problem with param-control-notes

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 06:08:14

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.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 12:52:28

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.

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 13:08:03

Well, I was mainly thinking of synths (in contrast to "real" stuff) here, where a simple lfo helps a lot with humanization.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 13:09:57

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.

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 13:11:55

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.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 13:16:17

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

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 13:29:39

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.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 13:45:48

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.

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 13:53:37

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.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 14:00:48

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?

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 14:05:03

This got useless as soon as you picked up on my post (first post on page 2). Everything until then made perfect sense.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 14:12:48

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....

Saga Musix · January 08, 2010, 14:24:03

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.

uncloned · January 08, 2010, 15:04:48

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.

Relabsoluness · January 08, 2010, 19:36:20

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.