Grex Music2 Conference

Item 81: Making music on your computer

Entered by raven on Sun Sep 14 14:29:28 1997:

This is the item to discuss making music on your computer.  Discuss both
technical aspects, ie. full duplex sound cards, software, etc, and your
experiences good or bad in general with computer sound.  Right now I'm
just getting into mixing and recording on my computer and I'm enjoying it
a great deal.  I downloaded a virtual mixer, wave editor, and drum machine
software from the net, and I have been mixing beats, a friend of mine 
singing and my poetry (or spoken word if we want to get pretentious).
25 responses total.

#1 of 25 by raven on Sun Sep 14 14:32:18 1997:

Other issues to consider are midi or not to midi and the related issue of
sequencers.  I'm not a big fan of sequencers as I think they make compositions
sound too mechanical, not leaving room for expressive improve, but I admit to a
lack of experience using sequencers so jump in with a different opinion.


#2 of 25 by scott on Sun Sep 14 16:05:51 1997:

Er... a drum machine *is* a sequencer...


#3 of 25 by orinoco on Sun Sep 14 23:00:24 1997:

I've got a Korg somethingorother connected to an old Mac SE in my basement.
So, I've done some pieces on it, either instrumentals or reciting poetry over
music.  I find that a sequencer works fine, but it is difficult to make
expressive melodic lines.  One thing that I've had some degree of success with
in that regard is creating two tracks for each instrument - one for the notes,
and one on which to record dynamic changes.  That way, I can go back later
and add finer articulation and phrasing and such like.
I'd be interested to see some of the stuff you've come up with, raven, and
likewise where you got your software.


#4 of 25 by senna on Mon Sep 15 06:11:22 1997:

There are a pair of pirated remix programs roosting in my hard drive right
now.  I think I still have some NIN, Newsboys, and Sarah Mchlachlan remixes
sitting on it.  mostly fragments, but I have a complete song or two. 
Unfortunately, my speaker setup makes it kinda difficult to hear it correctly.


#5 of 25 by orinoco on Mon Sep 15 21:25:11 1997:

WHat's the deal with remixing, Steve?  How does one capture, for instance,
just the vocals, without picking up background too?


#6 of 25 by senna on Mon Sep 15 23:31:49 1997:

There are programs that somehow manage to isolate the tracks based on
frequency (which isn't unheard of). It isn't perfect, but it does the trick.


#7 of 25 by lumen on Tue Sep 16 06:27:44 1997:

Oh damnit, some of you are just too rich!  I have *never* been able to afford
MIDI systems.  I worked with it at school-- with sound modules, a drum
machine, a digital reverb/sound effect machine, an electronic keyboard, a
synthesizer, a watered-down version of MasterTracks for the AppleIIgs, a
12-channel mixer, a sampler, a Denon tape deck, and a 4-track recording deck.
Trouble is, I never really learned how to use it all.

raven-- where did you download all this stuff?  (I would never be able to
download even if I could-- too little memory, and it's my folks' comp)


#8 of 25 by raven on Tue Sep 16 22:28:01 1997:

Try an altavista search for music spftware.  There is a great site in
Britain where I got all of the software, I'll give the URL next time I'm
on if I can remember it...


#9 of 25 by senna on Wed Sep 17 03:53:52 1997:

I am so not rich.  my remixes don't sound all that great, the just do some
stuff that I wanted to see done to the song :)  Like I said, though, pirated.
I should only dream of affording a MIDI system.


#10 of 25 by lumen on Wed Sep 17 05:51:33 1997:

See the electronic music item for an article I copied from Newsweek about
Thomas Dolby and the Beatnik program.  Read it, try it, and let me know what
you think.


#11 of 25 by orinoco on Mon Sep 22 03:28:38 1997:

Please do give the URL...I'll be waiting with baited breath...


#12 of 25 by lumen on Wed Sep 24 23:26:01 1997:

ThThe web site is in the article.


#13 of 25 by stonney on Tue Jul 21 07:35:01 1998:

I'm studying sound production, technology and engineering at MTSU.  One of
the first things I discovered is that producers and engineers have a good deal
of creative input into a composition, where as many peole are under the
impression that the musicians do it all.
In order to develop technique and style in production I realized I needed as
much time as possible doing tracks, mixes and mastering, so I decided to build
a "virtual studio" using a computer, A/D converters, two track open reel
master and other odd and ins.
Here's what I found:
-Check out the Steinberg software for sound recording.  It's expensive but
it does everything.  Cubase for sound, WaveLab for media.  Almost any plug-in
will work with Stienburg software.  www.steinburg.com
-Fast CPU speeds will be needed if you plan to use alot of tracts
simultaniously.  Most of us might record a guitar and vocals, maybe keyboard
drums.  If you plan to have several tracks for your drum kit, a bunch of
guitars, patched tracks, lot of vocals, etc.  You see what I mean!  If you
want to mix this stuff and have it sound right you'll need a Pentium II 266,
preferably a 300.
-You'll need a large hard drive for major projects.  SCSI is actually a good
thing to have here.
-Memory is cheap, get lots of it.
-For clean recordings you need to put the computer in a seperate room.  If
you're using professional equipment, the fan on your computer will get
recorded.
-Outboard A/D, D/A converters are necissary for professional aps.  The insides
of your computer produce too much electronic and RF noise to put them inside.
Some newer cards on the market are shielding the plug in card for
interference.  Abdigital is one of these companies (abdigital.com).
-Greater word length gets a better (higher) signal to error ratio, but the
sound recording will take up more storage space.  By this I mean 16bit vs
20bit vs 24bit.  Many low priced cards use 24bit conversion on recording and
playback and most allow you to select between 16, 20 and 24 (CDs use 16bit).
-You'll need mic preamps unless you're using a mixer, line amp or direct
input.
I obviously love to talk tech, so if anybody wants to give me some tips or
ask questions mail me at aws2b@mtsu.edu or just post a message to this
conference.


#14 of 25 by goose on Tue Jul 21 18:00:13 1998:

Hi Aaron, do you know BJ Hill?  He'sa former student of mine who is now
going to MTSU.


#15 of 25 by stonney on Thu Jul 23 06:25:34 1998:

hey goose, it's good to meet people interested in this stuff too! 
Unfortunately I do not know of BJ Hill.  Is he in the recording industry
program?  Are you still in touch with him?  I can get his number for you if
you would like.


#16 of 25 by tyr on Tue Jul 28 00:49:31 1998:

Has anyone had experience with the Roland MC303, it's a synth, a drum machine,
and a sequencer, in one cool little silver box. I'm thinking about hooking
it up to my PC and using Cubase VST, to control it all. For anyone interested
in Electronic Music I recommend it it's powerful and inexpensive (about $550
retail, and I got mine for $350 used) and it looks cool too!


#17 of 25 by stonney on Tue Jul 28 04:05:03 1998:

When I've looked at MIDI and sequencing (granted I have no experience with
MIDI) I was planning to use sound cards and wavetables to load sounds from
those instrument CD's or just sample the sound and load it onto the card. 
Mainly I was planning this because it extremly versitile and cost effective,
but hearing what you've said about the MC303 has got my attention.  I'm
looking at my Roland catalog and I see alot of Sound Canvas equipment new for
$400 - 800, but I don't see any MC-series equipment.  You must have been
lucky.  I more concerned with finding a MIDI controller with all the great
features like 16 polyphony, velocity and after-touch, but those things cost
thousands!


#18 of 25 by scott on Tue Jul 28 10:54:58 1998:

The MC-303 is aimed a little more at the "electronica" area of music... more
retro sounds, etc.  I've got a Yamaha QY-70, which is more of a regular set
of sounds (keys, drums, all sorts of things) with a pattern sequencer (like
a drum machine) and a 16 track linear seqencer.  About $475 new, lots of fun.


#19 of 25 by mcnally on Thu Jul 30 03:02:31 1998:

  MTSU = ?


#20 of 25 by stonney on Fri Jul 31 02:37:07 1998:

I love it!  I'm learning alot of useful stuff already from this conference.
So, are linear and pattern sequencers the only two types?
Can't a computer serve as a sequencer. provided the right software and sound
card?
Does anybody know if there are any drawbacks to using the computer port
(serial) rather than the MIDI port for a simple connection to a computer?

MTSU = Middle Tennessee State University
There is a very well funded Mass Communications department at MTSU, which
includes Radio, TV, Journalism and Recording Industry.
The Recording Industry department includes business, production, engineering,
soundtrack, MIDI, and probably a few others I'm forgetting.  It's one of those
programs that hits the nail right on the head for those of us who want to make
records, publish artists...oh well, take your best shot at it, this program
covers alot of bases.  There are two very nice recording studios, one with
a Neotech console (set up for soundtracks in Dolby 5.1 I think) and an Otari,
both of which have fader automation.  In-state tuition is about $1,000.


#21 of 25 by stonney on Fri Jul 31 02:43:52 1998:

Anybody interested in studing the technical or business side of the recording
industry should take a look at MTSU.

Try www.mtsu.edu        


#22 of 25 by scott on Fri Jul 31 10:58:51 1998:

Indeed you can use a computer as a sequencer, there is a fair amount of
software running from free to several hundred dollars.  Sound cards can be
used (there are some expensive ones for cleaner sound, more channels), or just
MIDI out to other units.  

MIDI itself is just a serial protocol; early MIDI interfaces plugged into a
serial port (19.2k baud).

A pattern sequencer is like a drum machine; you work in little loops of one
or more measures, then assemble the loops into songs.  Linear is like a tape
recorder, just continuous recording.  There are some others, more experimental
things which I don't know much about.


#23 of 25 by stonney on Sat Aug 1 05:00:38 1998:

I've heard that because MIDI is serial, if you try to control too much at one
time you will experience a lag in the music.  Is this why one would want more
MIDI channels?  Is the baud rate a standard or can it be user defined?


#24 of 25 by scott on Sat Aug 1 12:28:46 1998:

the Baud rate is fixed.  In the very early days of MIDI (early 80's), there
was a lot of debate over the limited speed.  A number of people were busy
hatching schemes to improve MIDI (ignoring the fact that just getting a
standard like MIDI was a miracle and unlikely to happen again).  Ultimately
the problem was seen to be:
a.      not a big deal
b.      easily solvable by running multiple cables
c.      most delays could be traced to the instruments' CPUs, not MIDI.


#25 of 25 by stonney on Sun Aug 2 05:57:53 1998:

Now if I could just get the money to buy some equipment!  Then I'd be really
be learning.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: