Paradigms and pleas

Gene,

I am really very sorry that you took my message the wrong way. You must have overlooked the sentence:

"I really do mean this in as benign a way as possible, and not some kind of goading!"

It was as sincere as I could make it. I honestly thought, since you were querying about some of the facilities of Csound and related materials, that maybe you were looking for slightly different ways to create/render your pieces. I was wrong in my assumption, but that is all it was - an honest mistake.

{you wrote...}
>Do you wake up in the morning and ask yourself how you can best spend the >day trying to get people to *not* compose microtonal music?

What do you _really_ think the answer to that is? What do you think the others on the list think?

>GO AWAY! You made me stop composing for a year. What more do you want?

I wouldn't have even ventured into the discussion had you not erroneously said that electronic methods "horrify" me, and in making sure you understood that wasn't the truth at all (and I _know_ you value the truth) I also thought maybe I might assist in a pathway for you, if even only a partial or alternate pathway.

I can't take credit or blame for your lack of composing, though I'm sorry to hear of it. I've written you frequently in private, and have always offered to receive correspondence. I wish you would have let me know that things had affected you that adversely, as harm is never my intent. And I promise not to publicly offer you any advices or suggestions whatsoever, and all I would ask in return is that you don't throw my name into your postings, casting aspersions where none are warranted. I hope that is agreeable to you.

I won't respond anymore about this onlist, and apologize to the list at large for this (apparent) food fight. And I won't go away.

Regards,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Jon Szanto <jszanto@c...> wrote:

> I am really very sorry that you took my message the wrong way.

I've been trying for a long time now, in both public and private, to
get you to quit bugging me on the topic of soundfont music, since I
find it is hindering my ability to compose. I didn't no what else to
do than to try yelling at you in public.

> It was as sincere as I could make it. I honestly thought, since you
were
> querying about some of the facilities of Csound and related
materials, that
> maybe you were looking for slightly different ways to create/render
your
> pieces.

I *am* interested in that. I am not interested in explanations of why
if you don't have twenty years of experience in Hollywood and $200000
worth of equipment you should not compose using soundfonts. I am
interested in writing music and in using different tunings. If I think
the result must sound like the Berlin Philharmonic or it isn't
acceptable, I can't do that.

> What do you _really_ think the answer to that is?

My honest opinion? I think you somewhat resent me, because I'm not a
member of the club but compose anyway.

>I wish you would have let me know that
> things had affected you that adversely, as harm is never my intent.

When I told you I had a hard time dealing with your criticisms, what
did you think I meant? What did you imagine my stipulation that people
discuss my latest piece without critiquing soundfonts meant?

To be answered off-list...

Gene wrote,

> I am not interested in explanations of why if you don't have twenty
> years of experience in Hollywood and $200000 worth of equipment
> you should not compose using soundfonts.

Just stepping in here, not with an opinion about music, but just to
mention about using "samples" for production... You might want to look into
Garritan Personal Orchestra, which is sample-based. It's a hell of a lot
cheaper than the Berlin Phil, and sounds pretty good, I think, for people
interested in realistic instrumental sounds.

With the latest version of Scala, and I hope soon Fractal Tune Smithy,
anyone could use GPO for doing microtonal ensemble music using the
pitch-bend method. GPO isn't dirt cheap, but it's not $200000 either.

I've also had fair luck using GPO with Rhino also, at least in tests so
far. Rhino's user-slider feature allows instruments to use exactly the same
volume control mechanism as GPO for expression, so that you can mix Rhino
patches with GPO.

Rick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Rick McGowan <rick@u...> wrote:

> Just stepping in here, not with an opinion about music, but just to
> mention about using "samples" for production... You might want to
look into
> Garritan Personal Orchestra, which is sample-based. It's a hell of a
lot
> cheaper than the Berlin Phil, and sounds pretty good, I think, for
people
> interested in realistic instrumental sounds.

When last I checked I couldn't see that it had microtonal capacity. Of
course, if they don't mention tuning it could be because they don't
think it matters, not because it isn't doable. Also, for my purposes
it must be able to render a score.

Hi Gene --

> When last I checked I couldn't see that it had microtonal
> capacity.

It doesn't. But you can use it with Scala relay to do microtonal work. It
implements pitch-bend in a very usable way. I posted some stuff on this
forum in the last month or two about it. You might want to check the thread
"Microtuning the orchestra" where I discussed it. Manueal made specific
modifications to Scala that make relaying work very nicely with GPO. And
I've been in discussions & beta-testing with Robert Walker who is making a
really super relay system that looks very promising as well.

> Also, for my purposes it must be able to render a score.

Ah, well, that's a different matter. I'm not sure what you mean by "render
a score", but... It works with MIDI of course, so you might be able to
find a way to weave it into your compositional process. I know everyone has
their own preferred compositional process, tools, etc. I just mentioned
GPO because the thread touched on sampling, and I've had good experiences
with it, and people in the microtonal community have been working on relays
to make it usable with any possible tuning.

Cheers,
Rick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Rick McGowan <rick@u...> wrote:

> Ah, well, that's a different matter. I'm not sure what you mean by
"render
> a score", but... It works with MIDI of course, so you might be able to
> find a way to weave it into your compositional process.

Can it take a pitch bended midi file and produce output? I know better
than to ask for MTS midi, alas.

Hi Gene --

> Can it take a pitch bended midi file and produce output?
> I know better than to ask for MTS midi, alas.

Presumably. If you put pitch-bends in before each note, it should work
fine. That is essentially what these MIDI relay systems do: they insert
pitch-bends before each note.

It's worth an experiment, certainly. If you have a small pitch-bended MIDI
file as an example, I'm willing to send the file to GPO and post back an
MP3 of the output.

Rick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Rick McGowan <rick@u...> wrote:

> It's worth an experiment, certainly. If you have a small
pitch-bended MIDI
> file as an example, I'm willing to send the file to GPO and post
back an
> MP3 of the output.

Thanks. How do you define "small"?

Gene,

> Thanks. How do you define "small"?

For the purpose of this experiment, a "small" MIDI file is one that you
could send in e-mail and takes no appreciable time to upload or download.
And I would hope to render it into MP3 and upload that; and hopefully, it
would again be, say, under a megabyte.

Rick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Rick McGowan <rick@u...> wrote:

> For the purpose of this experiment, a "small" MIDI file is one that
you
> could send in e-mail and takes no appreciable time to upload or
download.
> And I would hope to render it into MP3 and upload that; and
hopefully, it
> would again be, say, under a megabyte.

I have a suggestion: why not go here

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/gene.html

choose a midi file you like, or at least don't hate, and turn as much
as you feel up to into an mp3 file?

Hi Gene,

> I have a suggestion: why not go here
> http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/gene.html
> choose a midi file

OK, I took the first few measures of this file:

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/scores/nono.mid

and loaded it into Finale (which can play back MIDI). The file seems to
mostly be 4 tracks of monophonic data, so I ran it through Finale playback
to Garritan using oboe, clarinet, bassoon patches. The result (20 seconds)
is here:

http://rm-and-jo.laughingsquid.org/temp/nono-20secs.mp3

I didn't go on any longer because it appears that the channels don't
continue monophonically. There appear to be sections of polyphony (at least
that's how it appears). In GPO, most of the instruments (oboe, clarinet,
bassoon) are strictly monophonic. Also, this retuning method requires that
each channel be monophonic. (As I previously discussed on the thread
"Microtuning the Orchestra".)

I'm not sure if the result here is "correct", but it's doing something and
sounds pretty close to the beginning of the ".ogg" file that you posted
here:

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/ogg/gene/nono.ogg

Hope that is of some use. With GPO, we would get better results if the
MIDI file was tweaked for GPO: i.e., also including a lot of data for the
mod-wheel controller, which is used for the expression/volume control; and
also the legato controller. Those factors are discussed in the GPO
documentation at www.garritan.com.

Cheers,

Rick

Hi Gene --

Here's another bit. I took the first few measures of this file:

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/scores/choraled.mid

And ran it with GPO using a quartet of solo strings, and put the result here:

http://rm-and-jo.laughingsquid.org/temp/choraled-29sec.mp3

Again, I'm not sure if the result here is "correct", but it's doing
something and sounds pretty close to the beginning of the ".mp3" file that
you posted here:

http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/ogg/gene/choraled.mp3

(The strings in GPO also tend to sound better if the phrases are shaped
with their legato methodology, as they describe in documentation.)

Hope this is useful.

Cheers,
Rick

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Rick McGowan <rick@u...> wrote:
>
> http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/ogg/gene/choraled.mp3
>
> (The strings in GPO also tend to sound better if the phrases are
shaped
> with their legato methodology, as they describe in documentation.)

Thanks, Rick. Do you mean legato controlled by midi controller 68 data?

> Thanks, Rick. Do you mean legato controlled by midi controller
> 68 data?

Yes. That's what they use in GPO. Works nicely for phrasing.

The winds, strings, brass in GPO all respond to it.

The instruments also respond to mod wheel for controlling volume. Ordinary
velocity is used as well, but mainly to control articulation.

Rick

At 05:42 PM 12/15/2005, you wrote:
>Hi Gene --
>
>Here's another bit. I took the first few measures of this file:
>
>http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/scores/choraled.mid
>
>And ran it with GPO using a quartet of solo strings, and put the
>result here:
>
>http://rm-and-jo.laughingsquid.org/temp/choraled-29sec.mp3
>
>Again, I'm not sure if the result here is "correct", but it's doing
>something and sounds pretty close to the beginning of the ".mp3"
>file that you posted here:
>
>http://66.98.148.43/~xenharmo/ogg/gene/choraled.mp3
>
>(The strings in GPO also tend to sound better if the phrases are
>shaped with their legato methodology, as they describe in
>documentation.)
>
>Hope this is useful.
>
>Cheers,
> Rick

This sounds a bit better to me than Gene's version, but I think
what bothers Jon is not a non-multisampled soundfont, but the
lack of controller data. Since you're not entering this stuff at
a keyboard, Gene, you might consider algorithmic techniques for
generating it. Or maybe you could draw the controllers in a MIDI
editor. If you want a cheap program that has excellent controller
editing support, Cakewalk Kinetic might fit the bill. I reviewed
it here

http://www.keyboardmag.com/story.asp?sectioncode=30&storycode=4539

Also worth considering are the obscure 'resembling pre-SONAR
Cakewalk' versions still produced by that company (as used by
Herman Miller, IIRC)...

http://cakewalk.com/Products/HomeStudio/default.asp
http://cakewalk.com/Products/MusicCreator/default.asp

...hmm, looks like even these versions are starting to resemble
SONAR.

Perhaps Rosegarden or some other linux freebee also has this
capability.

Hopefully this will not mess up your pitch bends. Also, if you're
using channel hocketing, you'll have to put the other controllers
in first, since it'd be nearly impossible to follow a line across
channels in the editor. Hopefully this

-Carl

Oops, this was sent too soon...

>Hopefully this will not mess up your pitch bends. Also, if you're
>using channel hocketing, you'll have to put the other controllers
>in first, since it'd be nearly impossible to follow a line across
>channels in the editor. Hopefully this

...igonore the closing sentence frag.

-C.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> This sounds a bit better to me than Gene's version, but I think
> what bothers Jon is not a non-multisampled soundfont, but the
> lack of controller data. Since you're not entering this stuff at
> a keyboard, Gene, you might consider algorithmic techniques for
> generating it.

I've done that a little. I haven't tried working with the legato
controller, which most midi sequencers don't seem to use.