Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Re: [MMM] Microtonal Sequencer? @Jonathan

Hello Jonathan,

I made a mistake in presenting the information i had and asking for a microtonal sequencer "my way".
For more ease in the text let me use the abbreviation TI for microntonally "T"unable (Midi) "I"nstrument and NTI for standard Midi, "N"on tunable Instruments with pitchbend only.

In Hardware having an NTI only, I stored 12 equal patches (i.e. 12 pianos) using 12 channels to achieve polyphony via sequencer.

I think that it is not useful - even difficult - to think in three different phases in my head, when composing microtonally and toolbox-like, using my NTI.

>>> 1st phase in my head: the midi-note part >>>
a note might be G + 1312... but in fact, the information "G" is not relevant to you. The alternative would be a note-name i can freely assign to know what I adress. G+1312 would be the third note of the first scale in one song, I could name it A3. I could always insert a note (or its tonal height) into an other one within the "bar view" of the "microtonal sequencer".

>>> 2nd phase: the sound of the melody in my mind >>>
while having to record and measure the frequency of each note in a melody to finally put them together in the sequencer again, i cannot create music... I start calculating. Using G-Tune for this task (see below), I also have to work with the amount of pitchbend messages, rerehearsal, find the right pitch, then go on editing. It makes composition slow. The alternative would be a Scale - Memory system that works like a database where i can define "my pitches" to store them as "scaletuning of a certain melody within the song" or "scale of the whole song", thereby making all notes(with pitches!) adressable and reusable in a greater overview than just this list of letters and messages i have now. It is technical. Not really composers-idea-friendly, to my eyes ;)

>>> 3rd phase: polyphony >>>
This phase would be only active in using microtuning on NTIs, because of the one-note-pitchbend-pitches-all-channel-notes-fact. Here I have to calculate what channel I use what time to achieve the highest possible polyphony. I would never have to worry about this fact, when the sequencer would - internally and automatically- take that part for me, using my bar view composer input as calculation base (telling me the resources left, when necessary). Now, I spend a lot of time with this channel thing. Now you'll say, it's more useful to hav an TI and you are very right here, it saves Midi-channels. But even then, I would have to chance my whole tuning(mind)map of the synth, when just one new melody comes to my head while composing. The ideal sequencer would do that automatically (I could without bothering just go on composing), calculating what note to use best (ideal with full 8 octave retuning on each of 128 midinote-keys). The task of doing this is a separation of the composing flow and technical synth programming work...

The need to call what I look for "(microtonal) sequencer" is more clear when you see how bound or "tied" i am to the flow-closest-possible composing process. While I know now, and through your words even understand better, that we all have to work with tools, I felt a great need to say what I miss and how it could work... then I could use the energy of the ~three phases~ on mind-melody-to-real-sound transcribing only! How perfect would that be. Enter notes through mind/voice, polyphonies through mind/voice, and just administer these entries within the sequencer, one-click-work-with-feelings. A chord notepad of different tunings, easily transposable on any given start frequency. To compensate all these things with technical calculations is hard for me.
Described from outside view, what I looked for is a software microtonally mind-mapping the process of pitch-independence in a programs frames. Working with Microtonal Staff/Bar-views, without having to think of hardwaretuning issues.

This being the MIDI-part of the almost Fictional Microtonal Sequencer (and not really fictional anymore, as we know through the glorious Monz (I mean that! ;), the audio section would just be a luxury-addition useful for those using for example a tet-bassguitar to transform character and warmth of a natural bassguitar into a given tuning. Akoff Music Composer as an option to align Wav-File/ Live-Mic-Inputs into Tuned Midi output with pitchbend. Alignment would mean, to a set of given scales, not yet user tuneable. Digital Ear can transcribe microntonal wave-input to pitch-bend-midi-data. Here we miss the scale-alignment. What I LOVE is the microtonal bar view of frequency heigth. All these tools (including G-Tune) will confront you with one note having a lot of pitchbend messages.

In the Audio Section, Antares Autotune is said to be able to retune wave files to exact pitch heigths. If a major sequencer/audio-multitrackprogram also would built in adequate microtonal midi support functions, it could help to be a "all functions in one hand" working tool. While I cannot afford a system being able to run the present Autotune version, and also not Autotune itself, I can just speculate...

You asked if I have a way of creating scales through microphone - in german we have a word, "jain", being a morph word between "yes" and "no", "ja" and "nein". This is what I have to answer here. Mark Wilkes "WinTemper" actually has Microphone input and it looks to me as if it is possible to create own scales with it. Unfortunately WinTemper has problems accessing my microphone input and hangs up. WinTemper is an archiver for scales, with already a list of scales built in. You can listen to the most common intervals (and of course the notes of your scale) through sine-wave-sounds the program generates. Useful as scale-notepad, but I dream of more flexible chord comparing options and midi-interface. Uhh... work... the users always have wishes ;) !

Another way, that was my personal little revolution in MMM, is G-Tune by JHC Software. Here you have Midi-output with exact pitch amount (midi pitchbend). The measuring algorithms are very accurate. Finally I can sing in a melody (or scale, through internal Midi out) and "see" it in a sequencer (Internal Midi in), with pitchbend messages. Very good, for my way of composing! Disadvantage: every note of let's say a second length comes with 20 to 40 pitchbend messages. If you cannot control your voice with the accuracy of a sine wave ( : ( I can't), truthful G-Tune notices all changes and passes them on. You have to sort: is it G-4 + 2381 or G-4 + 1192 ? By the way, is there a name for these numbers? Pitchbend units or something? Like 1 cm has "cm", what has 2381 (PBU?)...
There is, at present, only one user-tunable tuning preset in G-Tune. You can use G-Tune to tune your instrument within a number of existing tunings. It would be beautiful to have an unlimited number of user-tuneable-tunings. Anyway, I like G-Tune.

Through your questions I understand even more that it is not easy to win the help of a developer in achieving more universal software-solutions for the "toolified" MMM sector. I am writing to larger and smaller companies to receive some echoes of their plans in such software develvopment. I ask them questions directly - do you plan developments like a microtonal sequencer? I think maybe they'll not really listen to one simple question -how could they- but I know that I am not the only one asking them these questions, and what else whout make people start to collect some stones for building a house later?

Thanks for helping my mind in clearness through your essential explanations. Could I be at least a little more clear this time? I tried to describe the "emulation" of what there is not yet in software, overcoming the given hardware/software limitations.

Knowing my need to virtually look onto melodies pitches and my symbolic view onto scales and "subscales", could you recommend a sequencer that works better than cakewalk?

I fear, through missing an "internal programming language" like Cakewalk has, I would lose at least some of the advantages I have now. For example assigning one pitchbend amount to a number of selected notes or splitting a polyphonic track into more tracks (use: separate channels/pitchbends possible) is easily done through some functions the "Cal-Scripts" make possible. If anybody wants to work with these Cals, ask me to email them to you.

Through the answers I received, I am inspired to really taste a TI (are there abbreviations like these in use already?), and also to keep on searching for a good user-interface to deal with what we are inspired with... Still with a little mumbling ;)

I am curious for Monz' February 04 Release !!

Thanks again and all the best
Clemens

----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan M. Szanto
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: [MMM] Microtonal Sequencer?

Clemens,

I'll try to add some information to your questions, but there is a bit of
unclarity in the situation as you present it.

{you wrote...}
>I tried to find a Microtonal Sequencer in the web. I know about Scala and
>FTS, but is there a software that supports scale editing ~while~ composing
>- via a sequencer?

Not that I am aware of. But a sequencer, as we are dealing with in this
era, is a MIDI sequencer - it sends note on, note off (and other)
information based on 128 assigned notes. It doesn't know anything about
pitch, just "note 27 on", etc. So right now the only was a sequencer "is
microtonal" is in one of two ways:

1. the output device (either hardware or software synthesizer) is capable
of being tuned to non-12et, and *has* been retuned;

2. the sequencer is relaying pitch bend information on a track by track
basis (on virtually all, if not all for sure, synths this would mean
monophonic tracks, since applying pitch bend while more than one note was
playing would bend all notes.

These are the only real-time sequencer scenarios I am aware of that would
be considered 'microtonal'.

>I miss things like "free scale making", out of notes I can sing in via
>microphone

I have never heard of this - do you actually have a way of doing this? Of
course, using a microphone is an audio, as opposed to midi, way of working.
And I'm not aware of any gadgets, hard or soft, that can accurately track
microtonal audio inflections and reproduce or replicate them. If they
exist, it sure would be nice to know!

>and also a tool structuring one scale into chord or arpeggio sections to
>make the overview easier, what notes of a larger scale i want to use together.

This sounds like something for Scala, though the description is a little
unclear.

>Considering all the people busy with microtonal music, why did noone
>invent such a thing?

There are many reasons for that, but part of it is that your description is
a little vague - is it midi, audio, or a combination of both? Is it
*really* a sequencer, or some kind of interactive-analysis program?

>Do you think it is useful at all?

I suppose so.

>Or are you happy and satisfied working with the tuning tables of your
>instruments (assuming we talk about midified instruments)?

No. We are trying to advance the ability to work microtonally. It is a slow
and difficult job, because there aren't that many people trying to do
microtonal music, and there is so little good microtonal music that you
could demonstrate for a developer Just How Great is would be to support
non-12et.

>Such a sequencer could also built in Keyboard retuning and an audiofile
>pitch section.

Again, two different areas - you'll need a good developer to handle both
keyboard and audio data.

>With the solutions I have now, I have to multitask between little tools,
>interconnecting what could be organized in the hands of one program with
>much more effort.

Yes, that is pretty much the case with everyone. And believe me, I've seen
quite a few different ways that people are putting together those parts!

>Does anyone at least ~plan~ the development of this kind of tool, or is
>there a real silence in the need for and creation of a microtonal sequencer?

There isn't *silence*, but if you can't do it yourself, I'd just ask: how
would *you* approach a developer and try to convince them that this would
be a worthy project to spend lots of hours and money trying to build?

>What kind of Sequencers are best for working microtonally?

Depends on the kind of microtonal music you are making.

Cheers,
Jon

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

[MMM info]------------------------------------------------------
More MMM music files are at http://www.microtonal.org/music.html
------------------------------------------------------[MMM info]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

Re: [MMM] Microtonal Sequencer? @Jonathan

🔗Clemens <ontheway1@...>

🔗Joseph Pehrson <jpehrson@...>