Unhappy with MIDI sounds - PG Music Forums

Quote:

<...>
Within 5 years all computers will be touch screen, tablet shaped or folded up, have wireless multiple ways, AND Band in a Box will run on a new revamped touch interface. And midi will be a memory. <...>

John you have a lot of good points, but here is where I respectfully disagree. MIDI will not disappear until another way for synthesizers to talk to each other gets invented. Before MIDI synth players had to be fenced in by a dozen or more keyboards piled on top of each other and in a U shape. MIDI not only became the solution for that so a synth player needs only one or two keyboards and lots of synth modules, but it also has become the communications system internally in most synthesizers.

MIDI came about with a rare cooperation between competing brands of synthesizers back in the adolescent phase of the synth market. I don't see Yamaha, Roland, Kurzweill, Casio, Moog, Hammond, Korg, M-Audio, Ensoinq, Novation, Technics, Akai, Buchla, and the other companies getting together again for a new standard any time soon. Especially since MIDI still works well and has room for more growth.

Saying MIDI will be a memory is like saying synths will be a memory. I could be wrong, but I don't see synths or MIDI disappearing in my lifetime.

I do see it disappearing in the amateur/hobbyist market because it's easier to play loops than to create the music yourself.

Another point I disagree with is the audience does give a hoot about signature licks. They may think your rendition of whatever is good enough, but if someone else comes along and does it better, they will know the difference. When I play the signature lick on the intro to "Don't Be Cruel" the audience responds before I sing the first note. Same for the intro to "Old Time Rock And Roll", "New York NY", "Electric Boogie", "Memory" (from Cats), "Sea Cruise", "At Last", "Key Largo", "Come Monday", "You'll Never Find Another Love Like Mine", "California Dreaming", "Build Me Up Buttercup", "Margaritaville", "Crocodile Rock", "Proud Mary", "Sweet Caroline", "Smooth" (Santana), "Conga", "Volcano", "Turn The Beat Around", "Dancing Queen", "Dreams" (Fleetwood Mac),"Hot Hot Hot", "Jumpin' Jack Flash", "Just The Way You Are", "Pretty Woman", "Satin Doll", "That's Amore", "Time In A Bottle" and dozens of other songs. They hit the dance floor before the first note is sung, because they know those hooks.

You even hear the "1,001 Strings" and other Muzak versions of pop songs doing the signature licks, because in many songs, these licks are important to the song. When I learn a song I determine which songs I think must have those signature licks in them and I include them. On other songs I may completely re-arrange the tune. It's my choice, it's my personal artistic taste (for what that's worth) and MIDI allows me to make that choice - pre-recorded loops do not.

But I also agree without the vocals and/or other lead instruments on top of the background, the best backing track in the world is pretty worthless. I also think that the solos in Peter's excellent example are a bit part of the reason why his sounds better. When I play that sequence, I sing and play guitar licks live on top of it and Leilani plays rhythm guitar and does fill-in vocals. By then you hardly know that the brass sounds only sound 'almost' like real horns and the drums are cigital samples of real drums instead of digital recordings of the drums themselves.

Quote:

Bob your points are certainly valid, to a degree. Where i disagree is where you make a finite statement. The net is full of karaoke midi files. Van Basco and many other sites, to name at least one.

I've visited those sites and most of the MIDIs I found there are not well done. Many of them are step entered or played by a hobbyist who doesn't play to pro standards. It's rare to find the gem in all that schlock. But it's like YouTube videos, people want to show off their stuff, although IMO some people should work on their skills more before they do.

Quote:

Your song is a perfect example, the piano chops chink chink chink are in absolute perfect timing, not capable of the variables that Peter RT had

I played those piano parts live into a sequencer before I imported the snippets into the BiaB styles. I play all the parts of my styles live into a sequencer that has a resolution of up to 960ppq. Any quantization done would be by PG Music's archaic 120ppq resolution in BiaB. It takes the 960ppq and resolves the timing 8 times coarser. 240 to well over 900ppq is the standard of the industry and people have been asking for at least 240 on the wish list for over a decade. It's not the fault of MIDI, it's the fault of the resolution. It is one of the reasons why we MIDI folks want PG Music to improve the core MIDI functions alongside the RT improvements. We don't mind the RTs as long as PG doesn't abandon the improvements to the MIDI functions (there is a long list but that's another thread on the wish list).

Quote:

I just think it is a bit narrow viewed to say one is better than the other, and kind of like saying a hammer is better than a saw. That might be true until you need to cut the board.

I agree, which is why I try to give all due respect for the RTs, and never claimed that MIDI is better for everyone, but it is definitely better for me.

I've stated that if I was using a songwriting demo, I'd use RTs, but if I wanted to play live I'd use MIDIs. And I gave my personal reasons and included YMMV. One tool for each job.

And I have quite a few customers, mostly professionals who agree with me.

Again this thread started as "unhappy with MIDI sounds" and I'm simply trying to explain why the user is unhappy with the sounds in his/her synthesizer and what the actual pros to MIDI are. Sacrificing a little sound quality for greater personal expression is the way I choose to go. Again YMMV.

There are Rap stars who have had hit records without playing a single instrument - 100% loops of other people playing -- and without any singing. On the other end of the spectrum there are people who want nothing but acoustic instruments recorded in an analog format. Neither method is right or wrong, and most of us make our music somewhere between the two extremes.

The thing to know is what the pros and cons of all the available methods are and choose the one or the combination that is right for you. I choose MIDI because it allows me to personalize all my parts. And I choose to play a MIDI wind controller, natural singing voice, acoustic sax, acoustic flute, and electric guitar over the tops of those tracks. It works for me. Leilani and I have been making our living in the same duo since 1985. What works for another will be slightly different. YMMV.

Insights and incites by Notes

You may want to explore soundfonts - especially now that BIAB can handle multiple synths. A good place to start is HERE. There are plenty of discussions on the forum about soundfonts.

And be sure to check out Coyote Forte.

R

Agreement with Dan and Rachael. Coyote Forte does the job, especially if you add some effects onto it, and especially especially if you are also using RealTracks.

You also might want to check some of the free synths and samplers online that handle General MIDI, e.g., Sampletank and Proteus VX.

So the choices are ...

coyote Forte/cakewalk tts1 at ~ $40
Ketron SD2 at $400
soundfonts/synths/samplers from online (cost = time + possibly free)

Since I don't want to become a synthesized sound hobbiest, I guess I'll start with the Coyote Forte demo and see how that works for me.

thanks for the help,

Saxmaam

And to avoid confusion, the Coyote WT (that gets installed with BIAB/RB) is not the same thing as the Coyote Forte (which you need to install separately). As I remember correctly, it will work with all features for 30 days before you have to register it ($40), so you can evaluate it for free.

Personally, I prefer external solutions. The Ketron SD2 has a great reputation but I've not heard it.

I have a number of synthesizer modules and keyboards that I've collected through the years including, Yamaha TX81z, Roland MT-32, Roland SC-55, Korg DDD5, Korg DS8, Korg i3, Edirol SD90, Yamaha VL70m and a couple of hardware samplers.

The nice thing about hardware synth modules, is that as long as you can put MIDI out of yoru computer, the modules will never become orphaned by a new operating system, you can mix and match sounds from them taking the best from each (zero latency for all practical purposes), they don't tax your computer's CPU, and never seem to break down or crash.

The TX81z, DS8, and MT32 that I purchased back in the 80s have some very dated sounds in them, but they still have some excellent voices that I haven't found a replacement for.

All in all if I had to use only one in my personal array, I'd choose the SD-90 as it is the most versatile and has the most polyphony.

Notes

Here's a sample of Ketron SD2:

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=1111184&songID=11280065

I made this as a backing track for my band to play in celebration of Frank Zappa's birthdate, which is Wednesday, December 21st. It wasn't made to highlight the SD2.

Bob

I personally lean towards hardware synths and have never been a real fan of most of the soft synths. I also wonder if some of the issues people have is not with the sound but with the GM standard. GM is a good idea but the GM patches always seem to be inferior. Want a good synth for cheap? Go on the net and buy an older rack mount synth used. I still use my trusty Roland 1080 which most all studios owned and you can get those for 100 bucks.

Here is a MP3 file (12 bar blues - public domain) made with Norton Styles and about 99% General MIDI patches.

http://www.nortonmusic.com/mp3/Sweet_Home_Chicago_M128.mp3

What's inferior of those GM sounds?

Notes

Add your sax to that, Notes, and I bet it's screamin'!

I hate to say it Bob and Bob, but those two files are really ringing endorsements for realtracks and the need for realStrings and realHorns.

They sound fine and all -- but they don't sound that real. Now I know there are high quality samples out there that do sound real -- but they are out of most of our price ranges.

Kevin

A midi primer here:

www.indiana.edu/~emusic/etext/MIDI/chapter3_DP5.shtml

I personally don't want to spend my days messing with the velocities of an english horn, to make it baroque. Either way.

THE ONLY test of the thing is the END result.

How you get there does not matter. You can spend 20 hours on 20 notes, or 20 hours playing 200 tunes. Whatever turns YOUR crank.

Take your backing tracks, done either way, and ask someone who's never played an instrument to critique it.

To my mind the biggest thing is to get realistic enough guitars. Almost every person over the age of 20 has had or has a close friend with one. On a given occasion, they can take it out, tune it a bit, and play 4 bars of Stairway...

They then are sort of experts and talk for days about pickups and humdingers and bucking this and amp that and delay with 800 feet of cable, and golly they could just improvise in the American National thing in front of 50,000 screaming fans, and become famous, oh yeah!

So the problem is your guitar has to sound very good. I'd suggest putting in the riff to Stairway in almost every piece, buried. LOL, there's a plugin to make!

[Bob]: Here is a MP3 file (12 bar blues - public domain) made with Norton Styles and about 99% General MIDI patches.
http://www.nortonmusic.com/mp3/Sweet_Home_Chicago_M128.mp3

========================================================
Nice MIDI arrangement Bob, thanks for posting it.

I don't see MIDI vs RealTracks as an "either-or" issue. They are different tools, and each have their uses, including combining them at times.

For example, there's an excellent MIDI blues demo that was posted above. That would be ideal to use in a club for a dance.

The RealTracks version of that sounds different, and would likely be used in different situations, maybe for when you're jamming (practising), or wanting more of a live-player sound.

Here's a RealTracks version of that, with the RealTracks "Blues Brothers" Sol Philcox and Brent Mason, joined by John Jarvis on Piano

Audio: http://nn.pgmusic.com/pgfiles/jazzu/misc/BluesEPianoGuitar.WMA

Actually it's just a demo of our RealTracks Set 140: Texas Blues Shuffle - playing over blues changes, but if you compare it with Bob's excellent MIDI sequence, it gives you a good comparison of the differences between MIDI and RealTracks, over a Blues progression.

(everything you hear, including the guitar and piano solos, were generated by BIAB, by pressing play. The 3 soloists (John, Brent and Sol) are trading off choruses, which is a feature added in 2011. Song took about 60 seconds to make). Of course, as with any RealTracks, you can type in any chords, any key and you'll get a full arrangement with soloing like this.

I wanted to run a blindfold test but I can't get Notes version to download, it says server execution error.

As for the PG version, I find it too busy for me. Now, that said my tastes have changed. I hung out in blues clubs for years, every weekend. Smokey, beer sticky on the floor, low ceiling, and every standard blues thing in the repetoire.

Alas with the hearing loss I'm no judge of anything, except I lean to minimalism, so a simple bass and drums behind my piano and I'm happy.

If the style is midi then I get that.

But I'm 90 percent realtracks, and even changed most of the folk song repetoire to those.

Some guitar player should weigh in here.

One thing you can do to improve a midi song is to add real stuff to it (or real tracks). I bet if you swapped out the drums and piano for realtracks in Bob N's blues demo, everything would sound more realistic.

... but it does sound better the more I listen to it.

Nice demo Peter.

The solos have come a long way since you introduced the RTs. I'm a live player and prefer to play the solos myself though

(If I didn't have to respect the other players in the band, I'd be a solo hog and do them all.)

And yes, I see room for RTs and MIDI, depending on what you are doing with them.

For my personal applications, MIDI is better, because I can edit them. Listening to the rhythm section of your excellent demo, there are things I would change for my own personal tastes. And I mean my own personal tastes, which of course are mine and mine alone (for better or worse). But then, I bought BiaB and my MIDI sequencers to play with, not for plug and play. Again, that's just me.

Also, I play in a duo for a living. There are other duos in our area who use karaoke tracks they purchase on the 'net. Nothing wrong with that either. However, IMHO having real instruments in the backing track sounds like karaoke. Something about the timbre, the mix, and the blending of the instruments sound like a recording instead of a live performance. Judging from the comments our audience members, many audience members know the difference too, because they tell me comments like, "Band X is only doing karaoke". The word only is the killer to my ears.

On the other hand, if I were doing song-writing demos to send to record companies, I'd probably use mostly Real Tracks, because I know the A&R people are definitely prejudiced against MIDI demos.

Different tools taken out of the tool box for different applications.

I'm definitely not dissing the RTs, they have their use, and I'm happy that we have both tools at our disposal. I just get a little irritated when someone thinks MIDI sounds bad. As most of us know, MIDI has no sound, synthesizers have sounds. The difference between the sound card on your computer and a Kurzweil is like the difference between a kazoo and a trumpet.

The MIDI sounds on the demo I posted sound 'almost live' to me. The have more separation than the RT background so they don't have that 'karaoke' blend for live performances (which I feel makes them more appropriate for an on-stage performance), and I was able to edit the BiaB output:

I entered the top sax note and let BiaB's excellent harmonizer do the 'mule work' of harmonizing the part -- then I exported the MIDI to a sequencer for further editing
Edited the bass line at the end of each progression, because it plays notes on both an upbeat and the following beat, something native BiaB cannot do without an expanded style
Manually entered (played) the walking bass line for the places where I wanted to play a guitar solo. This changes the feel over teh solo part and IMHO adds both interest to the song and drive to the solo section.
Added a touch of humanizing (randomization) to the harmonized sax parts because BiaB puts the harmony notes on exactly the same beat. I don't think the audienc would know the difference if I didn't, but I know the difference and I play this tune every couple of weeks on the gig.

This is minimal editing, but it couldn't be done with RTs. Other backing tracks I make have extensive editing: song specific licks, changing the instrument patches, adding a crescendo, diminuendo, accelerando, ritardando, and/or fermata, getting all the instruments to play a kick instead of a shot or hold, and so on. But as I said before, I bought BiaB and my MIDI sequencers to play with the music.

Back in the 80s when I first started sequencing, my MIDI sequences were pretty crude. Since then it's been an adventure and a learning experience. As I learn new ways to manipulate the MIDI data and hear something new or exciting, I get great satisfaction and a feeling of "Hey! I did that!" pride. To me that's what making music is all about. Of course, not everybody plays with the music the same way.

Playing with the MIDI data and getting different instruments to express themselves like the analog equivalent has opened my ears to how each instrument expresses itself. The subtle nuances that make sax express itself different from a trumpet or guitar. This in turn has increased my enjoyment of listening to music. I can listen to an old LP or CD that I've heard a million times and hear something new.

So while there is nothing wrong with the RealTracks, there is also nothing wrong with MIDI tracks either. MIDI doesn't sound good or bad, but different MIDI synthesizers sound good or bad. And many synths have both good and bad voices built in.

The synthesized pianos, organs, drums, and other instruments that superstars use on their records and in their live shows are virtually all MIDI based instruments. These people have roadies and can use anything they want. If the Hammond XK-3c synth didn't sound as good as a B3, they wouldn't use it.

The different tools in your toolbox are for different applications. You can use the big crescent wrench to hammer a nail, but a real hammer will work better.

For the newbies, repeat after me, neither MIDI nor GeneralMIDI sounds bad. The sounds are in the synthesizers.

Insights and incites by Notes

Approaching this logically as a NEW USER, I check out the demos and videos.
I don't understand midi.

For a while the VSC Dxi was not too bad. It worked and what came in the box worked with it.

Now as a new user I want to buy stuff but then I need an external module now because 64 bit over the counter soft synths are not available for a reasonable price.

Then I need good headphones but wait I got them and guys say you can't mix with them so I get a wee mixer and near field montiors and a sound card/input device and NOW:

Total Cost ...2 grand. Or more. But you get the photo.

If the system is sold as a Realtracks solution the customer does not have to become a midiot to make things work.

It would be great if everyone had to take a mid level hardware course.
Learn Midi in 100 simple lessons.
Learn BIAB by reading and understanding the whole manual.
AND make backing tracks for the Greatful Dead and Alice Cooper world tour Kiss Reunion using nothing but a netbook and Logitec speakers in grandma's spare room on a Sunday Morning.

Somehow the above has not quite happened, however I understand the Monkeys are still typing out the bible in Kurdish.

))) This is minimal editing, but it couldn't be done with RT

All kinds of editing is possible for RealTracks, including inserting song specific licks to replace the original ones.

There is a video tip here showing you how here.

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=316518&an=0&page=0#Post316518

If you read the thread, you will see other users responding with good success in editing projects to add song specific licks etc., using different techniques.

Or listen to the over 500 user compositions in the User Showcase, most of the compositions use RealTracks, and many use RealTracks that have been edited.

Wow , PG's Real Tracks wins hands down for sound ! Thanks for the comparison Peter !

I can see both sides of this issue. I use both midi and RTs in my cover songs. For original work i use mostly RTs, and live played tracks.

Back to covers which is what bob is talking about. I use a combo because i want the best of both worlds. Here is my method:

1. I start with a midi Kar song from the net, and pop it in RB.

2. I assign Rolands TTS synth top all the tracks, and play it through all the way checking for track sounds, and chord changes, lyric and chord symbols accuracy.

3. Open up Sampletank, and jamstix in the synth rack, and begin to audition the tracks one at a time for better sounds. I look for more reaslistic synth sounds for all the instruments. Piano, Guitars, Bass and drums. I usually allow TTS to handle things like strings, and such that are mixed in the back ground, unless it does not sound right.

4. I try Sampletank, Cakewalk studio instruments, TTS, and Jamstix for drum sounds, if I want to stay with the original drum track that is similar to the original song.

5. I audition RTs and Rds for replacements where i am unsatisfied with the midi results. Sometimes i want a specific sound or just to somewhat kill the midiness of the track. No matter what you do, some instruments never sound right as midi.

6. I mix the panning, volume, and such to taste and save.

I understand Bob's idea, especially since he is playing live over it, mostly as a duo. As a Solo player it is just me. as a Duo, you want the backing tracks as simple and clean as possible, you are the show. You solo, or your partner does. As a solo player, I might solo on occasion, but not every song, as it all starts to sound the same after a while.

Also there is the decision, do I want this to sound as close to "the original" as possible, or do i want to do a "version" of the song. To do knock off covers you need to stay very original, and that is midi turf. To do version, you want a fresh take on the song, and RTs really lend a hand here.

Recently i have been playing around with some old western swing type songs, and older traditional country tunes from the 40s 50s and 60s. I love that old sound, but love even more to modrenize them a tad, and that is where RTs really shine. A midi file with solid samples, and a couple well placed RTs can just come alive.

When I used Biab 2004 version ,I never needed an update to make more midi . Just hours on end editing ,now that there's RT's I could care less about midi editing and trying to make it sound real. To me it's like the difference between the wheel and a car , wheel good > car better it's just progress . Do I still use midi ? Only if there is no RT even remotely the same ,even then I would rather cut and paste a RT than to settle for midi sounds.

Basically in the world I live in, if I showed up at a writer's night with a BIAB or karaoke backing track I would probably be laughed or boo'd off the stage. It is "live" or nothing -- mostly just a guitar (or maybe another guitar/bass) and vocals. So my use of BIAB is 100% for recording original songs.

To be 100% truthful, if I was good at midi and musical notation and composing (and had good sound modules), I would probably use midi a lot more. You know I do have a PC88Mx which has lots of good sounds. Maybe I should try using that more often.

I have nothing against those that do the backing track gigs, it is just not for me.

I hear you kevin, but most gigs are not writers nights. They are folks eating dinner having a few drinks and listening to some old tunes they like. So backing tracks can give that feel. I have sat and listened to many different venues, and some folks can sit and entertain all night long with just a guitar and a mike, but after a while that gets somewhat old. Not to mention limiting since there are many genre's of music you can't do justice to that way. I have done several open mike nights, and i have to say half the folks there could use a good backing track.

There is room for all kinds of music.

Having listened to both Notes' midi file and the PG RT demo, i gotta say the demo fro RTs rocks big time, the other sound rather mechanical, and cheap. Now i know what Bob will say, it is my cheap mechanical synth in my desk top. he is right on, and first rate sound module would make that come alive to a degree, but it would still at best sound mechanical, and un real. If you use top flight synths, and a couple really good players over it, you can give a spirited song, but having Brent Mason, and John Varvis jam with me is totally hot!

having said that you can over do that as well. moderation is required in any thing. I have RT solo for me, and i solo for myself at times. I reworked the old coutry standard "From a Jack to a King" the other night and had John nad Brent sit in for the session. Wow what a dynamic tune.

Quote:

I play in a duo for a living. There are other duos in our area who use karaoke tracks they purchase on the 'net. Nothing wrong with that either. However, IMHO having real instruments in the backing track sounds like karaoke. Something about the timbre, the mix, and the blending of the instruments sound like a recording instead of a live performance.

Regarding the notion that songs recorded with Real Tracks sound like karaoke: I've researched the karaoke route, and an awful lot of it is MIDI. I dare say it's the MIDI stuff that gives karaoke a bad name. The BEST karaoke is recorded by real musicians in a studio. Now, if you're saying that real Tracks sound like the karaoke that's recorded by real musicians in a studio... that says something completely different about the sound of real tracks.

Quote:

Judging from the comments our audience members, many audience members know the difference too, because they tell me comments like, "Band X is only doing karaoke". The word only is the killer to my ears.

I dare say, the difference the audience notices is in your vibrant performance more than in the backing tracks. We're talking about the same audiences who barely differentiate between a real band, a DJ and karaoke.

Quote:

The different tools in your toolbox are for different applications. You can use the big crescent wrench to hammer a nail, but a real hammer will work better.

wait.. .are you saying that totally synthetic music is the real hammer but professional studio musicians playing note-perfect passages = the musical equivalent of using a crescent wrench to drive a nail??

whoah.

In the end, whether you start with MIDI or real tracks then mix down to an audio file for final use, you end up with a backing track that sounds like a live musician played it. Why on earth would you steadfastly resist using such a great tool?

A buddy of mine here is a drummer. Yamaha give him his drums. He tours with different bands, and it's all he's ever done.

Rockaoke! All the gear is setup. You get to sit in. Bring your axe. Drumsticks. Voice.

So the band plays, you sit in (even if one of them sits out), and you have Rockaoke!

That's how he fills in the Sunday to Wednesday slots when there's no work.

He tells me, once he got the gear hundreds of decent guitar players want to play. You just can't make money doing it. This way, only he gets paid. The guitar players have to know a standard repetoire they learn first.

Alas they start at 10 p.m. I'm in bed. No matter where I am, LOL.

Rockaoke..
that's an interesting concept.

it's kind of like combining open mic with a band that uses hired guns instead of regular members. The difference is that with Open Mic and karaoke, nobody gets paid. This way at least the guy who's clever enough to set it up can make some money.

In this case it's my friend Archie. He's single, a good drummer, and has a brain. He has never had a non music job, has been in at least 12 bands, 3 that have been around.

Like I said, any place that is over 250,000 probably has 2,000 or more guitar players and they all want in.

I think it's a cool concept but you need the group and a market.

The wife and I were out tonight and I liked the band, so it's 2:30, we saw a show, (Again I understood ZERO all night, ) then went to a local bar I used to go to 30 years ago, and the band played a lot of stuff I sort of know.

I'm undecided on all that. My hearing is crazy bad. Love yours, you have no idea. The lack of even a small part is a huge loss. The biggest thing I would like back is that. The lack of balance, the fact I have NO spit, the sore neck, the weird hair loss, that's nothing, my hearing is the thing I want back, and it's just gone for good.

And, now for something completely different.!!! I fart in your general direction!!!!

Quote:

Plus for my purposes, backing tracks for live duo performance (1) I'm going to play the solos myself and (2) to me the RTs sound too much like karaoke.

YMMV

That's funny, I feel the same about every full midi track I have heard! So I guess my Mileage Does Vary...

The old argument that "midi don't make a sound" is moot really, because a well created midi track played back thru the even the windows GM will sound well arranged & acceptable...but it will STILL sound like midi.

The best midi track I have ever heard from this forum is from Mac. His Steely Dan cover is tops...but it still sounds "midi"....there is no infliction of notes, no "feel" if I can use that term without getting crucified. What I mean is that even tho the ENTIRE track sounds great, there is no "feel" to each instrument of the whole.

The RT are the same tho...you have to "re-generate & re-generate" parts to get something both Different AND Acceptable at times...but the Sound of a Real Musician playing even the Same Part over & over 3 or 4 times across a whole song is more acceptable than a midi part IMHO.....

Quote:

<...snip...>

Notes, I have great respect for you as a person and as a musician. Please hear what I'm about to say in that context. Some of what's being said here doesn't jive with what's been said before

I seem to recall you saying on more than one occasion that you have been playing along with MP3s for quite some time. If there is a difference between the raw punch of a MIDI module and that of an audio file, both played through the same PA... by going to the MP3s, you've put yourself in the same place as the guy using real tracks. Once you've ended up with audio, the punch is in the mixing and mastering

There is a lot of difference between playing for a LP/Tape/CD/DVD than for playing for a live audience. I've done both, and what I play and the way I play my sax for a record is way different for the way I play my sax for a live audience.

There is a world of difference in how musicians approach playing in a studio. This is why so many great bands use studio musicians for their recordings while they play their own instruments live. Studio people know how to make a good recording, live people know how to play to an audience. Of course there are many who can change proverbial hats and do both.

Plus when recording for a CD/LP/Tape the recording engineer and later the mastering engineer use a good deal of compression, equalization and other FX to 'smooth out' (for lack of a better term) the recording. Everything seems to blend.

The main difference might be that I am not using any compression (other than the slight compression of a high bit rate mp3 file), another difference is that I have the parts mixed for a live performance, another difference is I have exaggerated the groove for live performance, another difference is I have different amounts of reverb and other FX on my MIDI instruments so that they don't blend and sound more separate (the acoustics of the room will take care of that) just like live musicians do, another difference is that I am recording the MIDI parts as if I might play them live, not as a studio session. I'm not sure as I let my ears be the judge as I play the music and play with the computer apps.

I do know that when I played my MIDI file of the Etta James version of "Shakey Ground" and followed it with the recording of Etta James singing it for a musician friend who happened to be there, his first comment was that my backing track has a lot more punch than the recording. He wasn't listening to evaluate our performance, he had never heard the song by Etta James before so after we rehearsed it, we played the Etta version for him.

Those musicians on the Etta James' "7 Year Itch" LP/CD are monsters, and I don't consider myself to be better than them by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, my backing track is an approximation, as close as I could get to the recording for the basic parts that I wanted to cover, leaving out parts for us to play live. The difference is that the recording was played, mixed and mastered for a recording, and my backing track was played, mixed and mastered for a live performance.

If I were playing to a karaoke track of the same song, it would sound like karaoke and wouldn't have the punch of my present backing track.

It's also why many of our audience members come up to us and tell us they appreciate the fact that we aren't doing karaoke like _________ (here they name some of our competitors). The audience members can tell the difference, even if they can't put their finger on why.

Again I'm not dissing RTs, I think they sound great, and I think PG Music has worked their usual magic with them. There are pros and cons to everything. If you have a car that gives you great performance, you have to sacrifice fuel efficiency. When using MIDI you sacrifice a little tone (depending on your synth) but you gain the ability to manipulate the sounds and therefore the expression of the track(s).

And for those of you who think MIDI cannot be as expressive as a 'real' instrument, remember virtually every modern synthesizer has MIDI 'under the hood'. Try telling Keith Emerson, Stevie Wonder, Rick Wakeman, and thousands of other synth players both on stage and in the studio that, and I think they will respectfully disagree.

I posted the solo of me playing synth guitar on this page http://www.nortonmusic.com/clips.html on a major guitar forum. I played it on a wind MIDI controller and a Yamaha VL70m synth module with the "turbo" chip in it. I asked the guitarists to evaluate my guitar playing, not telling them it was done on a synth. I got loads of compliments, one even told me that the guitar playing was "Jeff Beck like" (wow! that blew me away, I love Jeff's playing) and after the thread ran a few pages I admitted that I wasn't playing a guitar at all. The comments after that were still favorable with comments like "amazing", and only one person posted that there was something about it that sounded like it wasn't a real guitar, but he wasn't sure about that.

MIDI like any other instrument takes time and practice to learn. I didn't play the sax, flute, guitar, bass, drums, wind synth, or MIDI sequencer well the first time I picked each on of them up. It took practice and time to develop my hand/ear coordination. And while some people may think of it as work, I think of it as play. It is simply a matter of putting the time in it while you strive to improve your skills. The rest takes care of itself while you are playing. And I mean playing.

I call all these instruments toys until it's time to do my income taxes for the year, then they suddenly become tax deductible tools.

So for me, any compromise in tonal quality of MIDI tracks is more than compensated by the ability to manipulate the MIDI tracks, to play with them until I get something better than the original (at least to my ears). If I want that guitar to play a song specific lick at the end of the phrase, I can do it ... if I want to change a few bass notes to complement the rest of the song, I can do it ... if I want to create an accent and then a swell on the string line in a particular place, I can do it ... if I want to change that electric piano part to an 'attack clav', I can do it ... if I want to change those brass licks to piano or organ parts, I can do it ... if I want to change the 'leslie' speed on the organ from slow to fast on a particular chord, I can do it ... if I want to add a lot of chorus to that Rhodes part, I can do it ... if I want to scoop a sax note on the attack of a note, I can do it ... if I want to change that picked bass to a synth bass, I can do it ... if I want the entire 'band' to play a rhythmic 'kick', I can do it ... if I want to change the intro or the ending, I can do it ... if I want more snare drum on the 2nd and 4th beat of each measure, I can do it ... if I want a drum accent to help kick the attack of that horn line, I can do it ... the possibilities are only limited by my imagination and the MIDI tools at my disposal. I can't do any of that with pre-recorded loops.

I repeat: So for me, any compromise in tonal quality of MIDI tracks is more than compensated by the ability to manipulate the MIDI tracks. Of course, as always YMMV. There is more than one right way to make music.

Insights and incites by Notes

I think that it would be a good idea for PG to make a realtrack to feature the one and only Bob "Notes" Norton.

musiclover

On this comparison page (RealTracks, software MIDI synths, hardware MIDI synths)....
http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=347191&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

on request, we added a few more soft and hardware synths....

Software Roland Hypercanvas (TTS-1)
- note: this is available as a purchase from us (you buy Cakewalk Music Creator ($39), and it includes this great synth. http://www.pgmusic.com/musiccreator.features.htm

Software Coyote Forte $40
http://www.pgmusic.com/coyotefortedxi.htm

Hardware (older) Roland Sound Canvas SC-155

====================
Here's a list of all the synths (and RealTracks) demo'd in this link....

The MIDI synths are the
1. Roland VSC Software (Virtual Sound Canvas), (similar to MS GS WaveTable and Coyote WT Wavetable)
2. Roland Hypercanvas (TTS-1) software (better than the Virtual Sound Canvas, and compatible with all Windwos versions. (32 and 64 bit)
3. Coyote Forte Softsynth
4. Roland SD-20 Hardware Sound Canvas (newer module)
5. Roland SC-155 Hardware Sound Canvas (older module)
6. Ketron SD2 Hardware Module

I have BIAB now for about a month .Those GM2 Sounds are terrible ,I don't know why anyone would put that junk on a product ,It sounds like a Toy Keyboard .It is the Real Tracks that got my Interest.If there is a song that sounds cheap I try to convert them to Real Styles or Tracks. It makes a big Difference.My next step will be to have hands free control over track control in Real Time. I'M Looking into Foot Switches to control my computer keyboard so that I can have access to muting and un muting Tracks. I see you can program solos in different parts of a song but in my opinion being able to use foot control for that is far better because you can drop solos or tracks in and out of a song any where and any time in the song .It feels less robotic and gives even more realistic sound to a song in Real Styles.Over all I've been having lots of fun so far with BIAB.

Regards,
Greg

Quote:

... Those GM2 Sounds are terrible ,I don't know why anyone would put that junk on a product , ..

You wanna know how I know you haven't really read the thread?

GM sounds can be very good, depends on the synth.
I swear I'm gonna make a GM song some time on a bunch of different synths just to prove the point. (oops Peter has already done that above)
I wrote a classical piece once, for just such a comparison to a friend. *Which* GM synth it was written on (and played on) made a huge difference. Then when it was customized to fit a certain sample set (GM or not) it was an even bigger difference.
Someone made a good analogy recently; MIDI is like a written score. It has all the info, but what each note sounds like is up to the sound source (be it musician or synth)

Again; MIDI has no sound, it's just a spec. So is GM and GM2 .. it can sound like a toy or an orchestra. It would be fun to take that classical piece and try it on the really nice orchestra softsynths, but it's low on budget priority right now.

That said, I agree the realtracks sure are nice and fun to work with.

When I had my Yamaha psrs900 arranger it sounded good right out of the box that is because from the start they use only high quality sounds. I would agree GM can sound good if you spend time and money on a Synth to do that but don't you think Biab could have taken the time to have Taken care of that before they put it in the Box? But from a business stand point the less they put into a product the more they make so I understand that side of the fence also . So It all comes down to dollars and cents. but over all I like the product because the Real Styles are Ready to go.

Regards,
Greg

Quote:

I would agree GM can sound good if you spend time and money on a Synth to do that but don't you think Biab could have taken the time to have Taken care of that before they put it in the Box? But from a business stand point the less they put into a product the more they make so I understand that side of the fence also . So It all comes down to dollars and cents. but over all I like the product because the Real Styles are Ready to go.

Regards,
Greg

are you suggesting that PGMusic should have shipped your software bundled with a $1,000 hardware synth?

A good system accommodates a wide variety of accessories. Each customer prefers different gear. PGMusic's job is to make sure that whatever the customer buys, it works with the system.

Likewise, you can get good food if you spend time and money on it. But When you buy a refrigerator, it doesn't come stocked with food. Each person fills it with the food he/she likes.

Elvis,

(Really? You're using a pic of Elvis for an avatar?)

Maybe you should read the ENTIRE thread before posting. PG doesn't create MIDI sounds. They create commands. How it sounds on your end is up to you and your synth.

No what i'm suggesting is they could have built the Synth right into BIAB so the midi sounds would come out sounding right from the start. And I do understand that the price would have to be set higher and I'm sure there would be a market for that kind of unit don't you think ?

Regards,
Greg

Quote:

No what i'm suggesting is they could have built the Synth right into BIAB so the midi sounds would come out sounding right from the start. And I do understand that the price would have to be set higher and I'm sure there would be a market for that kind of unit don't you think ?

I think there is a market for that, with many companies in the software/hardware synth business. PG music probably has decided that they can't compete and lets the users decide which way they want to go. PG Music probably pays for the license to distribute the soft synths they have in BIAB/RB now and then users can choose better ones depending on their needs. While I agree it would be nice for PG Music to include the "best" synth, it is hard to decide which one is the best for all users. Most users probably want to choose the one(s) they want to work with.

Kevin

I agree, MIDI controlled synthesizers (including GM and GM2) can run the gambit from sounding like a kazoo to indistinguishable from the 'real thing' depending on how much money you spend on the synth.

I've read in trade magazines and seen in the DVD extras that entire movie soundtracks have been produced with MIDI controlled synths. Many commercial recordings have MIDI controlled synths on them. Virtually every modern synth player is playing a MIDI controlled synth. So obviously there is nothing wrong with MIDI sounds.

However most of us only have enough money to buy a decent to very good MIDI synth. A very good synth will not sound quite as 'real' as an audio loop.

For sound, loops are slightly better than the average good MIDI synth.advantage audio loops

On the other hand MIDI data is infinitely editable by the end user. You can do millions of things to a MIDI track that you cannot do to an audio loop.

For edit-ablity, MIDI tracks are much better than audio loops.advantage MIDI

- - - - - -

So which is better? MIDI tracks or Real Tracks??? Neither one.

It depends on what you want to do with it and who is going to be listening to it.

For me it's MIDI for the reasons I don't need to repeat here. For others it's the RTs. Still others will want to mix the two. There is more than one way to make music.

But I will repeat this, the title of this thread is "Unhappy with MIDI sounds" and of course that means "Unhappy with the poster's MIDI synthesizer sounds."

MIDI synths can sound so like the real thing that even recording engineers have been fooled. It depends on how much cash you have to spend and how good the player is.

Each user has to balance the ability to edit the tracks with the ability of the audience to distinguish between the tone of the synth and the track. We musicians listen much more critically than the general public. If you play a recording of two tenor sax players, John Coltrane and Stan Getz to the average listener, they would think they are playing different instruments. If you play the same two to a musician he/she will tell you one has better tone than the other. If you play the same two to a good sax player, he/she will tell you reasons why the two tenor sax tones are different.

Considering my audience, most of them care more about expression, song specific licks, entire band kicks (figures), and other things that make a song less generic than they do about the finer points of the snare drum or other comp instrument sounds. I am going have vocals and two more instruments added to the backing track (sax, guitar, wind synthesizer, tactile MIDI controller and/or flute). MIDI tracks give me that capability where the loops do not. But that's for me. There is nothing wrong with others doing a song entirely made of RTs. We each have our own 'formula' and our own priorities.

When I play the standard introduction to songs like "Old Time Rock And Roll", "Satin Doll", "Superstition", "Time In A Bottle", "Take The A Train", "In The Mood", "At Last", "Your Momma Don't Dance and Your Daddy Don't Rock And Roll", Dancing Queen", "Black Magic Woman", "Don't Be Cruel", "Dreams", "Soul Man", "Hold On I'm Comin'", "Spanish Eyes", Pretty Woman", "Rockin Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu", "California Dreaming", "Margaritaville", "Crocodile Rock", "Brick House", "Sweet Caroline", "Twist And Shout", "Just The Way You Are", "Conga", "Hot Hot Hot", "Midnight Hour", "Moonglow", "Sea Cruise", "Smooth Operator", and scores of other songs, the audience immediately recognizes them and gets up to dance or stays on the dance floor. When the proper entire band kicks, horn lines, and other important parts are played by the entire band, they feel it. As you can tell I play for a baby boomer audience (good pay, short hours, appreciative audience), but it would work for any audience. Especially with many of the more contemporary songs that could not even exist without their song-specific parts.

But again, these are my needs. And for my needs, MIDI tracks are superior.

For yours, RTs might be better.

For others, combining the best of both.

Just don't tell me that MIDI sounds bad when MIDI has no sound or I'll get up on my soap-box again. I don't do this to criticize but to help. If you understand the limitations and capabilities of the various tools in your BiaB tool box, you can use them wisely and make better music. And isn't that what it is all about?

Notes

Quote:

No what i'm suggesting is they could have built the Synth right into BIAB so the midi sounds would come out sounding right from the start. And I do understand that the price would have to be set higher and I'm sure there would be a market for that kind of unit don't you think ?

It's already there, Greg. Look at the home page, they sell Music Creator so you can get Rolands TTS-1, the Coyote Forte DXi, both for $40, Garritan JABB for $169 and the Ketron SD2 for $399. What more do you want? Apple includes Garageband and the sounds are decent but it's not going to scare Ketron users or me with my new Kurzweil PC3. No other DAW I'm aware of includes a high quality softsynth with the program. Sonar includes the TTS-1 but that's hardly a high quality synth, Reaper? Cubase? Reason has it's own stuff but look at the cost.

Sounds are up to the user, you can simply run a midi cable from your keyboard and then Biab will play that. Where's the problem?

Bob

Norton no need to get back up on the soap Box . Well exsplained lol :O) I can tell your heart is in music by the length of your response .

Regards,
Greg

Bob I sold my keboard a while back or I would have used that with BIAB. You said that there is Music Creator.I Really don't understand how that hooks up with the midi in BIAB .Does each midi have to be worked on or does it just take over all the midi sounds that are all ready in biab ? Im well aware of the sounds in Ketron products but not sure if the good sound of ketron is going to be present in the Music Creator software ,What is your opinion on that ? As far as good sound I like the yamaha arranger sounds ,Roland arranger sounds ,Ketron .If Music creator sound any less quality then any of those I probley would not be happy with it. Thanks for your support :O)

Regards,
Greg

Greg, you are really either missing the point here, or trying to fluster people. You keep saying the midi sounds in the software. Lets just get this back on track, midi has not sound it is information, that is sent to a synth (hardware or software) to make sounds. BiaB comes with the Coyote wavetable to make basic sounds from the midi data. You the user has the option then to upgrade to whatever synth will sound right for you. Some use the ketron hardware unit, others use the Roland TTS synth that comes bundled in Cakewalk music creator, others buy a different synth. You get to choose.

Music creator is a Recording studio software package similar to the RB or PT here at PG. PG chooses to sell it since it has the TTS synth in the package. If you want the good sounds of ketron in Music Creator, or RealBand, or BiaB, or Cubase you need to output the midi data to that hardware synth.

If you want top end synth sounds then buy ketron, or a Roland or Yamaha keyboards, or a rack mounted synth modules. I personally use Sampletank, a sample based software synth, along with TTS, and a couple more.

I use BIAB to rough out my songs then get it into Realband where the funwork begins.

Love and primarily use the Realtracks but these midi forums and the customizability of the midi "notes" have piqued my curiosity in this area.

I've ordered a Yamaha EZ 200 keyboard to experiment with midi.
Will be interested to see how it's synth compares to the Coyote Forte DXi I purchased from PG.

Am I correct in assuming that the Yamaha will show up as an option in the "Choose a synth" dialog in addition to my Coyote Forte DXi?

Also that each track can have a different synth if desired?

Any advice or links to a good basic midi tutorial will be greatly appreciated.

Carkins

Been reading this thread for a while now, & am amazed at how passionate some of the responses are.

IMHO Notes has it right on the head - YMMV - use the software your way for your kind of music.

I personally use MIDI the same way that Notes does, & have been using it since Powertrax 2.1 came out That was such a long time ago). Lots of changes to software & equipment since then. For my single with backing gigs I find that MIDI lets me customise all parts of the backing track using a PC, & played through a decent Yamaha keyboard synth, gives me the backing that I like, & that my audience (generally) likes.

Don't really care how others use BIAB, or what they use it for. I know how & why I use it. That is what is important. You don't like MIDI, use RT, don't like RT, use MIDI. YMMV, we are all different.

BTW - totally agree with all the different reactions to midi sounds, cos there are none. The same MIDI information will be processed differently by all synths. You don't like the sound, don't blame the information, look at the equipment.

Just my 0.02c worth

Simon
Canberra Australia

Dunno if the EZ 200 has it's own MIDI driver or not (which would determine if it shows up in driver list or not). It may require a USB-MIDI adapter in which case it would show up as that driver.. it would likely show up in an area near the Forte DXi (since t is software and the Yamaha is hardware) but should be intuitive enough to figure out.

Yes; each track in RB can have its own synth .. up to 16 software synths and however many hardware synths you can figure out how to route with available putput ports. MIDI OUT port restriction has never been an insurmountable issue here, so basicly each track can have its own synth for all practical purposes.

If you want multiple hardware synths you may need multiple physical ports or learn how to be creative with the existing ports, but RB is up to task in this regard as long as hardware allows it.

RB simply sends the MIDI out to any available MIDI port (per track), be it software or hardware.

I seem to recall that back in the old Windows 98 days, user could customise the midi mapper & send different MIDI channels to different synths/outputs. This is one feature that seems to have been lost in Windows - real pity, it was quite a useful feature. Sounds like RB can do this - this would make it a useful upgrade for me.

Simon
Canberra, Australia

Thanks Robh and everyone else for the input .Something to look into in the future.

Regards,
Greg

Yes, I did have to order a USB/MIDI cable.
Excited to solve the mysteries of MIDI.
Thanks for the input.
Carkins

Quote:

You said that there is Music Creator.I Really don't understand how that hooks up with the midi in BIAB .Does each midi have to be worked on or does it just take over all the midi sounds that are all ready in biab ?

Greg, I'm not getting on you at all because this stuff is confusing to a lot of people and you're trying but you're not getting it. Again you use the phrase "the midi sounds that are all ready in biab". THERE ARE NO MIDI SOUNDS ALL READY IN BIAB. Burn that into your brain. BIAB HAS NO SOUNDS. Get it?

Think of Biab like your PC keyboard you just used to type this post. What happens if you unplug your keyboard from the computer and then tried to type something? Absolutely nothing would happen. That's Biab. Biab has to be "plugged" into a synth or nothing happens. Both Biab and your PC keyboard are controllers that control what happens inside a computer. Think about that concept for a moment.

There are two types of synth, hardware and software. Both use your computer as a "switchboard". If it's a software synth then you "plug" Biab into it via software controls inside the program. If it's hardware then you still use the software controls but add a physical connection using a midi cable from your external synth to the computer. Once that hook up is made then Biab still controls it from within the program.

Now, move on to Music Creator. The TTS-1 is a decent GM software synth. Not great, nowhere near as good as the Ketron or my Kurzweil but decent. You can't buy the TTS-1 separately because Cakewalk only bundles it with their recording software like Sonar, Home Studio or MC. MC is the only one of those that's inexpensive enough to buy it just for the TTS-1. If someone wants to use it for recording also fine but we already have Real Band for that but still MC can do that too.

This is enough basic education for now, keep reading and asking questions.

Bob

(1) Either you missed the point or you are flustering the people.

(2) Maybe you should read the ENTIRE thread before posting.

To answer the first question I would answer no I am not flustering the people but sometime miss the point.

To Further exsplain my self you all need to read this artical to fully understand me and why coming on this forum is a challenge for me as well as learning how to use a program like BIAB . I sometimes am feeling like I do not fit in to this forum and so to better understand me please read the artical below .I am not only doing this for me but for all those millions that go un herd and do not speak out. This may be your first time in understanding this so please read carefully . Thank you

Top 5 Emotional Difficulties of
People with Learning Disabilities

Click Home
________________________________________
1. Shame
People growing up with a learning disability often feel a sense of shame. For some, it is a great relief to receive the diagnosis while for others the label only serves to further stigmatize them. For many adults, especially older adults, an accurate diagnosis was unavailable. These individuals were frequently labeled as mentally retarded, written off as being unable to learn, and most passed through the school system without acquiring basic academic skills.
Sadly, these feelings of shame often cause the individual to hide their difficulties. Rather than risk being labeled as stupid or accused of being lazy, some adults deny their learning disability as a defense mechanism. Internalized negative labels of stupidity and incompetence usually result in a poor self concept and lack of confidence (Gerber, Ginsberg, & Reiff, 1992)
Some adults feel ashamed of the type of difficulties they are struggling to cope with such as basic literacy skills, slow processing, attention difficulties, chronic forgetfulness, organizational difficulties, etc.
The following myths about learning disabilities have perpetuated the general public’s negative perception about learning disabilities:
Myth #1
People with learning disabilities have below average intelligence and cannot learn.
Fact
People with learning disabilities have average to above average intelligence (Gerber. 1998). In fact, studies indicate that as many as 33% of students with LD are gifted (Baum, 1985; Brody & Mills, 1997; Jones, 1986). With proper recognition, intervention and lots of hard work, children and adults with learning disabilities can learn and succeed!
Myth #2
Learning disabilities are just an excuse for irresponsible, unmotivated or lazy people.
Fact
Learning disabilities are caused by neurological impairments not character flaws. In fact, the National Information Centre for Adults and Youth with Disabilities makes a point of saying that people with learning disabilities are not lazy or unmotivated (NICHCY , 2002).
Myth #3
Learning disabilities only affect children. Adults grow out of learning disabilities.
Fact
It is now known that LD continues throughout the individual’s lifespan and “may even intensify in adulthood as tasks and environmental demands change” (Michaels, 1994a). Sadly, many adults, especially older adults, have never been formally diagnosed with a learning disability. In fact, the majority of people with learning disabilities are not diagnosed until they reach adulthood (LDA, 1996)
Myth #4
Dyslexia and learning disability are the same thing.
Fact
Dyslexia is a type of learning disability. It is not a another term for learning disability. It is a specific language based disorder affecting a person’s ability to read, write and verbally express themselves. Unfortunately, careless use of the term has expanded it so that it has become, for some, an equivalent for "learning disability".
Myth #5
Learning disabilities are only academic in nature. They do not affect other areas of a person’s life.
Fact
Some people with learning disabilities have isolated difficulties in reading, writing or mathematics. However, most people with learning disabilities have more than one area of difficulty. Dr. Larry Silver asserts that "learning disabilities are life disabilities". He writes, “The same disabilities that interfere with reading, writing, and arithmetic also will interfere with sports and other activities, family life, and getting along with friends." (Silver, 1998)
Typically, students with LD have other major difficulties in one or more of the following areas:
• motor coordination
• time management
• attention
• organizational skills
• processing speed • Social skills needed to make friends and maintaining relationships
• emotional maturation
• verbal expression
• memory
Many adults with learning disabilities have difficulty in performing basic everyday living tasks such as shopping, budgeting, filling out a job application form or reading a recipe. They may also have difficulty with making friends and maintaining relationships. Vocational and job demands create additional challenges for young people with learning disabilities.
Myth #6
Adults with learning disabilities cannot succeed in higher education.
Fact
More and more adults with learning disabilities are going to college or university and succeeding (Gerber and Reiff 1994). With the proper accommodations and support, adults with learning disabilities can be successful at higher education.
2. Fear
Another emotional difficulty for adults with learning disabilities is fear. This emotion is often masked by anger or anxiety. Tapping into the fear behind the anger and/or the anxiety response is often the key for adults to cope with the emotional fallout of learning disabilities.
Feelings of fear may be related one or more of the following issues:
• fear of being found out
• fear of failure
• fear of judgment or criticism
• fear of rejection
Fear of Being Found Out
Many adults with learning disabilities live with fear of being found out. They develop coping strategies to hide their disability. For example, an adult who can hardly read might pretend to read a newspaper. Other adults may develop gregarious personalities to hide their difficulties or focus on other abilities that do not present learning barriers. Unfortunately some adults will have developed negative strategies such as quitting their job rather than risking the humiliation of being terminated because their learning disability makes it difficult for them to keep up with work demands.
The fear of being found out is particularly troublesome for many older adults who have never been diagnosed with a learning disability or those who received inappropriate support. Such adults were frequently misdiagnosed with mental retardation, inappropriately placed in programs for the mentally disabled, and/or stigmatized by teachers and classmates. In later life, these adults often return to learning through adult literacy programs in order make up for lost educational opportunities. Seeking help is a difficult step forward for these adults because it requires them to stop hiding their disability. The simple act of entering a classroom can be an anxiety producing experience for adults who have been wrongly labeled and/or mistreated by the educational system. For these adults, returning to a learning environment is truly an act of courage!
Low literacy skills and academic difficulties are not the only type of learning disabilities adults try to hide. Adults with social skill difficulties may live in constant fear of revealing social inadequacies. For example, an adult who has trouble understanding humour, may pretend to laugh at a joke even through they don’t understand it. They may also hide their social difficulties by appearing to be shy and withdrawn. On the other hand, hyperactive adults may cover up their attention difficulties by using a gregarious personality to entertain people.
Fear of Failure
The National Adult Literacy Survey, 1992, found that 58% of adult with self-reported learning disabilities lacked the basic functional reading and writing skills needed to experience job and academic success (Kirsch, 1993). Most of these adults have not graduated high school due to the failure of the school system to recognize and/or accommodate their learning disability. Needless to say, adult literacy programs are a second chance to learn the basic academic skills missed out in public school. As mentioned above, going back into an educational environment is often a fearful experience for adults with learning disabilities. One of the main reasons for this is the fear of failure. Many adults reason that, if they have failed before, what is to stop them failing again and, if they do fail again, then this failure must mean they, themselves, are failures.. The tendency for adults with learning disabilities to personalize failure (i.e. failure makes ME a failure) is perhaps the biggest self-esteem buster for adult learners. Educators need to be aware of these fears to help learner’s understand that failure does not make them a failure and making mistakes is a part of the learning process.
For most people, anxiety about failing is what motivates them to succeed, but for people with learning disabilities this anxiety can be paralyzing. Fear of failure may prevent adults with learning disabilities from taking on new learning opportunities. It might prevent them from participating in social activities, taking on a new job opportunity or enrolling in an adult education course.
One positive characteristic that often helps adults overcome their fear of failure is their ability to come up with innovative strategies to learn and solve problems. These strategies are often attributed to the “learned creativity” that many adults with learning disabilities develop in order to cope with the vocational , social and educational demands in their everyday lives. (Gerber, Ginsberg,& Reiff, 1992).
Fear of Ridicule
Adults with learning disabilities frequently fear the ridicule of others. Sadly, these fears often develop after the individual has been routinely ridiculed by teachers, classmates or even family members. The most crushing of these criticisms usually relates to a perceived lack of intelligence or unfair judgments about the person’s degree of motivation or ability to succeed. For example, comments such as “you’ll never amount to anything”, “you could do it if you only tried harder”, or the taunting of classmates about being “in the mental retard class” have enormous emotional effects on individuals with learning disabilities. For many of these adults, especially those with unidentified learning disabilities, these and other negative criticisms, continue to affect their emotional well-being into their adult years. It is not uncommon for adults to internalize the negative criticisms and view themselves as dumb, stupid, lazy, and/or incompetent. Such negative criticisms often fuel the fear adults with learning disabilities have about being found out.
Fear of Rejection
Adults with learning disabilities frequently fear rejection if they are not seen to be as capable as others. If they come from a middle to upper class family where academic achievement is a basic expectation for its members, fear of rejection may be a very real concern. They may also fear that their social skill deficits will preclude them from building meaningful relationships with others and may lead to social rejection. Prior experiences of rejection will likely intensify this sense of fear.
3. Environmental and Emotional Sensitivity
Environmental Sensitivities
Adults are often overwhelmed by too much environmental stimuli (e.g. background noise, more than one person talking at a time, side conversations, reading and listening at the same time). Many people with LD and ADD have specific sensitivities to their environment such as certain fabrics they cannot wear, foods they cannot tolerate, etc.
Emotional Sensitivity
Many adults with learning disabilities see themselves as more emotionally sensitive than other people In its most extreme form, high levels of emotional sensitivity are both a blessing and a weakness. The positive features of this trait helps adults with learning disabilities build meaningful relationships with others. For example, they are often very intuitive and in-tune with both their own and other people's emotions. Sometimes they are actually able to perceive other's thoughts and feelings. However, this strength also serves as weakness due to its propensity to overwhelm the individuals. Emotional difficulties occur when they are unable to cope with the onslaught of emotions they are feeling. Highly sensitive adults with LD may be moved to tears more easily or feel their own and other people’s pain more deeply. For example, Thomas West, writer of "The Minds Eye", not only gives a thorough explanation of Winston Churchill's learning disability, but also describes his sensitive nature. West details Churchill's tendency to break into tears quite easily" (West, 1997) even out in the public eye. He notes one incident in which Churchill was moved to tears after witnessing the devastating effects of a bomb.
This description of Churchill also serves to highlight the strong sense of justice that many adults with learning disabilities possess. Unfortunately, this sense of justice often serves as a double edged sword. On one hand, it is refreshing to behold the passion of many of these individuals in their fight to overcome injustice. While on the other hand, this very passion, when it crosses the line into aggression, can cause social rejection and/or emotional overload. Often the individual may be unaware that their behavior has turned aggressive. They only wish make their point known and have others understand it. This type of over reaction is not a purposeful attempt to hurt anybody. It is more likely to be caused by a difficulty with monitoring their emotions and consequent behavior.
4. Emotional Regulation
Difficulties with regulating emotions are common for highly sensitive adults with learning disabilities. Dr. Kay Walker, describes the connection between learning disabilities and self-regulation problems in her paper “Self Regulation and Sensory Processing for Learning, Attention and Attachment”. She asserts that self-regulation problems frequently occur in those with learning disabilities (Walker, 2000) In its most extreme form, individual may easily shift from one emotion to the next. Others may experience difficulty regulating impulsive thoughts or actions.
Fortunately, most adults have learned to handle their emotional sensitivity to avoid becoming overwhelmed or engaging in negative social interactions. Nevertheless, some adults may be so deeply affected that they become depressed or suffer from anxiety. A lack of school, job and/or social success will likely add to this emotional burden. Some adults with LD, especially those who have been ridiculed by their family members, teachers and/or peers, may be more apt to take criticism to heart because of their experiences and/or their ultra-sensitive nature. Emotional wounds from childhood and youth may cause heightened emotional responses to rejection. In turn, social anxiety and social phobia may result
5. Difficulty Adjusting to Change
Change is scary for everyone, but for people with learning disabilities and other neurological disabilities, change may be particularly difficult. Children with learning disabilities may prefer procedures to stay the same and have a hard time moving from one activity to another. Usually this difficulty becomes less of an issue as the child matures. However, adults with learning disabilities may still experience difficulty adjusting to change in more subtle ways . For example, some adults will have trouble moving from one work task to another without completely finishing the first task before moving on to the next one. Adults with learning disabilities are frequently described as inflexible when it comes to considering another person’s view point or a different way of doing something.
Adjustment to change is difficult for adults with LD because change brings the unexpected. In general, people with learning disabilities are less prepared for the unexpected. The unexpected may bring new learning hurdles, new job demands or new social challenges. Since all these areas can be affected by learning disabilities, it is no wonder why change can produce so much anxiety for adults with learning disabilities.
To avoid the tendency to blame the person for their lack of flexibility, it is important to understand the neurological basis for this difficulty with adjusting to change. With this said, through social skills practice, adults with learning disabilities can improve their ability to tolerate change. In addition, parents, instructors, and other professionals can help adults with learning disabilities by making transition processes easier through understanding and accommodating the adults’ needs

________________________________________

I use Master Tracks Pro as my MIDI sequencer of choice, but I cannot recommend it because when GVox bought it from the originators (Passport) they introduced bugs that they have not fixed in over 7 years. We're still waiting. I still use it because for me it's the easiest MIDI sequencer to use and I've learned how to get around most of the bugs. Like most modern synths, MTPro allows up to 960ppq and up to 16 different synthesizers without having to buy a MIDI Patch Bay.

I have a half dozen external synths and a couple of hardware samplers. One synth might have the best bass patch for a particular song, another might have the best Rear Pickup Tele sound for the clean guitar, another might have the best organ sound, and another the best sax sound. I can mix and match to my hearts content.

Some of the voices on my synths sound so real that it would take golden ears to tell them from a recording of the real thing. Others sound different, but that can be good as well. I have a brass patch that sounds much reedier than a real brass section, but in the right song it works better than a more traditional sounding brass section. I have a patch on my VL synth that is supposed to sound like an alto sax that was made out of glass -- I love that sound. I have a patch on my pre-GM Roland MT32 that is called "Doctor Solo" that sounds much like an analog synth lead patch, and I find that works for sequencing the background singers' parts in a song (I don't want real human voices because it will shout KARAOKE to the audience).

The ability to choose from thousands of virtual instruments gives me a huge sonic palette. This adds a lot of variety to my music so all the songs don't start sounding the same. I just worked up Stevie Wonder's "Superstition" for a Friday 13 party I'm doing this week. I used a patch called "Attack Clav" for the famous clav figure and then added another not so aggressive clav to run guitar-like lines to complement the "attack clav" and I'm really happy with the results. We tried it out at a party last Saturday and as soon as the introduction with that famous figure started, a half dozen ladies enthusiastically hit the dance floor.

When I'm all done sequencing my MIDI parts I'll put the output of the mixer into the input of PG Music's Power Tracks Pro Audio. For the money this is the best audio recording value I've ever seen. I'll record everything on PTRro and then make a WAV File, turn the WAV file into a high bit-rate, high quality mp3 file and take that to work.

I used to drag around all my synth modules to the gig, but I started thinking about what would happen if one failed on the gig. It's impractical to bring a duplicate road 10 space road rack filled with duplicate modules just in case one of them dies, but a spare computer with the mp3 files duplicated on it is no problem at all. That way if one computer dies, I switch to the spare (always up and running) by moving the USB->Audio interface to the backup computer and the audience doesn't know there was a problem. I've had to do this twice since I went computer in 2002.

If you are interested, I have a web page that explains how I make my backing tracks and how I use them on stage http://www.nortonmusic.com/backing_tracks.html - it's the sum total of the experience I've had doing a duo track gig since 1985 and the easiest method I've found to date.

I started using MIDI back in the 1980s, and it's amazing how the tools have grown. The 128 continuous controllers allow for a huge amount of expressiveness http://www.nortonmusic.com/midi_cc.html -- and they aren't even all used yet. Plus there are controllers dedicated so that individual synth manufacturers can use them for custom controls.

When audio loops came around, I bought some loop software but it was frustrating. It was like a person who is skilled at creating oil paintings being forced to go back to 'paint by number' sets. The honeymoon of those great loops was over very quickly when I realized just how many things I couldn't do with the loops. Things that I've been doing for years that help me make my music both personal and more expressive.

The depth of what you can do with MIDI is incredible. But like any musical instrument, it isn't instant gratification. It takes time and practice to get good at it. But since the controls can be done in computer time rather than real time it's a lot easier than learning saxophone, piano or guitar. And it's fun to get over another hurdle, listen to the playback, and think to yourself, "I did that!"

Plus playing with MIDI has taught me a lot about musical arranging. I took music courses in school, but without an orchestra at my disposal, arranging was just theory - facts in my head. I couldn't afford to hire an orchestra to see how an idea of mine worked out. Now with MIDI I can try things out and listen to them in the privacy of my own home. I can even get daring and break the rules just to see what it sounds like, and if it sounds terrible, I'm the only one who knows.

MIDI gives me the creativity that I crave. I love listening to other people's music, but I love creating music even more.

The tools have grown phenomenally since I started using MIDI on my Atari/ST computer way back in the 80s. When I started using Band-in-a-Box it was on the Atari, when I started writing styles Peter Gannon generously offered to help me my convert the styles to the PC format so I could sell them to a broader market (thanks Peter). Then I got my first PC, running BiaB as a DOS program, before it went Windows and I bought a Mac Classic ][ running OS6 on Motorola chips. Back then BiaB was limited to 3 instruments, drums, bass and piano, and had virtually no features other than auto-accompaniment (it didn't even have any endings). In fact, the entire program fit on a floppy disk.

Now look at it. The good folks at PG Music have expanded the program so it is virtually the "Swiss army knife" of musical apps. There are plenty of features that I have absolutely no use for -- these are for other people to enjoy. And there are plenty of features that make my life easier and my music creations more expressive while it makes the process of making music easier.

As Zone1958 indicated, I'm passionate about my music. It's my life, it's my love and it's just not what I do for a living, being a musician is what I am.

I hope PG never abandons the core MIDI aspect of this great app, and I also hope they continue to develop the core MIDI functions so that people like myself who like to have ultimate control over the music we create can continue to have improved tools to do just that.

And as for those features that I don't use -- I'm glad they are there for others to enjoy.

Insights and incites by Notes

This is a most remarkable thread!

Quote:

I'm passionate about my music. It's my life, it's my love and it's just not what I do for a living, being a musician is what I am.

I hope PG never abandons the core MIDI aspect of this great app, and I also hope they continue to develop the core MIDI functions so that people like myself who like to have ultimate control over the music we create can continue to have improved tools to do just that.

And as for those features that I don't use -- I'm glad they are there for others to enjoy.

Insights and incites by Notes

This is me, also.

These are my thoughts, also.

Your quote is from a killer post (yet another killer post by you) in an amazing thread.

I clicked on the "How I make my backing tracks and how I use them on stage" link in your thread.

This is not my gig; it won't be my gig. But I not only bookmarked that, I saved it, in case you take it down. Anybody that asks me about that gig gets your link, along with "This guy's really successful. Here's his method. It would be a great starting point for you."

I was astonished at your generosity in posting that on the internet. Among other things, I realized that any / all of your competitors could read and apply that knowledge.

What specificity!

I laughed when I read, "If someone comes up and puts a hug sum of money on the keyboard and asks for a special request we know, I can slip that in as soon as it is appropriate to do so."

I wondered what a "huge" amount of money was! Then I read it a second time and saw the typo.

I laughed again. Cause it is a "hug" if you think about it.

It's a "hug" to the song and that couples' life experience with the song.

It's a "hug" to each other, by that couple.

It's a "hug" to the "Sophisticats" for the good time that couple is already having.

Yet another "insight" by Notes, the touch-typist!

My wife and I live over 1000 miles from your locale. I found myself wishing that we could attend one of your gigs.

I'm positive we would have fun!

Quote:

MIDI sounds can be fabulous, as good or better than "actual" for some instruments (especially bass, piano, drums). Particularly if you're recording your own tunes, able to play the parts on keyboards, yes, choose MIDI instruments, and you'll get great results. No hassles about setting up mics to record the instruments etc. ...

Peter Gannon's quote from earlier in this thread

describes me, exactly.

describes my experience, exactly.

Peter's comment on the quality of MIDI "sounds" and the recording process is 100% consistent with my experience. Note the "better than 'actual'" part.

Myzone,

Don't wonder if you fit in here... you fit in just fine. I've noticed that in every group, there is a "getting used to each other" stage, and it's no different here. We've all had to work at fitting in, and I dare say many of us have wondered if we fit in at some point. But this isn't about anything but music... and if you use PGMusic products to enjoy your music then you fit in here, period. There's no other qualification!

Welcome to the forum

Thank you Marr for your understanding .

Regards,
Greg

Since all the MIDI GURUS seem to be watching this forum thought I'd post here for some advice.

Just got a Yamaha EZ 200 MIDI keyboard, in my price range, very nice sounds and I think will be a good start for a non player like myself to get into MIDI.
Only drawback is the lack of a Pitch Bend Wheel.

I assume Pitch Bending can be done somehow in the Realband Piano Roll Window?

Any "simple" advice on how to accomplish this or direction to a tutorial will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Carkins

Quote:

Since all the MIDI GURUS seem to be watching this forum thought I'd post here for some advice.

Just got a Yamaha EZ 200 MIDI keyboard, in my price range, very nice sounds and I think will be a good start for a non player like myself to get into MIDI.
Only drawback is the lack of a Pitch Bend Wheel.

I assume Pitch Bending can be done somehow in the Realband Piano Roll Window?

Any "simple" advice on how to accomplish this or direction to a tutorial will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Carkins

Hi Carkins...
1) go to this thread and read it
http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/showflat.p...;gonew=1#UNREAD

2) on the picture there is a drop-down list box that says CONTROL... using that same list box, there is another option called PITCH BEND

3) follow the instructions in the above thread to see how to change the amount of pitc bend
(you do it by changing the numbers in the lower pane of the piano roll)

hope this helps

Thanks Pat,
Much appreciated.
Carkins

Maybe I'm trying the wrong thing in the Realband Piano Roll.

What I would like to do is generate or play on my Yamaha keyboard (no Pitch Wheel),a midi guitar part and then be able to bend the notes (or "strings") ala BB King blues or using a whammy bar in certain parts.

I thought Pitch Bend was what I wanted but maybe not?
Don't have the USB/MIDI cord yet so have to use Realband to generate the MIDI for now.

Generated a Midi Solo (Barney K Blues Guitar) using a Distorted Midi Guitar Patch
Opened the Piano Roll, selected Pitch Bend from the View Edit.
Went to the bottom window and drew all sorts of curves (using Control+Shift pen tool )below a variety of notes.
On playing them back I could notice no bending effect?

Are the Midi Solos blocked from changing them?
Do I have to remove or zero out some number somewhere to allow the Pitch Bend to work or am I using the wrong Edit selection?
Do I need to use a variety of selections to get that string bending sound?

Thanks for your patience,
Carkins

Carkins,

what you did should have worked. I'm out of town at the moment, so I can't get to my music computer to verify what works. If somebody else doesn't reply, I'll get back to you on this sometime over the weekend.

Speaking from memory:
In pitch bend mode, there should be a straight line down the middle of the lower pane. That represents the nominal pitch. In order to make a bend, you need more than one click . One click will just change the pitch of the whole part and leave it there.

For a guitar-like pitch bend, you need a whole series of clicks that ends up forming a curve or line under the MIDI note you want to bend. Immediately after bending, you should click back on the nominal line to restore the pitch to the the "unbent" note.

To bend UP, you start at the nominal line, and make an arc of clicks ABOVE it, each click progressively higher than the one before it. How high you go depends on how much of a bend you want to simulate. Realistically, a guitar rarely bends more than a full step

Likewise, To bend DOWN, you start at the nominal line, and make an arc of clicks BELOW it, with each click progressively LOWER than the one before it.

Don't forget to click on the centerline after the bend, or the passage will sound out of key.

Make sure you are adding pitch bend to the right track. Even though you can see the MIDI notes from your guitar track, it is possible to be adding your pitch bends to a different channel. Look at the picture in the previous thread again... there are list boxes where you can select the track and channel. Make sure they both match the track and channel of your guitar track. If you did add it to the wrong place, easiest place to change it without doing it over is in the events list. Just edit the track/channel and leave the bends as-is.

Greg, I have a fair amount of understanding about learning disabilities because my long time lady is a retired teacher and she earned her Masters in children with learning disabilities and has written a book about it called Parents In Control. At the time she was one of three people taking that program in the entire state of California. She has become an unofficial consultant to a lot of parents in the neighborhood with small children. Like so many wannabe authors just like so many musicians she's not yet been able to publish it but I've read it and there's good stuff in it. If you would like please feel free to PM (private mail) me and I'll walk you through getting this set up. All you do is click on my username and at the bottom of the page that opens up click on "send a private message".

Bob

Quote:

<...>I clicked on the "How I make my backing tracks and how I use them on stage" link in your thread.

This is not my gig; it won't be my gig. But I not only bookmarked that, I saved it, in case you take it down. Anybody that asks me about that gig gets your link, along with "This guy's really successful. Here's his method. It would be a great starting point for you."

I was astonished at your generosity in posting that on the internet. Among other things, I realized that any / all of your competitors could read and apply that knowledge.<...>

I come from a generation of sharing. Back when musicians met face to face and shared our secrets, it benefited everybody. I remember when I was 18 an older sax player teaching me how to get that buzz tone on the sax. In the 80s I remember asking another musician "What is a sequencer?". I could go on and on. The Internet hasn't changed that. It just expanded it. You can go to YouTube and get free guitar/sax/violin/theory/etc. lessons.

The best way to pay back the people who have been generous and shared information with me is to pass it on to others.

If it helps others the way others have helped me, it's a good thing.

And my competitors are free to use the info. Hopefully our vocal skills and my multi-instrumentalist skills on stage will still keep us one notch above the rest.

Carkins, the info Pat Marr related to you should be helpful. A little practice at that method and you should be able to make realistic guitar bends.

A few points about my observations about my own guitar playing. (1) I bend up more often than I bend down. (2) When I bend down, I usually do so on the first note of a phrase (3) when using vibrato with my fretting hand, the pitch goes from zero to higher pitch and never lower than zero (4) when using the whammy bar for vibrato it goes from zero to lower pitch and never higher than zero (although my guitar does have the option for a floating whammy bar, I have it locked in the traditional down only position).

Notes

Thanks Pat and Notes for the info.

Following your leads I was able to get the Pitch Bend to work rather crudely, but I'm sure that practice, practice, practice will eventually get me to the alley next to Carnegie Hall.

Is there a way to copy and paste bends I like to other notes in the Piano Roll or in some other Window?
I notice some of the notes in the "Barney K Blues Guitar Midi Solo" already have bends I'd like to duplicate.

Can these bend dynamics be saved to apply to future projects and if so where?

Also a WARNING (also mentioned by several others in another BIAB forum post below which I read too late)to those who are thinking of ordering the inexpensive USB/MIDI cord on amazon to connect their Yamaha midi keyboard to either Win XP or Win 7
DON"T WASTE YOUR MONEY IT DOES NOT WORK!:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003XTX09S/ref=oh_o00_s00_i00_details

Better off ordering one of those recommended in this recent BIAB post "Slightly OT: Where to Buy a USB-MIDI Cable That Works?"

Thanks again for all you do,
Carkins

Quote:

To answer the first question I would answer no I am not flustering the people but sometime miss the point.

To Further explain my self...

Greg,
Way too much to read, but I did scan it and I do understand. We all have our crosses in life to bear and you should and will find proper respect and help here in the forum. Ask away and we will take good care of you here. Welcome to the forum.

Quote:

Is there a way to copy and paste bends I like to other notes in the Piano Roll or in some other Window?
Carkins

that's a good question... I've never tried it. Best way to see if it works would be to try it on a project that doesn't matter if it doesn't work as planned. If you look at the sample you like and try to recreate that same pattern in your song, it may work.

a couple of other ways to introduce string bends:

1) if you have a whammy pedal, you can run the output of the guitar track thru the whammy and record the whammy pedal's output to another audio channel. That way you could change the pitch in real time while listening to the music and you'd probably get a better sounding bend.

2) You can buy programmable MIDI pedals like the Roland EV-5 that can be used in place of the pitch wheel when you record your MIDI. The same pedal can be used to control volume, pitch, modulation, etc etc (not all at the same time though) In order to use it, you need at least one device in your MIDI chain that accepts a pedal.

3) use real tracks that include bends

Realband has a feature under Actions called "Realtime control' which is a virtual slider/pitchwheel option. Dunno if you noticed that, or if you are working in RB or BiaB ..

You should be able to edit-copy and use the data filter to copy just CC's you want, or any other data for that matter.

Quote:

Realband has a feature under Actions called "Realtime control' which is a virtual slider/pitchwheel option. Dunno if you noticed that, or if you are working in RB or BiaB ..

You should be able to edit-copy and use the data filter to copy just CC's you want, or any other data for that matter.

I never noticed that before... thanks.. I'll check it out

-------OLD DOG-O-METER---------
OLD TRICKS______/_NEW TRICKS

I notice that the realtime control doesn't seem to change anything while I'm playing... but after the fact in piano roll mode, I can record over a track and add only the real time CC bends, and when I quit and save it, the bends appear in the piano roll. its actually a pretty good way to add pitch bends... much more intuitive than drawing them in with the mouse.

You also might try using a Pedal Controller http://www.midisolutions.com/prodped.htm

I've had a Footswitch Controller from MIDI Solutions for well over 10 years and it has operated flawlessly since the day I received it.

You could hook the MIDI outputs of your Keyboard and the Pedal Controller into the inputs of a MIDI Merger http://www.midisolutions.com/prodmrg.htm and the output into your computer via a MIDI-USB interface.

Then you could use a pedal connected to your Pedal Controller to create Pitch Bends or any other continuous controller effect you want in real time while you are playing the keyboard.

Notes

Hi all,
I tried the demo of Coyote Forte a long time ago and don't remember if I liked it that much. I bought the TTS-1, the cakewalk softsyth. I like it somewhat. I still always liked the VSC and the Real SC-55.

Can anyone post a link to anything they have recorded using the Coyote Forte DXI. I would love to hear the sound again before I pay the $40. They won't let me demo it a second time and I have no reference to what the sounds were like. Anything simple with Drums, Bass, Piano and strings would be great.

Thank you, Wayne,

Quote:

Hi all,
I tried the demo of Coyote Forte a long time ago and don't remember if I liked it that much. I bought the TTS-1, the cakewalk softsyth. I like it somewhat. I still always liked the VSC and the Real SC-55.

Can anyone post a link to anything they have recorded using the Coyote Forte DXI. I would love to hear the sound again before I pay the $40. They won't let me demo it a second time and I have no reference to what the sounds were like. Anything simple with Drums, Bass, Piano and strings would be great.

Thank you, Wayne,

Here's a page Peter Gannon set up recently to show the differences between some of the commonly used synths

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=347191&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

You can hear the same song(s) played through the VSC and the forte (as well as some other heavy hitters)