New recording of "Transformation"

Some of you may remember this one from a few years back:

http://home.comcast.net/~teamouse/transformation.mp3

This is a new recording made with a combination of the Synful Orchestra strings, horns, and woodwinds along with the harp and percussion from my PC's sound card. In just a few minutes with only a few minor adjustments I was able to make this recording from my retuned MIDI file.

It's supposed to be in 17-ET, but it sounds so good this way, I can live with a few little intonation problems. I don't know what's up with that horn part near the end (around 1:32); probably trying to simulate the effect of sticking a hand into the bell of the horn or something. It's an interesting effect, even if it's unintentional.

Hi Herman,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@I...> wrote:
> Some of you may remember this one from a few years back:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~teamouse/transformation.mp3

I hope you don't mind a few comments, as I'm interested to see what
Synful can do as well. I think this recording is a good first stab at
utilizing S as a new soundsource, but I also think it points up the
fact that there is no "silver bullet", where one can simply pour a
plain midi file and expect certain musical effects (say, such as
approaching a realistic simulation of acoustic instruments). It is
quite good considering you did no tweaking, but the results are
similar, in a way, to midi files with other samplers, etc, that
haven't had any fiddling with velocity, note length, and other
editable feature. I have a funny feeling that if you got in and mucked
about with some of that (does that particular Cakewalk program, which
I'm not familiar with, have a piano roll view?), you would be able to
make the individual instrumental lines a lot more believable.

I would also heartily suggest that you try out sfz, a freeware version
of rgc:audio's commercial soundfont/wave player:

http://www.rgcaudio.com/sfz.htm

With this, I could point out to you a couple of different public
domain soundfont files for GM soundsets that have better samples of,
for instance, timpani. I'm sure you'd find it an easy substitute for
the default GM sounds on your card.

> It's supposed to be in 17-ET, but it sounds so good this way, I can
live
> with a few little intonation problems. I don't know what's up with that
> horn part near the end (around 1:32); probably trying to simulate the
> effect of sticking a hand into the bell of the horn or something. It's
> an interesting effect, even if it's unintentional.

Ah, yes: serendipity. Isn't it fun?

Looking forward to the next advances in your compositions/renderings!

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <jszanto@c...> wrote:

> I would also heartily suggest that you try out sfz, a freeware version
> of rgc:audio's commercial soundfont/wave player:
>
> http://www.rgcaudio.com/sfz.htm

Is there a reason to prefer this over Timidity or SynthFont?

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <jszanto@c...> wrote:
>
> > I would also heartily suggest that you try out sfz, a freeware version
> > of rgc:audio's commercial soundfont/wave player:
> >
> > http://www.rgcaudio.com/sfz.htm
>
> Is there a reason to prefer this over Timidity or SynthFont?

Possibly you aren't following the mode of work: Herman is creating his
midi file inside of the Cakewalk application. *Within* that
application you then load instruments and assign individual parts to
individual sounds or patches in those instruments. He loaded the
Synful collection, not as a stand-alone application, but as a DirectX
Instrument (DXi) right inside of the sequencer, and assigned
individual midi tracks to instruments, such as violin, flute, etc.

Within that working paradigm, you would then load sfz as an instrument
(in this case, in the format of a VST instrument), load your
particular soundfont that corresponds to GM soundsets, and then assign
the relevant tracks (lets think of the timpani track, for this
example) not to the GM wavetable synth of the soundcard, but to the
sfz soundset.

After this is done (I'm guessing, but assuming his Cakewalk product
works like most others), you then select all tracks and then export to
audio (which is like having Timidity render the file).

What is different? Well, for one thing, you can work on your
arrangement in realtime. Most people like to hear their music as they
are developing the composition/arrangement, and this means you have a
completely informative feedback loop. Don't like that bleeding oboe?
Change the instrument and listen to the results _right_then_.

It's all about how you choose to work on music creation. I repeat that
it isn't for everyone, and it still has a learning curve. But it works
for me, and I'm encouraged to see Herman step away from the default
soundcard GM instruments.

HTH,
Jon

Jon Szanto wrote:

> I hope you don't mind a few comments, as I'm interested to see what
> Synful can do as well. I think this recording is a good first stab at
> utilizing S as a new soundsource, but I also think it points up the
> fact that there is no "silver bullet", where one can simply pour a
> plain midi file and expect certain musical effects (say, such as
> approaching a realistic simulation of acoustic instruments). It is
> quite good considering you did no tweaking, but the results are
> similar, in a way, to midi files with other samplers, etc, that
> haven't had any fiddling with velocity, note length, and other
> editable feature. I have a funny feeling that if you got in and mucked
> about with some of that (does that particular Cakewalk program, which
> I'm not familiar with, have a piano roll view?), you would be able to
> make the individual instrumental lines a lot more believable.

Thanks for the comments. I could probably fix it up pretty well, given enough time to play around with (the sequence took a while to put together in the first place; adding expression to all those tracks would take a while). But I'd rather start out simple: here's the latest thing I've been trying out (to get a feel for the expression controls):

http://home.comcast.net/~teamouse/starling.mp3

Note that this is actually using the correct Starling temperament! I'm figuring out how to do what the thing wasn't designed to do and use pitch bend for intonation. But it takes some hand tweaking (putting in extra pitch bends, changing some negative pitch bends to positive ones, and so on). There are also two controls that I'm manipulating: the volume/expression control and the "harmonic tilt" control.

> I would also heartily suggest that you try out sfz, a freeware version
> of rgc:audio's commercial soundfont/wave player:
> > http://www.rgcaudio.com/sfz.htm
> > With this, I could point out to you a couple of different public
> domain soundfont files for GM soundsets that have better samples of,
> for instance, timpani. I'm sure you'd find it an easy substitute for
> the default GM sounds on your card.

Hey, it does .sf2 files; I could play my old AWE32 music with that. But I'll need something to relay MIDI to a VSTi plugin....

Hi Herman,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Herman Miller <hmiller@I...> wrote:
> Thanks for the comments. I could probably fix it up pretty well, given
> enough time to play around with (the sequence took a while to put
> together in the first place; adding expression to all those tracks
would
> take a while).

And the worst part, if you really like a piece, is that it is hard to
stop tweaking!

> But I'd rather start out simple: here's the latest thing

I'll check that out presently.

> Hey, it does .sf2 files; I could play my old AWE32 music with that. But
> I'll need something to relay MIDI to a VSTi plugin....

I did some checking, and saw that the program you use handles DX but
not VST instruments. HOWEVER...

Assuming you are a registered Cakewalk customer, you can get Sonar
Home Studio for $79, which is $70 off list price. And not only does it
incorporate all the most immediately useful parts of Sonar, including
audio and VST support, it actually includes *sfz*, bundled right in
there. You'd be good to go, you've already got a good idea of how
their idea of editing midi data works, and you'd be able to render
some real quality 'performances'.

I don't know, but I think it is really something for you to consider.
Details can be found here:

http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/HomeStudio/default.asp

Going to listen to music now...

Cheers,
Jon

> I think this recording is a good first stab at utilizing S
> as a new soundsource, but I also think it points up the fact
> that there is no "silver bullet", where one can simply pour a
> plain midi file and expect certain musical effects (say, such
> as approaching a realistic simulation of acoustic
> instruments).

Actually it's a terrible example, because it's microtuned
via pitch bends.

> but the results are similar, in a way, to midi files with
> other samplers,

Synful isn't a sampler.

> I have a funny feeling that if you got in and mucked
> about with some of that (does that particular Cakewalk program,
> which I'm not familiar with, have a piano roll view?),

It does.

> you would be able to make the individual instrumental lines
> a lot more believable.

Tweaking will always (well, almost always) sound better
than no tweaking, regardless of what software one uses.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> Actually it's a terrible example, because it's microtuned
> via pitch bends.

Hmmm. I can't find any documentation in Synful that I could tune it
any other way - no support for .scl, .tun, etc. What would *you*
suggest as a microtonal example? (or better yet, why don't *you*
prepare one? :)

> > but the results are similar, in a way, to midi files with
> > other samplers,
>
> Synful isn't a sampler.

Yes, right, should have (or meant to) say other electronic/soft
instruments.

> > you would be able to make the individual instrumental lines
> > a lot more believable.
>
> Tweaking will always (well, almost always) sound better
> than no tweaking, regardless of what software one uses.

Yes, Carl, but not many people around here realize that. Or at least
take the time to do it, so it bears saying.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <jszanto@c...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> > Actually it's a terrible example, because it's microtuned
> > via pitch bends.
>
> Hmmm. I can't find any documentation in Synful that I could tune it
> any other way - no support for .scl, .tun, etc. What would *you*
> suggest as a microtonal example? (or better yet, why don't *you*
> prepare one? :)

I said it isn't microtunable as far as I know.

-Carl

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...> wrote:
> I said it isn't microtunable as far as I know.

Yes, well, right-o, we'll have to work on them (see my post to Gene).

Cheers,
Jon