real player..
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 08:35 Permalink
Mark and others. Take a look at this video and learn why Jan is so frustrated about not being able to use his shiny new Halion 5 fully with SFP/E.
Warning! Watching this may make you jealous of Cubase users!
In essence, instead of automation being on the channel so it effects all note horizontally in the timeline ... as in chords, parameters of volume, pan, pitch, tone and 'emphasis' can be programmed on the basis of a single note. I can take a long note, say a bar, and have the volume swell, the tone change from dark to bright, glissando up a fifth or octave and trill. But it's just one note! Even better, if I move or reposition the note, all the parameter tweaking stays with the note.
This is entirely different from the improved key switching and dynamics also in VST Expression2. Have a look at the video at about 1:20 seconds if you don't want to spend much time.
More than anything I want a version of SFP/E with essentially two features and no audio engine and no devices. All I want is the current GM set up and the ability to name a GM type instrument and assign it quickly to any available port/ channel available.
I don't mind paying for all the extra wonderful ideas so others can use them. I just want a simple midi output system with the wonderful SFP/E prototyping features.
Why would it be so hard to provide a 'stripped down' midi only version of SFP/E for users?
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 09:14 Permalink
When janamdo said, that the accordion loses 'liveliness' I thought that eventually the expression controller is not imported correctly. Therefore I made this test, but expression is imported correctly. Also all dynamic and timing informations are identical to the original. The only difference is that the melodic line of the accordion is not exactly the same, but that's a normal thing when the MIDI notes are converted to dynamic phrases. If you want to have the original melody then you need to import it as static and you can harmonize it then at Synfire's harmonizer. But the melody will remain static then.
I simply have different expectations when I'm importing a MIDI file. I do not expect to get exactly the original music but I expect to get material to create new compositions. It would even be counterproductive if I just would hear the original after the import. For me, these changes that occur after the import are the first source of inspiration.
And by the way: The changes in the melody after the import are for me also the first step on the way to get rid of copyright issues. Presumably, the composer who composed this accordion melody is not yet 70 years dead. So, it anyway can't be used as it is. The melody must be changed anyway. At least if you want to publish your composition (of course things are different if you doing it only for fun). So, the changes that occur to an imported melody are not a real issue to me. The opposite is true. I see it as a source of inspiration.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 10:14 Permalink
Jürgen, i respect your point of view.
Mine is a little different. I wouldn't import a midi file if there was not something in it that inspired me. Therefore I would like to have that 'inspiring' thing to mold in SFP using SFP's tools and harmonic palettes.
Many types of music have highly stylized melody lines ... think ethnic dance music like reels and jigs or some of the wonderful Columbian Vallenato music. The timing of notes and note values are integral to those type of compositions. I want to have phrases that adhere to those musical forms ... not something vaguely similar but lacking the specific genre 'flavor.'
How many notes must be changed before something is no longer in copyright? Two 1/16th and a 1/16th rest to a dotted 1/8th?
I want the specific musical line in SFP/ E not as a final melody line, but as a point of departure to experiment with ... and when successful to add to the phrase pool.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 10:30 Permalink
I did this (by accident )on a another way..
I don't care also to get the original melody back, but with copy and paste i get a nice musical result, and i am wondering if it is the same as the original melody, because it is now processed again by the musical AI of Synfire (or not ?)--> the notes notated for a phrase are not the same anymore as they are played.
I think this is the best approximation of the original midi you can get, because it fits well with all other tracks.
Chance one note in the melody and there are no copyright issues anymore (only when it stay sounding musical ofcourse :)), but the audio output counts and if Synfire changes the midioutput from the accordion, than the original accordion melody is not present anymore.
Nothing to worry about copyright issues and there are enough free Midifiles to arranged by professional musicians ( yamaha )
Suppose i want to compose more with a accordion .. i can store the phrases in the library and use this to come up with a another melody
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 10:35 Permalink
Prado..i am totally agree with you
The midi is a startingpoint for inspiration for a new arrangement
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 10:37 Permalink
It's not that simple. The ear must perceive it as something different. In case of doubt it is decided on the court.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 10:49 Permalink
Yes, it is serious affair ..copyright, but in the case of synfire with the accordion..synfire's musical Ai has translated the melody notes to other ones
Synfire has not yet a feature to see the midi output, but HAlion5 has a keyboard where all played notes of the accordion melody can be seen as a pressed keys.
So if you are afraid of copyright..you can check it there.
I think the only strong point are the written notes and not judging it on ear: person x claims this melody and person y also..what notes they are playing than?
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 11:19 Permalink
Prado..thanks for pointing to this
To aspect that Synfire is capable to perform the same notes treatment as in Cubase (note expression) is probably too much asked, i think that you must accept that..correct ?
Note expression comes on top of the expression maps for articulated instruments..awesome
The livelyness of midi notes in Synfire is a issue..at least i could bring back some livelyness with copy and paste, otherwise i should become depressed from this. :)
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 11:26 Permalink
Hi Blacksun
Yes it is some food for thoughts and it is not that complicated to give up and indeed the language is a barrier.
I am curoius if it helps you ( copy and paste) in your project to preserve a original melody line as much possible ..or even better in combination with the other tracks .nn
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 11:45 Permalink
I hope that at least ...drawing easy a accurate expression automation line (vector) will be possible in Synfire.
To be able to get some control about a sort of expression ( volume control per track ) ( see my other post and concern about this )
Synfire Express is limited without some articulations for modern instruments and the difficulty to express ( expression cc ) accurate and easy at least the volume for a track ( the professional expression curves form the yamaha midi have i in mind )
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 18:00 Permalink
You should be able to setup the articulations in the instrument definition. Think synfire supports around 10 midi cc expressions (But that's from memory). Those are available in the express version but it is missing keyswitches. Assign them to a controller knob and record them in real time overdubbing the figures as they play. You should be able to achieve better, smoother, more natural expression than drawing them manually on a sequence, although you can do that too.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 19:06 Permalink
I looked at the video, yes, the Halion is very impressive... Does the AU version work in Logic work as good?
One thing that slightly bothers me, is Halion is 'hijacking' the MIDI standard format. This has been done numerous times in the past.. But it forces other companies to match it, or like Apple, they will make their own propriatory method, that other manufactors must pay a royalty for. Hence it makes a lot of headaches for 3rd part parties to accomodate things.
These things eventually works out.. If one company comes out with a great idea, eventually the other companies will be forced to 'catch up'.
I understand Jamando's dilemma. Did you try splitting the notes up and treating as seperate instruments in SFP? Not the ideal set-up, but I think it would work.
If Cognitone is going to play 'catchup' with each new sound library, virtual instrument, or hardware, that uses something not called for in the midi spec. This will probably require the use of sysex commands, that will only address the proper instrument. I don't know about the rest of you, but 'sysex' is beyond the scope of my intelligent IQ.
Logic and I imagine most DAWS can accomodate it.
Then we get back to the old story of 'is SFP going to be a DAW?. How many and which features, will they have to accomodate.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 19:16 Permalink
"More than anything I want a version of SFP/E with essentially two features and no audio engine and no devices. All I want is the current GM set up and the ability to name a GM type instrument and assign it quickly to any available port/ channel available."
Yes Prado, I totally agree with you.. except I want MSB/LSB/Prog. After spending two years with SFP, I still don't fully understand the private, shared, midi, etc.. I've got a method that works for me..
Just like in Logic,, I'd rather look over to the instrument info, and assign port, patch, channel etc.. Its much more direct.
As I mentioned before,, I already have Logic templates, with control sequences to set up the desired parameters.. All I need to do is select the MSB/LSB/Prog, if a want a different sound.
Everything is complicated enough, already
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 19:30 Permalink
Jügen ... Of course I understand that it is not that simple.
I made that statement simply to illustrate that it isn't that simple or clear, and that there is some vague and somewhat arbitrary line between what is an original melody and what is a plagiarized one.
Anything that must be left for a court to decide is obviously unclear.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 19:35 Permalink
You mean 'accept,' not 'aspect.' But, yes, of course, it is too much to expect.
And this is again why I always expect to bring the production of SFP/ E back into Cubase or another DAW. There will always be midi editing tasks that a DAW can do that SFP/E will be unable to accomplish.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 19:55 Permalink
Let me clarify and then give my opinion.
1. First, the VST 3.5 standard that includes what Steinberg calls 'Note Expression2' requires a capable instrument, such as Halion 5, and also the Cubase DAW.
(http://www.steinberg.net/en/company/technologies/vst_expression.html)
So, no. The AU version of Halion would not give you Note Expression capabilities in Logic. But I believe it would give the advanced articulations and dynamics.
2. While the use of all the features of VST Exression2 is limited to the Cubase platform, the development of instruments is not. VST has always been an open standard and any company can produce using that platform. Besides Cubase themselves, many other instrument developers including Vienna Symphonic Library offer VST 3.5 instruments.
3. This development does not change the GM standard, it is simply built upon it. Steinberg is not trying to undermine it, but to improve it with full backwards compatibility. That is, all VST 3.5 instruments will still play fine on any DAW using the VST platfrom and will be controlled in the normal manner by GM. But their advanced VST 3.5 features will be unavailable.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 22:28 Permalink
What Halian is doing is ground breaking. I completely agree with companies making advancements. What I object to is they are doing it with their own priority software. .. That was the reason Apple created Audio Units, cause at the time they were more stable (or so they claimed.. And they wanted to stiff it to Cubase, Then came DTM, RTAS, and AAX. Each of these companies ulterior motive, to make you bound to their platform.. And after 10 or more years, one is very reluctant to jump ships because of the large 'learn time' to get back to running status.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very interested in Halion 5. I wish there was a two week demo, so I could hear the sounds. I might just buy it anyways. In general I prefer hardware synths, I like moving the knobs in realtimes, and they have a less. The new libraries, with round robin assignments are getting more realistic all the time..
What I'm saying is Halions new features, are going to have to force the other manufactors to incorporate their counterpart into it,, I was working at Voyetra, in the 80's and Voyetra was the 6th company to go online supporting the Midi Spec.. They had no idea how the MIDI spec would grow and create variations. They are changing the MIDI standard, from the original specs, but those are so ancient by now.. Yamaha is mega company and can force their influence onto the synth, DAW market..Other companies will be forced to join..
When re-wire came out, propellar - head quickly copryrighted it,and became the standard, and other companies were forced to pay royalties. Microsoft,and now Apple have become the kings of this. They are constantly patenting any idea they can think of so that when a future company comes up with a suitable idea. The lawyers are at the gates..
I'm all for improvement. What has been benificial is these large companies bought up smaller companies to incorporate those features into their products. So with any of the affialated programs with a Cubase, Logic, or Protools. It's gonna work, and you don't have to waste time, trying to get things to work..
The truth Cubase is changing the functions of the MIDI spec. But it has been changed numerous times thru the years. The MIDI spec made set aside a lot of blank areas, sysex excluse data. which will only communicate with one particular piece of hard or software.. So cubase system exclusive data going to a Tryros will be ignored by a Roland module. Perhaps with sysem exclusive messages, SFP could be able to deal with this other factors.. But does it want to? At some point, Andre has to stop rewriting the program, and focues on videos,
Right now Cognitone is suffering the consequences, of some of this. Andre has to reverse engineer a DAW's feature, and figure out a way to implement it, without violating copyright infringements.
Band-in-a-Box, has been largely the same for many years..I've been using it over 20 years, They do add new features, but the programming looks like an ugly DOS interface.. The front panel, is totally littered with commands, seemingly with no logic to where they were put.. Situation is as ugly as it's interface is, it does function..
With Synfire we are looking for polish, and sophistication, and the ability to do deal with all the idiosyncrocy of individual programs.
What I feel about it, doesn't really matter, cause the mega companies are gonna force their methods onto the buyer.
Fri, 2013-09-13 - 23:25 Permalink
Mark,
I hear you ... but I don't quite agree.
The way I see it, the midi standard is unchanged and great as ever. It is the DAW that is advancing. Most of the major DAWs are owned by big corporatiions ... Acid Pro/ Sony, Cubase/ Yamaha, Sonar/ Roland, and Logic/ Apple.
These companies and their shareholders are competing. So are the 'little guys' like Reaper. One offers an innovation the other doesn't have to keep old customers and lure new ones. If they weren't competing there would be no reason for them to innovate. It is no different than deciding to buy a Ford or Chevrolet. The parts of one do not fit in the other.
So buy or don't what appeals to you. If you can afford it, get both a Ford and a Chevrolet.
When I started getting into Cubase, I didn't really have a clear idea of what it could do at the time or what it might do in the future. The more I learned to use it, the more valuable it became. It's just dumb luck that I happen to have bought into it and it now has this great feature. It's probably also just dumb luck that many MAC users fell into learning Logic, another great program.
Personally, I enjoy keeping on top of all these innovations ... whether I have them or not. I've spent the last 6 months investing in and diving into Pro Tools. I want to learn it because whatever it has feature wise, it is the professional standard DAW. I've been please to discover it has many fabulous features not available in Cubase or Reaper, the other programs I own. I also just got an upgrade for a very low price on Ableton. I haven't used it yet, but it too has features none of the other DAWs have.
Just like an engineer might choose one compressor or eq over another one in a studio depending on what he was trying to accomplish, there is no reason not to think that if you are fortunate enough to have them, one DAW can do something special no other can do ... at least for a few editions till the others catch up.
Anyway, I'm rambling, but I want to see innovation continue and I think it only arises in the market place.
Sat, 2013-09-21 - 18:41 Permalink
I have checked out the Halion, looks very nice. However they have 'bended the midi standard format, to incluce expression on each note in a one midi track.. There is no way any other program is going to intrepret that but to apply expression and CC' to all notes on that midi track. Which defeats the Halion VST 3.5. advantage.
To me it looks, like you would have to sepereate each note and assign to a different midi track.. because even three voices all assigned to Halion Midi 11, are going to be affectted by the data on each chanels going to that midi track of that instrument,, Hence it's going to sound wrong, discordant or worse.
I'm not sure if Andre is willing to write code to accomodate that.. Cause eventually every synth manufacture is going to have a slightly different procedure so as to avoid copyright infringement,,
PS.. This is my limited perspective interpretation of what I read and corresponded with Cubase.. They told me those featurea would not be able to work on Logic. Only Halion, cause it has this new VST 3.5 spec.
Apple like Microsoft does not give in to 3rd parties, althering theire protocol methods. Apples decision to use AU's was not so much on stabilty,but to draw a line in the sand, and force individuals to cross and become part of that family.. Pro-tools did the same do..
Enough with all these priotory convenctions,, it' the user who suffers.. Like one car manufactorure to put the gas pedal on the steering column and windshield washer on floor, cause it suited their need, and forced the hand of their customer base.
Sat, 2013-09-21 - 19:49 Permalink
Mark, you are confusing the standard with the platform. Halion is a VSTi that incorporates the VST 3.5 standard. That standard includes 'Note Expression.' VST 3.5 is an open standard which any virtual instrument manufacturer can utilize. There are other instruments from Steinberg/ Yamaha that also incorporate VST 3.5. One othe example is Halion Sonic.
To take advantage of VST 3.5 you need the correct platform. At present this is only available on Cubase (and I imagine also on the flag ship, Nuendo).
As an instrument, Halion will work perfectly well in Logic or any other DAW. You won't have to worry about problems with the Note Expression feature, as you wouldn't be able to create midi tracks incorporating it in Logic. The instrument simply won't have that capability exposed to the user. If unexposed, there is nothing you can do to create problems of wrong sounds, CC articulations, etc.
There are some real questions about the future of Logic. Apple seems to have focused everything on the consumer, not on the professional. Look at the latest iteration of the MAC Pro, which is well-spec'd for video, but without any internal card slots is clearly not geared towards pro audio. The amount of these units sold is infitesimal in the larger scheme of Apple products and accordingly seems to be fading off the corporate radar.
Sat, 2013-09-21 - 21:16 Permalink
Since I'm so good at correcting others' use of English, how about we spell that 'infinitesimal' instead?
Sat, 2013-09-21 - 21:34 Permalink
Cubase and Halion seems to me interesting combination Mark for composing, but try this first out and than you can decide to buy it somewhere : used or for a low price.
But as you are a vivid logic user and own a fantastic tyros composerkeyboard..the chance is there that if you like Cubase it is coming under dust.
But you can use Tyros still in Cubase (= yamaha ) for musical ideas.
Recently i installed my humble Yamaha piano keyboard for study more pianomusic to get more insight in the piano, together with the new mastering boxes..great piano sound.
Note: you can also try to play drums like andy Kaufmann is doing ..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bu45POJ-8E
Mon, 2013-09-30 - 06:53 Permalink
The basic standard is still there, but what is becoming rapidly apparent is how various companies, are 'pushing the envelope'... I'm all for that. The Tyros 4 itself scans the keyboard and applies AI to accomplish what it does, It has Articulation 2! file type voices, when certain fingerin techniques and articulation buttons are used new samples are substituted 'on the fly' to achieve it's realism.
It has mega voices, that are only meant to be used by the Tyros style generators. In the megavoice, each note takes into account every individual note velocity between 30 - 127. It is humanly impossible to maintain that kind of accuracy. (also probably technically impossible for the keyboard to generate that much accuracy, (just the difference in the springs for each note, would overide perfect response on whole keyboard..
Halion uses its own genious of processing in it's 3.5 VST. Many years ago, drum companies had their GM format, but they also had their own individual mapping, making it a painstaking process to shift from BFD drums to Superior or Addictive drums.. Often after completing a song, I go back, and revoice individual drums. Some companies will put 8 different snare articulations mapped over the keyboard or mapped to one note and make use of velocity.. I do all the revoicing, but then want to make a standard GM score, so it could in the future be performed by a real drummer.
We have no standards for articulation, each company using various extra low or extra high notes to achieve their magic.
We have scripting, where entire passages of note samples are swapped out for something else to accomade a particular style of playing, especially for strings..
The General Midi standard as accomodations for manufactor specific data, with it's sysex.. so a Korg won't go bonkers' when it reads a Yamaha midi file with sysex controlling.
I'm all for this growth, don't get me wrong.. but it's removing the 'portability' of the song, that Andre is trying to achieve, which in turns make SFP more complex and is also a means by which a company keeps it's customers 'hooked' on their products alone..
Like I said before, when I create a part that uses some form of articulations to modify the notes,, I consistantly want to hear that accross different program platforms, because it effects what you are going to play or manipulate on your later tracks..
I'm sure many of us here recognize, that building music is like a house of cars, or Startrek's 'Kalto' game.. One change in one track, can result in you have to rephrase, re-record sometimes several other parts to make the song 'whole'.
Changing one track, can make a whole song sonically 'disintergrate' in front of you. Same is true, if the key track loses it precision articulation, the whole song can suffer, and become lifeless.