drum set really quiet on 2.0
So I just downloaded the 2.0 beta and opened a file I was working on from version 1.2. Everything loaded correctly but when I used the playback to check it the 5-line drum set was really quiet and I could hardly hear it over the other instruments (2 guitars and a bass). The bass drum was especially quiet even at fff marking I could not hear it over the other instruments. In version 1.2 even at piano dynamic I could hear all components of the drum set very clearly but when I opened it in 2.0 beta I cannot. Suggestions?
Edit: I attached 2 samples, one from version 1.2 and one from the 2.0 beta. Both have the same exact instruments and notes. For both the electric guitar is at the default dynamic and the drum set if on fff. Notice how on 2.0 beta version it is nearly impossible to hear the bass drum.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| drum sample 1.2.mscz | 3.55 KB |
| drum_sample.mscz | 3.19 KB |
Comments
FWIW, I'm hearing the bass drum OK in your sample. Are you trying to listen through computer speakers? They probably have very limited bass response.
However, it shouldn't have been necessary to add an explicit fff to get that, and if I remove the fff, I agree it doesn't balance very well. I think the fault is as much with the guitar being too *loud* (drums balance fine with many other instruments).
Anyone know if we can reasonably change relative volume of instruments in the FluidR3 soundfont?
BTW, a better way to change the relative volume of tracks is using the Mixer window. Then you can still have normal dynamics within the score.
In reply to FWIW, I'm hearing the bass by Marc Sabatella
I was using pretty good headphones, and I could barely hear the bass at all in the 2.0 sample. Maybe its just my computer or something. But do you agree that it is a lot different from the 1.2 version?
In reply to maybe its just my computer by sam.silverman.90
Yes, different soundfonts will have different balances, and there was a change in default soundfont. You'd hear the same using FluidR3 in 1.3 or TimGM6mb in 2.0 Beta/Nightly.
The presets in FluidR3 are not very well balanced. I find I'm constantly having to balance things in the mixer which was un-necessary with TimGM6mb in 1.3.
I am, now that I know how to set it up, starting to use VSTi via Jack Audio Connection Kit more, as there is a better degree of control, with the consequent improvement in sound.
In reply to The presets in FluidR3 are by ChurchOrganist
I find just the opposite - less level tweaking is necessary with Fluid than Tim. But it depends on what instruments you tend to use, I guess. Electric guitar is fpdefinitely overbearingly loud, drums maybe a little soft. Is this something we can fix?
In reply to I find just the opposite - by Marc Sabatella
Well I could go right through the soundfont and reset the levels, but that is too time consuming a task.
If the original author had used normalised samples in the first place it would have helped.
In reply to Well I could go right through by ChurchOrganist
What does the task of resetting the level involve? Is it "just" changing parameters in the soundfont or we alsp need to normalise the samples?
It would be cool if any user could have a decent experience without having to buy and set up VSTi...
In reply to What does the task of by [DELETED] 5
There are hundreds of decent free VSTi plugins out there. I am currently looking into what is actually available for nothing and I am finding a lot of good quality stuff. I now have several pipe organs, a Hammond B3, several drumkits, and a really outstanding free acoustic guitar VSTi.
There is also the Sonatina Symphonic library out there that can be set up in a VST host with an sfz player - again all free.
It's just the initial pain of setting up Jack properly.
I will take a look and see what can be done - but not until after the concert on Saturday.
In reply to Well I could go right through by ChurchOrganist
I don't know anything about how soundfonts are put together, but I do know what "normalizing" means. I guess if soundfonts are supposed to have normalized samples, then going through and normalizing everything is a fine idea. However, that in itself would actually make the problem worse, not better. Normalizing would make everything the same volume, but an oboe is *not* as loud as a trombone, a nylon string acoustic guitar is *not* as loud as a piano, etc. So there would have to be some sort of subjective level adjustment that can be applied to the samples. Assuming such a possibility exists (and it would have to if samples are supposed to be normalized), this could actually be done with or without first normalizing. If we didn't normalize, we'd need only slight tweaks to improve the balance where needed. If we normalized everything, we'd need to start over with the level settings, unless perhaps the tools provide an automatic way to apply level adjustments while normalizing to keep the overall balance the same, and then we could tweak from there.
I keep saying it, I'll say it again: much as I like the overall sound of FluidR3, if there is some good general purpose alternative we should be considering that would serve our needs better, I'd like to know.