synth sound comparison

Well, finally I had a chance to go over to Sam Ash and listen to the
sounds of the Proteus 2000. For the most part, it was rather a "ho
hum..."

Of traditional orchestral instruments, which I would use with
Sibelius, *few* actually came out as nicely as I get with a simple
Soundblaster 128. This isn't even the "Soundblaster Live" with all
the "sound fonts" and so on.

Could somebody please explain a bit to me about that "sound font"
business?? I'd appreciate it.

Regardless, it really seems that the card does every *bit* as nicely
as the Proteus for traditional orchestral sounds. In fact, I would
say it does quite a bit better for certain of them.

Not to mention that the "generic" Proteus 2000 (I know there are
sound expansion modules, I guess they're cards that slide in?? Dunno)
doesn't have *many* of the orchestral instruments. There was no
bassoon, for instance, and I didn't see a harp. The acoustic guitar
didn't really sound so great (soundcard was better)...

Trumpet was pretty thin, oboe was *very* thin. Clarinet and piano
were both quite nice... probably the best of the conventionals.

It didn't really seem to have *all that* much percussion built in,
either but, again, I would suppose expansion cards would have more...

I didn't see a French Horn among the generics. Trombone was pretty
good.

On the overall, though, it seems my Soundblaster 128 soundcard does
better...

Am I dreaming??

Certainly the sounds of the Proteus 2000 don't seem to be worth the
$800 investment, when the Soundblaster sounds as good if not better...

Anybody else have similar experiences??

Although it beats the TX81Z's out in certain categories, I have to
say that even the TXs have some *much* better sounds than the Proteus
2000. As we know, the bells, celeste and such like on the Z's are
really quite fantastic with the FM operators.

I guess the Proteus 2000 really has a better primary *piano* sound
than the Z's, but the Z has a nicer trumpet and *has* a bassoon (I
guess nobody knows what a bassoon *is* anymore... nobody needs
*that* ...)

And, the bottom line is, really with all *three* methods, the halfway
decent soundcard, the Z's and the Proteus 2000, it all *still* sounds
synthesized and the improvements are marginal.

Without a doubt, *many* of the sounds of the Proteus 2000 are
inferior to the Soundblaster 128 *and* the TX81Z's...

I'm not anxious to make this particular *investment* at the moment
after *hearing* the Proteus. (It's not surprising that they got
their tuning implementation wrong, as well... the synth is very
*middle road...*)

Comments from anybody who has any experience with any of this would
be *greatly* appreciated!

Thanks!

Joe Pehrson

Hi Joe--

If it's orchestral sounds you want, you should check out the *Virtuoso*
2000, which is completely devoted to classical orchestral sounds.....
For sketching/proofreading I've heard it's more than adequate (I'm using a
Roland JV1010 which, I believe, is less so, although it is better supported
by Sibelius). If you're looking for production quality, there are apparently
things you can do to vastly improve the sound of the Virtuoso 2000--let me
know, I think I can dig up some stuff from another list where this was
discussed.

Stan

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Stan Hoffman <stanhoffman@m...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_3586.html#3590

> Hi Joe--
>
> If it's orchestral sounds you want, you should check out the
*Virtuoso* 2000, which is completely devoted to classical orchestral
sounds..... For sketching/proofreading I've heard it's more than
adequate (I'm using a Roland JV1010 which, I believe, is less so,
although it is better supported by Sibelius). If you're looking for
production quality, there are apparently things you can do to vastly
improve the sound of the Virtuoso 2000--let me know, I think I can
dig up some stuff from another list where this
was discussed.
>
> Stan

***Hi Stan!

Nice to see you on the list! [Stan was a classmate at Michigan,
*years* ago!]

Actually, they *did* have the "Virtuoso" module right there at the
story, so I'm sorry I didn't check it out. Another trip.

I don't believe I remember Sibelius support, though, listed. Is it
supported by Sibelius??

Of course, I don't know anything about the *tuning...*

Does it have the same "full scale" tuning implementation as
the Proteus 2000? And then, we have to see if SCALA (the tuning
program) can support it, since that is important for me too...

Thanks for the tip!

Joe

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Stan Hoffman <stanhoffman@m...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_3586.html#3590

***Hi Stan,

I just checked on the Sibelius site, and the "Emu Virtuoso" *is*
supported. Is that the same instrument as the "Virtuoso 2000" or is
it an earlier synth??

Anyway, it seems, regarding Sibelius, that I'm sufficiently impressed
with the quality of my simple Soundblaster 128 as far as *acoustic*
instrument emulation is concerned.

That, and traditional "score reading skills..." :)

So, as far as purchasing something else, at the moment it seems a
little in the category of "what's the point..." ($$)

Hopefully, the *acoustic* sound emulation by the Virtuoso is
substantially better than the Proteus 2000 for some of the standard
instruments, since I certainly wasn't all that impressed. Even the
soundcard seemed to do better...

best,

Joe

Joseph, didn't you once say that you don't want to "emulate" real sounds
(i.e. orc insts.) but to have sounds playing the music that don't
necessarily make people think "oh this is supposed to be a clarinet."?

In that case, I would test a synth by playing a voice and asking the
question, "Is there a way I could use this synth voice to make some
interesting music?" It might be a very specific kind of music. . .but
hey, that's true of bassoon or timpani too.

Of course, to really make MIDI kick sonic ass, I suppose one has to have
all sorts of volume curves, vibrato, tremolo, etc. happening, keeping
every note "alive" during it's duration. I rarely here this in MIDI
compositions. In fact, I don't know if I've ever heard it.

As for using MIDI to "test" instrumental compositions, I always just use
piano sounds. . . even if the piece is for string orchestra. MIDI strings
are usually so awful, that I'd rather listen to a MIDI piano play a string
orc piece than MIDI strings. I certainly wouldn't feel like I'm getting
the "basic idea" of the sound of the piece from the latter. In fact, I'm
probably getting more of a dangerous distortion than with piano. Ditto for
winds.

Actually, that Roland XV-5080, I mentioned in my past post, has some quite
nice orchestral instrument timbres (and some bummers as well . . ). Well,
at least, there were some that didn't make me wince in pain.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Christopher Bailey <cb202@c...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_3586.html#3597

>
> Joseph, didn't you once say that you don't want to "emulate" real
sounds
> (i.e. orc insts.) but to have sounds playing the music that don't
> necessarily make people think "oh this is supposed to be a
clarinet."?
>

***Hi Christopher!

Yes, you are correct. In my *electronic* music lately I want to
*avoid* all the emulations. Some people found them "silly" and I
tend to agree.

What happened is I've been using Sibelius of late for acoustic pieces
so, with my synth purchase I rather "want my cake and eat it too..."
or some such.

In other words, the orchestral instrument emulation would be
desirably in Sibelius, but I would be hesitant to purchase the
*Virtuoso* mentioned above, since I really *do* want a synth that has
other kinds of sounds as well.

The "acoustic sound" playback is just for *me* composing the acoustic
pieces, but the *electronic* sounds, which hopefully are
significantly different from acoustic instruments, would be the only
ones I would ever now play in *concert...*

But, the issue is pretty much solved with the Proteus 2000, since I
found that not only were the traditional instrumental sounds I would
use with Sibelius not so great, but *also* the *other* kinds of
sounds were not so "wow..."

Frankly, there are more "wow..."-type (descriptive, huh?) sounds even
in the "humble" TX81Z than in the Proteus. I'm thinking of the
*wonderful* FM bells, celeste and such like.

Of the *whole gamut* of sounds the Proteus produces (pro pro), and I
listened pretty much to *all* of them in the store before they threw
me out, there were only a *handful* of really exciting and promising
sounds of *whatever* nature.

Well, maybe it was my mood that day, but I came to the store with a
full wallet, happy attitude, and synth-lust.

For the moment, I think I'm going to bury myself in the patch editor
for the TX81Z and really try to come up with some *original* sounds
as you suggest.

I actually haven't even tried *that* yet with the equipment I
*already* own!

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate them!

Joseph

The "Emu Virtuoso" and "Virtuoso 2000" are the same as far as I know.
Sorry, don't know anything about the tuning implementation on this unit.

On 7/11/02 1:29 PM, jpehrson2 at jpehrson@... wrote:

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Stan Hoffman <stanhoffman@m...> wrote:
>
> /makemicromusic/topicId_3586.html#3590
>
> ***Hi Stan,
>
> I just checked on the Sibelius site, and the "Emu Virtuoso" *is*
> supported. Is that the same instrument as the "Virtuoso 2000" or is
> it an earlier synth??
>
> Anyway, it seems, regarding Sibelius, that I'm sufficiently impressed
> with the quality of my simple Soundblaster 128 as far as *acoustic*
> instrument emulation is concerned.
>
> That, and traditional "score reading skills..." :)
>
> So, as far as purchasing something else, at the moment it seems a
> little in the category of "what's the point..." ($$)
>
> Hopefully, the *acoustic* sound emulation by the Virtuoso is
> substantially better than the Proteus 2000 for some of the standard
> instruments, since I certainly wasn't all that impressed. Even the
> soundcard seemed to do better...
>
> best,
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> [MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
> More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
> ------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., Stan Hoffman <stanhoffman@m...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_3586.html#3616

> The "Emu Virtuoso" and "Virtuoso 2000" are the same as far as I
know.
> Sorry, don't know anything about the tuning implementation on this
unit.
>

***Thanks, Stan!

Well, I guess I'll have to bother the salespeople in the store like I
did last time, listening to *every* patch of the instrument... :)

best,

Joe