softsynths

Yee-hah! My new computer will be coming soon, and it should be fast
enough to accomodate the new softsynths.

I know Jon Szanto has done some research in this area, and I imagine
others have as well.

My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether they've
tried them. Where should I start?? (Sorry not to be the researcher
in this, but there are some on this list who are more qualified in
this department than myself, I'll have to confess... :)

I'm hoping to eventually replace my TX81Zs with softsynths for
microtonal compositon, if that's feasible...

Thanks!

J. Pehrson

on 18/4/04 15:13, Joseph Pehrson at jpehrson@... wrote:

Yee-hah! My new computer will be coming soon, and it should be fast
enough to accomodate the new softsynths.

I know Jon Szanto has done some research in this area, and I imagine
others have as well.

My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether they've
tried them. Where should I start?? (Sorry not to be the researcher
in this, but there are some on this list who are more qualified in
this department than myself, I'll have to confess... :)

I'm hoping to eventually replace my TX81Zs with softsynths for
microtonal compositon, if that's feasible...

Thanks!

J. Pehrson

Native instruments FM7 is excellent - the instrumental patches are good
enough to emulate orchestral instruments for your sketches and the sound
design possibilities are the best I've come across, especially with those
long envelopes. A bit of fiddling is needed to get the Scala files in, but
I'm sure that Manuel and others would help with this.

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

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, <mopani@t...> wrote:
> Native instruments FM7 is excellent - the instrumental patches are
good
> enough to emulate orchestral instruments for your sketches and the
sound
> design possibilities are the best I've come across, especially with
those
> long envelopes. A bit of fiddling is needed to get the Scala files
in, but
> I'm sure that Manuel and others would help with this.

I've used Max Magic Microtuner (free version) for this. There is a
free archive of Scala tunings in Microtuner's own format that is
available from the same place where one downloads Microtuner. Be
sure to check the "full range" checkbox when exporting a Scala tuning
to an .syx file for FM7 to load, otherwise notes below middle C will
not be retuned

CAUTION: FM7 on Mac OS X has an intermittent stuck-notes problem
which AFAIK has yet to be fixed by Native Instruments.

Paolo

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
<jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
> particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether
they've
> tried them. Where should I start?? (Sorry not to be the
researcher
> in this, but there are some on this list who are more qualified in
> this department than myself, I'll have to confess... :)

What platform do you use? On Mac OS X, I've used FM7, but most
patches are too much of a strain on my 700Mhz iBook, even with a
Firewire audio interface. On retrospect, CronoX might have been the
better choice - I wasn't aware of Bidule at the time. What somebody
needs to do is start making microtunable VSTs for Mac OS X with
Pluggo and Max/MSP. I've cut down on my softsynth activity due to a
combination of increasing activity with my viola (will be joining a
2nd orchestra, started sitting in with intermediate-level string
quartets) and the acquisition of an Emu XL-7, a microtunable hardware
synth with sequencer, drum machine type controls, etc.

Paolo

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, <mopani@t...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6141

> on 18/4/04 15:13, Joseph Pehrson at jpehrson@r... wrote:
>
> Yee-hah! My new computer will be coming soon, and it should be fast
> enough to accomodate the new softsynths.
>
> I know Jon Szanto has done some research in this area, and I imagine
> others have as well.
>
> My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
> particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether
they've
> tried them. Where should I start?? (Sorry not to be the researcher
> in this, but there are some on this list who are more qualified in
> this department than myself, I'll have to confess... :)
>
> I'm hoping to eventually replace my TX81Zs with softsynths for
> microtonal compositon, if that's feasible...
>
> Thanks!
>
> J. Pehrson
>
>
> Native instruments FM7 is excellent - the instrumental patches are
good
> enough to emulate orchestral instruments for your sketches and the
sound
> design possibilities are the best I've come across, especially with
those
> long envelopes. A bit of fiddling is needed to get the Scala files
in, but
> I'm sure that Manuel and others would help with this.
>
>

***I "messed around" with the FM7 and it looked as though it was only
microtunable *per octave*... not full keyboard... Unless, that is, I
was doing something wrong, which is quite possible...

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "paolovalladolid" <phv40@h...>

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6145

wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
> <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> > My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
> > particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether
> they've
> > tried them. Where should I start?? (Sorry not to be the
> researcher
> > in this, but there are some on this list who are more qualified
in
> > this department than myself, I'll have to confess... :)
>
> What platform do you use? On Mac OS X, I've used FM7, but most
> patches are too much of a strain on my 700Mhz iBook, even with a
> Firewire audio interface. On retrospect, CronoX might have been
the
> better choice - I wasn't aware of Bidule at the time. What
somebody
> needs to do is start making microtunable VSTs for Mac OS X with
> Pluggo and Max/MSP. I've cut down on my softsynth activity due to
a
> combination of increasing activity with my viola (will be joining a
> 2nd orchestra, started sitting in with intermediate-level string
> quartets) and the acquisition of an Emu XL-7, a microtunable
hardware
> synth with sequencer, drum machine type controls, etc.
>
> Paolo

***Almost certainly Windows xp...

JP

Hi Joseph,

I recommand CronoX from LinPlug.
A good choice for a cheap softsynth.
You can load any "tun" files from the back-side of the
interface.

<http://linplug.com/Products/CronoX/cronox.htm>

You'll fin hundred o files converted to this format at:
</16tone/>
File section -> "AnamarkTunings.zip"

Kind regards,
Phi

"Joseph Pehrson" wrote:
> My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
> particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether
they've
> tried them.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Philip"

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6157

<philippe.gruchet@f...> wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> I recommand CronoX from LinPlug.
> A good choice for a cheap softsynth.
> You can load any "tun" files from the back-side of the
> interface.
>
> <http://linplug.com/Products/CronoX/cronox.htm>
>
> You'll fin hundred o files converted to this format at:
> </16tone/>
> File section -> "AnamarkTunings.zip"
>
> Kind regards,
> Phi
>
> "Joseph Pehrson" wrote:
> > My question is, what softsynths people are finding that are
> > particularly useful for microtonality and (of course) whether
> they've
> > tried them.
\

***Thanks so much for the help.

Are there any softsynths, though, that will import native SCALA
files?? That would be the most terrific...

J. Pehrson

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
<jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ***I "messed around" with the FM7 and it looked as though it was
only
> microtunable *per octave*... not full keyboard... Unless, that is,
I
> was doing something wrong, which is quite possible...
>
> JP

It can load full-keyboard microtunings. I've done it with .syx (MIDI
System Exclusive) files converted from Scala format by Max Magic
Microtuner.

Since you're on Windows XP, you have a good selection of softsynths
that can load Scala files directly. I have no direct experience with
these - I suggest going to the URL below and looking at the right 2
columns of the synth listings - if you have questions about a
specific synth, I'm sure somebody else can help you.

http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com

Paolo

Joe,

{you wrote...}
>Are there any softsynths, though, that will import native SCALA >files?? That would be the most terrific...

As reported numerous times on the list, the z3ta+, which Alison and I use, imports .scl files directly.

http://www.rgcaudio.com/z3ta%2B.htm

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6164

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Are there any softsynths, though, that will import native SCALA
> >files?? That would be the most terrific...
>
> As reported numerous times on the list, the z3ta+, which Alison
and I use,
> imports .scl files directly.
>
> http://www.rgcaudio.com/z3ta%2B.htm
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***Thanks, Jon. I *thought* I read that, but I just wanted
confirmation of it. How are you coming along with the z3tz+, by the
way? Do you have any sound samples?

And did you purchase it from the website? I notice the price was in
Euros. What country is it from?? Did you buy it that way?

Thanks so much!

Joe

Joe,

{you wrote...}
>How are you coming along with the z3tz+, by the way?

I enjoy using it, and am just now going to start arranging patches into banks I'll use, along with some of the ones I've come up with. It is a very easy program to tweak the sounds in.

>Do you have any sound samples?

If you go to the link I sent you, there are at least 4 mp3 demos you can download that would give you a complete idea of the sounds. Also, as in your above question, the demo is completely *free*, so instead of relying on other peoples ideas about a softsynth, you should try downloading and using it. I can't *guarantee* it will work on your system, but if you combine either the free demo of "Forte" (a VST host) or the completely free "Bidule" (www.plogue.com - I think) you should be able to run it on even a modest system. (see more below)

>And did you purchase it from the website? I notice the price was in >Euros. What country is it from?? Did you buy it that way?

You ask too many questions! :) As for purchase stuff, I'll write you off-list.

Now: there is a lot that we can all share, from insights and impressions of sounds to usability of a particular program. But NONE of us would have those insights and impressions if we didn't get our hands dirty.

Nothing will teach you more about installing, running, mucking around with, etc. all these new toys than *doing it yourself*. So much of the software end of music production can be demo'd (sorry that Cubase seems to be an exception) and I *heartily* encourage people to download, install, and share the frustration of trying to make sense of all this.

Tips, hey, I'm always happy to share! But I really think one learns many and big lessons when they say "hey, why don't I just try this out myself!"

Enough from ListMom for this morning...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6171

> Now: there is a lot that we can all share, from insights and
impressions of
> sounds to usability of a particular program. But NONE of us would
have
> those insights and impressions if we didn't get our hands dirty.
>
> Nothing will teach you more about installing, running, mucking
around with,
> etc. all these new toys than *doing it yourself*. So much of the
software
> end of music production can be demo'd (sorry that Cubase seems to
be an
> exception)

***You know, this really is a bit of a "piss off" since I remember
demoing Sonar a while back...

I guess I'll have to take Cubase "on faith..."

Well, at least it's clear that it works with the z3... at least
*somebody* on the z3ta+ got it to do it...

From reading the manual, I *did* glean that the Cubase SX can support
up to 64 VST instruments, whereas the SL can only support *half* or
32...

Now the question is, of course, how many softsynths can a person be
running *practically* before the system resources go out! :)

A full orchestra really only has about 32 parts, so I wonder if I'd
really need more, or if in the "real world" the computer would still
function! :)

And, yes, I did listen to the sounds of the z3 on the website. I
think I could definitely work with that. The point, at the moment,
is to no longer use the hardware boxes and mixer, etc., but to try to
do it all in the software realm... at least that seems intriguing as
of the moment...

JP

Joseph,

You should check this one too:
http://zynaddsubfx.sourceforge.net/

It reads .scl and even .kbm files and is free.

Manuel

Joseph Pehrson wrote:

>>From reading the manual, I *did* glean that the Cubase SX can support > up to 64 VST instruments, whereas the SL can only support *half* or > 32...
> > Now the question is, of course, how many softsynths can a person be > running *practically* before the system resources go out! :)

More importantly, how many can you play at once?

> A full orchestra really only has about 32 parts, so I wonder if I'd > really need more, or if in the "real world" the computer would still > function! :)

An orchestra can't multitrack, can it? Once you get a part right as MIDI, you can save it to audio. Then you don't need the instrument slot any more, and it frees up the processor. It may help to get the tempi right with simplified instrumentation, but 32 instruments doesn't mean 32 parts. It means a lot of work, but that's unavoidable.

I'd much rather get one instrument working well than worry about running them simultaneously. Even with split zones on my ZTar, I've never needed more than 6 simultaneous channels.

According to the website, you can get Cubase SE Hybrid for $150, and upgrade later if you find it isn't good enough. 48 audio tracks, 16 VST instruments and 5-8 effects. That should at least do as a demo, and while you're learning about VST instruments.

Cubase SL, they claim, "offers most of the professional features found in Cubase SX 2.0 with the exclusion of surround mixing and advanced score editing, ..." So if you're planning to keep Sibelius as a score editor and not use surround sound, you're hardly going to need more than that.

Steinberg have been making audio sequencers for a long time now. That means the top of the range products are very advanced. If you really needed something that good, you'd probably know it. Are you planning to synchronize the soundtrack to a video, or run the system live with 10 keyboards plugged in?

Graham

Graham,

{you wrote...}
>Joseph Pehrson wrote:
>
>More importantly, how many can you play at once?

I think in many cases, certainly in Joe's, this is a *compositional* issue, not a live-playing issue.

>An orchestra can't multitrack, can it?

It most certainly can - I've done it for over 25 years. I've not only performed (and the percussion is usually the *last* part to go down, and unfortunately the timing - esp in the strings - can curl one's hair) but I've done quite a bit of producing, composing, and arranging in this kind of setting. This is not, for the most part, rhapsodic stuff like Vaughn Williams (i.e. frequently there is a click track), but I've even pulled off multi-track orch sessions with conducting. In fact, "stacking" strings has been a feature of commercial recording since the 60's, at least.

>Once you get a part right as MIDI, you can save it to audio. Then you >don't need the instrument slot any more, and it frees up the processor.

That is a great point, and one that I was going to mention to Joe. I decided last night to try (before you so aptly brought this up this morning) checking to see how well it would work. Since I had mixed to audio the two synth parts, I simply started a new project, set the tempo to be the same, imported the .wav file as an audio track, and hit 'play'. Sure enough, the metronome click stayed right in sync with the audio, and I was able to add more parts on top of it.

I may be wrong, but I've seen a number of references to 'freezing' tracks in multi-VST setups; this may simply be current jargon for 'bouncing to audio'.

>I'd much rather get one instrument working well than worry about running >them simultaneously. Even with split zones on my ZTar, I've never needed >more than 6 simultaneous channels.

But for others, who think in larger instrumentations, it isn't just beneficial but pretty much necessary to hear as much of the full instrumentation as possible. Sometimes the composition *is* the arrangement/instrumentation.

>According to the website, you can get Cubase SE Hybrid for $150, and >upgrade later if you find it isn't good enough. 48 audio tracks, 16 VST >instruments and 5-8 effects. That should at least do as a demo, and while >you're learning about VST instruments.

Excellent, that should do just fine for Joe. I've urged him to try the Sonar demo as well, when he gets his setup.

Cheers,
Jon

Manuel,

{you wrote...}
>You should check this one too:
>http://zynaddsubfx.sourceforge.net/
>It reads .scl and even .kbm files and is free.

I'm not sure how that one escaped my radar. That means with Bidule, Zyn, and Scala, a person (at least in Windows, or Linux if there is a free VST host) can make microtonal music for free.

Pretty amazing.

I'm going to try out the Zyn tonight or tomorrow. It looks a little 'nerdy' to setup, but if it's easy enough I can recommend to the general public...

Cheers,
Jon

At 09:13 AM 4/21/2004, you wrote:
>Manuel,
>
>{you wrote...}
>>You should check this one too:
>>http://zynaddsubfx.sourceforge.net/
>>It reads .scl and even .kbm files and is free.
>
>I'm not sure how that one escaped my radar. That means with Bidule,

Where do you get the idea that Bidule is free?

-Carl

C,

{you wrote...}
>Where do you get the idea that Bidule is free?

I've used it for free, and as my beta had just expired I downloaded the latest and run it. It is free while it is still in the beta stages (always has been, AFAIK) and I didn't seen any upcoming commercial release date on the bidule site.

Cheers,
Jon

>{you wrote...}
>>Where do you get the idea that Bidule is free?
>
>I've used it for free, and as my beta had just expired I downloaded
>the latest and run it. It is free while it is still in the beta
>stages (always has been, AFAIK) and I didn't seen any upcoming
>commercial release date on the bidule site.

OK, but it isn't free software, it's commercial software.

-Carl

Carl,

{you wrote...}
>OK, but it isn't free software, it's commercial software.

From their website:

"Pricing:
While Bidule is a commercial product, we encourage you to try out this early beta version for free! The price for v1.0 is TBD."

Happy? Gee, it's both - it's a commercial product AND it's free to try!

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Graham Breed <graham@m...>

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6179

wrote:
> Joseph Pehrson wrote:
>
> >>From reading the manual, I *did* glean that the Cubase SX can
support
> > up to 64 VST instruments, whereas the SL can only support *half*
or
> > 32...
> >
> > Now the question is, of course, how many softsynths can a person
be
> > running *practically* before the system resources go out! :)
>
> More importantly, how many can you play at once?
>
> > A full orchestra really only has about 32 parts, so I wonder if
I'd
> > really need more, or if in the "real world" the computer would
still
> > function! :)
>
> An orchestra can't multitrack, can it? Once you get a part right
as
> MIDI, you can save it to audio. Then you don't need the
instrument slot
> any more, and it frees up the processor. It may help to get the
tempi
> right with simplified instrumentation, but 32 instruments doesn't
mean
> 32 parts. It means a lot of work, but that's unavoidable.
>
> I'd much rather get one instrument working well than worry about
running
> them simultaneously. Even with split zones on my ZTar, I've never
> needed more than 6 simultaneous channels.
>
> According to the website, you can get Cubase SE Hybrid for $150,
and
> upgrade later if you find it isn't good enough. 48 audio tracks,
16 VST
> instruments and 5-8 effects. That should at least do as a demo,
and
> while you're learning about VST instruments.
>
> Cubase SL, they claim, "offers most of the professional features
found
> in Cubase SX 2.0 with the exclusion of surround mixing and
advanced
> score editing, ..." So if you're planning to keep Sibelius as a
score
> editor and not use surround sound, you're hardly going to need
more than
> that.
>
> Steinberg have been making audio sequencers for a long time now.
That
> means the top of the range products are very advanced. If you
really
> needed something that good, you'd probably know it. Are you
planning to
> synchronize the soundtrack to a video, or run the system live with
10
> keyboards plugged in?
>
>
> Graham

***Thanks so much, Graham, for this advice. I think it really does
make sense to go for the SE Hybrid, until at least I get my "feet
wet" in this. There's not much to lose that way!

Thanks!

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6180

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Graham,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Joseph Pehrson wrote:
> >
> >More importantly, how many can you play at once?
>
> I think in many cases, certainly in Joe's, this is a
*compositional* issue,
> not a live-playing issue.
>
> >An orchestra can't multitrack, can it?
>
> It most certainly can - I've done it for over 25 years. I've not
only
> performed (and the percussion is usually the *last* part to go
down, and
> unfortunately the timing - esp in the strings - can curl one's
hair) but
> I've done quite a bit of producing, composing, and arranging in
this kind
> of setting. This is not, for the most part, rhapsodic stuff like
Vaughn
> Williams (i.e. frequently there is a click track), but I've even
pulled off
> multi-track orch sessions with conducting. In fact, "stacking"
strings has
> been a feature of commercial recording since the 60's, at least.
>
> >Once you get a part right as MIDI, you can save it to audio.
Then you
> >don't need the instrument slot any more, and it frees up the
processor.
>
> That is a great point, and one that I was going to mention to Joe.
I
> decided last night to try (before you so aptly brought this up
this
> morning) checking to see how well it would work. Since I had mixed
to audio
> the two synth parts, I simply started a new project, set the tempo
to be
> the same, imported the .wav file as an audio track, and
hit 'play'. Sure
> enough, the metronome click stayed right in sync with the audio,
and I was
> able to add more parts on top of it.
>
> I may be wrong, but I've seen a number of references to 'freezing'
tracks
> in multi-VST setups; this may simply be current jargon
for 'bouncing to audio'.
>
> >I'd much rather get one instrument working well than worry about
running
> >them simultaneously. Even with split zones on my ZTar, I've
never needed
> >more than 6 simultaneous channels.
>
> But for others, who think in larger instrumentations, it isn't
just
> beneficial but pretty much necessary to hear as much of the full
> instrumentation as possible. Sometimes the composition *is* the
> arrangement/instrumentation.
>
> >According to the website, you can get Cubase SE Hybrid for $150,
and
> >upgrade later if you find it isn't good enough. 48 audio tracks,
16 VST
> >instruments and 5-8 effects. That should at least do as a demo,
and while
> >you're learning about VST instruments.
>
> Excellent, that should do just fine for Joe. I've urged him to try
the
> Sonar demo as well, when he gets his setup.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***I'm glad that both you and Graham find this an affordable way to
start. Sounds like a great idea!

Thanks again!

(This list is wonderful again, Jon!)

JP

Joe,

{you wrote...}
>(This list is wonderful again, Jon!)

And it will stay that way if you can be so kind as to trim your replies a little bit, OK? No need to quote an entire msg...

Kindly,
ListMom

>{you wrote...}
>>OK, but it isn't free software, it's commercial software.
>
> From their website:
>
>"Pricing:
>While Bidule is a commercial product, we encourage you to try out this
>early beta version for free! The price for v1.0 is TBD."
>
>Happy? Gee, it's both - it's a commercial product AND it's free to try!

Right, it's commercial software.

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_6120.html#6188

***willdoo!

{you wrote...}
>Right, it's commercial software.

Be sure and let us know when the 'commerce' part kicks in, OK, Carl? In the meantime (meaning *now*), it is a useful tool for some people, and there is nothing incorrect about the original statement "That means with Bidule, Zyn, and Scala, a person ... can make microtonal music for free."

Cheers,
Jon

Jon wrote:

>That means with Bidule, Zyn,
>and Scala, a person (at least in Windows, or Linux if there is a free VST
>host) can make microtonal music for free.

You don't need a VST host under Linux. ALSA makes connecting
and routing MIDI and audio channels quite easy.
There is one though: pd.
This site has a lot of useful info:
http://www.djcj.org/LAU/quicktoots/
AlsaModularSynth is another free microtonal softsynth.

Manuel