Sound Fonts are evil.

• Jun 21, 2014 - 17:49

I consider myself sufficiently capable in the realm of computers and technology. I can reformat my hard drive, I can find, download, and install programs, I can use a computer without a mouse using keyboard prompts. I can even type with my eyes closed.

Apparently, all this wisdom grinds to a halt with the mere whispered utterance of that unholiest of unholies.

sssooundddfontssssss

My windows just rattled and I think I heard a scream from the basement. I wouldn't be overly concerned, except that I have no basement.

I have downloaded the "Fluid" soundfont from here: http://musescore.org/en/handbook/soundfont
The bassoon makes me want to weep, and not in a good way. Now I know why it's called "Fluid".
"General User" brings me to a non working page. I found it somewhere else, and it's the same sound font that originally comes in Musescore.

I have read a ridiculous amount of tutorials that take me down the rabbit hole, because either I am a complete sound font idiot or they are not written in English.

Take for instance, this video regarding the setup of Jackrouter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h883l3PUJ50
It looks like a great tutorial, except that I can't even find an executable file to get to the starting point.

I have downloaded other SF2 file collections, but I can't get Musescore to recognize the individual SF2 files when I browse Display--->Synthesizer---->Soundfont.
I'm guessing they need to be joined into one file. I can't figure out how. Just creating a normal file obviously doesn't work.

I gave up and tried to do this:

http://bartruffle.blogspot.com/2012/08/musescore-with-garritan-instrume…

I have the sound fonts for Garritan Personal Orchestra.
I have Aria, which continuously reminds me that my registered copy of Garritan Personal Orchestra is not registered. But it is.
I downloaded Loopbe1.
I downloaded the "jack audio server" Twice. Still can't find the setup.

And while I'm complaining about my incompetence, can anyone tell me how to check messages? I sent myself and someone else a message to see where it went, and it didn't come up in email or anywhere on Musescore.


Comments

Hi,

1/ Which version of MuseScore are you using? On which OS? (I will assume MuseScore 1.3 and Windows in the following)

2/ About GeneralUser. It's not the same soundfont than the one included by default in MuseScore, at least on Windows and Linux. You can download it from http://schristiancollins.com/generaluser.php at the bottom of the page.

3/ If you are explaining in details which style of music, instruments etc... you want to listen to, some people could try to give suggestions for a "good" soundfont.

4/ Next version of MuseScore, still in development will let the user load several soundfonts at the same time. In Musescore 1.3 it's not possible. You need to edit a single soundfont from several of them. You can find a list of software here http://musescore.org/en/node/13734 Editing a soundfont is not always an easy job...

5/ Jack audio website is currently down because of a spam attack as explained on jackaudio.org. The binaries for windows are not yet on the front page. However they are working on a new website and you can download Jack for windows here http://jackaudio.github.io/downloads/

6/ Currently MuseScore is a notation software first, and it happens to support playback via Soundfonts and Jack. However the playback capabilities are less developped than the notation feature. If you really want sound and not graphical sheet music, you can always export the score to MIDI and load it to a sound dedicated software like a digital audio workstation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_workstation

As mentioned, General User is definitely *not* the same one included with MuseScore. It's considerably better, but still nowhere near as good as Garritan of course. The one included with MuseScore is TimGM6mb, and it's main claim to fame is being only 6 MB in size.

I've tried dozens of soundfonts, and while Fluid is by no means perfect, I have so far found it to be the best of the GM-compatible soundfonts for my purposes, which mostly involve orchesteal & jazz instruments. I have found a couple of much larger soundfonts that do especially well with electric/electronic instruments but are not as strong in winds or strings. There are a couple of soundfonts that have very good strings or winds but are not a full GM set or even close to it, lacking some really basic instruments one would need if one were workong on this sprt of music. Garritan is of course very good, but it isn't a "soundfont" - it's something similar, but in an entirely different format.

As for tutorials, not sure what you're reading or why, but there isn't isn't anything more to using a soundfont in MuseScore than what you see in the Synthesizer window. If you've successfully installed Fluid, you've done everything MuseScore can do with soundfonts.

Jack is a totally different story. It has nothing to do with "soundfonts". It's a way of routing MuseScore's MIDI output to another program that can the perhaps plays your score, perhaps using a "soundfont" but much more likely using a different techinology entirely (Garritan, for example). It is indeed probably possible to configurate Jack to control a third party program that performs playback using garritan, but you'd need to consult the documentation for Jack, the third party program, and/or Garritan to learn how to so this. It will have nothing to do woth either MuseScore or jack, so if you have trouble understanding their tutorials, younshould post question in their forums.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Thanks for the replies.
My apologies if I wasn't specific enough. I am trying either join individual sf2 sound fonts into one recognizable file like Fluid, or use a program to improve the sound as a midi file.
I guess it was a bit vague because I have spent multiple days trying to figure this out, to no avail, and I'm not even sure which avenue to pursue anymore.

I'm trying to enter a piece in a competition, and I want to be able to make it sound better.

By the way I love Musescore. I tried both Finale and Sibelius, and came crawling back to Musescore both times.

I have tried the nightly builds in the past, but haven't recently. I will have to see how things are going!
My operating system is Windows 7, and I am using Musescore 1.3
The piece is orchestral, and has a large string, woodwind and brass section.

In reply to by mmcazz

It's possible you somehow downloaded the wrong one before?

There are slight differences in how MuseScore handles the playback between 1.3 and the development/2.0 builds that leads to differences in sound even with the same soundfont. Mostly, as I understand it, in the handling of the attacks and/or the releases of the notes, which is improved in the development/2.0 builds. I think it's mostly noticeable in drum sounds? Maybe also difference in reverb defaults.

BTW, there is also a known bug in one of the libraries used by MuseScore that leads to a loud annoying pop or click on certain notes when using the compressed version of Fluid that comes with the nightly builds. Switching to the full version of Fluid should make that go away. If you hear anything else else different, then you've got the wrong file, I'd say.

In reply to by mmcazz

FWIW, I get an error trying to access those files - after logging in to Box, it says the file "has either been deleted or is unavailable to you".

You might try posting the score itself here (as an attachment to a post), so we can try oun our own systems to see if we can hear a difference.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

I have uploaded the scores here. The first one (Test Clarinet, Fluid 1) should be opened in 1.3.
The second one should be opened in the nightly build from 6.22. They both sound the same when opened in the nightly build.

Here's another try at the online wav version:
Musescore 1.3:
https://app.box.com/s/bfv3bh87tnhh9doxbz9v

Nightly build:
https://app.box.com/s/guj2m2tegcvyocag36fn

In reply to by mmcazz

I'm pretty sure that's just the difference in default reverb from 1.3 and 2.0 I am hearing. Sounds like the exact same samples to me, but they are too dry in 1.3. I think it's a totally new effects subsystem for 2.0, I don't understand enough about how those parameters work to say if it's possible to get 1.3 to sound more like 2.0 just by tweaking settings.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.