[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: midi articulation

From: Daniel Birns
Subject: Re: midi articulation
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 15:24:17 -0700


It’s 3-to-1, and I have to count your votes as more informed than mine, since 
you’ve worked in this field longer than I. In any case, even if someday you 
agreed with me, the first effort should be improving the native midi output, so 
in some ways this issue is moot.

I’ll download the sources, (hopefully) build it, and then I’ll probably be back 
for more…

Thank you all for you patience and kind responses. The only reason I mentioned 
the midi player was so that I could see the overall intention, before working 
at the micro level. And I seem to have agreement from all responders that, yes, 
lilypond is the right place to make these changes (rather than another filter).

> On Mar 25, 2016, at 12:16 PM, Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 3/25/16 12:22 PM, "Daniel Birns" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> So my question is: When you use Aria Maestosa, do you have the problem I
>> outlined? As far as QSynth and FluidSynth ‹ I was able to use brew to
>> install QSynth, but not the other, and the build is kinda ridiculous for
>> most people. Iąm a developer and the instructions
>> are sketchy to me, at least on mac.
>> The basic problem is that once you make edits in the score, you must redo
>> all the work youąve done fine-tuning the sound in the midi player. You
>> donąt have the problem with Aria Maestosa?
>> And without fine-tuning, my impression is that midi usually sounds pretty
>> awful. 
>> My perspective is as a Sibelius user. Hearing what youąve written has no
>> equivalent in lilypond/midi players.
>> When I first used Sibelius, I didnąt understand why they cared so much
>> about midi results. But Iąve been able to get some quite listenable
>> results with Sibelius. Hereąs an example:
>> In order to anything like this with lilypond, youąd have to do a great
>> deal of work, which you would not to lose, in the midi editor. And once
>> you generate new midi files, you lose everything.
> I think the point is, if you are really generating good midi (which
> LilyPond doesn't do right now),  and if you have a good sound font (which
> is widely claimed to be available for both Timidity and FluidSynth, but I
> haven't personally checked it), you don't need to do any work in the midi
> editor.  All the work you would do in the midi editor should be doable by
> LilyPond.  So you shouldn't need to write a midi editor, you should just
> need to write good midi output from LilyPond.
> If a midi editor can create a midi file that sounds good on a decent midi
> player, then the midi format supports everything that is needed, and we
> can generate it from LilyPond.  Which is where I think your effort would
> be best spent.
> Thanks,
> Carl

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]