PG Music Home Forums PG Music Product Forums Band-in-a-Box for Windows BIAB: Why Bother with MIDI?

I have a digital piano (Yamaha DGX640) and I have BIAB software on my laptop. Other than enabling BIAB-generated sounds to play thru the Yamaha keyboard's speakers, are there any other reasons for connecting the two via MIDI? Wouldn't it be just as good to play BIAB songs thru the laptop (with external speakers) and to just play along on the Keyboard independently?

I'm not trying to be difficult or a troll, but I'm not sure I see any other reason to connect the two (laptop and keyboard) except for playing BIAB sounds thru the keyboard. Perhaps I'm missing other reasons to connect the two?

Thanks!

If you can play MIDI sounds on BiaB from your laptop, there is no reason you HAVE to connect your keyboard. There is a parallel argument about whether one needs MIDI at all if you're using RealTracks...

The MIDI synth in your yamaha keyboard has some really good sounds in it. Not only that, use of the hardware MIDI synth inside the keyboard allows near zero latency at all times, something unobtainable when using software MIDI synths. This is likely of importance only if you are recording your keyboard playing in realtime. The luscious sounds inside that keyboard are reason enough, though, you have them and might as well make use of them. Connecting the MIDI to the computer and selecting the proper Input and Output to send what BB plays as MIDI to that keyboard's internal synth is a different world of sound from using internal software synthesizers for MIDI.

Looking at the Yamaha DGX640's .pdf manual, available on the yamaha instruments website, I see that all you need is a single USB cable to attach this keyboard to the computer. You must install the USB drivers that are provided on the CD that shipped with the keyboard. If that's lost, it likely can be downloaded from the yamaha support site.

There are about 500 different MIDI voices in your piano, and 11 MIDI percussion banks. You will likely want to have a Patchmap to drop into the BB folder and select inside BB so that you can access all those by name using the + button to the right of the standard GM patches already listed in the dropdown. Check the PGMusic Support Pages, under Patchmaps to see if someone has already written and posted one to download. If you don't see one for your 640, don't despair, there's a wizard inside BB that can convert a Cakewalk .ins file to a bb patchmap with a single mouse button push. Websearch engine should bring up a cakewalk .ins file for this popular instrument.

Other than that, there's no hard pat reason to have to hook it up to the computer if all your needs are just to be able to play piano along with Band in a Box.

Have Fun,

--Mac

To start out, you could just use the first 128 voices, which correspond to the GM bank most likely.

To see if that's the case, go to Options->MIDI/Audio inside BB.

In the window that opens will be two smaller windows.

LH side is where you should see the INPUT from your keyboard. Click that to highlight it.

RH side is where you should see the OUTPUT from bb to keyboard, click that to highlight as well.

UNcheck the 'Use DXi" button, say Okay to close that window, then load a BB song that uses MIDI in the style and hit Play, see if the MIDI is now being played by the keyboard.

--Mac

Perhaps Luddites prefer it. The basis is the same on most keyboards to an extent. I have made it redundant, I use RealTracks.

.
The so-called 'first 128' sounds are not the best sounds in your Yamaha. The 'first 128' are a set of standard instruments that make up a protocol called General Midi, or GM. The good thing about them is that they are standard, not that they are outstanding.

The patchmaps will enable you to tell BiaB to call sounds outside of the 'first 128.' These include the ones called 'Cool' and 'Live' on your keyboard. Once you get the patchmap working the difference will be like night and day.

Newbert, I've done a search on the internet too and cannot find a pre-built patchmap for the DGX-640's 535 voices.

If FlatFoot doesn't have one available, follow these instructions and you can make one yourself pretty easily: http://www.pgmusic.com/tutorial_bbwpatchmap.htm

Here is a link to a instrument definition (patchmap) for a Yamaha GDX-630...not sure how close that would be, but perhaps you could modify it or use it as a template: http://www.jososoft.dk/yamaha/ins_files.htm .

To add to Notes point, midi is as good as the effort , and synth quality you insert with it. There are time that RTs rock the song, and times i can't find a single one to fit in with the tracks i have. While working in an original song i might be able to use a set of RTs or a mixed bunch either way, and nail it. But when working on a cover tune, if I want to get the original feeling of the song, like signature licks, or grooves, midi is the tool set of choice. I might add one or two RTs to give the song a newer flavor, but midi is still the pony you want to ride.

Right now i use sampletank, Rolands TTS, and Jamstix to fire up the midi a bit. I hope to add a hardware synth at some point, but who knows maybe Kontact or something like that. The very fact PG came out with super midi tracks let's us know Midi is not dead, it is still very valuable. The ability to edit will always make midi a cool thing.

One very good example is with backing ohhs and ahhs in a midi track. open one up and play it and you go hhhmmm that really sucks most of the time out of the box, but open that track in the piano roll, and work for a while with the notes lengths, and see how it can slowly smooth out and actually blend into the song. use a better set of voice patches, and next thing you know it sound like a full set of background singers backing you up.

The argument about whether or not Real Tracks are sufficient by themselves or whether or not midi is "dead" all boils down to the individual user. This is a worldwide forum and there are people who use this software who are coming from all kinds of different perspectives. The range goes from someone with minimal musical knowledge and ability to to true pro level players. Then there's the computer pro angle. Some limited musicians are pro computer types while some top pro players know squat about computers and digital audio recording.

All this makes trying to answer a broad question about midi very difficult because in a forum like this we can't tell who the poster really is, where they are in terms of musical ability and equally important, computer ability.

For myself, I'm basically a mid level pro player and now after about 10 years of working with digital audio maybe a mid level computer guy. When the Real Tracks came out a few years ago I was absolutely thrilled with them. They sound great and yes, many times they're all I use for routine things like jamming and practicing. I want to work on soloing over Green Dolphin Street for example, I have it all set up using all RT's and it sounds great but it doesn't sound like any of the many commercial versions of that tune. RT's are generic backing tracks in various styles. That's good enough for quick jamming but I also have a couple of very good Biab midi style files too that have some very good arranging elements in them that cannot be duplicated with the RT's. Only midi can do that but then I have to set them up to play using better midi synths than just the basic GM Forte Dxi or my Roland TTS-1. It takes some time to set those up while the RT's simply play with one mouse click.

Since I'm a good player and do these tunes live with jazz groups anyway I'm not so concerned with getting the arrangement perfect at home for jamming along with so most of the time the RT's are good enough. I can tell that the really nice elements of any particular song are missing but I don't care, I get to play along with those when I'm doing a gig with other good players anyway.

But this is just for me. Other people who don't do a lot of gigs maybe do want to have complete arrangements of their tunes and for that the RT's are not good enough because you can't edit them to give you melody lines, certain song specific licks and other things. For those you need midi tracks and like Notes said lots of times the best overall sound is a combination of both.

As as far as midi in the overall music industry is concerned just look at video demos of other DAW software. Midi is huge, not just "a" part of music, no it's the biggest part of much of current song creation from pop music to movie soundtracks. Midi is far from dead, if anything it's getting bigger. I have been watching videos from Winter NAMM 2013 and the Midi Association had a booth there and the guy is talking about how Midi 2.0 is in fact being developed right now due to demand from software and music producers. There have been insider rumors about this for years but this is the first time I've seen them at a NAMM show so that tells me progress is actually being made.

Bob

Tools.

The wise user of tools does not throw away his hammers because of the introduction of the Nail Gun.

Keep your tools, all of your tools, in good working order and keep learning how to use them, for there are certain tasks that each will excel in doing and it therefore falls on each craftsperson to strive to not only understand how each tool works, but to understand the process of tool selection when confronted with a project.

The advent of a new tool does not necessarily indicate the demise of the older tool.

Those who take that stance should ask themselves why they have chosen to limit their possibilities.


--Mac

As a keyboard player, MIDI captures what I play. RealTracks doesn't do that, because it's the rendition of what someone else has already played. So, I need MIDI. Sure, I could mic and record my piano, but then I would have to deal with the other noise generated, since my piano sits in my living room, that's not optimal. So MIDI is necessary for capturing what I play, whether it be the main melody part, or just additional accompaniment, and the only way to achieve different types of sounds.

MIDI or Real Tracks: it's NOT the hammer, it's HOW you use it...

Definitely how you use them.

When most people dis MIDI or GenMIDI it is not the fault of MIDI or GenMIDI, but the fault of the person who hasn't acquired the skills to use it and/or the synth to render it properly.

If a person hasn't learned to play drums, piano, or guitar well, it isn't the drums, piano, or guitar's fault. Like any other musical instrument, MIDI requires learning and practice to become proficient. And like any other musical instrument it requires a well built instrument to get a good sound from (your laptop's built in soft-synth will not do).

So many workmen blame the proverbial hammer.

Like everything else about PG Music, the RTs have gotten quite a bit better than they were when they started out. And I do find uses for them -- but I haven't found that they replaced the MIDI tracks at all, they have just added more choices for me.

Like the MIDI tracks, if a RT works for my particular song without editing, I just use it. However if either one doesn't quite fit, I can edit the MIDI tracks in many ways that are impossible for me to do in the RT domain. Therefore, both are useful.

I don't watch TV at all (no cable, no antenna, no digital converter) but I do watch a rented DVD from time to time. Often I like to watch the extra features on the disk (I call them BVDs because they are shorts) -- especially if they concern the music and aren't just the "Isn't everybody wonderful" reels.

I have seen a number of high-budget, major studio movies that had the sound track done entirely with MIDI synthesizers. I don't consider that obsolete. Others have used symphony orchestras. Thankfully they aren't obsolete either.

I still enjoy a symphony concert and will be attending two different concerts by the Russian National Orchestra later this month. Sometimes these world-famous touring orchestras bring MIDI synths along with them to play the parts of the instruments that are difficult or impossible to take on the road (like pipe organ, celeste, etc.).

My wind synthesizer didn't replace my saxophone, it just added to the sax-like tones I can produce. The Fender Rhodes did not replace the acoustic piano, it just added to the tones the pianist had access to. Audio loops did not replace MIDI, it just added one more thing we can use to make music.

Not that every tool should be used by everyone. I don't play trumpet, I tried but didn't want to invest the time and effort to develop the lip. I don't play oboe, I know the fingering but don't like the double reed embouchure. My brother-in-law, an excellent trumpet player doesn't use the computer for his professional music career, but he does occasionally play with other people's backing tracks.

My tool box included the computer (with audio and MIDI), wind synthesizer, sax, flute, guitar, keyboard synthesizer, bass, drums and voice. When I get more comfortable with all of these, or when something new comes along that catches my ears, I'll add something else. But I won't discard any of the others.

YMMV

Insights and incites by Notes