Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Scorewriter + sequencer help (Read 9397 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

1. I'm told that programs like Sibelius and Finale are not substitutes for real DAWs. Is that true?
2. I need a score-writer and sequencer. I'm told that Cubase 6 is the best choice, are there any other programs/combinations that cost less?
3. I don't know how VST works, it seems that certain software only supports specific libraries. Like Garritan Personal Orchestra only lists a few partner softwares on their site.
4. I have a few AKAI CDs of audio samples. What can I do to import them to my library?
5. I have a few "sound libraries" that comprise largely of raw WAV files. Can they be used as VST libraries as well?
6. What's the simplest way to add expressions to your music? Cubase's Note Expression feature is exclusive to the new VST 3.5. Do libraries have to be of VST 3.5 compatibility or just the players?
6b) If VST 3.5 is not an option for my old sample libraries, then is there any other program that have equivalents to the Note Expression feature?

Thanks.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #1 –
Phew... several confusions in your thread.


1) Conceptually, programs like Sibelius and finale are for composing while programs like Cubase are for producing. In practice, there is no difference, but the former are more geared to musicians that have their own instruments and use the programs as a way to store the partitures while the latter are the the beggining and end of the audio.

2) Steinberg programs are definitely good, but it all depends on what you need. It's not the same the needs of a pianist than of a studio label. Cubase has been the reference in producing audio on the PC for more than 10 years. As the fathers of the VST technology, they made virtual instruments (instruments simulated by a PC) a day-to-day thing.

If i'm not wrong, they offer versions to try, so that you can have a first-hand experience with their software and decide if it is good for you.
Also, sometimes hardware manufacturers include reduced versions of their program (Cubase SE) with some MIDI keyboards and other accessories.

Said that, there are many other applications like this. One example is Fruityloops. I used to feel more comfortable with this than Cubase. But it's been a long time since i last used any of them.

3) If you understand that a .dll file is, then a VST is a .dll. If you don't know, you should think of VSTs like a small program that needs another one to run. VSTs are addons for programs that support VSTs and increases the feature set.
There are two type of VST plugins, Virtual Instruments and Virtual effects. The former simulates a real (or synthetic) instrument. Basically, an instrument is anything that produces sound. Virtual effects are whatever that can change the sound. There are virtual equalizers, virtual reverbs, virtual vocoders, .... the list goes on and on.

4 and 5) AKAI is a format like WAV, but that was developed specifically for a hardware made by a company of the same name. AKAI samples include other information that allow the hardware to reproduce the wav in a more real way (adding envelopes, looping, filtering...).
Generally, all programs support WAV, be it as an audio track, or using Virtual instruments that play them back. The support for AKAI is reserved to Virtual instruments that specifically support them. Search google for the words AKAI and VST and you might find one such plugin.

Also, there is another standard that is quite more popular nowadays: SoundFont.  Conceptually, a SoundFont is similar to an AKAI sample, but this standard has had more support (Soundfont was invented by EMU, which was bought by Creative Labs.).

6) Let's see... when you say expression, do you mean the effect of pressing a key and changing its pressure over time, so that the sound sort of vibrates?  That normally depends on the Virtual instrument being used and if it supports it. I stopped following VST at 2.4, so i can't comment on this 3.5 feature. (3.x format is different, it is not just an upgrade).
What i mean is that Virtual instruments are based on the MIDI standard, and whatever it can be transmitted via MIDI (except sysex) can be received by a Virtual Instrument. Vibrato, Velocity, and aftertouch are usually supported.


6b) As i said, your libraries are not plugins, but you should be able to find plugins that play them. I suggest you to find shareware/trial versions that you could try, familiarize a bit with the VST technology, and you will see that there are many that are free.  One place to start is http://www.kvraudio.com/

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #2 –
Quote from: [JAZ] on

In practice, there is no difference, but the former are more geared to musicians that have their own instruments and use the programs as a way to store the partitures while the latter are the the beggining and end of the audio.
That seems to say "there is no difference, but there is". Can sibelius and finale 2011 perform all of the common sequencing jobs that Cubase can do? (ie. common meaning excluding new fangled stuff like VST 3.5)

Quote
2) Steinberg programs are definitely good, but it all depends on what you need. It's not the same the needs of a pianist than of a studio label.
I need to input the music on a score format, and then assign instruments from my own libraries to them adding some processing like reverb, and then save them as midi and wav formats for my self and uploading to youtube.

Quote
6) Let's see... when you say expression, do you mean the effect of pressing a key and changing its pressure over time, so that the sound sort of vibrates?  That normally depends on the Virtual instrument being used and if it supports it. I stopped following VST at 2.4, so i can't comment on this 3.5 feature. (3.x format is different, it is not just an upgrade).
What i mean is that Virtual instruments are based on the MIDI standard, and whatever it can be transmitted via MIDI (except sysex) can be received by a Virtual Instrument. Vibrato, Velocity, and aftertouch are usually supported.


This thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVR82w7bv7E

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #3 –
I don't know recent versions of Finale. I don't know how they have evolved. Since their target audience is different, their feature set is different too. Back in time to the initial versions, Finale was only a MIDI editor with score visualitzation. But it was a true score, i.e. with graphical notes as in a partiture, not like Cubase, which uses what is known as a piano roll.

This is why i said it all depends on what are your needs, and with which you are more familiar. Since I am not a musician, I am not comfortable with a partiture, but I can understand easily Cubase's piano roll.

Your goal seems to be more like what Finale is for, but that doesn't mean the same cannot be done in Cubase. It is for sure that Cubase has the biggest feature set of all.


Now, onto Note Expression again.  Ok, I've seen what is the key difference.
In MIDI, there was no way to control a single note (A thing we have had in (musical) trackers since late 80s, go see.. ).  One was limited to control either the MIDI channel as a whole, or control just a few parameters of the note, at start time.  Obviously, expression can't be done properly with this scenario, so they have standarized new ways to do this.

Without having read the VST3.5 docs, they only mean that pre-3.5 plugins (and hosts) cannot support it because they don't know about it. Possibly, it is just a matter of knowing the new control codes.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #4 –
This by no means answers all your questions but what I do in this situation is write the music in a scorewriter (I use Musescore; a very good - in my opinion - piece of freeware), export as MIDI and then import into my DAW where I have a lot more control over the sound.

I've not used Cubase since v4 but I recall it being able to do pretty much what you're looking for, though I wouldn't swear to it. I'm not sure if a decent freeware DAW with good MIDI capabilities exists but if you want to see what you can do without spending anything you could try Musescore to create the score and try demo versions of various DAWs to see how it goes.


Edit : I meant to mention that there are general purpose sample players available. I've not used samples much so I'm reluctant to recommend anything but I've had a dabble with discoDSP's HighLife - another piece of freeware

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #5 –
For a DAW look into "REAPER" very cheap and extremely powerful.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #6 –
Quote from: [JAZ] on


Now, onto Note Expression again.  Ok, I've seen what is the key difference.
In MIDI, there was no way to control a single note (A thing we have had in (musical) trackers since late 80s, go see.. ).  One was limited to control either the MIDI channel as a whole, or control just a few parameters of the note, at start time.  Obviously, expression can't be done properly with this scenario, so they have standarized new ways to do this.

Before the coming about of vst3.5, how did the digital composers control single notes?

Quote
For a DAW look into "REAPER" very cheap and extremely powerful.
i'll look into it.
 

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #7 –
Quote from: HTS on
Before the coming about of vst3.5, how did the digital composers control single notes?


As i said, there is a limited amount of things that can be applied to the note at the time it starts (there's also the possibity to control the noteoff somehow, but i'm not sure how much that is supported), and the rest can only be sent as commands for the channel.

You can play one or many notes in a channel, and MIDI is limited to 16 channels.  A channel has a set of characteristics (the program, which defines which sound does it produce), channel volume and others. Also, control changes can be sent while playing to affect the sound, like channel aftertouch, panning, pitch bend, Mod Wheel...

The problem is that all these control changes affects all the notes that are playing on that channel. So if it is really needed, you use more channels. Of course, each channel is independent of the others, so we are really talking mostly about controlling individual notes of a chord or drums. Different instruments are by definition playing in other channels.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #8 –
Quote from: [JAZ] on

Quote from: HTS on
Before the coming about of vst3.5, how did the digital composers control single notes?


As i said, there is a limited amount of things that can be applied to the note at the time it starts (there's also the possibity to control the noteoff somehow, but i'm not sure how much that is supported), and the rest can only be sent as commands for the channel.

You can play one or many notes in a channel, and MIDI is limited to 16 channels.  A channel has a set of characteristics (the program, which defines which sound does it produce), channel volume and others. Also, control changes can be sent while playing to affect the sound, like channel aftertouch, panning, pitch bend, Mod Wheel...

The problem is that all these control changes affects all the notes that are playing on that channel. So if it is really needed, you use more channels. Of course, each channel is independent of the others, so we are really talking mostly about controlling individual notes of a chord or drums. Different instruments are by definition playing in other channels.

Are midis the only way you can create digital music? How did the hollywod and game composers compose their music? Many of them didn't use a live orchestra.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #9 –
MIDI was designed just as a language in which instruments, sequencers and controllers could communicate and understand each other. Then, the MIDI format was invented just as a way to store that language which also allowed to replay that conversation.

The language has had several evolutions, one of them the one that allowed midis to be played on mobile phones as ring tones, previous to the support of mp3 and aac audio.

Said that, one thing is to have a language, and another is depending completely on in.
Most of the times, music is not simply sequenced, but sampled. You don't need to sample the whole thing at once, you can use separate samples in conjunction.
The programs are not limited to MIDI, they internally can do many more things. MIDI only matters when there is interaction between either another software/plugin or hardware. And then, you always have a keyboard and a mouse.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #10 –
Quote from: [JAZ] on

MIDI was designed just as a language in which instruments, sequencers and controllers could communicate and understand each other. Then, the MIDI format was invented just as a way to store that language which also allowed to replay that conversation.

The language has had several evolutions, one of them the one that allowed midis to be played on mobile phones as ring tones, previous to the support of mp3 and aac audio.

Said that, one thing is to have a language, and another is depending completely on in.
Most of the times, music is not simply sequenced, but sampled. You don't need to sample the whole thing at once, you can use separate samples in conjunction.
The programs are not limited to MIDI, they internally can do many more things. MIDI only matters when there is interaction between either another software/plugin or hardware. And then, you always have a keyboard and a mouse.

So what does MIDI have to do with the wav files in sound libraries?

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #11 –
With .wav files, nothing.

With AKAI samples and SoundFonts, many things, since these two formats were designed to play sounds being controlled in some way. It is not necessary to use the MIDI language to make a player of these formats, but the formats themselves had MIDI in mind.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #12 –
Quote from: [JAZ] on

With .wav files, nothing.

With AKAI samples and SoundFonts, many things, since these two formats were designed to play sounds being controlled in some way. It is not necessary to use the MIDI language to make a player of these formats, but the formats themselves had MIDI in mind.

So is there a language that controls wav files? I happen to have some libraries that are a bunch of notes in wav format.

I'm posting this thread because I already have Finale 2011. But I need to have a full suite consisting of scorewriters and sequencers, and I want to do something with the wav files that I have.
I want to find the cheapest way to do this.

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #13 –
As I mentioned earlier you need a sample player to enable you to playback your .wav format samples. Highlife might be worth a look as it's free. I've not used it myself as I rarely use MIDI and have never used samples (yes, it's the blind leading the blind here)

If you already have Finale you need recording software as you say. That will give you far more features for manipulating the sounds that you create. Reaper has been suggested. I use Mixcraft. Alternatively you could try something like Cubase which I believe will do what you want all in the one program. It's a bit pricey though. Even better might be to have a look at some home recording forums (fora?) and try to get a better feel for things. The KVR site has some tutorials that might be useful - KVR Link

Scorewriter + sequencer help

Reply #14 –
I'm buying some sample libraries that are claimed to be recorded at 192/24bit. They offer various "downsampled versions" of 44.1, 48, 96 and 16bit versions.

My questions are the following:

1. Is there a high chance that they are not really recorded at 192khz, but rather marketed as so? (i.e. they upsampled the original source to 192khz, rather than the other way around)
2. If I do get the supposed "original" 192 recording, I will have to downsample for every project. However, if I get anything other than 44.1 khz, I may have to downsample everytime to 44.1 anyways. So which one should I get? Because theoretically I will have downsampled twice (i.e. 192-48-44.1)

Thanks.