Hi everybody.
I thought about the discussion (http://forum.openmpt.org/index.php?topic=3637.0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0) that I had with Mr. Unlconed about natural (or not natural) sounding (vsti)-guitars. I always believed that I have to use a seperate instance of the vsti for every nuance. And I think that the effort is disproportionate to the benefits.
Now I found a text about "param-control-notes" in the German OMPT-wiki (http://sagamusix.de/openmpt/Param_Control-Noten). If I understood the text correctly, it seems to be possible to control with these notes the parameters of a vst(i) directly in the pattern-editor, which could be extreme useful and relativly easy to use. Of course, I heard about those "Zxx-macros", but I must confess I did not understand it... :oops:
The problem that I have manifests itself as follows:
After loading a plugin in OMPT I assigned the pc/pcs-notes to the keys '<' and '>'. But now, when I try to insert these notes into the pattern-editor by pressing the keys, nothing happens.
What have I done wrong?
Greetings
TheEagle
Hi,
Param-control notes are only available in the MPTM format, so you may need to first convert your song in mptm.
Now, if you double-click on a note, the note list will open and you can find PC and PCS (at the end of the list).
Imho the problem with PC/PCs is that you can't edit them with the graphic param editor.
As for Zxx and /xx(smooth) commands (IT or MPTM), they're not that hard to use :
1) In your VSTi window, select Info->Macros->SF1:unused (or any empty slot), then turn the knob you want to automate.
Same thing for other knobs in SF2, SF3, ... to assign them.
2) Then in any channel, enter the number of your instrument (01) and SF1 to control the knob you assigned to SF1 (after that you enter the Zxx or /xx values):
... 01 .. SF1
... .. .. /07
... .. .. /09
... .. .. /0B
In the same channel or in another one, you can control the second knob you assigned to SF2 :
... 01 .. SF2
... .. .. /39
... .. .. /37
... .. .. /34
Multiple knobs/parameters can be modified simultaneously.
3) You can set the /xx values with the param editor (Alt+B) or you can also record it live while playing the track :
In your VSTi window, select Options->Record Params, then turn the knobs you assigned (while playing the song), the parameter is recorded in the pattern.
You may have to add manually the instrument number next to SFx and don't forget to uncheck Options->Record Params once you're done.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong. :wink:
Most likely you're not working in MPTM format, which would explain why the "<" and ">" keys (on a German keyboard) don't work. Or maybe you're just not using the latest keymap files and they're not assigned yet? You can always get the latest version of the DE_Jojo keymap on the wiki.
Also, regarding the 3rd method Paul explained, I would like to add that in the next version, when using the MPTM format, this will be a lot easier as param control notes will automatically be used.
Thank you very much for the quick & detailed answer, Paul I simply forgot that the ".it"-format doesn't work here.... :oops:
Quote from: "Jojo"Most likely you're not working in MPTM format...
Uhmm, yes, you're right. I have already noticed that this was the fault... :oops:
Anyway, I think I will try to go ahead with the pc-notes. zxx-macros seem to be too complicated for me.... :wink:
especially, zxx macros are a lot more limited.
Quote from: "Jojo"especially, zxx macros are a lot more limited.
They have been doing their job pretty well though and have some good points (like not using the note/instrument/vol data), are they going to be obsolete ?
Quote from: "Jojo"Also, regarding the 3rd method Paul explained, I would like to add that in the next version, when using the MPTM format, this will be a lot easier as param control notes will automatically be used.
That's very good news ! 8) I hope the Alt+B param editor will feature PC/PCs as well, although it will requires a minimum 999 pixels high window to be accurate...
TheEagle, In your example you have 2 values 000 and 500 used with linear interpolation ( /\/\/\/ ) : I think more subtle musical expression like bending for guitars or saxophone glissando requires the yet-to-be-released editing capabilities for PC/PCs to draw curves or record live.
Quote from: "Paul Legovitch"In your example you have 2 values 000 and 500 used with linear interpolation ( /\/\/\/ ) : I think more subtle musical expression like bending for guitars or saxophone glissando requires the yet-to-be-released editing capabilities for PC/PCs to draw curves or record live.
I agree. It was just trial for me to see how it basically works.
Anyway, again I thank you both for your help and I'm looking forward to the next version of OMPT, so keep on coding,
Jojo and all the other devs..... :D
Paul: Yes, for controling plugin parameters they're obsolete now, but not for their other purposes.
Quote from: "Jojo"Paul: Yes, for controling plugin parameters they're obsolete now, but not for their other purposes.
So I won't be able to assign vst params to SFx like before ?
you will, at least for the next few versions. just like assigning VST instruments to channels (as it was done before) is "deprecated", but still possible.
Quote from: "Jojo"you will, at least for the next few versions.
Why would it be taken away?
Well, there is no reason for such plan indeed (at the moment at least), but you can never know what happens in the future.
In this sense working with samples is a lot easier since the "humanization" codes are already there and functioning. Pitch bends, vibrato, etc. in the IT native format.
Mr. Eagle - you might have an easier time, in the short run, to use samples of guitar in a more traditional manner. If you need samples I can provide them for you - especially after my finger fully heals.
I already have some useful ones here
http://clones.soonlabel.com/public/cjv-guitar/singlenotes/
and the hi-e dark is the one I was referring to that overcame the format problem. Of course these are available to everyone.
About samples I agree with uncloned, that's why trackers were great in the first place.
You can record one or several notes from your VSTi and create a classic sample-based instrument.
About parameters (sorry for highjacking a bit the thread) : I like SFx control. PC notes do not remember the parameter number, it has to be written in every row. With SFx commands, the same pattern filled with Zxx values can be used several times while inserting other patterns with SFx data that will change the current parameter and instrument affected by these values. I like these tracking possibilities a lot also for easy edition (change one value and all is changed).
Why not make PC 00 000 xxx remember the last parameter used ?
Concoerning humanization, VST Instruments are better in many cases IMO because they either can automatically change their sound per note (so that every note sounds different) or you get a whole different sound if you assign a different volume command to the note that plays the VSTi, meaning that you get many different articulations of a note with minimal effort.
that is IF the VSTi is well written it will have timbre manipulation.
I know Kontakt does that with its orchestral samples - not so sure a free or cheaper VSTi would.
But... the discussion is about pitch manipulation - not timbre manipulation.
And timbre changes are relatively minimal for a distorted electric guitar which is the instrument for which humanization is under discussion.
Well, I was mainly thinking of synths (in contrast to "real" stuff) here, where a simple lfo helps a lot with humanization.
well.. but you can do a simple LFO with a tracker and samples natively so... I'm puzzled with your point then that VSTi are better.
Hell, you are misunderstanding me. I don't say that either of them is better. My point was that adding humanization is often less hassle with VST Instruments as many of them actually act in a way that every single note press sounds different. Of course there is general rule that every plugin does that! But just try playing a synth line with a sample and a VSTi. To archive the same "dynamic playing" as you get it with VSTis, you need at least 10 samples and have to work with pattern codes etc, while you only need to enter notes with VSTis.
Quote from: "Jojo"Concoerning humanization, VST Instruments are better in many cases IMO because they either can automatically change their sound per note (so that every note sounds different) or you get a whole different sound if you assign a different volume command to the note that plays the VSTi, meaning that you get many different articulations of a note with minimal effort.
Dude... you DID say better.
None the less people like IT-Alien have demonstrated incredible life-like sounding music with just a tracker and samples. It takes work to do it, more work than I was ever willing to put out - but it can be done - VSTi's are simply a nice thing to use and by no means a necessity.
edit
Betrayer is another example - and there are lots of them.
/edit
Wrong part of quote highlighted, let me do that for you again:
QuoteConcoerning humanization, VST Instruments are better in many cases IMO (...)
I never ever said that VST instruments are better in any case!
Quote
None the less people like IT-Alien have demonstrated incredible life-like sounding music with just a tracker and samples.
I know that very well. I do appreciate mod music a lot, maybe more than most of you here (since I listen to it all day long). I have a lot of great-sounding mod music here, many tracks which even an experienced person could take as sequences tracks made using gigabytes of samples, just because of their awesome sound.
But you are arguing for Mr Eagle to NOT use samples but instead use VSTi's for which OMPT seems to not have a fully developed interface to do what he wants to do.
Or if the interface is developed and easy to use please explain it.
My point with suggesting samples and using native tracker effects is that it would be EASIER to use right now to achieve MOST of what he want's to accomplish.
If it was EASY to do with VSTi's - from the sound of his replies, he would ALREADY be doing it with VSTi's.
Quotehe would ALREADY be doing it with VSTi's.
How so? He neither has all VSTs nor all samples in the world which would be able to do what he wants. VSTs are simply controlled in a different way than samples, and often, you don't even have to "control" them like you control samples - as they do many things by themselves. I do neither say that TheEagle should use samples, nor that he should use VSTs. He should use whatever suits him best. I'm just explaining this in general.
Are you saying then - everything you just said in the last few posts, has no meaning whatsoever to this conversation?
I'm like totally confused.
I thought we were trying to help Mr. Eagle out.
To that end, the easiest and most direct way for him to achieve pitch bends and vibrato guitar leads with the tools he has in hand or can acquire for free, is the agenda of this conversation.
Jojo - can you help or no?
This got useless as soon as you picked up on my post (first post on page 2). Everything until then made perfect sense.
jojo,
you love to argue and have real problems dealing with opposing opinions as far as I can see.
Let me just say that we are talking guitar and you were talking synthesizer here in page two. That is irrelevant.
And the VSTi''s that I have used change *timbre* not vibrato or create pitch bends based on velocity - which is the *only* easy way to control a VSTi as you mentioned. Yes, VSTi can and do work like that - but I can't see how it helps.
So you know....
I have no problem with opinions as long as they don't try to invalidate correct things I say. And in this case. I was mainly thinking of synth plugins, however the same can apply to guitar plugins - although those that probably take this into consideration and make composing easy are pretty expensive. For guitars it's still wise to record them oneself, yes, but you don't always have this possibility. Then a good plugin might help as well.
And I fail to see how a bit of general information and advice (which even fitted into the topic, which was originally about param control notes) can be irrelevant to such a disucssion.
Please see the last two posts of page one. The idea of using a VSTi to emulate a lead guitar was just discarded. That is the context in which I read your first post on page two which stated that
QuoteConcoerning humanization, VST Instruments are better in many cases IMO
and my immediate response
Quotethat is IF the VSTi is well written it will have timbre manipulation.
I know Kontakt does that with its orchestral samples - not so sure a free or cheaper VSTi would.
But... the discussion is about pitch manipulation - not timbre manipulation.
And timbre changes are relatively minimal for a distorted electric guitar which is the instrument for which humanization is under discussion.
As for me, I have a vested interest in this subject because I really appreciate Mr. Eagle's music - he has a talent that not every one has.
And Jojo,
I have a great deal of respect for you, don't think otherwise.
I hope this explains things a bit. In my opinion we should drop this and get on with helping Mr. Eagle.
Quote from: "Paul Legovitch"About parameters (sorry for highjacking a bit the thread)
Perhaps you're not the worst hijacker in this thread :)
Quote from: "Paul Legovitch"like SFx control. PC notes do not remember the parameter number, it has to be written in every row. With SFx commands, the same pattern filled with Zxx values can be used several times while inserting other patterns with SFx data that will change the current parameter and instrument affected by these values. I like these tracking possibilities a lot also for easy edition (change one value and all is changed).
While the macros can indeed be more convenient in many aspects, there are also drawbacks: \xx or Zxx commands are not independent in the sense that they can depend not only on what channel they appear on but also on the playback history. Parameter control notes on the other hand are independent: one command defines its behaviour regardless of the channel they appear on or the playback history, which simplifies their usage: for example they can be safely copied and pasted without worrying about setting the right macro. But of course this is not to mean that macros couldn't be very useful when used right.
Quote from: "Paul Legovitch"Why not make PC 00 000 xxx remember the last parameter used ?
I'm not sure would it be worth the effort. It would destroy some of the simplicity and currently 'interpolate effect' when used with parameter control notes automatically fills other columns and one ended interpolation is also possible, i.e. can interpolate parameter control effect value to empty command. That can help, although it's surely shorter to add one SFx command.
But possibility to use control channels, that is channel that would be assigned to control defined plugin and parameter so they could be just one column wide, would sound like a real improvement in this matter.
Thank you for the answer, I understand. As usual drawbacks can be considered as advantages and vice versa.
PC-notes are very promising for sure, (the hijacking continues...) I think it would be great to be able to convert a VSTi patch (preset) into a list of PC notes (in the cilpboard), so that a new patch could be "loaded" during a song via this list written in several rows of a pattern when the VSTi is not playing.
Back to the topic :
In IT format, I use several effects for humanization :
- E/F/G (pitch slide/glissando)
- SDx (delay) : to play the note a bit before or after the beat.
- O : sample offset to alter the timbre.
- S9F : to play the sample backward (good for violins, some guitars)
- H/R : vibrato (H) and tremolo (R) are good when holding long notes.
I sometimes like to use a long instrument filter envelope, with envelope carry.
Varying how notes end is also possible with note off/note fade or quick D0x volume slide down (can be combined with vibrato or pitch down).
I'm not sure how XM commands and instruments convert to IT - though I think you'll have better luck going in that direction.
Here are some coding examples and remember I was developing the technique so not all parts are excellent examples as well I am NOT an excellent module coder - not all all like the greats. But at least I understand these and can tell you what I'm doing if needed. The bass often has slides as well. In fact that bass sample is great! Some anonymous person made it and I have yet to find a better one.
Beware I do use guitar feedback samples liberally - but the distinction should be clear. On guit09-5.zip I tried to include a bit of the noise a guitar makes when played in the style - but this seems to have been lost upon the listener and just sounds like "errors".
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/deadland.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/guit09-5.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/time8.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/brain-8.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/school.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/thespell.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/agent77-.zip
http://clones.soonlabel.com/mods/travell8.zip
(I'm posting this list in free music as well)
To continue the hijacking... :P
Quote
I'm not sure how XM commands and instruments convert to IT - though I think you'll have better luck going in that direction.
IT instruments are a superset of XM instruments. Most XM pattern commands are also available in IT. The few missing ones are only Kxx (key off) and Lxx (set envelope position), I think.