Howdy Ladies & Gents
I've been using Modplug for years now due its versatility and ease of use. As a classical composer, I aim for the most NATURAL realistic sound possible. The basic question here is, If I use the BEST samples out there and convert them into MP Instruments why shouldnt Modplug tracker be as good as high priced "proffesional programs?
What do those other programs have that Modplug doesnt (for the classical field) :?:
Thanks Folks
MPT currently doesn't support 24/32bit samples natively, so you won't get as good sound quality as with some (or most :) ) other programs. Using a plugin sampler will help the issue, but you'll lose the full flexibility of the pattern editor effects.
That said, some people seem to be using OpenMPT for professional purposes successfully.
Quote from: "rewbs"
That said, some people seem to be using OpenMPT for professional purposes successfully.
Like me :)
Quote from: "rewbs"MPT currently doesn't support 24/32bit samples natively, so you won't get as good sound quality as with some (or most :) ) other programs.
Is there a simple way to show or give an explanation how significant or relevant the sound quality difference in practice really is?
i think that the fact that modplug only does up to 16bit samples is not really a problem since this is what cds have and thats what most people listen to music on (or lower quality, eg. mp3s). i'm more concerned about the quality of the mixing of sounds and the resampling in modplug.
the resampling - can be easily checked by looking at a frequency view of a highly repitched sample output by modplug and looking for added harmonics that are introduced by the repitching. modplug comes out ok here but not the best. if you are using multi-sampled instruments then this will not be an issue at all since each will playback at the correct pitch with no repitching needed.
the mixing - i have no idea about how to test this for quality easily, it sounds ok to me but programs such as cubase etc. are supposed to be better in some way, i'm not up on the technical stuff here...
No, but I can assure you, its there!
I've done a check between MPT and Fruitty Loops 6 with the exact same VSTi, VST effect and melody.
Compared the result, and FL6 had a better high-end.
really, i only have two issues with the professional quality of mpt:
1) lack of multi-layer instruments (something that REALLY would help especially when emulating real instruments)
2) the extremely confusing plugin system (makes mixing very hard, tho recently i have been exporting instrument tracks, and mixing in tracktion which seems much more suited to that). also, this isnt really a big issue with classical style stuff, since mixing would be pretty basic.
the 24/32bit samples would be nice, but i only have a few of them to begin with, so its not a big deal to me right now...
Oh, wait I confused Professional and Profession :P
I use MPT for my profession. I'm not sure if I can call myself a professional in music, but I'm surely not a rookie either :P
Quote from: "LPChip"Oh, wait I confused Professional and Profession :P
I use MPT for my profession. I'm not sure if I can call myself a professional in music, but I'm surely not a rookie either :P
1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession
b : engaged in one of the learned professions
c (1) : characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace
2 a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer>
b : having a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier>
c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return <professional football>
3 : following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a professional patriot>
EDIT: I thought you worked at a bank?
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"Quote from: "LPChip"Oh, wait I confused Professional and Profession :P
I use MPT for my profession. I'm not sure if I can call myself a professional in music, but I'm surely not a rookie either :P
1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b : engaged in one of the learned professions c (1) : characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace
2 a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer> b : having a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier> c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return <professional football>
3 : following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a professional patriot>
EDIT: I thought you worked at a bank?
I do work at a bank, but I also have my own company which is a gamesdevelopmentstudio, where I'm resonsible for the music.
EDIT: Bytheway, what do you mean with your post, cus I kinda didn't understand its meaning :P
Quote from: "Snu"really, i only have two issues with the professional quality of mpt:
1) lack of multi-layer instruments (something that REALLY would help especially when emulating real instruments)
Excuse my lack of knowledge but could someone explain what multi-layer instruments are? Hear of them all the time, but not entirely sure what they are.
Have a virtual beer.
2 KrazyKatz
I'm not living in the classical field, but I agree about OMPT being the best tool so far for composing.
You call it 'versatility and ease of use', I call it 'maximum control over the process'.
Professionality is another thing. It's more about craftmanship dealing with the tools and material available. Not that much about earning a living by producing quick-made fruity loops.
A professional doesn't have a priority for 'ease of use' i.m.o., knowing that one has to learn first.
In this way the degree of professionalism has no relation to the value of resolution of the samples used.
Of course there is a bottom threshold concerning acceptable quality.
But due to the excellent resampling algoritm of OMPT even using 8 kHz 8bits samples can produce almost Cd-quality.
So aiming for 'the most Natural realistic sound possible' related to resolution, can lead to a senseless overkill.
Is a human, with the fysical properties of the ears, capable of hearing the difference between a 256 bits sample and a sample of 48 bits ? I don't think so.
Quote from: "LPChip"No, but I can assure you, its there!
I've done a check between MPT and Fruitty Loops 6 with the exact same VSTi, VST effect and melody.
Compared the result, and FL6 had a better high-end.
As previously discussed, I'd like to see more details of this test. You sent me some stuff a while back but then said it wasn't valid. It would be nice to see:
1. The original IT and FL files, as simple as possible (avoid EQing etc..).
2. Rendered WAVs from MPT's and FL's respective renderers.
3. Rendered WAV from MPT and FL, but made using the same 3rd party renderer (e.g. tapeit).
4. Spectrum analysis and diffs of the various WAVs.
I don't doubt that FL's sound is much better, but it would be nice to take the problem one step beyond an emotional comment. :)
There's always a possibility that the relative poor quality in MPT is exacerbated by some configuration setting, like the attenuation or ramping or something. A little analysis could point out any low hanging fruit.
Quote from: "KrazyKatz"Excuse my lack of knowledge but could someone explain what multi-layer instruments are? Hear of them all the time, but not entirely sure what they are.
If you strike a piano key very softly, it will not sound the same as if you strike it with force (disregarding the change in volume). With multilayered instruments you could have many versions of the same samples but with different velocities, so that the sample actually played will depend on the (probably in MPT's case) volume of the instrument. They way MPT works now, an instrument can only contain one sample per note.
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"Professionality is another thing. It's more about craftmanship dealing with the tools and material available. Not that much about earning a living by producing quick-made fruity loops.
I take it you have never used FL Studio then?
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"In this way the degree of professionalism has no relation to the value of resolution of the samples used.
Of course there is a bottom threshold concerning acceptable quality.
The bottom treshold of acceptable quality is currently at 24 bit resolution.
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"But due to the excellent resampling algoritm of OMPT even using 8 kHz 8bits samples can produce almost Cd-quality.
If you have 8 kHz 8 bit samples, everyting above 4 kHz will disappear. You'd have to have very bad hearing to consider that "almost CD-Quality".
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"So aiming for 'the most Natural realistic sound possible' related to resolution, can lead to a senseless overkill.
Is a human, with the fysical properties of the ears, capable of hearing the difference between a 256 bits sample and a sample of 48 bits ? I don't think so.
The limit for when most people can't tell the difference is around 16 bits, but that's irrelevant since we're talking about samples that will be processed and mixed.
Quote from: "LPChip"I do work at a bank
So can you, like, get free money and stuff? ;D
Quote from: "Snu"2) the extremely confusing plugin system (makes mixing very hard, tho recently i have been exporting instrument tracks, and mixing in tracktion which seems much more suited to that).
This is, IMO, one of the biggest problems with MPT right now...
The paradigm of having an effect on e.g. an aux channel and then being able to send from various channels at various levels to that effect, is the way it usually works on a real mixing console. As far as I can tell, this is not possible in MPT.
So for example if I have a reverb effect, I might want to send a only a little bit of guitar through it but quite a bit of lead vocal but you can't do that in MPT (I think). We need the ability to create submixes or mix groups and route them through effects...
Quote from: "yrk"Quote from: "LPChip"I do work at a bank
So can you, like, get free money and stuff? ;D
I wish :lol:
Quote from: "yrk"
So for example if I have a reverb effect, I might want to send a only a little bit of guitar through it but quite a bit of lead vocal but you can't do that in MPT (I think). We need the ability to create submixes or mix groups and route them through effects...
This is not true. You can have as many reverb (for example) effects as instruments (if you want to), and adjust each individually to your taste. So, I see no problem with this.
i see the reverb thing as a big problem too (or whatever effect, but yeah i most often use reverb in this way.) it is possible to use loads of duplicate reverbs but its so much more efficient to have 2 reverbs and variable amount of wet/dry per channel.
Quote from: "anboi"i see the reverb thing as a big problem too (or whatever effect, but yeah i most often use reverb in this way.) it is possible to use loads of duplicate reverbs but its so much more efficient to have 2 reverbs and variable amount of wet/dry per channel.
Create two duplicate instruments, one sent through a "dry" effect chain, the other sent through a reverb chain. Adjust the instrument volumes accordingly.
Done and done.
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"I take it you have never used FL Studio then?
I did use it for a while and chose different.
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"If you have 8 kHz 8 bit samples, everyting above 4 kHz will disappear. You'd have to have very bad hearing
I was talking about the resampling algoritm, not about the material of the source.
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"that's irrelevant since we're talking about samples that will be processed and mixed
You're right. As with graphic files, all the editing must be done with the best possible original.
Besides this, I think there is a bit too much emphasis on the element 'quality of the sound' as defined by frequency-ranges and clock-speed. An underestimated aspect of the representation is the 'quality of dynamics'.
The resolution of the amplitudes, the quality of a sound being very soft or very loud.
People say : well, this mp3 sounds good enough, despite the original from audio-cd. But they only pay attention to the quality of the sound-'color', while the whole dynamics of the song are more or less gone.
Quote from: "xaimus"
Create two duplicate instruments, one sent through a "dry" effect chain, the other sent through a reverb chain. Adjust the instrument volumes accordingly.
Done and done.
yeah but when i'm running 20 channels of drums through a reverb then i have to duplicate 20 channels again and thats not very efficient either, although its better than 20 reverbs by a long way!
having thought about this more i reckon that this is one of the main failings of modplug when compared to regular music programs - i expect every multi-track audio program to have a per-channel effect-send percent changer. err, or whatever you call it!
by the way - i am a semi-pro music maker (in that i have released music made in modplug on a proper label + play gigs using modplug but i don't make a living from it). i know my way around live, cubase and modplug but choose modplug for everything but the final final mixes (cubase for that) and that's because i don't trust modplugs mixing quite as much (i actually have no sound basis for this) and because cubase has the ability to change the percent going to effects. adding both that ability and the power to automate it somehow in the effects channel (and any other automatables that are currently missing) will pretty much leave me just using modplug.
i think that what the regular user will miss most about modplug compared to 'professional' audio sequencers is the full midi support (ability to change any vst params through a midi controller, send notes to external hardware etc. etc.) but this does not affect me since i have no midi gear.
oh, and finally: www.myspace.com/greenbank to check out some info on my 'superstar' alter-ego
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"Besides this, I think there is a bit too much emphasis on the element 'quality of the sound' as defined by frequency-ranges and clock-speed. An underestimated aspect of the representation is the 'quality of dynamics'.
The resolution of the amplitudes, the quality of a sound being very soft or very loud.
People say : well, this mp3 sounds good enough, despite the original from audio-cd. But they only pay attention to the quality of the sound-'color', while the whole dynamics of the song are more or less gone.
dynamics? mp3 compression has nothing to do with the dynamics...
besides, 99% of modern music has no dynamics anyway, and radio streams are HORRIBLY compressed beyond that (gah, i cant even listen to the radio it buggs me too much).