Improved Sound Library

"I don't think soundfonts will ever give as good a sound"

Soundfonts, like any other sample library are capable of producing professional standard sounds provided the sample library contained within them is of high quality, and the velocity splits and layering etc have been programmed by someone who thoroughly understands how the instrument concerned behaves in a performance situation.

I did once obtain a copy of the Garritan soundset a few years ago - it occupied 8 gigabytes of memory, and has probably grown since then.

If you can throw resources of that size at a Soundfont, then you can get it to sound as good as Garritan. You will not, however be able to cram the entire GM soundset into it.

What also needs to be borne in mind is that IME you cannot produce performance standard music entirely from scorewriting software - even with a humanise factor.

As I think Marc said earlier - anything like that produced for film or broadcast is polished in other software, very often by recording one track at a time, using a sequencer to add extra controllers to enhance the sounds. This was how I used to create orchestral backing tracks in the 90's - writing the score in Finale then transferring to Sonar 3 Producer to record the actual track.

It would be great if MuseScore's playback was better. But until we have the output of notation perfect, then, quite rightly, it has to take a back seat.

Given all options, it does make sense to access external sound libraries. Now, I can also say that MuseScore and this Sound Font idea is about as easy as it could get to roll with MIDI and an robust music notation software package.

I like to re-use whenever possible and when it is clearly wise to do so. All of the great sounds out there, with their respective sound engines to make them work......it does seem that MuseScore would do well to consider the cost to interface with them, probably at the VST level.

Just the same, I am very happy with MuseScore at this point.

THank You,
SHD

I like the idea of MuseScore connecting with OpenOctave (once OO becomes available for PC and Mac, of course).

Marc, are you perhaps referring to something like Sibelius 7's "smart buttons/knobs"? Something like that, I think, would be well worthwhile. They allow control over things like different types of mutes (for several various instruments, not just trumpets), attacks, releases, vibrato, room size, mics, vibrophone motor, trill and tremolo speed, and many other things.

Let's consider the structure of MIDI and then further consider this effort to marry up DAW and Music Notation.

Check these links and read about Velocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_MIDI_File#Standard_MIDI_.28.mid_o…

http://web.archive.org/web/20070702113348/http://improv.sapp.org/doc/cl…

http://faydoc.tripod.com/formats/mid.htm

http://www.sonicspot.com/guide/midifiles.html

MIDI is prevalent enough that it should be embraced and leveraged. MusicXML seems to back-fill on the gaps and add lot's of functionality.

When I got going deep into hands-on MIDI, it became very clear to me that Velocity does not equal volume. Imagine hitting a note on the piano softly versus loudly. We call that dynamics in acoustic-land. Then, that acoustic sound is recorded. The play-back of that sound is where volume comes to bear. In the illustration of hitting a drum soft or hard, even more clear how Velocity matters. Also, hitting an electric guitar softly versus loudly. Then, having the guitar amp turned to different settings while playing either softly or loudly. Sometimes the guitar amp must be turned up loudly and played hard to get the sound desired. Fortunately, speaker emulator's are good and priced well to keep the neighbors from being upset on late night jams. Making a sound versus referencing the sound. Playing a keyboard versus listening to that keyboard recorded and listing to that recording on iPod. Or, driving down the road with the windows open....blasting the radio of that keyboard song that went gold on the record charts.

Sampling of an acoustic instrument is best served to sample record at different Velocity levels. Then, depending on the Velocity the MIDI note is played, the range of sounds are played through the sound module (tone generator) that closely match the sound of the acoustic instrument to the Velocity level.

Now, since not all MIDI hardware use Velocity, it is not going to work with 100% of MIDI gear. Velocity sensitive is very clear in manufacturer documentation of a MIDI controller or device to preach they have that feature and justify charging more for their gear.

Playing with MIDI effects for an arpeggio or glissando happens a lot. I do not like those effects. I would rather play that said passage of music and lay down hard tracks in the form of data. To wit, what note.....at what Velocity level......played for a specific duration. The trumpet is a good example of these 3 attributes. No wind, not sound. Acoustic delay is not too much, and no harmonic series happening like in say the piano or the guitar.

I would say that having a Standard MIDI File in play on the DAW while simultaneously working a MusicXML file on the Music Notation, and a program to keep the Standard MIDI file and MusicXML file in sync, though physically separate, would do the deed. Otherwise, exporting a Standard Midi File from MusicXML would kill the Velocity setup in the DAW for the MIDI notes and duration of those notes. Unless MusicXML handles Velocity and I do not understand that at this point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MusicXML

I do not see Velocity as a parameter to pass to the Standard MIDI file.

SHD