Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Soft-synth and microtuning: LinPlug Alpha2

Hello,

Just purchased and tested the new Alpha2 from LinPlug.
(Available as VST for Windows, VST & AU both for Mac.)

It's a great synth (all FreeAlpha presets work with Alpha!),
and offers the 'tun' files support like their Albino and CronoX.
A 'Microtuning' folder is also installed, including a set of 305
tun files + a pdf providing a little description of each scale.

Note: FreeAlpha is always available as freeware, but
without microtuning support.
The only way to test the microtuning feature of Alpha2
is to pay for!?!

About the synth itself, it's a subtractive synthesis generator,
rather soft, not so 'agressive' than a Vanguard, but offers a
quite large sonic palette!
And the tun file support works just as expected: fine!

LinPlug:
<http://linplug.com/>

LinPlug KVR forum:
<http://www.kvr-vst.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=10>

Kindest regards,
Philippe

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Gene,

{you wrote...}
>With any of these, I always like to know if they support non-realtime >operation, taking a score of some kind (eg, midi) and rendering it.

I think you may have confusion with a dedicated rendering program, like Wavemaker or Timidity (or the similar functions in Csound), and a softsynth/sampler. As a rule, these are realtime generation devices.

However...

All the current generation of DAWs (digital audio workstations), like Cubase, Sonar, etc., allow you to burn your tracks to audio. You would simply set them up as VST/DXi plugins into a midi sequence, assign which tracks should output to those synths, and then render/export to audio.

You have a very particular and fairly unique way of creating your pieces. I don't anticipate there will be many units out there that render in quite the manner that you currently do, but maybe you can adapt your end of the process a bit to take advantage of these. You might also consider demoing some of these to see if any of the *sounds* are good to your ears, and then you could always sample sounds and create your own soundfont with a soundfont editor.

Just some thoughts on the work process...

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

🔗Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@...>

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Gene,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >With any of these, I always like to know if they support non-realtime
> >operation, taking a score of some kind (eg, midi) and rendering it.
>
> I think you may have confusion with a dedicated rendering program, like
> Wavemaker or Timidity (or the similar functions in Csound), and a
> softsynth/sampler. As a rule, these are realtime generation devices.

I'm not confused; I'm aware this is true as a rule. I'm simply
pointing out there is interest in any exceptions.

> However...
>
> All the current generation of DAWs (digital audio workstations), like
> Cubase, Sonar, etc., allow you to burn your tracks to audio. You would
> simply set them up as VST/DXi plugins into a midi sequence, assign
which
> tracks should output to those synths, and then render/export to audio.

I'd be interested if anyone has anything to report on using this
method to create microtonal music.

> You have a very particular and fairly unique way of creating your
pieces.

Surely I can't be the only one currently employing the Scala to midi
to rendered wav file method. I know a number of us are now using
Scala, since I've looked at some of the midi files people provide.

I
> don't anticipate there will be many units out there that render in
quite
> the manner that you currently do, but maybe you can adapt your end
of the
> process a bit to take advantage of these. You might also consider
demoing
> some of these to see if any of the *sounds* are good to your ears,
and then
> you could always sample sounds and create your own soundfont with a
> soundfont editor.

That's a thought. What I'd really like to do is get a library of
Csound instruments which I like. There's a huge amount of work on
Csound, but it seems the emphasis is on making strange and exotic
sounds. I'm not interested in exotic; I want musicality. There is a
book out on Csound recipes for woodwinds, but I have never heard the
results and don't know if it would be worth it. I don't think much of
the waveguide instruments built into Csound, nor of FM synthesis, and
additive synthesis of sine waves is OK, but limited. Maybe I'm just
cranky.

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Gene,

{you wrote...}
>I'm not confused; I'm aware this is true as a rule. I'm simply pointing >out there is interest in any exceptions.

I see (sorry about the 'confusion' - it isn't rare that people get things a bit mixed in a new environment). There *may* be exceptions, which we should be on the lookout for. But virtually all the development in these soft instruments cater to people who make music either in realtime or in a sequencing environment. Stand-alone rendering engines are not going to pop up often.

>I'd be interested if anyone has anything to report on using this method to >create microtonal music.

It is pretty much all I've used for the last year or so. If all you are doing is ending up with a midi file out of Scala, you could do this with all the big/common DAWs. And, if you are doing as has been done so much - having Scala spit a single musical line onto multiple midi channels and using pitch bend to create a tuning - you will *have* to render/export, because with multiple instances of a softsynth/sampler you'll quickly tax the cpu. For similar reasons Csound is not (essentially) a realtime environment.

>Surely I can't be the only one currently employing the Scala to midi to >rendered wav file method. I know a number of us are now using Scala, since >I've looked at some of the midi files people provide.

I think most everyone else is a little more hands on in the creating of the sequence itself, before passing it to Scala. And an awful lot of these seem to end up simply as GM midi files (like Herman Miller's). It's only an opinion, but I find this method very unfulfilling, and not a good representation of the music that should be there.

>There's a huge amount of work on Csound, but it seems the emphasis is on >making strange and exotic sounds. I'm not interested in exotic; I want >musicality.

They aren't mutually exclusive, but I don't think you meant it that way anyhow. But the musicality of the end sound source is only part of the issue, because I've heard people make the best, most well-crafted samples sound like a Speak-and-Spell toy. The musicality comes before the rendering as well.

>Maybe I'm just cranky.

If you say so, but you are demanding as well, and there is nothing wrong with that when you are applying it to your music! The demands I place on my own work is similar to what George Secor recently remarked: I have a hard time being satisfied with my results, and end up fussing and tweaking, over and over.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Philip <philippe.gruchet@...>

Jonathan,
> >FreeAlpha is always available as freeware,
> >but without microtuning support.
> >The only way to test the microtuning feature of Alpha2
> >is to pay for!?!
>
> LinPlug has always had demos of current software -
> I'll check it out, but if there isn't a current Alpha2 demo
> with tuning I'll drop Peter a line. It was trying
> the demo of CronoX that gave me reason to purchase it.

I'm sure Peter will understand and update FreeAlpha.
(This is the beta version of Alpha, available but not yet advertised.)
As a CronoX user too, I confidently got Alpha and I'm not
disappointed :-)
For mac users: I forgot to mention that it's the first
Audio-Unit (AU) version of Alpha and runs great: no bug found.

Bye,
Phi

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

🔗Philip <philippe.gruchet@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Phi,

{you wrote...}
>FreeAlpha is a real freeware, but it's also the demo version of Alpha.
>There's no other Alpha demo than FreeAlpha itself.
>LinPlug demo:
><http://linplug.com/Download/download.htm>

Ahhh, that's too bad, and thanks for setting me straight. Well, Peter seems open to ideas at times. Seems like most often it is just a matter of catching the developer at the right time, a bit of luck...

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Philip <philippe.gruchet@...>

🔗Jonathan M. Szanto <JSZANTO@...>

Hi Phi, (been wanting to do that for a while...)

{you wrote...}
>If they build a new FreeAlpha with the microtuning feature, I'll post >something here about it.

There is one other thought that has come through my mind recently:

*How* alternative tunings is/are implemented in a new product is certainly of interest, as it should match well with what the end user will want, as well as being as flexible and robust as possible (as in the .scl vs .tun discussions).

However... one can certainly take an instrument, such as the FreeAlpha, and use it as it is (in 12tet) to evaluate the _musicality_ of the instrument. There are most definitely circumstances where the sound architecture of an instrument will be of interest and importance to a composer/performer (as in additive vs subtactive), but there is nothing to stop you from deciding what the sonic qualities are like, and how they may or may not fit in with your music making.

For instance, I recently put FreeAlpha up on my computer for two reasons: to see if it had a small memory footprint for possible use in guide tracks, and to just hear how it sounds. And it didn't take long for me to find that I wouldn't have any use for the instrument itself, even if it was tuneable. That is simply my taste, not necessarily anyone else's. On the other hand, there is a softsynth from a small developer that I like Very Much, and I'm going to approach him privately to see if he could add tuning to it.

(Phi, could you email me off list regarding the code resources you've come up with, as this is a SynthEdit instrument and he might be able to add it easily)

So, I've gone through pretty much all the soft instruments that offer microtuning, and only some of them match up with the sounds I want to hear. Naturally, there are a couple that don't tune but I'd love them too!

Bottom line: it isn't just the tuning that makes the music, and everyone needs to evaluate the musicality, the nuances, the programming interface, and many other aspects of an instrument. It can certainly be figured out if you are going to like an instrument even from a 12tet version.

At least I *think* so.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Philip <philippe.gruchet@...>

Jonathan,

I'm really glad that you 'speak' about soft-synths as
musical instruments!
Yes, and of course, we have all our own tastes.
Actually, I like to play Alpha while I've some doubts
about Cameleon5000. (I find it mushy, flat.)
I just rediscover Claw from reFX, freeware, a 12tet
monophonic synth.
Playing it with a guitar via an Axon interface, I really
'get a kick' ;-)
Six months later, I could write a string quartet using
a Kontakt and its little standard microtuning feature in cents.
Who knows...

Cheers,
Phi

🔗Philip <philippe.gruchet@...>

Hi,

The final 2.2 has been released and FreeAlpha is no more
the demo version of Alpha.
(FreeAlpha is still an available VST freeware for Mac and Windows.)

Good news: There's now a real downloadable demo, AlphaClassic,
with the same microtuning support, TUN format.
(VST for Windows; VST & AU for Mac.)

Bad news: No free microtunable Linplug softsynth.

More info... ?
<http://linplug.com/Products/Alpha/alpha.htm>

;-)
Cheers,
Philippe