Is there a really good midi to cowbell tool though?
Did someone say COWBELL!
BEEN there, DONE that.
I started with nothing - and I've still got most of it left.
Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in any dictionary?
Greybeard's Pages
My Articles & Reviews on GN
Is there a really good midi to cowbell tool though?
Did someone say COWBELL!
BEEN there, DONE that.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I don't understand - I thought Cowbells were part of the standard MIDI drumkit - it's on G# above Middle C on my keyboard
Mike - I think you might need to splash some cash. I use Cakewalk Pro-Audio 9 on a Windows 98 machine feeding out through a Terratec soundcard into a Yamaha PSR270 and find the instrument sounds are pretty good. Having said that, the guitar sounds in MIDI are rubbish, except for the "overdriven guitar" sound.
Where most MIDI falls over is that it tends to be a bit robotic, and although I've played around with quantisation I was never satisfied that it sounded any more human. It's possible to tinker with the sound effects to prduce things like string bends and pianissimo to fortissimo dynamics but it's a lot of work and I don't know if it's available in software that you don't have to pay for.
Best,
A :-)
"Be good at what you can do" - Fingerbanger"
I have always felt that it is better to do what is beautiful than what is 'right'" - Eliot Fisk
Wedding music and guitar lessons in Essex. Listen at: http://www.rollmopmusic.co.uk
Mike - I think you might need to splash some cash. I use Cakewalk Pro-Audio 9 on a Windows 98 machine feeding out through a Terratec soundcard into a Yamaha PSR270 and find the instrument sounds are pretty good. Having said that, the guitar sounds in MIDI are rubbish, except for the "overdriven guitar" sound.
Don't be that impressed...it was a demo I tried. I only own Band In A Box & Fruity Loops (ZZFruity Loops I got from a friend!)
Where most MIDI falls over is that it tends to be a bit robotic, and although I've played around with quantisation I was never satisfied that it sounded any more human. It's possible to tinker with the sound effects to prduce things like string bends and pianissimo to fortissimo dynamics but it's a lot of work and I don't know if it's available in software that you don't have to pay for.
Best,
A :-)
This is what I was trying to say all along. It is as real as it gets based on the TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TODAY. I never said it sounded EXACTLY like real instruments and the original poster NEVER asked for anything that sounded EXACTLY like the real instruments. All he asked for was BETTER SOUNDING. The sequencers I mentioned ARE MUCH better sounding than standard midi.
It is as real as it gets based on the TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TODAY
I'm sorry Mike but I still don't agree. But since this is something that can be settled let's turn it into a contest, could be a fun learning experience for both of us. You may use any violin in your software and I'll use mine, and the good people hear can vote which one sounds most natural and pleasing. And then I'm even using the low-budget sample libraries which stand no chance against the big boys. All of those libraries are perfectly availlable at any decent music store.
If you do make it a contest, make it a blind test for us schmoes doing the listening please... :wink:
Head over to the soundsonline.com forum and the samples demo pages to hear what some folks are doing with MIDI and decent samples...I use EWQLSOL Gold myself ( http://www.soundsonline.com/EWQL-Symphonic-Orchestra-Gold-Edition-pr-EW-160.html ) with Cubase 3.0 (Colossus will be next), but it's more than just the samples - entire books have been written on getting good quality, realistic midi orchestration. I know the things I've done with the Gold samples sound nowhere as good as some of the pieces I've heard others do. The most important thing to do to avoid robotic midi, is to play the parts on a keyboard or other midi controller and don't quantize, or use a quantization that will allow you to adjust how "hard" the quantization is (usually a percentage - under 50% probably best). Controller channel 11 (expression) is pretty vital too. There's definitely a fine art to it.
Here is a short comp I did with Project 5V2 and Dimension Pro (1.2, I think) - A Morceau in Eb (if it takes too long to load, try refreshing the page). Just your basic flute and piano. I've never used any other products so I can't comment on them but, P5 and Dim Pro are all I need right now.
Not bad for being MIDI and all, IMO. 8)
The sequencers I mentioned ARE MUCH better sounding than standard midi.
A sequencer and standard MIDI (maybe you mean General MIDI, the original stardard patch set?) are two different things. A sequencer is a timing, mixing and contoller application. Standard (General) MIDI is one set of sound patches that are available to be controlled by a sequencer. It seems as if you are comparing the patches that happen to be included with the demo sequencers to General MIDI. In the fully-enabled sequencers, one chooses whatever sound patches, loops, MP3, WAV etc files one wishes to use. The sequencer is not actually making the sound; it's controlling triggering, timing, overall dynamics, plus adjusting a MIDI sample's other parametrics available for control according to the MIDI standard.
-=tension & release=-
The sequencers I mentioned ARE MUCH better sounding than standard midi.
A sequencer and standard MIDI (maybe you mean General MIDI, the original stardard patch set?) are two different things. A sequencer is a timing, mixing and contoller application. Standard (General) MIDI is one set of sound patches that are available to be controlled by a sequencer. It seems as if you are comparing the patches that happen to be included with the demo sequencers to General MIDI. In the fully-enabled sequencers, one chooses whatever sound patches, loops, MP3, WAV etc files one wishes to use. The sequencer is not actually making the sound; it's controlling triggering, timing, overall dynamics, plus adjusting a MIDI sample's other parametrics available for control according to the MIDI standard.
I thought this was obvious? The patch is a blanket put over the top of the general midi sound...I may have used the wrong terms but I thought this is what we were all talking about. Everyone knows that the GENERAL midi built into everyone's computer is crap. These sequesncers along with their plugins is what we ALL were talking about.
Greg, have you tried soundfonts?
I thought this was obvious? The patch is a blanket put over the top of the general midi sound...I may have used the wrong terms but I thought this is what we were all talking about. Everyone knows that the GENERAL midi built into everyone's computer is crap. These sequesncers along with their plugins is what we ALL were talking about.
Never assume anything is obvious. You are freely mixing terms, and that makes it difficult to determine how much you understand; plus it's confusing to those who are completely new to this. Not everyone knows the ins and outs of what's being discussed, and I'm sure there are quite a few lurkers. It is very easy to spread misinformation through casual misuse of terms.
-=tension & release=-
Greg, have you tried soundfonts?
This is Creative's tech? No, but I can do some digging on the innards and have a listen. You have experience to share on this?
-=tension & release=-
I used soundfonts with my SB Live! card (as using VSTs turned out to be a big latency problem) and it was pretty cool. On itself the SFs don't allow for the variation some of the above plugs allow for but it does make it easier to work with. With one of my piano songs it took me about 5 minutes to get a decent result with SFs against more then an hour with Steinberg's The Grand2. Eventually STG2 did sound superior to SF (atleast the piano samples I had!) but for working out ideas in a musical way SF would do more then decently. Plus there are tons of (legal) free SFs on the net.
Mikespe: Could be, but there is more to it. The plugs that come with sequencers are basically free-bees and shouldn't be used to judge the sequencer itself. You can't say that programX is better then programY if you haven't taken the step and got a good quality, commercially-availlable, sample library and test them with both. And don't forget that the better libraries allow for so much performance variation that it would not only require you to learn the sequencer, but also learn both how the plug really works plus you'll need to be able to play keybord well yourself. This is not something you can do in a few weeks and is definitely not something you can judge using demos and freeware plugs.
