issue1b

EMUSIC-L Digest                                    Volume 16, Number 1b


   Music Censorship
   Panning PAN
   S-770
   Simmons
   SQ-1? (2 messages)
   ST midi port (3 messages)
   Step programming from Computer keyboard ? (14 messages)
   Translating hype: Lesson 1 - "awesome" (11 messages)
   VFX-SD (9 messages)
   Wavetable synth
   WX family instruments (5 messages)

Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon .
You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with 
the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text.
 
The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the 
University of North Carolina.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 00:01:04 EDT
From:         "David A. Roth" 
Subject:      Music Censorship

In the May 1990 issue of Electronic Musician, page 122 an article
appeared written by Craig Anderton called "SELL A RECORD, GO TO JAIL".

The article talks about attemps at censorship of music.  I thought the
following info might be useful to others:

"...the newsletter Rock & Roll Confidential offers a pamphlet, You've
Got a Right to Rock, that summarizes courses of action ($3 from RRC,
Box 15052, Long Beach, CA 90815)..."

David
david@david.UUCP

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 09:51:16 EDT
From:         "George Buckner" 
Subject:      Panning PAN

A digester replies...

Tim:  I was a member of the PAN system for about a year. I was given
free registration (a so-called $150 "value") with my purchase of Texture
for my PC. Here are my observations, for what they're worth:

I was only able to access it via TYMNET at 1200 baud, and that was the
least of the problems. It has the most antiquated and unfriendly user
interface imagineable, thus making it a major task to find your way
around in it (response time can be very slow as well). A friend of mine,
who is also an ex Pan user, put it best when he suggested that our most
sensitive national secrets should be stored there -that way NO ONE will
find them. :-)

As for what I could actually find there, it consisted of product
announcements and the usual forums, email, etc. which you can find
most anywhere else (and a lot easier). Also certain messaging and
business services which MIGHT be useful to SOME professional performers.
At any rate, I was NOT impressed.

------------------------------

Date:         Sun, 6 May 90 14:06:00 EST
From:         "M. J. Kociscin,
Subject:      S-770

The following message was sent to me, rather than the net:

>Subj:  RE: S-770 info

I paid $1495 plus $99 for the mouse for my S-330 several months ago.

David

[END OF MESSAGE]
------------------------------------------------------------------
Readers- Please be SURE that you are posting to the net, unless
you specifically want to send the author of the message a personal
note.  Thanks!  Mark  (MJK7911@RITVAX.BITNET)
------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:         Tue, 1 May 90 19:25:13 BST
From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
Subject:      Simmons

	Yes indeed Simmons has gone out of business ... and back.

	No the first time now, this is the fifth (!) time they have
	gone bust ... and back.

							Patrick.

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 08:22:43 CST
From:         Jayson Tipp 
Subject:      SQ-1?

From the discussion here, the SQ-1 sounds like the ESQ-1 which was discontinued
a couple years ago.  I recall a salesman recently telling me that Ensoniq
was bringing back a revamped version for low cost.  Is this the SQ-1?  A
pumped-up ESQ-1?

By the way, does anyone know the latest ESQ-1 software version?

Lastly, does anyone have experience with the KORG P-3/U-3 boxes.  I picked
up the U-3 (also called Symphony) module recently cheap.  I need to find
cards for it.  Does anyone know a good source, or if other KORG cards will
work?

Thanks.... Buzz.

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 12:30:00 PDT
From:         Willis Dair 
Subject:      RE: SQ-1?

Re: those Korg desk top boxes...  Actually, I think the Symphony box
was called an O-3.  But whatever it is called, the P-3 and O-3 boxes
have been discontinued for a while (so what else is new...) and the cards
are a little hard to come by.  Only cards designed for these boxes will
work.  As far as I can surmise, there are no further developments for
cards.  At Christmas time, I called all the big stores and the ones in the

back of magazines and only found one that carried them. For those interested,
give Throughbred Music a call in Florida.  I don't have the number handy,
but they are a regular advertiser in the music rags.  Sam Ash said they might
carry them, but I never called them back.

Good Luck finding those cards-

Willis

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 12:49:00 CST
From:         jeff beer 
Subject:      ST midi port

What is the problem with that?  I have written interrupt driven Input and
Output routines for it and it works great.   If you don't like the Xbios
calls, you can write your own routines with ease, which is what I did.

With the other computers, MAC and AMIGA, you have to buy an interface.
I won't comment on something I don't know, but I know there were a lot
of complaints when the interfaces first came out.  Apparently whatever
the problems were have been fixed.
Still, I would rather deal with something sitting on the bus than to have
to deal with a non-MIDI port, at least from a programmer's viewpoint.

Jeff

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 14:31:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      RE: ST midi port

OK! I'm glad to hear that the midi port is working well on the ST.

I am only just starting to program in C, (and I have not done any
amiga programming in assembler, for lack of a good one) so I still
carry some of my old biases from elsewhere. I find the bus on the only
other machine I've programmed for recently (the bloody PC) to be
hopeless. Of course, the serial port on a PC won't do 32.5Kbaud
correctly, either...

For information's sake, the MIDI adapter on the amiga consists of a few
opto-isolators. Period. (Ok, I lied---There's some resistors, too). Otherwise,
for the programmer, it acts like a modem, and you access it like any other
serial device attached to SER:. If you're in for time problems, you might not
like the fact that everything needs to be passed off to the EXEC operating
system, and you can't be sure that it'll go out immediately, but in practice,
it can handle 12-note chords (on 8 MIDI channels) easily. I haven't done
more with it because of the limitations of DMCS and my reluctance to
dump a few more hundred dollars on more software that'll make my machine
play like a machine.

The upshot of this, is that, somewhere along the line, I'd like to write
some music software for the Amiga which allows some real tailoring of the
output, but in a better sense than `record it in a sequencer and edit each
number'. Like something graphical: the notes appear on a staff (or on
a `music space' if you like less definite displays) and you move lines
above and below the staff to make graphical displays of tempo variations,
in-tuneness, attack strength, stuff like that.

To this end, I will throw my head open to all comers: What have you always
wanted in music comp/transcription/score-manipulation software; what would
you like it to look like; how would you prefer to manipulate it?

Mauro seems to prefer computer keyboard input, and that will always be
there. What else? If there's any mouse stuff, it'll all have to be do-able
with the mouse alone. This one-hand-on-the-keyboard, one-hand-on-the-mouse,
one-hand-on-the-instrument stuff has got to stop!

I look forward to the responses!

raybro

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 08:39:00 N
From:         Max 
Subject:      RE: ST midi port

Raybro,

Just nudging in again on the computer keyboard input stuff, which I started
out.......
        The C-Lab Notator package is really more MOUSE than keyboard oriented.
You get pull-down windows which contain all the symbology, all you do is pick
a symbol and drag it onto the score sheet (then click it into place). The
program supports just about all the classical musical symbols and......
it is directly interfaced (as if it were one single program) to the Creator part
(a 64 track sequencer). All the music which is typed in (or clicked-in to be
more precise) is directly converted into MIDI messages, including all the
expression symbols!!!! (one can also choose whether to work on the score sheet
or on the MIDI events page of course!). Notator does a pretty good job of
printing musical scores as well.

P.S. Don't know if I'm doing the right thing yet.... but I'm determined to
go through with it...... (silly Eyetie.......).

-Mauro-

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 09:37:00 N
From:         Max 
Subject:      good, bad or just ugly????

Any comments on the following set-up ? :
rack module FM-synth......Yamaha TX81Z
 "     "    PCM module....Roland U110
Computer Atari Mega1 + C-Lab Notator SL
On the sideline: Fostex X-26 4-track.
        That's my sort of idea of a semi-economical set-up to compose music
directly from the computer keyboard (remember my request for advice some time
ago ??). Well yes I am hard headed and I want to be able to punch in my scores
directly (no keyboards or controllers involved!!!!!!!). There are a lot of
people out there who certainly have a lot more experience than I do!!!!!!!
Thanx a lot for any help.......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mauro A. Zordan
Dept. Biology, University of Padova
Chemical and Environmental Mutagenesis Laboratory
Via Trieste, 75
35131 Padova (ITALY)
tel: 049-8286276
Bitnet: biolev@ipdunivx
______________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 07:58:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      RE: good, bad or just ugly????

Mauro-
I mostly want to comment on the computer, and get a general clarification:

First, the clarification. When you say you `want to be able to punch in
my scores directly (no keyboards or controllers involved!!!!!!!)' you
confuse me. How, then, will you `punch [them] in', since all input
to synthesizers come from a keyboard or controller of some sort, and
if the controller is a computer, it also has a keyboard or controller?

I have been doing some transcription of renaissance music to modern
notation, using an Amiga [1000] and two FB-01's for output. Although
I had to buy a MIDI interface, It was not expensive (and there are
versions with multiple outs available). The ST's midi port has been
described as an afterthought, and my limited experience with the
machine leads me to agree. (Other points of view are encouraged, net!)

The Amiga has a fair amount of music/MIDI software available for it, and
Two very good implementations of each of the major (fast) programming
languages, in case you want to roll-your-own: Lattice/Aztec C and
JFORTH/Multi-Forth. (JFORTH also has some tie-ins to a music composing
language, but I've never been able to afford the extra software).

Size-wise, there is not much difference between the Amiga500 and
the ST's footprint. You can still get 2Meg into the 500 box. What
you get with the Amiga that you can't get with an ST is real multitasking.
The benefit of this is that you can get to other functions of the
computer (like work-processors, program editors, sequencers, etc.) while
something else is going on. As an example:

Mimetics has software for a multi-track Midi sequencer and also for
making their sampler work. The sequencer is part of a system called
SoundScape, which implements a MIDI patch-panel. Electronic Arts has
a (fair) music editor/player with MIDI capabilities called Deluxe
Music Construction Set (which is available for other computers, including
the ST). One day, I fired up DMCS while SoundScape was running, and found
that the authors had included the necessary code hooks, and DMCS had installed
itself on the SoundScape patchpanel. I connected the DMCS out to the sequencer
input, and was able to record 8 tracks from DMCS, which I could then
(laboriously) edit to include velocity information that did exactly
what I wanted it to.

Additionally, I didn't like the Mimetics sampler software as much as another
program I'd gotten. I was able to use the other sampler at the same time as
Soundscape, even though they didn't have a direct interface, because the
machine is multi-tasking. (Multi-tasking allowed programs that were
written to communicate to run together, and programs that weren't written
to communicate directly to run at the same time, and communicate by other
means, like saving a file to hard disk and then pulling that file into the
other program.)

The whole point is that I was using the Amiga's internal sound generators
to make samples of my voice, using DMCS to play a transcription of
Randall Thompson's `Alleluia', and using the Mimetic's patch panel
at the same time. This is not possible in anything other than a true
multi-tasking machine. (even OS-2 will not be truly multi-tasking, when
it finally becomes `multi-tasking' at all.)

-------------------------------------------

OK, I'm done hyping the amiga. Now, on to another point about computers
used for music:

I can'
can't imagine using a computer without at LEAST a 20Meg hard disk when
doing music. Floppys become such a bottle-neck to getting something
creative done in such a short time. Please consider this BEFORE laying
out cash (or mortgaging your estate) on any computer hardware.

Also---Determine what you'll need for a computer from a music store;
buy the computer from a computer store. (I don't know what it's like
in Europe now, I haven't been there since '79). In America, music
stores will sell computers, but the people who sell them don't know
enough about them to help you choose one properly, and can't begin to
service them. [If you are a computer wizard, you wouldn't have
been reading these ravings at all, so I'm not too afraid of insulting
anyone...]

The only exception to this rule might be if you settle on a computer
made by a music instrument company. (I wouldn't recommend it...)

I hope this has been helpful, and not just unnecessary BS. I'm not
trying to sell you anything, but I'd really like to save you some
of the hours of frustration I've already paid to buy this information.

-raybro

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 16:50:11 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      good, bad or just ugly????

>The whole point is that I was using the Amiga's internal sound generators
>to make samples of my voice, using DMCS to play a transcription of
>Randall Thompson's `Alleluia', and using the Mimetic's patch panel
>at the same time. This is not possible in anything other than a true
>multi-tasking machine.

You can do it on a Macintosh with MIDI Manager.

But, I don't want to start this war again.

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 19:48:46 CST
From:         Jason Keeler 
Subject:      Re: good, bad or just ugly????

Well, the TX is a good all-around FM unit, but the U-110 is absolutely
horrible!  I would strongly suggest either a U-220 or Proteus for your PCM
module.  As for the computer side, I can't help you too much there; I'm an
Amiga user :)

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 14:07:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      RE: The good, bad or ugly again

I have no familiarity with C-lab's Notator package. My experience is with
DMCS in the amiga format.

DMCS allows using the mouse to place notes, and allows computer
keyboard shortcuts. It also allows using a midi keyboard to input
note and duration values (you can set a time period, say .5sec. Then,
a short midi keypress gives the current note duration, >.5sec hold gives
current value,dotted; >1sec gives next larger duration value, etc.)

I tried using the mouse for everything. It got so bad...
	that I ran out and bought a DX-100. Now, when I'm doing much
transcriptions, I use the DX and the comp keyboard: I choose duration
with my left hand and pitch with my right. If the passage goes out of
my keyboard range, I just transpose by an octave and edit it later.
I have done this for the first 25 pieces in Petrucci's Odhecaton A,
Randall Thompson's `Alleluia' (which I also did some neat tricks so
the amiga `sings' the words!) and started work on Tschaikowski's
`Little Russian' symphony and Nielson's 4th (the Inextinguishable).

The techniques work best when you don't have to think. If you want to
do anything creative, it's out of the question, unless you can keep the
creative flow up for hours, unabated.

That's what I've been doing.

As for the ST midi port, The wide spread availability of a machine
says nothing for it's limitations nor lack thereof. IBM-clones are
the perfect example. The question is more ``what will you do with
it, and will it do that?''

My info on the ST midi port is second hand, from:
AVideo (a pro-video techhie mag)
Amiga World (hardly unbiased)
some net gossip (see above-hardly, etc.)

The specifics ran to difficulties when you tried to output many channels,
I think. If you have one, press it, and see if it squeals...

-raybro

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 12:02:51 BST
From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
Subject:      Step programming from Computer keyboard ?

> Any comments on the following set-up ? :
> rack module FM-synth......Yamaha TX81Z
> "     "    PCM module....Roland U110
> Computer Atari Mega1 + C-Lab Notator SL
> On the sideline: Fostex X-26 4-track.

	I think typing in your music note by note will soon
	become a nightmare for you, seriously. Benjamin Ellis
	used to do this on his BBC Music 500 and if you want
	to know how it is ... ha ha ... ask him.

	You really should consider having one of the modules
	in a keyboard. Either have the DX-11 instead of the
	TX-81Z, or the U-20 instead of the U-110, especially
	given the excellent sequencer package, you should be
	able to input real-time performance like pitch bend,
	modulation and aftertouch, ... etc to enhance your
	music.

	I am sure this is not the first mail you got telling
	you NOT to do this, but my word ... do you REALLY have
	too much spare time at your disposal ?

						Patrick.

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 09:43:11 EDT
From:         "ISA-HRDD Robert N. Muth" 
Subject:      Re:  Step programming from Computer keyboard ?

>> Any comments on the following set-up ? :
>>rack module FM-synth......Yamaha TX81Z
>>"     "    PCM module....Roland U110
>>Computer Atari Mega1 + C-Lab Notator SL
>>On the sideline: Fostex X-26 4-track.

	                                  .... you should be
	>able to input real-time performance like pitch bend,
	>modulation and aftertouch, ... etc to enhance your
	>music.


	If you even think of punching in pitch bends, modulation, etc. from
a computer, you might as well take a coat-hanger and insert it 6 inches into
your ear.  It is such a pain to even edit these when I've played them on my
board (that's why I usually just do the track over, instead of messing around
with things like that).  But to punch them in??!  Do yourself a favor and
get at least one board.  It will save you *alot* of time (and enhance your
music to boot).


|=============================================================================|
|  Robert N. Muth                 | INTERNET: rmuth@cor1.pica.army.mil        |
|  Engineering Coop Student       |           u91_rmuth@vaxc.stevens-tech.edu |
|  Stevens Tech/Picatinny Arsenal |   BITNET: u91_rmuth@sitvxc                |
|=============================================================================|

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 09:00:00 PDT
From:         Willis Dair 
Subject:      RE: Step programming from Computer keyboard ?

I thought I'd point out a few things about step entering from my experiences.
Step entering is a great tool to get some music in that is hard to play
or to get music in if one does not play the keyboards well.  I have used
step entry in fast 16th note arpeggio sections.  It would be close to
impossible for me to play.  Step entry allows me to get it in quicker than
if I were to make a bunch of "takes."

However, I have found a few down sides to step entry.  The music is very
sterile.  Every note always falling exactly on the beat is very mechanized.
It is very hard to get some "feel" to the music.  Another fault is the
inability to control the velocity of the notes.  I have heard of people
working from a musical scoring program and converting it to a sequencer
program.  In most cases, the programs defaults to a velocity of 64 and
there are no dynamics to the music.  Step entering from a keyboard presents
another problem; inconsistency of velocity information.  Without playing
in a fluid motion at the correct tempo, one cannot judge the relationship
of the "loudness" of the notes.  I may have wanted something to be
soft-soft-Soft-Loud-LOUD, and have gotten something like
soft-Soft-Soft-Soft-Loud.  It is hard to tell from note to note.

My recommendation is to get a keyboard or controller of some sort.  Play the
music in real-time and resort to step entry if need be.  I guess it all
depends on what you want in your music.  For example, "industrial" type music
sounds better in a rigid, monotone style, and lends itself to step entering or
quantizing.  I think the decision to play real-time or step entering is
a compromise of time, playing ability, rigid note durations, and dynamics.

Willis

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 14:27:35 BST
From:         "Benjamin M. J. Ellis :->" 
Subject:      Step programming

Yeah,
     To back up what Patrick says:

     (But also to throw a little salt in)

     I used to compose and write that way, using a programming
language called Ample... you enter tunes like:
          ABCDEFGfedcba
     Is a scale, going up, then down again... capitals make the
synth go up to the next note, small ones go down, duration is
set with a ',' command, and octave by ':', and chords are
put in brackets... ie a typical tune part might look like this:
     "Pianopart" [ 0:24,CDEcbCbC(E) ( )E(G)G(C)c(EG) (  ) ]

     Bad news huh??? but having said that, I composed some very
complex and some cool stuff... its a different way of writing,
so you get different music... after that I used sequencers, but
still using step time. I still usually use step time to this day,
although less and less as my piano playing improoves, and as I
have opertunities to use MIDI guitars... BUT without a keyboard,
editing and entering stuff onto a score is a PAIN! Using the
(I think its called:) Stienberg 12 software, trying to survive
without a key board means everything takes five times the time (?!?)
to enter, o.k. fine, enter every thing in step time, that's fine
by me, but using a keyboard means you can enter chords for example
at about 3-5 times the speed!!! I think Patrick and I will time
how long it is before a keyboard of some description is added to
the set up!

             the guy is BRAVE though,
               I'll give him that!
                 Benjamin.

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 16:17:21 LCL
From:         ERL@SARA.NL
Subject:      Re: step programming

Hi list.

     >  I think typing in your music note by note will soon
     >  become a nightmare for you, seriously. Benjamin Ellis
     >  used to do this on his BBC Music 500 and if you want
     >  to know how it is ... ha ha ... ask him.

Depends on several things. What kind of music do you make?
What instruments are you used to? What software do you use?
Do you use any other input devices (eg, drum pads, light pen,
joy stick, paddles)? Keyboardless composing doesn't have to
imply typing in music note by note. Given the right tools, I think
a keyboardless setup can be very useful/friendly/easy/...

Example:
If you compose rhythmic, percussive music, a piano keyboard
is just as adequate as a row of function keys. If you're
studying AI and computer-generated music and music programs, a
keyboard is of even less use. If you have a wind controller,
you don't even need a keyboard. Ask Nick. (:-)

Of course, many of us couldn't do without the piano layout.
But making music is certainly not limited to this layout.
Suggested reading is Mike Metlay's series on this subject,
posted about nine months ago. Treats *all* man-machine
interfaces that don't involve a computer screen.

     >                                          Patrick.

Cheers,

Edo Roos Lindgreen, SARA, Amsterdam (erl@sara.nl)

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 15:46:00 N
From:         Max 
Subject:      The good, bad or ugly again


>I mostly want to comment on the computer, and get a general clarification:

>First, the clarification. When you say you `want to be able to punch in
>my scores directly (no keyboards or controllers involved!!!!!!!)' you
>confuse me. How, then, will you `punch [them] in', since all input
>to synthesizers come from a keyboard or controller of some sort, and
>if the controller is a computer, it also has a keyboard or controller?

        Yes, well, the software I was thinking of makes it possible for one
        to edit scores (type in music characters) directly, the Creator part
        of the Notator package (by C-Lab) then does the rest (e.g midi channel
        routing and transmission of messages which are translated directly from
        the music sheet into midi messages. The midi sequencer works with 64
        tracks and is fairly powerful, as far as I know........ By the way
        the Notator+Creator package is know in its SL (soft link) version
        which means multitasking should be possible with various packages....
        Have to try though first!!!!!!!!!!

>The ST's midi port has been
>described as an afterthought, and my limited experience with the
>machine leads me to agree. (Other points of view are encouraged, net!)

        Doesn't work well ?????? or what. I'm sorry but I didn't quite get
        this part. Strange that the ST should be such a widely diffused machine
        and yet be limited..............?

In any case, my plans are more or less the ones you initially had in mind:
transcription of Baroque and other classicals, with an eye to peculiar
instrumental arrangements etc.............
        Thanx for clubbing in, very much appreciated the comments and advice!!!

Ciao Mauro

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 10:23:30 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Step programming from Computer keyboard ?

>However, I have found a few down sides to step entry.  The music is very
>sterile.  Every note always falling exactly on the beat is very mechanized.

You have to mix step-entry stuff with real "played" sequences. I use
both, and generally cover fast rigid sequencing with looser pads and
things to get a fluid effect (which *is* possible).

>another problem; inconsistency of velocity information.  Without playing
>in a fluid motion at the correct tempo, one cannot judge the relationship
>of the "loudness" of the notes.  I may have wanted something to be
>soft-soft-Soft-Loud-LOUD

You can do this, but it takes practice and a reasonable staccato keyboard
technique.

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 16:21:00 N
From:         Max 
Subject:      RE: Step programming from Computer keyboard ?

>>However, I have found a few down sides to step entry.  The music is very
>>sterile.  Every note always falling exactly on the beat is very mechanized.

>You have to mix step-entry stuff with real "played" sequences. I use
>both, and generally cover fast rigid sequencing with looser pads and
>things to get a fluid effect (which *is* possible).

        The software I have just started using permits a definition of events
up to 1/768 th of a click! Now it should be possible to select MIDI events to
be processed (on an attribute basis..let's say, select all events which have a
certain pitch or any other attribute) and then increase or decrease their timing
"micrometrically". This should be one way of "Humanizing" the otherwise very
mechanical feel "programmed" music would otherwise have.

-Mauro-

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 13:31:08 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Step-entry vs. Keyboard

Having now done both, I can say that a comparison (from my point of view)
comes out this way:

Step-entry is great if you don't play well and you already know what you'll
be wanting to enter. It allows you to be very accurate in the specification
of what you play, but it is time consuming to figure out where the "right"
spot is for a note without having to tweak it a lot. Step-entry is death
to improvisation.

Keyboard entry allows you to experiment more while putting in the various
lines. If you are not a "write-it-out-first" composer, the keyboard gives
you a lot more flexibility. If you are not very good at playing, though,
you'll either have to slow it down to nearly a stop to get it played
right, or go mad in the process of playing the same five-note figure
for the ten-thousandth time, and getting it wrong *again*...

From what you were saying, you plan in general to do transcriptions.
Step-entry may serve you very well here. The problem that you may have
is injecting enough "feel" from the keyboard. It's difficult to break
the emotions associated with what one is playing on the keyboard into
specific numerical representations of pressure, dynamics, etc. Still,
good luck! Maybe you'll have something for Magnetic Filings II this
winter...

 --- Joe M.

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 10:19:50 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      AWEsome sound?

>Or possibly,
>Ching-aaaaahh-tiddlyping-tiddlyping-tiddlyping ...

Actually, the D-50's Ching-aaaaahh-tiddlyping-tiddlyping-tiddlyping
(-swish, don't forget the -swish) has received a lot of use in TV
commercials and incidental music. People are actually *using* the
D-50 flashy presets (including Tangerine Dream, and Schmoelling and
Vangelis both use the Chiff sounds).

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 09:47:00 EDT
From:         "b.klassen" 
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

>I have a number of "awesome" sounds on my four synthesizers, all of which
>are old and decrepit by today's standards. Among these are a string pad
>that practically massages your shoulders and pours you a cup of hot cocoa
>laced with amaretto, the sound of a bolt of lightning striking and detonating
>an improperly-grounded liquid oxygen storage tank, and an indescribable
>noise that has induced an uncontrollable orgasm in at least one young
>woman after some 30 to 45 seconds of exposure at moderate volume. These are

Yeah, but I *know* that practically everything that comes out of an Xpander
sounds "awesome".  I remember the first (and only, unfortunately) time I
heard/played one ... I was looking at the Matrix-6 at the time, getting off on
that OB sound, and then the guy starts playing a "similar" patch on the Xpander
... not hard to imagine aurally induced orgasms.  As far as the VS is
concerned, I've never knowingly heard one.  And what's the fourth?  A Korg
DW-something-or-other, wasn't it?

>metlay

brian

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 12:09:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

Brian:

The oozing sweetness string pad, believe it or not, comes from the VS.
(I turned off the vector capabilities and tried to see what it could
do as a straight wavetable synth...and boy, did I find out, too! |-> )
The two sound effects I mentioned *are* Xpander patches. I didn't mention
anything that my poor little Korg can do, because I'm still teaching
myself how to make it jump through hoops; surprisingly powerful little
box! (If only it could do splits or multitimbral stuff, sigh) My fourth
synthesizer is not yet a topic for discussion here.

metlay

------------------------------

Date:         Tue, 1 May 90 17:01:00 EDT
From:         "b.klassen" 
Subject:      Translating hype: Lesson 1 - "awesome"

I was just browsing through the recent postings in rec.music.synth and saw
someone's mini-review of the new Yamaha SY77.  The word awesome was used
repeatedly to describe its sound.  Since every new synth that comes out these
days (maybe excepting the uWave) sounds, to me, like a D50, if figure I can
replicate the sound on my beat up ol' axe.  Since I can't reply to r.m.s (don't
ask me why ... something to do with the way I'm obtaining my read-access;-), I
though I'd ask you people, in your opinions, what exactly it is that awesome
sounds like ...

brian

------------------------------

Date:         Tue, 1 May 90 18:06:41 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

Well, I can't comment too much on the sound, because the front panel is
so non-intuitive that I couldn't figure out how to change patches -- I
got stuck in some weird mode or another and couldn't find patch select.
The only sound I did get to hear was a clarinet which struck me as no
large deal.

The reviewers seem to be most interested in the unpredictability of the
beast. The Keyboard reviewer went on about the neat sounds it could
make, sometimes several different kinds in the same patch :-).

 --- Joe M.

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 08:54:17 SST
From:         Gan Seum-Lim 
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

Joe,
  Well, maybe you just have to get used to the SY-77 and its
setup formats. Once you know them, it is quite easy to get anywhere
you want. I must say that it is a great machine though I've got
a bit of problem with the built-in sequencer  8-) .

Seum-Lim Gan
Acoustics Control Room
Department of Physics
National University of Singapore.

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 09:46:35 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      AWEsome sound?

>though I'd ask you people, in your opinions, what exactly it is that awesome
>sounds like ...

Anything which goes CHIFF.

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 11:45:52 BST
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

>
> >though I'd ask you people, in your opinions, what exactly it is that awesome
> >sounds like ...
>
> Anything which goes CHIFF.
>

Or possibly,

Ching-aaaaahh-tiddlyping-tiddlyping-tiddlyping ...

(Like all those awesome D50 and K1 patches - they sound so good when you play
with them in the shop, but are absolutely useless in any musical context -
e.g. native dance on the D50 or terminator on the K1)

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Tony J Jewell
  Systems Officer		City Of London Polytechnic
                                                           ___     .    ___
  JANET:          tonyj@uk.ac.clp.unixa                   /   \   /    /   \
  EARN/BitNet:    tonyj@unixa.clp.ac.uk                  /       /    /___ /
  EAN:            tonyj%clp.unixa@ean-relay.ac.uk       <____/  <___ /
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 14:51:00 EDT
From:         "b.klassen" 
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

>Ching-aaaaahh-tiddlyping-tiddlyping-tiddlyping ...

Hey, that's like right on.

>(Like all those awesome D50 and K1 patches - they sound so good when you play
>with them in the shop, but are absolutely useless in any musical context -
>e.g. native dance on the D50 or terminator on the K1)

Why do companies do that? (To sell synths, of course, stupid ...)  The D-50 has
quite a few such PCM loops taking up precious ROM.  The worst is that there was
actually a song that got a lot of airplay a while back that featured that
famous D-50 IntruderFX patch ... end of chorus, bass and drums vamp to make
enough white space for ... aaarrrgggeeeoooowww-ssppprrriiinggg-CHINGGGG ...
wha?  Come on guys ...

 >  Tony J Jewell

brian

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 18:06:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

Brian:

I have a number of "awesome" sounds on my four synthesizers, all of which
are old and decrepit by today's standards. Among these are a string pad
that practically massages your shoulders and pours you a cup of hot cocoa
laced with amaretto, the sound of a bolt of lightning striking and detonating
an improperly-grounded liquid oxygen storage tank, and an indescribable
noise that has induced an uncontrollable orgasm in at least one young
woman after some 30 to 45 seconds of exposure at moderate volume. These are
all either full-analog or analog with digital oscillators (no samples);
they comprise the reason why I walk through music stores these days with
mild but passing interest.

metlay

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 17:58:40 MDT
From:         schabtac@SPOT.COLORADO.EDU
Subject:      Re: AWEsome sound?

Actually, the D-50 PCM loops don't take up any ROM -- they're just a bunch of
the attack transients that are already in ROM played in sequence. The story
goes that one of the engineers set up a couple of start/end points (i.e.
addresses) in the ROM sample memory wrong, and got the infamous tiddlyping-
tiddlyping effect. He was going to fix it, but Roland decided it was kind
of nifty (or rather, they decided it was a unique, innovative feature that
would put more power in the hands of the musician) (me? sarcastic? nah... :-)
so they left it in, and DigitalNativeDance was born.

(
(Truth be told, I thought it was pretty nifty the first time I heard it, too.
It would be hard to do anything useful with, though.)

--Adam

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 15:03:00 EST
From:         D_NOLAN@UNHH.BITNET
Subject:      Re:  VFX-SD

Dean Writes:

>Buy the Vfx.  The Peavey is just plain icky.



I can't tell you how true this is...

I walked into a "music" store in Portsmouth N.H. and walked pawed to DEATH
by a salesman that LOVED the new Peavey synth.

Think of it as the Yugo of the Automotive Industry.
Or Emerson of Electronics fame.
Or the Tops-20 of today's operating systems.

Again.. I cannot say enough bad things about the Peavey (including the fact
that it doesn't even deserve to be capitalized)

 BLECCH

.................................................................Shadow

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 10:43:28 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      VFX problems...

>      Any info that you could give me regarding those "VFX problems"
>would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Well, there's not a lot to say other than that the version 1 VFX
software is very buggy, so you *must* have version 2.0 or greater.
Even so, some VFX's are a bit prone to crashing, so I believe. This
may be hardware-related; my colleague has a VFX (firmware 1.63, now
updated to 2.1) and has had very few problems with it, even at version
1; other folks on the net have had their machines going back to
Ensoniq with their legs in the air (that includes the machine my
dealer got in for me to try out; I never saw it).

My *personal* feeling about this, based on the articles: there are
many stable (V2) VFX's out there now. If you get one, good for you.
But, I'd only buy one on a satisfaction-or-complete-change-of-machine
agreement (well, this is what my consumer rights are about, but you
know what sales staff are like...).

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 12:35:27 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Re: VFX problems...

I've been torture-testing the VFXsd as much as I can this week. Worst I
can do it blow it out with an "error 193" in the sequencer. This makes it
restart, but that's all. It happened while I was trying to flip through a
bunch of different displays, change patches, and record something at the
same time. I've just been making sure that my patches are set before I
start to record and I haven't had that problem again, or any others.


 --- Joe M.

------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 3 May 90 13:41:29 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      VFX

>You wrote to the emusic-l list that you have info on VFX on-line.
>Could you possibly send a copy for me?  I'm especially interested
>in knowing how I could use it with my Mac (software, etc?).

No hard info, really, just comments about reliability, upgrades/fixes,
and so on.

If I get a VFX, I'll be adding librarian support (probably not editor
support, since the front-panel interface is pretty good) to Anodyne,
(which is the (spacey) name of my generic editor/librarian for the Mac).

I'll have to do *something* constructive to take my mind off the sad fact
that Metlay will have stopped talking to me.

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Tue, 1 May 90 13:11:22 +0300
From:         aku@TKO-SONY-21.HUT.FI
Subject:      VFX

Hi!

You wrote to the emusic-l list that you have info on VFX on-line.
Could you possibly send a copy for me?  I'm especially interested
in knowing how I could use it with my Mac (software, etc?).

Thanks in advance,

//aku

Jaakko Siuko	Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
		aku@niksula.hut.fi

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 15:24:49 EDT
From:         "Rob Klamka (RSK4) Taylor A112" 
Subject:      VFX problems...

Nick,
      Any info that you could give me regarding those "VFX problems"
would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
          --Rob

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 08:26:47 EST
From:         Wild Bill 
Subject:      VFX-SD

I have been shopping for a work station as of late and have settled into
either the peavey DPxxxx or the Ensoniq vfx-sd. Does anyone have any input
that may sway me one way or  the other.........any info on these products
will be greatly appriciated.....Oh yeah, the price on the vfx-sd with
the 75,000 memory expansion stands at $2,300 .......how low can they go?????

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 19:01:02 EDT
From:         Dean Swan 
Subject:      Re:  VFX-SD

Buy the VFX/sd.  The Peavey is just plain icky.

-Dean

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 18:36:43 CST
From:         Jason Keeler 
Subject:      Re: VFX-SD

Actually, before you commit yourself to either the Peavy or Ensoniq, I'd take
a serious look at the T3....although price may be another factor to consider
here;  the T3, although fantasic sounds (in my opinion anyway) is a little
pricey.

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 15:56:33 BST
From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
Subject:      Wavetable synth

Hello,

	As I understand it, a wavetable synth works by scannig an array
	table of a waveform in memory, is that right ?

	So what makes the P.P.G. so interesting ? Is there something it
	does that digital synths of today won't do ?

	For months now a friend of mine has been designing a very fast
	DSP add-on board for the PC and I wish to write some DSP code
	for it to perform digital additive synthesis, using on-board
	memory for wavetables. The PC is mainly used for timbre design,
	control and downloading.

	What I cannot understand is the difference between a wavetable
	synth and a digital additive synth. Both of them would need to
	scan through a waveform table of some sort, don't they ?

	This is an area that I have been interested in, but know very
	little about, and I would much appreciate any advice.

								Patrick.

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 08:07:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      WX family instruments

It's been three days since I tried to post this, and I haven't seen
the post nor any replies, so I'm trying again to a differing address.
Please forgive me if this is redundant. (at least the verbiage will be
different...)

I am considering buying a WX7. Now, I hear (read) that there is also
a WX11. What is the difference? How much should I expect to pay. Are there
any that someone knows of in stock at a store near me? How about you?

I am a bassoonist and recorder player. I do not play sax nor clarinet very
well. How difficult is it to set the fingering to recorder (which I believe
is a preset-fingering) or program the fingerings to someting a bassoonist
could understand?

What control information can it send, and which sensors does this controller
information come from? (for instance, does breath pressure come as velocity
or breath controller or loudness sysEX readable by FB01s? If it comes as
breath controller, where does velocity come from?)

Any answers to any of these questions will be better than what I've got now.
I trashed two years of Keyboard/Music Technology/Guitar Player when I stopped
playing rock (also sold my Charvel Guitar controller, but kept the FB01's,
and I have an old Mirage now). I haven't a chance of getting to Caruso's in
the near future, since I have to stay close to my wife. Our next child should
have been here by now...

-raybro

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 16:47:49 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      WX family instruments

>I am considering buying a WX7. Now, I hear (read) that there is also
>a WX11. What is the difference? How much should I expect to pay. Are there
>any that someone knows of in stock at a store near me? How about you?

I don't know anything about the WX11, just the WX7.
Do you really want to know where you can get one in Edinburgh?

>What control information can it send, and which sensors does this controller
>information come from? (for instance, does breath pressure come as velocity
>or breath controller or loudness sysEX readable by FB01s? If it comes as
>breath controller, where does velocity come from?)

The WX7 sends one of (i) breath control (cont. controller 2), volume
(cont. controller 7), aftertouch. Also, the velocity of the transmitted
notes increases as the breath pressure increases, so you get dynamics
even on instruments which don't respect volume, BC or aftertouch.

I have a WX7, but it took three months to arrive, and it's broken.

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Fri, 4 May 90 14:10:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      RE: WX family instruments

Nick-
I'll admit that prices in Edinburgh may only be of academic interest to
me, but I would like to know.

However, if they're all like yours...I may not.

What are you planning to do about it?

Is it used (i.e., not under warrentee)? Maybe a local electronic repairman
could look inside it. When you remove the crickets, electronics work better!

On the other hand, if it is under warrantee, the factory's in Japan...

Good luck,
raybro

------------------------------

Date:         Mon, 7 May 90 10:24:46 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      WX family instruments

>I'll admit that prices in Edinburgh may only be of academic interest to
>me, but I would like to know.

I paid around 300 quid mail-order from a place in England.

>What are you planning to do about it?

Give them hell (and get my money back) if they keep giving me the run-around
like this.

		Nick.

------------------------------

Date:         Wed, 2 May 90 09:50:00 EST
From:         "William R(ay) Brohinsky" 
Subject:      wx-family synths

Out side of the postings about the apparently-faulty WX7, What do you folks
know about the WX family. I just saw an `article' (I use the term lightly)
in Music Technology about alternate fingerings for WX7 and WX11's.

I'd not heard of the WX11. What are the differences from WX7?

Also, How hard is it to use a WX7 with recorder fingerings? I am a bassoonist
with 20 years of recorder experience, but no sax and only little clarinet.

Does anyone know of a shop with a WX7 for sale? How much?

Thanks
raybro

------------------------------

End of EMUSIC-L digest
******************************