Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play

Some of you who studied piano long enough ago might remember the John
Thompson pedagogical boook "Teaching Little Fingers to Play". Well,
this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".

http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html

I guess I just came up with this for several reasons. One, I just had
my little student give a recital on the 10th, so pedagogical sounding
music has been on my mind and in my brain.

Secondly, I spied some pedagogical music on my friend Steve's piano
last night, and realized that an awful lot of great music that we take
for granted has come from the search to write something both musically
meaningful, as well as technically easy or accesible for kids. Think
of Bartòk's 'Mikrokosmos', Schumann's 'Album for the Young', works by
Prokofieff and Shostokovich, Mozart's elegant little minuets and of
course, the Bach of the 'Anna Magdelena Notebook'. Fellow lister Chris
Bailey also wrote a nice inspiring set for kids, too. I figured the
universe was trying to tell me something, and I ought to try my hand
at this game.

This is my first humble venture, sent out to my daughter Annika with
love; maybe it will become a set of pieces, but for now, a single
movement.

Alas, no human could play this on anything but a specially tailored
microtonal keyboard with lots 'o keys, hence the virtual aspect, and
the 'robot' title.

I used my own 'micro_composer' software, then Timidity++ drove
"Campbell's Tuned Harpsichord" soundfont, no doubt a very nice
soundfont indeed. Then I opened Ardour (Linux only) and applied a bit
of Freeverb3 to get a feel of a robot student recital hall.

Enjoy!
Aaron.

🔗Magnus Jonsson <magnus@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Magnus Jonsson <magnus@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron, I geta 403 Forbidden when I try to click on the ogg.

Fixed, sorry about that!
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay.ogg
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay.mp3

> The mp3
> works
> fine though and it's a nice piece to listen to :).

Thanks, I appreciate your listening and commenting.

> A lot of people
> complain about comma shifts, but I find them very juicy.

Agreed, under the right circumstances...:)

>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> > this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".
> >
> > http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html
>

🔗Margo Schulter <mschulter@...>

Dear Aaron,

Congratulations on your _Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play_,
which I might describe as part of your Annika Magdelana Bartok's
Notebook.

I loved it, and indeed it did remind me of Bartok, for example. It
also makes me interested in teaching my own little fingers more
systematically to negotiate small intervals at the keyboard.

People here and on other tuning lists have fun seeing well a given
temperament might approximate certain JI ratios -- but how about
seeing how well more specifically such a system might represent JI
commas.

Quite apart from this "influence," however, it's a great piece,
showing how you can "juggle" JI ratios as nicely as 17-EDO or 19-EDO,
for example.

Peace and love,

Margo

🔗J.Smith <jsmith9624@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>> > this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".
>> >
>> > http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html

Excellent! Gad, JI sounds good, doesn't it?
Love the ending too.

Aaron, I often notice really strong reverb / stereo
separation on your stuff. I think it detracts from
your music.

-Carl

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
> >> > this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".
> >> >
> >> > http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html
>
> Excellent! Gad, JI sounds good, doesn't it?
> Love the ending too.

Yes, JI is great! Glad you liked this!

>
> Aaron, I often notice really strong reverb / stereo
> separation on your stuff. I think it detracts from
> your music.

Interesting...I rather like stereo images, and sense of space. I
wonder what the consensus is on this?

Are you saying you would prefer more of a closer-to-mono feel?

Perhaps I can post a different (drier, more mono-ish) version and
people could discuss/compare the qualities of the different versions.
It would make for a lively discussion, since I'm sure there are twice
as many opinions as people in these parts!

-A.
-A.

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> Aaron, I often notice really strong reverb / stereo
>> separation on your stuff. I think it detracts from
>> your music.
>
>Interesting...I rather like stereo images, and sense of space.

I do too, but there's such a thing as "too wet". Unless
it's dub or space rock.

>I wonder what the consensus is on this?
>
>Are you saying you would prefer more of a closer-to-mono feel?

Yes.

>Perhaps I can post a different (drier, more mono-ish) version and
>people could discuss/compare the qualities of the different versions.

I think that's a good idea.

-Carl

🔗Gene Ward Smith <genewardsmith@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@> wrote:

> > Aaron, I often notice really strong reverb / stereo
> > separation on your stuff. I think it detracts from
> > your music.
>
> Interesting...I rather like stereo images, and sense of space. I
> wonder what the consensus is on this?

I'd tone the reverb down.

🔗Prent Rodgers <prentrodgers@...>

Aaron,
Another wonderful piece. I really liked the slow revelation of the
theme and the gentle introduction of "challenging" intonation. Great
stuff. I liked the reverb, but I'd also like to hear a dry version. I
play with reverb depth a lot, and usually end up on the dry side most
times. But I like a lot of wet ambient that I hear too. And it seems
most solo classical music is recorded very wet as well.

Prent Rodgers

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
Well,
> this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".
>
> http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html
>
Then I opened Ardour (Linux only) and applied a bit
> of Freeverb3 to get a feel of a robot student recital hall.
>
> Enjoy!
> Aaron.
>

🔗aum <aum@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> >> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>> >> > this "Teaching Little JI Robot Fingers to Play".
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.akjmusic.com/works.html
>>
>> Excellent! Gad, JI sounds good, doesn't it?
>> Love the ending too.
>
>It's 441-et d00d! Ennealimmal country. I forget what we decided to call
>that, but it's beyond wafso-just.

"Damn near enough for me" (to quote Benny Hill).

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> >> Aaron, I often notice really strong reverb / stereo
> >> separation on your stuff. I think it detracts from
> >> your music.
> >
> >Interesting...I rather like stereo images, and sense of space.
>
> In the 19-ET fugue sketch for example -- and I realize
> this was unfinished -- it sounds like the voices are full-
> panned to the left or right channels.

Not full panned, but if I remember correctly, 25%,50%, and 75% for the
voices 1,3,2.

I may be in the minority here, but I know what I like. I like space,
and a vivid sense of room, anything from a neat little ambient room to
a gigantic tail reverb for 'space music'---I agree that there's such a
thing as "too wet" (definately not my 'JI robot' track)--with the
caveat that sometimes, the max value of reverb is perfect for a
haunting sense of
'eternal-galactic-universe-tunnel-sound'....obviously, only for a
certain type of music where things washing together is ok....AND, I
think panning helps *enormously* for contrapuntal music. I love this
capability of electronic music and electonic recording techniques: to
be able to make counterpoint really also behave spatially, for clarity
and definition. I'm a big fan of rich, vivid, stereo fields, and not
much of a fan of mono, and lo-fi. I'm a fan of the 'ear-candy' concept.

I love the fact that I have 2 ears, (even though my right ear has some
frequency loss---I'm not sure if it's genetic, or from too much oud
music and headphone listening when I was younger) and I want to take
advantage of 2 ears!

Another thought about reverb---how much of the emotional experience of
Gregorian Chant is tied into the sense of 'cathedral space'? Would you
want to hear Gregorian Chant in a tiny, dry room? Would it have the
same effect on you? I know what my answer is, and I don't question it
for a second, it seems glaringly obvious to me.

-A.

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:
>
> AKJ,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >I may be in the minority here...
>
> I doubt it.
>
> >I know what my answer is, and I don't question it for a second, it
seems glaringly obvious to me.
>
> Me too: dry is for dorks.

Aaron runs for cover, seeing that Jon lobbed a missle straight into
the 'I like dry' camp.....another MMM war is about to erupt. Sound the
alarms!

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

{you wrote...}
>Sound the alarms!

Only if people are humorless. The point is: do what your ears say is best, and I just happen to rebel against a clinical approach to recording presentation. I didn't necessarily think that the mix was too wet, but that the apparant size and characteristics of the "room" you chose didn't seem to match the music you were surrounding. I know you are fond of Linux/open source tools, but you might want to investigate more sophisticated verb programs, or play with yours a bit more. Also, one hopes you aren't mixing with phones, and that your listening/mixing station is set up for this kind of things. I've certainly butchered things by mixing in cans.

So, pay no heed to my remarks about dryness, unless you are a dork...

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "daniel_anthony_stearns"
<daniel_anthony_stearns@...> wrote:
>
> Ideally i think these sorts of things should be nearly analogous to
> how painters choose color and especially to what the photographer does
> in the darkroom. There should be a million wets and a million dries
> and a million gradations in-between, and hundreds of them should be
> totally particular to somebody who has used them in such a fashion to
> have established beyond a doubt that that things is theirs, and it
> works whether you love or loath it. Unfortunately what usually happens
> is that somebody bumps the first usable button on a box or records
> without one in the same useable fashion. Crude...pristine.....it can
> all work--I mean compare the Gregorian Chant analogy with say bushman
> field recordings who wants to hear that imported to the cathedral or
> glossed up in pretty little reverb sheen by some ear candied engineer!

On the face of it I wouldn't, and I agree---however, I wouldn't want
to rule out anything I haven't tried before, on the principle that I
experiment, and one never knows what is possible unless one escapes
one's own preconceptions.

Anyway, for me the choice of no-reverb could be as much about
ear-candy as having reverb, to me, by definition 'ear-candy' is always
a good thing, i.e. what delights the ear.

> These extremes go both ways, and 70 more sideways too. What i look for
> is musicians who somehow manage to treat the total aspect of their art
> in some "SPECIAL" way, including the miking, mixing, effecting, etc
> ,etc. And sometimes that seems to mean just knowing when to leave
> something slone too... but I guess I just hate lazy as a rule, and too
> many generic boxes and interfaces ,especially the "better" they get,
> promote a lot of lazy when it comes to making a good sound I
> think....but that's my opinion, or some facet of it anyway .

Agreed. Well put.

-A.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:
>
> A,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Sound the alarms!
>
> Only if people are humorless. The point is: do what your ears say is
>best,

I always do.

> I know you are fond of Linux/open source tools, but you might want
> to investigate more sophisticated verb programs, or play with yours
> a bit more.

I wonder what you are basing your assumptions about how sophisticated
Linux audio apps, including reverb are? Have you used them? Can you
tell the difference between a 'corporate reverb' and an open-source
one, 100% of the time? Have you ever seen/used Ardour, for instance?

There are plenty of professional recording studios now using
open-source tools. I would be careful to speak so dismissivly about
them until you know of what you speak. I usually am with you Jon on
aesthetic matters, but I noticed on more than one occasion you have an
unjustified gear/software lust, meaning it seems you really think
people can't make high-quality music and recordings without dropping
$10,000.

My Dad loves taking an amazing $8 dollar bottle of wine to a wine
tasting, pitting it against some big-shot $100 bottle, and have all
the tasters prefer his. There's nothing that says price guarntees
quality, and that principle extends to software.

I would like to challenge your assumption, which I think is pure
prejudice on your part---take any reverb program you want on your
platform, I'll take mine, and let's 'produce' the same dry track, you
with your tools, me with mine, and compare. We can send them to a
neutral third party, who can relabel them and present them randomly or
whatever, and let the rest of the group decide what they hear and
like/dislike. I can guarantee that the results would be simply the
skill of the engineer, not the supposed quality of the tools.

-A.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron,
> Another wonderful piece. I really liked the slow revelation of the
> theme and the gentle introduction of "challenging" intonation. Great
> stuff. I liked the reverb, but I'd also like to hear a dry version.

Thanks, Prent. In case anyone's interested, here's a dry version:

http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay_dry.mp3

Also, I applied *no* stereo panning on this or the previous version,
except to say that I did have a high 'width' parameter in the reverb
version.

So if you don't like the panning in this, blame it on the soundfont. I
like it, it's one of the nice things about the font to me...it's the
next best thing to sitting in front of an actual instrument and having
an image laid out in front of you.

Anyway, let me just say that although the first version might have
been a tad on the wet side (I don't happen to think so), this version
doesn't nearly sound as sonically exciting to me. The reverb version
sound much better, I think. The dry one is ok, but I have to disagree
that it sounds better that way. The JI becomes more vivid, to my ear,
with a bit of reverb. Perhaps I can experiment with toning the reverb
down, which seems reasonable. Certainly, the settings were middle of
the road.

-A.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> These extremes go both ways, and 70 more sideways too. What i look for
>> is musicians who somehow manage to treat the total aspect of their art
>> in some "SPECIAL" way, including the miking, mixing, effecting, etc
>> ,etc. And sometimes that seems to mean just knowing when to leave
>> something slone too... but I guess I just hate lazy as a rule, and too
>> many generic boxes and interfaces, especially the "better" they get,
>> promote a lot of lazy when it comes to making a good sound I
>> think....but that's my opinion, or some facet of it anyway .
>
>Agreed. Well put.

Ditto. One of the things I like about Glenn Gould as a pianist.
He had Steinway put lighter hammers, and (if I'm not mistaken)
set a shorter hammer throw on his grand, to destroy sound -- the
modern piano has too much of it for Gould's (and my) taste.
He involved himself intimately with every facet of the recording
process. And even though his catalog was put down on ancient
equipment (a fair bit of it mono), you can appreciate how good
it is within itself.

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>There are plenty of professional recording studios now using
>open-source tools.

I hate to say it, but I've been in a fair number of studios
and been given cards by and spoken with a fair number of studio
owners and producers, and I've never encountered a single
one using open source tools. Sadly, almost every pro studio
that wants to stay in business feels compelled to have at least
one Pro Tools rig of some sort, even if they promote a
higher-end solution.

This isn't to say I think there are no good open reverbs out
there. But... are you using one?

>I noticed on more than one occasion you have an
>unjustified gear/software lust, meaning it seems you really think
>people can't make high-quality music and recordings without dropping
>$10,000.

I'll definitely say that Jon has produced some of the best-
sounding tracks I've ever heard on this list. Next to Dan Stearns,
who is somehow touched by god when it comes to getting a sound.

-Carl

🔗Jon Szanto <jszanto@...>

Aaron,

{you wrote...}
>> Only if people are humorless. The point is: do what your ears say is
>>best,
>
>I always do.

Yeah, I know that - it was a generalist statement in support of your usual ear-driven tendencies.

>I wonder what you are basing your assumptions about how sophisticated Linux audio apps, including reverb are?

Sorry, I have to cut off all the rest and jump in here: I meant *absolutely* NO slur on the open source stuff, and really meant it in the most benign way. While I have on hand numerous apps that I paid money for (always because they happened to do exactly what I wanted them to (and/or more)) I also have a lot of freeware and open-source stuff (and I know you know that open-source isn't related to the *nix platforms).

I simply meant to imply that there might be more variations within your chosen verb app, such as room size, early reflections, etc. Not in any way meant to denigrate your toolset, or suggest something I know about is superior.

Just wanted to clear up what came across as a misunderstanding! Really!

Lastly, what *is* the verb of choice for you? I'd like to read up on it and what it can/can't do...

Cheers,
Jon

P.S. Complete concurrence with Dan Stearns' thoughts.

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> Aaron,
>> Another wonderful piece. I really liked the slow revelation of the
>> theme and the gentle introduction of "challenging" intonation. Great
>> stuff. I liked the reverb, but I'd also like to hear a dry version.
>
>Thanks, Prent. In case anyone's interested, here's a dry version:
>
>http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay_dry.mp3
>
>Also, I applied *no* stereo panning on this or the previous version,
>except to say that I did have a high 'width' parameter in the reverb
>version.
>
>So if you don't like the panning in this, blame it on the soundfont.

This sounds noticeably better to me.

I'm happy to blame the soundfont for the remaining stereo shmaltz.
If it weren't there, I might put 50% of the original reverb back
on the track.

One band that seems just to crank a stereo expander to 11 and
send their final mix through it at all times is Ozric Tentacles.
And I like them, so I'm not just a hater. Of course this started
with dub, but I've never heard it to the extremes Ozric take it.

-Carl

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> >There are plenty of professional recording studios now using
> >open-source tools.
>
> I hate to say it, but I've been in a fair number of studios
> and been given cards by and spoken with a fair number of studio
> owners and producers, and I've never encountered a single
> one using open source tools. Sadly, almost every pro studio
> that wants to stay in business feels compelled to have at least
> one Pro Tools rig of some sort, even if they promote a
> higher-end solution.

This is to be expected. However, there is growing adaption of
open-source audio, esp. outside the US, where people just don't have
that corporate 'Windoze only' mindset. Here's a blurb about a studio
in Quebec that's 100% open source tools:

http://www.indyish.com/artists/studio-cadence/

I'm sure, like you , that many open-source using studios right now,
for perceived 'safety', would be in a hybrid situation at this point.

Here's another interesting blurb about a solid-state Ardour workstation:

http://mixonline.com/news/headline/SSL-strategic-ardour-103006/

> This isn't to say I think there are no good open reverbs out
> there. But... are you using one?

Yup. Freeverb3.

> >I noticed on more than one occasion you have an
> >unjustified gear/software lust, meaning it seems you really think
> >people can't make high-quality music and recordings without dropping
> >$10,000.
>
> I'll definitely say that Jon has produced some of the best-
> sounding tracks I've ever heard on this list. Next to Dan Stearns,
> who is somehow touched by god when it comes to getting a sound.

BTW, I was looking for Jon's "Avon Lady" and I couldn't find it. And
Jon, where is there a repository of your music online? Or, where are
you selling it?

-A.

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@...> wrote:
>
> >> These extremes go both ways, and 70 more sideways too. What i
look for
> >> is musicians who somehow manage to treat the total aspect of
their art
> >> in some "SPECIAL" way, including the miking, mixing, effecting, etc
> >> ,etc. And sometimes that seems to mean just knowing when to leave
> >> something slone too... but I guess I just hate lazy as a rule,
and too
> >> many generic boxes and interfaces, especially the "better" they get,
> >> promote a lot of lazy when it comes to making a good sound I
> >> think....but that's my opinion, or some facet of it anyway .
> >
> >Agreed. Well put.
>
> Ditto. One of the things I like about Glenn Gould as a pianist.
> He had Steinway put lighter hammers, and (if I'm not mistaken)
> set a shorter hammer throw on his grand, to destroy sound -- the
> modern piano has too much of it for Gould's (and my) taste.
> He involved himself intimately with every facet of the recording
> process. And even though his catalog was put down on ancient
> equipment (a fair bit of it mono), you can appreciate how good
> it is within itself.

Oh yeah---Gould was an amazing pianist, thinker, and aesthete. And a
provocative writer to boot.

BTW, my 1886 Steinway (a beauty, in rosewood, as Carl can attest) is
something I always want to tone down the brightness of. Like you, I
prefer a mellower piano sound, too. My tech said, "then why did you
buy a Steinway?", to which I said "because no piano responds to
direction like a Steinway" to which he agreed....but anyway, voicing,
voicing, voicing. It also depends on the room, which in my case is a
hardwood floor with no rugs--and the showroom where I played it was
thick-rugged.

Also, on the subject of reverb, there are now tools which alow one to
take an audio impulse response of a given space and encapsulate that
into a reverb effect---pretty amazing tools we have! The author of the
amazing open-source organ 'Aeolus' has such a tool.

-A.

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> >There are plenty of professional recording studios now using
>> >open-source tools.
>>
>> I hate to say it, but I've been in a fair number of studios
>> and been given cards by and spoken with a fair number of studio
>> owners and producers, and I've never encountered a single
>> one using open source tools. Sadly, almost every pro studio
>> that wants to stay in business feels compelled to have at least
>> one Pro Tools rig of some sort, even if they promote a
>> higher-end solution.
>
>This is to be expected. However, there is growing adaption of
>open-source audio, esp. outside the US, where people just don't have
>that corporate 'Windoze only' mindset.

In the studio world, it's more of the Mac-only mindset.

>Here's a blurb about a studio
>in Quebec that's 100% open source tools:
>
>http://www.indyish.com/artists/studio-cadence/

If you have to go to Quebec for examples... :)

>Here's another interesting blurb about a solid-state Ardour workstation:
>
>http://mixonline.com/news/headline/SSL-strategic-ardour-103006/

Cool.

>> This isn't to say I think there are no good open reverbs out
>> there. But... are you using one?
>
>Yup. Freeverb3.

What impulses are you using?

-Carl

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

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

> In the studio world, it's more of the Mac-only mindset.

Yes, that too, but I've seen lots of Windoze boxes too.

> >Here's a blurb about a studio
> >in Quebec that's 100% open source tools:
> >
> >http://www.indyish.com/artists/studio-cadence/
>
> If you have to go to Quebec for examples... :)

That's just an interesting case because it's *all* open source. I'm
sure one could Google for others.

>
> >Here's another interesting blurb about a solid-state Ardour
workstation:
> >
> >http://mixonline.com/news/headline/SSL-strategic-ardour-103006/
>
> Cool.
>
> >> This isn't to say I think there are no good open reverbs out
> >> there. But... are you using one?
> >
> >Yup. Freeverb3.
>
> What impulses are you using?

It appears there are 2 'freeverb3' plugins out there. Maybe they are
the same code-base, but the one I use is in the LADSAP 'cmt' plugin
set. It doesn't use impulses from what I can tell. It has 6
parameters: freeze mode, room size, damping, wet gain, dry gain,
width. It's also known as 'Jezar's Freeverb'.

The other freeverb3 I see is a different plugin, and is probably the
one you came across. I haven't used it, but I should check this
out--it looks like you can take arbitrary impulses and create acoustic
spaces that way. Of course one could also do this with
'jack_convolve'from the commandline (Margo Schulter take note),
'dssi_convolve' which is another Linux 'dssi' protocol applications,
and then, in a truly universal way, one could convolve things in
CSound with the 'convolve' opcode, but that would be inconvenient for
a quick interface point-of-view.

While we are on the subject, I came across these two websites which
offer room impulses:

http://noisevault.com/nv/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=29&func=selectcat&cat=17

and

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm

🔗Carl Lumma <ekin@...>

>> In the studio world, it's more of the Mac-only mindset.
>
>Yes, that too, but I've seen lots of Windoze boxes too.

That's a very new development.

>> >> This isn't to say I think there are no good open reverbs out
>> >> there. But... are you using one?
>> >
>> >Yup. Freeverb3.
>>
>> What impulses are you using?
>
>It appears there are 2 'freeverb3' plugins out there. Maybe they are
>the same code-base, but the one I use is in the LADSAP 'cmt' plugin
>set. It doesn't use impulses from what I can tell. It has 6
>parameters: freeze mode, room size, damping, wet gain, dry gain,
>width. It's also known as 'Jezar's Freeverb'.

That sounds like a digital echo -based 'verb.

-Carl

🔗Prent Rodgers <prentrodgers@...>

Aaron,

I liked the dry version more, but that's just me. For fun, I ran it
through my personal favorite open source sound tool, Csound. They have
an opcode called CONVOLVE, which, as you would expect, convolves the
source file with an impulse response file. The impulse response file I
use is from Teatro Alcorcon in Madrid, recorded by Angelo Farina. I had
to set it to 50% more than my normal level to be audible. You can listen
here:
http://ripnread.com/listen/Aaron%20Krister%20Johnson%20TeachingLittleJIR\
obotFingersToPlay%20wet.mp3
<http://ripnread.com/listen/Aaron%20Krister%20Johnson%20TeachingLittleJI\
RobotFingersToPlay%20wet.mp3>

Prent Rodgers

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
<aaron@...> wrote:
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
> <prentrodgers@> wrote:
> >
> > Aaron,
> > Another wonderful piece. I really liked the slow revelation of the
> > theme and the gentle introduction of "challenging" intonation. Great
> > stuff. I liked the reverb, but I'd also like to hear a dry version.
>
> Thanks, Prent. In case anyone's interested, here's a dry version:
>
>
http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay_dry.mp3
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Aaron Krister Johnson <aaron@...>

Prent,

Thanks for posting that, that was nice. I like that impulse file.

You may have missed a post I just did earlier where I mentioned using
the CONVOLVE opcode in CSound!

Anyway, in the same post I mentioned other open-source reverbs,
including convolution reverbs. I downloaded a *different* 'freeverb3'
package today (the one that's *not* in the LADSPA cmt.so library,
whichisthe one I had been using) that included convolution reverb
plugins for the 'audacious' application (it's like winamp). I then
downloaded a rather nice impulse file called 'Church Schellingwolde'.
I like it very much---good for chamber music type scenarios. I'd love
to hear your (I mean anyone's) opinion of it if you test it yourself....

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/Files/Church%20Schellingwoude.zip

Best,
Aaron.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@...> wrote:
>
> Aaron,
>
> I liked the dry version more, but that's just me. For fun, I ran it
> through my personal favorite open source sound tool, Csound. They have
> an opcode called CONVOLVE, which, as you would expect, convolves the
> source file with an impulse response file. The impulse response file I
> use is from Teatro Alcorcon in Madrid, recorded by Angelo Farina. I had
> to set it to 50% more than my normal level to be audible. You can listen
> here:
>
http://ripnread.com/listen/Aaron%20Krister%20Johnson%20TeachingLittleJIR\
> obotFingersToPlay%20wet.mp3
>
<http://ripnread.com/listen/Aaron%20Krister%20Johnson%20TeachingLittleJI\
> RobotFingersToPlay%20wet.mp3>
>
>
> Prent Rodgers
>
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Krister Johnson"
> <aaron@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
> > <prentrodgers@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Aaron,
> > > Another wonderful piece. I really liked the slow revelation of the
> > > theme and the gentle introduction of "challenging" intonation. Great
> > > stuff. I liked the reverb, but I'd also like to hear a dry version.
> >
> > Thanks, Prent. In case anyone's interested, here's a dry version:
> >
> >
> http://www.akjmusic.com/audio/TeachingLittleJIRobotFingersToPlay_dry.mp3
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>