========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Dec 1994 17:54:03 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Alternate tunings - a program to help out I find alternate tuning interesting. One of my favorite albums is Terry Riley's _The Harp of New Albion_; here, a Bosendorfer grand is retuned to a just-intonation scale (in this case, what's called a "5-limit scale"; no prime factor of the ratios between the base frequency of the scale and any note in it is more than 5). Now, most synthesizers that can do alternate tunings do it by means of sharping or flatting notes a given number of cents. Since alternate tunings are usually expressed in terms of ratios of freqencies, it's necessary to convert these ratios into detunings if we want them to be usable (not precise! see below). Here's a little C program which, with a judicious amount of editing, will let you calculate cents-detuning from a table of ratios, based on whatever root frequency you desire. #include #include /* The base number of cycles per second on which both scales will be based */ #define FUNDAMENTAL 440 /* This program calculates and prints a table of detunings necessary to tune an equal-tempered instrument to the arbitrary scale defined by the newscale[] array. In this case it's a 5-limit just-intonation scale, as used by Terry Riley in "The Harp of New Albion". */ main() { int i; /* array index */ double oldscale[13]; /* holds old scale (in Hertz) */ double semitone = exp(log(2)/12); /* 12th root of 2 ratio for distance between semitones in an equally-tempered scale */ double cent; /* 1/100th of a semitone; actual value dependent on the interval between two semitones */ double hzout, centsout; /* used for printing */ double relsemitone; /* calculated "relative semitone" - interval in Hz between a pair of semitones */ /* This assignment sets up the *ratios* used to define the new (in this case, 5-limit) scale. The ratios define the ratios of the frequencies to one another, based upon the base note of the scale. For example, this means that the ratio between the base note and the note a major third above it is 5 to 4; if the base note of the scale were 400 Hz, then the major third of the scale would be 500 hz. Remember to specify these in floating point, or C will happily and silently truncate all the results. */ double newscale[13] = {1.0, 16.0/15.0, 9.0/8.0, 6.0/5.0, 5.0/4.0, 4.0/3.0, 64.0/45.0, 3.0/2.0, 8.0/5.0, 5.0/3.0, 16.0/9.0, 15.0/8.0, 2.0/1.0}; /* Calculate the frequencies of the notes in the new scale. Multiplying the base frequency by each of the ratios determines this. */ for(i=0; i<=12; i++) { newscale[i] = newscale[i] * FUNDAMENTAL; } /* Similar operation for the equal-tempered scale, except that we calculate each successive frequency by multiplying by the fixed semitone ratio. */ oldscale[0] = FUNDAMENTAL; for(i=1; i<=12; i++) { oldscale[i] = oldscale[i-1] * semitone; } /* Print a nice header that will match the output columns. */ printf("Equal-tempered\t\t5-limit\t\tHz out\t\tCents out\n"); /* for each corresponding note in the two scales, calculate the difference in Hertz between the two notes. Calculate the relative size of an equal-tempered semitone between the current note and the previous one. Divide this by 100 to get the size of a cent in Hertz for this interval. Now divide the number of Hertz out-of-tune for the corresponding notes by the size of a cent (in Hertz) for this interval to get the number of cents detune that must be applied to the equal-tempered note to get the desired note in the new scale. */ centsout = 0; /* 1st note always in tune */ for(i=0; i<=12; i++){ hzout = oldscale[i] - newscale[i]; /* How far out of tune (Hz) */ if (i != 0) { /* Skip for first note */ relsemitone = oldscale[i] - oldscale[i-1]; /* Interval size (Hz) */ cent = relsemitone/100; /* Hz/cent */ centsout = (hzout/cent); /* Hz/(Hz/cent) = cents */ } printf("%f\t\t%f\t%f\t%f\n",oldscale[i],newscale[i],hzout,centsout); /* Print result */ } } It is important to remember that these generated tunings will still not be exactly accurate. For one thing, since the 12th root of 2 is an irrational number, any interval ratio is going to come out to a non-integral number of cents detune. (The synths I know of with alternate tunings use an integral number of cents). Second, the tuning will get (relatively) less perfect as you go up the keyboard, since the size of an interval expands, making the fractional part of the detuning increasingly larger. Most of us will be relatively satisfied, even with the combined errors. Assuming a note frequency of 20 KHz, an equal-tempered semitone interval is 1122.25 (and some odd) Hz. Choosing the worst fractional error in the table (below), we still get to within (.170311*1122.25/100) = about 1.9 Hz difference from a "perfect" tuning. Not bad. A perfectionist of course, should seriously consider using a physical instrument which can be tuned exactly. Here's the output from a run of the tuning calculator, with A440 assumed as the fundamental note: Equal-tempered 5-limit Hz out Cents out 440.000000 440.000000 0.000000 0.000000 466.163762 469.333333 -3.169572 -12.114358 493.883301 495.000000 -1.116699 -4.028562 523.251131 528.000000 -4.748869 -16.170311 554.365262 550.000000 4.365262 14.029837 587.329536 586.666667 0.662869 2.010871 622.253967 625.777778 -3.523810 -10.089814 659.255114 660.000000 -0.744886 -2.013144 698.456463 704.000000 -5.543537 -14.141190 739.988845 733.333333 6.655512 16.024874 783.990872 782.222222 1.768650 4.019473 830.609395 825.000000 5.609395 12.032546 880.000000 880.000000 0.000000 0.000000 The "Cents out" column is absolute; it doesn't matter what the fundamental note is chosen to be. Negative numbers indicate that the equal tempered scale is *flat* by that many cents, and positive numbers indicate it's *sharp* by that many cents. Enjoy. I recommend that you read "Genesis of a Music", by Harry Partch (Da Capo Press), for a very clear exposition of why alternate tunings exist and what their advantages and disadvantages are. This is, of course, assuming you can *find* this book. You might also look for Helmholz's _On the Sensation of Tone_ (reprinted by Dover) - I believe it has a section on tunings in it as well. Anyone else have any sources? --- Joe M. (I know, I know. Somebody's going to tell me that the K2000 does its alternate tunings using exact ratios. :) ) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Dec 1994 14:17:27 PST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List Comments: Environmental Systems Research Institute From: Tapas Das Subject: Winter NAMM show Could some kind soul please post the dates for the Winter NAMM show. Is there any way for a person not connected with a dealership to attend this show. Is the last day of the show open to the public? Thanks in advance. Tapas. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Dec 1994 16:59:18 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Ed Berlett, Music" Subject: Piano Lab suggestions We are upgrading out piano lab at the University. I was asked to try to get some imput from the net on the subject. The student unit needs to have 88 keys, weighted action and be MIDI compatible. I'd appreciate any input. What is the best keyboard? What are the advantages of one model over the other? If you were buying right now what would you get? If this is too far off topic just EMAIL me directly. Thanks Ed E7M7BER@TOE.TOWSON.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Dec 1994 14:38:53 PST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List Comments: Environmental Systems Research Institute From: Tapas Das Subject: Re: Piano Lab suggestions >The student unit needs to have 88 keys, weighted action and be MIDI compatible. You can try out the Kurzweil PC-88, around $1700 street price. It has 88 keys, very good MIDI implementation, and a set of onboard sounds which includes a piano. The key action is somewhere between a strict weighted action and a synth which makes it easy on the fingers. It is very portable. For maximum versatality, nothing beats a strict controller with added sound modules of your choice. The Peavey C8 is perhaps the best. The Fatar 2001 ($1650) also comes to mind. You would then need to buy a sound module with a good piano sound like the EMU Proformance ($360) or the Kurzweil MicroPiano ($350). Tapas. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 10:09:04 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Eric Harnden (Ronin)" Subject: faq/kyma/mars? 1 - as to the ongoing faq thang... i've seen several on the net that simply consist of the collected sayings of the local gurus on the topics at hand. messages are collected and indexed, and that's about it. maybe not a bad idea for here? i am thinking of metlay's recent exegesis on vs/ppg/et al, which looked to me like the makings of a pretty good essential info piece. and then there's metlay's speech about... and of course who could forget metlay's classic rant on... and then metlay said... hmmm. maybe we should just set up a direct link to metlay's prevocal wetware. anyway... mayhaps grep the archives and extract the goodies, identify the gaps and put out invitations for filler? we could run a competition between us old farts and the new young lions (i'm thinking of somebody from microsoft.com, here), and let the passive readership evaluate the results on succinctness, utility, and general cool. i lose, i think. 2 - i recently picked up the kyma docs from the aes convention, and here's what little i can say about it. it's a software package that drives a dsp engine based on the motorola, and that runs on standard mac/dos platforms. the software presents graphical objects for the generation and processing of sound, that you instantiate, hook up, and parameterize with point/drag/ click. all of the current cool algorithms seem to be present, except possibly for waveguide modeling. seems pretty straightforward. modular virtual digital synthesis. the basic pack costs about $4K, and includes 4 dsp chips, which is enough for quite a chunk of nifty sound. you provide your own platform. 3 - Mars? what the hell is that? wasn't that the name of a modular system from some time ago? no... that was Aries. any company relation? tell us more. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 01:41:18 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Shawn T. Rutledge" Subject: Re: Alternate tunings - a program to help out In-Reply-To: <01HKTYA1ZUW69I5VSB@asu.edu> from "Joe McMahon" at Dec 19, 94 05:54:03 pm >I find alternate tuning interesting. One of my favorite albums is Terry Riley's _The Harp of New Albion_; here, a Bosendorfer grand is retuned to a just-intonation scale (in this case, what's called a "5-limit scale"; no prime factor of the ratios between the base frequency of the scale and any note in it is more than 5). Forgive my ignorance, but you probably know how to tune to the "old" (non equal-tempered, I forget what it's called, but it was in use until 1940-something or thereabouts) scale. Also, I have a tape containing an Icelandic Christmas carol which is played on a piano that seems to have a wierd tuning; it just has that "old" sound, and I'd like to experiment with the common known tunings to see which one they used, or if the piano just needed tuning. So, if you or any other old timers on the list would like to go on a full-scale tirade about various kinds of piano tuning that have been tried, I'd be glad to oblige and listen. -- _______ KB7PWD - now on packet! shawn.rutledge@asu.edu (_ | |_) html: http://enuxsa.eas.asu.edu/~rutledge/home.html __) | | \__________________________________________________________________ * "Don't play fake. Be true to music with the new Ultrasound MAX..." * ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 10:09:31 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alessandro Fiorletta Subject: Re: FLY30 Andy, I think that FLY can be good for your needs. It has a good "cad like" software that let you program the board as you need, interacting with common objects rappresentations. It's quite a long time now that I'm not hearing people at CRM so I'm not upgraded for the last news about FLY30 software & hardware. I think it is better if you contact the guys at CRM to get all the newest informations you need. You can write, phone or fax to: Antonio Pellecchia CRM - Centro Ricerche Musicali Via Lamarmora, 18 00185 Rome - Italy Phone ++39 (6) 446 4161 Fax ++39 (6) 446 7911 If you want I can contact them for you, but it can take a bit long. Let me know. Saluti, Ale. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alessandro Fiorletta - ccd505@tovvx2.ccd.utovrm.it University of Tor Vergata - Rome ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 13:13:33 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Roger Blayney Subject: Re: Alternate tunings In-Reply-To: from "Automatic digest processor" at Dec 20, 94 01:00:09 am >for each corresponding note in the two scales, calculate the difference in Hertz between the two notes. Calculate the relative size of an equal-tempered semitone between the current note and the previous one. Divide this by 100 to get the size of a cent in Hertz for this interval. Now divide the number of Hertz out-of-tune for the corresponding notes by the size of a cent (in Hertz) for this interval to get the number of cents detune that must be applied to the equal-tempered note to get the desired note in the new scale. I too am interested in alternative tunings and in Joe's program. I don't think the calculation of cents is quite right, though. I thought a cent was defined by dividing a semitone into 100 equal *ratios*, not 100 equal *differences* of frequency. In other words, it is logarithmic rather than linear. (A semitone is a ratio of 12th root of 2, and so a cent is a ratio of 1200th root of two). So I think 'centsout' should be calculated as... centsout = 1200 * log(oldscale[i]/newscale[i]) / log(2); This doesn't make very much difference to the results of the program, as the intervals are small, but it would make a significant difference for large intervals. Sorry to nit-pick, but I hope this gets the theory right. :-) >Second, the tuning will get (relatively) less perfect as you go up the keyboard, since the size of an interval expands, making the fractional part of the detuning increasingly large I don't think this would matter, as we hear intervals as ratios rather than linear differences of frequency. So although, as you go up the keyboard, the 'size of an interval expands' in terms of Hz, the ratio stays the same, and we perceive it as the same interval. Similarly, although the rounding errors would get larger in terms of Hz, they shouldn't be any more noticeable. ______________________________________________________________________________ Roger Blayney R.Blayney@greenwich.ac.uk Computing Services University of Greenwich London SE18 6PF, UK 0181-331 8372 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 10:33:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: Alternate tunings >I too am interested in alternative tunings and in Joe's program. I don't think the calculation of cents is quite right, though. I thought a cent was defined by dividing a semitone into 100 equal *ratios*, not 100 equal *differences* of frequency. In other words, it is logarithmic rather than linear. (A semitone is a ratio of 12th root of 2, and so a cent is a ratio of 1200th root of two). So I think 'centsout' should be calculated as... >centsout = 1200 * log(oldscale[i]/newscale[i]) / log(2); >This doesn't make very much difference to the results of the program, as the intervals are small, but it would make a significant difference for large intervals. Sorry to nit-pick, but I hope this gets the theory right. :-) Urk. I think you're right. :) I tried my retuning table last night and it just didn't sound quite right. I'm going to retry tonight with your fix and see how it sounds. I will report. >>Second, the tuning will get (relatively) less perfect as you go up the keyboard, since the size of an interval expands, making the fractional part of the detuning increasingly large >I don't think this would matter, as we hear intervals as ratios rather than linear differences of frequency. So although, as you go up the keyboard, the 'size of an interval expands' in terms of Hz, the ratio stays the same, and we perceive it as the same interval. Similarly, although the rounding errors would get larger in terms of Hz, they shouldn't be any more noticeable. Right. As I mentioned, the worst rounding error came out to about 2 Hz at 20 KHz. Endurable, I think. -- McMahon's Corollary to Crispen's Law: "The eventual K2000 messages will usually be followed by a post about how the Ensoniq machines aren't bad either." ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 10:54:54 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: Alternate tunings (fixed table) Here's the results of Roger's fix: Equal-tempered 5-limit Hz out Cents out (fixed calc.) 440.000000 440.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 466.163762 469.333333 -3.169572 -12.114358 -11.731285 493.883301 495.000000 -1.116699 -4.028562 -3.910002 523.251131 528.000000 -4.748869 -16.170311 -15.641287 554.365262 550.000000 4.365262 14.029837 13.686286 587.329536 586.666667 0.662869 2.010871 1.955001 622.253967 625.777778 -3.523810 -10.089814 -9.776284 659.255114 660.000000 -0.744886 -2.013144 -1.955001 698.456463 704.000000 -5.543537 -14.141190 -13.686286 739.988845 733.333333 6.655512 16.024874 15.641287 783.990872 782.222222 1.768650 4.019473 3.910002 830.609395 825.000000 5.609395 12.032546 11.731285 880.000000 880.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 As you can see, the answers are a fair amount different, which would explain why the tuning just didn't sound very musical when I tried it. Worse, with so many half-cent differences, I won't be able to get the proper results on the VFXsd. It's a really noticeable difference between the sound from Riley's specially-tuned piano vs. the retuned synth - not just the sound quality, but that identical chords don't "ring" properly due to the ratios not being quite right. I suppose the best way to do this would be to use MAX if one were using a commercial synth - it would detect the note-on, and send a proper amount of pitch-bend (assuming that the pitch-bend granularity is fine enough....). Of course, this means that improvising is probably out; I don't know of any synth that allows you to selectively pitch bend different notes by different amounts in the same MIDI channel. Real-time csound, perhaps? Anybody have a spare grand piano and a free piano tech to go along with it? Oh yeah, and somewhere to put it? :) --- Joe M. -- McMahon's Corollary to Crispen's Law: "The eventual K2000 messages will usually be followed by a post about how the Ensoniq machines aren't bad either." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 09:43:02 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: MARS Hello Alessandro, I couldn't help notice your bagging MIDI... >It is made for real professional musical applications (it dosen't have MIDI at all) OK, we all know about MIDI's shortcomings, but what else could have been done that cheaply and universally in 1982? We'd all like to have a MIDI 2.0 or better, but we'd be replacing every other piece of gear. Hey, it works! Clunky? Yes. Slow? sometimes. Coarse? Gang controllers and get 14 bit resolution. As has been said in this space previously, there are more problems with the way devices respond to MIDI (very slowly) that with the speed of MIDI itself. And with multiport interfaces like MOTU's and Opcode's we can go a long way to reducing those discrepancies. There will be a bunch of academic guardians out there about to flame me for ignoring all the great (and very expensive) workstations like MARS and your FLY30. They are fantastic if you've got the access or the money. But if you don't... So I expect that there are a lot of poor students and techs and musicians and composers out there (like me) who are applauding. We make do with what we've got and some do very well indeed. (BTW, I do have access to some high end gear if I want it, NeXT and IRCAM board.) Thanks for your information though. There'll be many who are just itching to get their hands on a FLY30! Regards, David ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 09:34:39 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: samick sm series mixers Hello Phil, excuse me for intervening, but J. Brian said... >Why Mackie? Built like a rock. I don't agree. It's not going to fall apart in your hands (I assume we're talking about the 1604 here), but the faders and knobs don't feel like real ones. The case doesn't seem particularly sturdy, either. Stick it in a good flight case and you'd probably haveno problems. The faders are short and their throw is quite frankly weird if you're used to 100mm log, 0 about 3/4 the way up. Sound is good, but the EQ is limited and not defeatable. I have a feeling I'm repeating myself! I'm not saying don't buy a Mackie, just play with one (or anything else) a lot befreo buying. Regards, David ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 09:47:52 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: Roland Rhodes Model 760 Hi Rhodes fans, it might be a U20 inside but I hope th outside is nicer. Steer clear of the U20's and U220's interface. It stinks. Regards, David ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 18:48:25 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: john rossi Subject: Re: MARS In-Reply-To: <199412202321.SAA17301@falcon.bgsu.edu> I have been away from BGSU for exactly 1 week. In that time I chalked up 395 mail messages. All of these were from two sources EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L. That makes more than 55 messages per day. When R.M.S. was in its interesting prime (circa 1987-1989) i seldom got more than 50 messages a day. Joe, congradulations! I think the old R.M.S. is back and it is in these two listservs. John 3 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 10:02:38 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Elsea Subject: Alternate tunings Roger Blayney writes: >I thought a cent was >defined by dividing a semitone into 100 equal *ratios*, not 100 equal *differences* of frequency. In other words, it is logarithmic rather than linear. (A semitone is a ratio of 12th root of 2, and so a cent is a ratio of 1200th root of two). Backus, in "The Acoustical Foundations of Music" defines a cent as 1/100 of a semitone in the text, but gives calculations based on 2*1/1200 in the appendix. So you're both right, unless you use a Pentium. Peter Elsea UCSC ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 10:29:04 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alessandro Fiorletta Subject: Mr. Fourier Results! Hello Guys, Here are the results of the first edition of "Mr. Fourier Contest 1994" (do you remember?) I found many listings in various FTP sites, but just a few of them was rigth for my needs. In my search I found a 3 part document called FTTSTUFF made by Peter McKinney by collecting answers to a question like mine. It was in a ghoper server in France but it was not complete, so I wrote to Peter and here's it. For my needs the best program contained in FFTSTUFF is the one of Eyal Lebedinsky, so he is officially declared "Fast Fourier Trasformer of 1994". Thanks to all the one that entered in the contest and look for 1995 edition. Saluti, Ale. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * Have a Jazz Chirstmas and a Funky new year (or was it hear?) * * * ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alessandro Fiorletta - ccd505@tovvx2.ccd.utovrm.it University of Tor Vergata - Rome ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mckinney@me.umn.edu To: ccd505@ccd.utovrm.it Received: from hercules.me.umn.edu by meserv.me.umn.edu (8.6.8.1) id JAA09350; Thu, 3 Nov 1994 09:31:31 -0600 X-Posting- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 09:31:31 -0600 X-Original-Id: <199411031531.JAA09350@meserv.me.umn.edu> X-Sender: mckinney@me.umn.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 >Hello Peter, >I need, in a too short time, an ultra-fast fft C/C++ code for real time AUDIO applications (very simple spectrum analisys). Can you give me a good source pointer (or wathever else)? >p.s. if the code is optimized for X86 cpu it could be great! >Many Thanks, Alessandro. Alessandro - I have included a pointer to an appropriate file that I noticed a couple of days ago. Also attached to thgis mailing is a compressed file (fftstuff.zip) that contains a collection of fft codes and pointers to fft codes. It's over a year old now, but was assembled by me after posting to the net asking the same question you did. You might want to check out this pointer from fftpart1.txt: >Return-Path: From: eyal@fir.canberra.edu.au (Eyal Lebedinsky) Subject: Re: Recommendations for good (Fast) FFT code in C ? >You did not say what kind of FFT you want. I wrote a fast integer (16 bit) FFT that is usfull when wanting top speed. It completely unrolls the algorithm. It can generate asm too it your compiler is not smart enough. If you end up wanting it then just ask and I will email. >It does NO windowing but you can add almost anything. NO inverse FFT. If you're doing work on sound files, you might not need real numbers... Also of interest might be the code in fftpart4.txt and and the code in asm_fft.txt. >From: HOMER@vaxld.ameslab.gov (John Homer) Subject: fft4wav2.zip - Analyse WAV/VOC/SND/RAW/IFF/SAM/MAT files+more Summary: Reposted by Keith Petersen > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 1994 00:42:47 GMT >I have uploaded to SimTel, the Coast to Coast Software Repository (tm), (available by anonymous ftp from the primary mirror site OAK.Oakland.Edu and its mirrors): >SimTel/msdos/sound/ >fft4wav2.zip Analyze WAV/VOC/SND/RAW/IFF/SAM/MAT files+more >FFT4WAV2 written 1994 by Lars Otte - Analysis of many data types with C source code included. Realtime Scopes, Realtime FFT Analyzers, FT Analyzer with logrhythmic Frequency, and many cool Visual Effects, this is for your Home-Disco and Electronic Labor very useful! You just need a Sound Blaster card (or compatible). >The Highspeed Mode works with some 16.Bit sound cards up to 48kHz! 286-Code, VGA:(320x200x256...640x480x16) Coprocessor speed up >10 times the FFT! >FreeWare. Uploaded by: >John Homer homer@ameslab.gov >Ames Laboratory Office: 515 294 0748 >Iowa State University FAX : 515 294 0568 I hope this is helpful. By the way, where did you get my address? I really haven't done much with this code - I originally assembled it for a friend that had no net access. I've done a fair bit of spectral analysis, but I've usually treated any fft code that I've used as "black box". Good luck in your work, - Pete ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 10:56:15 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alessandro Fiorletta Subject: Re: MARS Hello David, I have to tell that I'm absolutely not against MIDI and I agree to all your correct sentences (look at my other mail about IMA). My "it has no MIDI at all" was just because as someone previously noiced, in a machine like FLY30 MIDI is not usefull for many reasons: first of all because it was developed having in mind the needs of composers who think about music as a continuos matter, not like a sequence of ON/OFF. In Italy we call this kind of music "musica verticale" that in english means "vertical music". It is the result of binding classical/contemporary music with eletronic music. For them (the composers) one of the biggest limit of MIDI is the assumption that a pressed key identifies a note on ... for example in Polar Synthesys you can assign to every key of a synth a diferent set of parameters including pitch, sound, pan etc. all changing in time. This could be a good argument for this list: the way that instruments limit the composer mind. Most of the applications of the Fly need 32 bit resolution. It is a nonsense to have a 32 bit floating point board and send it 14 bit integers. You can also define a new set of 4 byte data MIDI messages, but then you will be no more compatible with the rest of the world, and even worst you will push tons of byte in your line every real time action you take. Even more I think that most of the work of this equipment is not done when they are connected to a midi controller, but for example processing audio signals in really new and unbeliveable ways. This doesn't mean tha FLY ignores MIDI. You can control your board using a third part midi interface. That's the good point. When MIDI 2.0 will be the new standard, you don't have to trash your board, you simply change your midi interface. What about implementing this also on synths? And now let's talk about costs. You are absolutely rigth they costs too much. But when I sent my mail someone was talking about MARS. I simply noticed that there is another board that make more and better work than MARS and it costs the same. So if you can spend for MARS why do not look at FLY? Indeed we are talking about equipments that lie in the research field, but they are just preceding the market. As soon as DSP prices will drop down you will get commercial application of technology developed on thoes monsters. Look at Yamaha new synths (I think they are called vl or vp): they are based on the same synth method of PolarSynthesys but they cost 1/10 of the FLY board. (well, the things that Yamaha can do are 1/100,000 of the FLY but...) Anyway I belive that for most of the common musical application MIDI is more than enough, and I'm sure that 85% of people who use midi can't figure out all its possible applications. Saluti, Ale. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * Have A Jazz Christmas And A Funky New Year (or was it Hear?) * * * ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alessandro Fiorletta - ccd505@tovvx2.ccd.utovrm.it University of Tor Vergata - Rome ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 12:08:31 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alessandro Fiorletta Subject: who knows? Who knows telephone, fax, emial, ftp site or something else about IMA - International Midi Association? I need all the hrdware and software spec. about Midi 1.0. Thank you, Ale. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * Have A Jazz Christmas And A Funky New Year (or was it Hear?) * * * ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alessandro Fiorletta - ccd505@tovvx2.ccd.utovrm.it University of Tor Vergata - Rome ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 17:42:43 +0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "COORDINADOR DEPTO. DE ELECTRONICA" Subject: Cents, semitones and frequency ratios... According to the IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms, cent is "the interval between two sounds whose basic frequency ratio is the twelve-hundredth root of 2. Note: The interval, in cents, between any two frequencies is 1200 times the logarithm to the base of 2 of the frequency ratio. Thus 1200 cents equal 12 equally tempered semitones equal 1 octave." So, as Roger points out, it is logarithmic rather than linear. Saludos, Pablo Pablo San Nicolas Montevideo, Uruguay ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 00:41:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Donald R. Carroll,Jr." Subject: Re: midi to 4-track // I don't understand how to get midi files sent to my 4-track Tascam // 246.... Edmond, Although you can't send MIDI files for storage on your Tascam as in a ' tape 'backup' , you could sync your sequencer to the multi-track using such methods as SMPTE or ChaseLock. I use a Music Quest MX-32 PC Midi Interface to sync to one of my four-tracks. This is just an I/O Card similar to a sound card. It has two MIDI In's and two MIDI outs , in addition to an output for sync signal. The sync signal ( which is a timecode i.e. position data) is recorded onto one track. This sacrifces one track yet provides a way for your sequencer (Cakewalk-which I also use) to give you 256 MIDI tracks along with 3 Analog tracks (not including the use of *.WAV files). It syncs VERY WELL. Hope this helps ..... DonnieCarr@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 01:12:35 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Donald R. Carroll,Jr." Subject: Re: midi to 4-track | Now if I mix down everything from the sequencer |to 2 tracks them do the acoustic stuff on the remaining 2 tracks |would I still |be able to get a stereo recording? And (forgive this mike but...) what |does |smpte mean? SMPTE stands for Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers..... ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 09:26:53 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Josh Karnes Subject: Re: midi to 4-track >>And (forgive this mike but...) what |does |smpte mean? >>SMPTE stands for Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers..... AND, more importantly, is the common name for a type of time encoding used (among other things) to synchronize sounds with film and has been embraced by the electronic music industry as a good way to synchronize their audio recording gear with their sequencers, etc. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 17:06:08 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Quinten Williams Subject: COMPRESSION Can anyone tell me what the effects of compression has on vocal tracks? Also what would be a good midi compression unit to use with my 8trk recorder? If anyone can provide me with this information I would be more than thankful. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 09:57:35 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: COMPRESSION Hi Quinten, I have just spent a few sessions with an engineer who has 26 channels of compression, everything from old Teletronix and Ureis to Yamahas and Gain Brains. I, too, did not fully understand what compression could do until this time. Any vocal or instrumental performance will have varying levels. Sometimes the performer will sing or play loudly, or softly. Depending on the type of music we are producing or our approach to capturing (recording) that music, we may want to even out those variations. I'll give a practical example. If you listen to a typical Mariah Carey pop ballad (sorry emusicers! I know she ain't up there with Xenakis and Partch!) the actual change in level between her soft breathy vocals and her strong, screaming ones (not quite screaming) is very little. You can check this out by recording such a record on your cassette deck and looking at the meters during the song. The level stays pretty high. Yet she still sounds soft and breathy. Her voice has been compressed to reduce the dynamic range of her performance. This means that we can bring her vocal to the 'front' of the mix, yet retain the feeling of dynamic range. What her engineer has done is to turn up her vocal so the soft bits are louder. This presents a problem: how do stop the loud bits from overloading the tape? We compress them. Above a certain level (referred to as threshold), the compressor circuit will act. The amount of compression is determined in 2 ways. On some machines, it is selectable; on ohters, it varies with the level above the threshold (and you can't 'set' the amount). Where a box does allow you to set all parameters independently, you can set the threshold and the compression ratio. If you were to select a ratio of 4:1 for Mariah, the following would happen. Every 4dB rise above the threshold would be compressed to give only 1dB rise at the output. The compressor is reducing the amount of gain above the threshold. Boxes which don't have a ratio control will monitor the input level and vary the compression ratio according to how much the signall rises above the threshold. The greater the rise above it, the more compression (higher ratio) is applied. Now for compressors. You may not need a MIDI compressor unless you wish to automate changes in compression. Some units will allow this by receiving MIDI program change controls. More sophisticated units will allow you to adjust individual parameters. Mostly, though, you won't want to do this. You might just wish to 'even out' the levels in a performance (which you can easily do by compressing while recording or playingor both). These days there are a lot of units out there. SOme are very expensive; some are very cheap and not worth the money. Many older units, like valve compressors, are highly prized and will cost heaps. I've used lots of different compressors now. They differ in their harshness and sound. This is dependent on the circuitry, so I can only say that you should get your hands on one, figure out what it does, then start comparing other units. The old Kepex Dynamites are quite savage (very effective!). The older dbx 160s and 162s are a bit smoother - quite nice. The valve units like the Teletronix are very smooth indeed, abit like valve guitar amps copared to solid state amps. Valley People Gain Brains are very versatile with a side chain to allow frequency dependent compression. Newer units like the Alesis work quite well. The Yamaha (can't remember the model number) is noisy. Some of these units you can pick up second hand (look in the back pages of Mix for dealers) quite reasonably priced. Perhaps the greatest advice I can give is to get demos and get advice from people who won't stuff you around. It's a minefield! Happy hunting. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 12:19:47 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "" Subject: Re: COMPRESSION David Rodger wrote--- [snip]> >I'll give a practical example. If you listen to a typical Mariah Carey pop ballad (sorry emusicers! I know she ain't up there with Xenakis and Partch!) Depends on the criteria, David (OK, who said *any*?). Good description of compression, though: thanks. I use (over-use?) compression a good deal on bass guitar - highly recommended (but addictive). And you can get away with cheaper boxes. Regards Clive Clive McFarland CSIRO Australia clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 23:37:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Quinten Williams Subject: compression Many thanks to you David and Kevin for your most informative responses to my question on compression. David, I will save your response in one of my computer files for future reference. You really made the concept very clear to me. I've been doing some home recording using a Tascam midistudio 688, my synth and the Alessis MMT 8 sequencer. For percussion, I've added the Yamaha RY 20 rhythm programmer. I often sing lead while for backgrounds I may add a two part harmony. I have worked in studios on keyboards and vocals and the engineering was handled by a specialist. From your description of how compression works, I can see why the vocals on my home recordings without compression are very hard to mix down to 2 track stereo with the proper balance. I mix down to a Sony DAT recorder and either the instrumental tracks are peaking the vocal, or the vocals are peaking the instrumentals. My final mixes contain the exact effect that you described, the vocal parts having varying levels throughout the track and because my synth is touch sensitive, the bass is sometimes a problem also. I'm into alternative rock or jazz with sort of a blues blend. I'll multitrack on the sequencer, sync it to 2 trk stereo, sync the percussion to 2 trk stereo, play live overdubs, and record the vocals on trks 6, 7, and 8. Track 8 is usually my sync-tone track and the last track I dub on with the second background harmony part. I'm getting about 12 virtual tracks of instrumentals and 3 tracks of vocal. I add effects with the alessis effects processor and EQ internal to the TASCAM. I plan to follow your advice and get to the music store nearby to get hands-on experience with the compressor. It sounds like I certainly need to add it to my home system in order to improve the sound quality of my mix-downs. Thanks again. Quinten Williams Fax 914-997-6254 72633.3371@compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 03:17:08 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: michael Subject: Re: compression In-Reply-To: Message of Sun, 25 Dec 1994 23:37:42 -0500 from Hello, I have not got a multi tack recorder at this time. I have been wondering about the Tascam Line. How do you like yours? Would you suggest it to others? Thank you in advance for any help you can provide. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 14:40:47 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Quinten Williams Subject: Would I suggest the Tascam? Michael asks >I have been wondering about the Tascam... Would you suggest it to others? Michael, for my purposes the Tascam midistudio 688 8trk cassette recorder has worked out fine. It is a fine unit, compact for portability and is virtually a 16trk recorder when you consider its "dual input modes". I think it is capable of top notch quality recordings although you have to remember it is a cassette tape machine which means extra work if you plan to transfer cassette recorded tracks to reels. It has some minor drawbacks but one could live with those. Things like not being able to mute a track without turning down the fader. It's complete parameters are controlled by a built in microprocessor and it has built in DBX NR. I would recommend the use of it for professionals and amateurs but beginners beware, it is a very technical unit. Price about $2600.00 Quinten ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 15:17:36 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Quinten Williams Subject: A place in the performing arts? I would like to probe the list for comments on the appearance of "ONE MAN/WOMAN BANDS". Lately I've been accepting gigs that contract for just the use of my synthesizers and my vocals. Although the synthesizer can reproduce an acceptable full band sound, many people in the audience being entertained don't realize what is happining in such a production. I have had people come up to me during breaks and comment that my kareoke performance was great, or that my boom box has a nice sound to it. I find myself rendering an explanation of midi and sequencers to non-musicians only to confuse them even more about what they were listening to. Granted, I do often appear with guest instrumentalists, usually a horn player, or singers people still seem to be baffled. I think kareoke and "You sing the hits" tapes ( tapes with the vocal part muted out ), are giving synthesists a cloud cover we can do without. True, synths are great for studio sessions because of their capability to replace conflicting schedules of session musicians, multi-timbral features and perfect timing and pitch, but what good is a synth that can reproduce 300 sounds, but sits all night on a show, programmed to the electric piano patch, while seven other musicians stand around and cram for their parts? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 16:39:49 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Subject: Re: COMPRESSION In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 26 Dec 1994 12:19:47 EST from What piece would you recomend? I want it for both keybaords and vocals. I could buy different units for each job if needed, my money is slim but my desire to produce quilaty work is paramount. Please give me your recomendation. What about Limiters, are they basicly the same? If you could explain it I'd also like to know exzctly how Aural Exiters work, and what a normal musician would need one for. I have spend almost all my available funds in recent years on the keyboards and Mods that I wanted but not on the recording and vocal end. I don't really know where to begin. Could you point me in a general direction there too. Please? Thank You. From Michael in Chattanooga. Hope the Holidays are going well. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 16:47:59 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Subject: Samplers I am trying to deside what I want in a sampler. I currently work on a veriety of projects ranging from pop to Industrial, Primarily Techno. I have been looking at the EmulatorIIIxs for a long time and I have the chance to aquire one fairly reasonably. How does it rank up compared to a K2000rs for sampling? I currently have a K2000 keyboard which I'm growing to like. Should I deversify? Is the K200rs and EmulatorIIIxs comparable in sampling and playback quality . Is there an easy way to dump samples between them? I have a PC and I love the fact that my PC and K2000 can share their SCSI drives, the SMDI option is nice too. I have only seen the legendary Emulator in passing so I do not know much about it. What I heard of course was wonderfull. Please I'll take any input I can get. This is a major purchase for me, I'd like the best chance I can of making it a good one. Thanks, from Michael in Chattanooga. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 18:41:06 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Davvid Brooks Subject: Re: Samplers BEFORE YOU BUY AN EIII,MAKE SURE AN ESI32(NEW) WON'T DO IT FOR YOU. 99% OF THE EIII'S FUNCTIONS. AT 33% OF THE PRICE! IT READS EMU,AKAI, ENSONIC,CARDS. IT HAS REPLACED THE EMAX AND THE EMULATOR III, OF COURSE THE ***E4***IS COMING. I'LL HAVE ONE SOON AS SOME PEOPLE BUY MY CD AND MAKE ME RICH SAMPLERS ARE MUSIC TOOLS! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 22:52:38 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: michael Subject: Re: Samplers In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 26 Dec 1994 18:41:06 -0500 from What about the K2000s and K2000rs? Do these machines compare to pro samplers? Is the CD3000 worth a look? ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 23:41:46 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "J. Brian Rice" Subject: Re: MARS I second your resonse . Name one standard that was ever established that ever pleased everyone involved. The MIdi specifications standard has precipitated a revolution to the average musician. To those embracing a more elite attitude to the performance and writing of music, please excuse us. Brian ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 23:41:51 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "J. Brian Rice" Subject: Re: samick sm series mixers David, Your point is well taken as to the limitations of the Mackie design. Remember that I tried to qualify my selection based upon my particular needs and those I thought were expressed by the orriginal writer. If I had my preferences and the dollars I would take 100mm faders and semi- parametric EQ as a minimum standard. Throw in insertion points on all channels and major buses and the list goes on into serious gear lust. But if you want a clean, bare necessities mixer I still vote for the 1202 . Now if we want to stray into the price range of the 1604 you must consider the Allen & Heath GL2 mixer. Yeow, now this is the rack mount / compact mixer that makes me lust. Sorry, I believe that this is outside the intent of this list. ould someone tell me were this discussion should be conducted. J. Brian ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Dec 1994 01:57:07 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mi Subject: Re: samick sm series mixers In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 26 Dec 1994 23:41:51 -0500 from Why would you consider this a conversation outside the enterest of this forum. I for one am interested. You may me right, but if this isn't where we can discuss varius ideas and equipment needed to produce music as electronic musicians, myself, right now I'm just a computer hack with a bunch of stuff, but I'm getting there. If you find a different place to shed your wisdom, anyone on this board please grant me the priviledge of following along. I may be less than the ultimate musician and I might need a computer to put my sound together but I need the input and guidance this board and it's gifted membership allow. Thanks for hanging out here. If you guys go somewhere else, take me too. Slow but at a pace, Michael in Chattanooga Tn. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Dec 1994 09:36:57 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: samick sm series mixers In-Reply-To: <9412270442.AA26884@farside.gsfc.nasa.gov> from "J. Brian Rice" at Dec 26, 94 11:41:51 pm >Now if we want to stray into the price range of the 1604 you must consider the Allen & Heath GL2 mixer. Yeow, now this is the rack mount / compact mixer that makes me lust. Sorry, I believe that this is outside the intent of this list. Could someone tell me were this discussion should be conducted. Over on SYNTH-L would be perfect. (synth-l@american.edu; subscribe in the same way as you did for this list, if you haven't already - send 'sub synth-l your name' to listserv@american.edu in a mail message). --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Dec 1994 20:59:36 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Arne Claassen ISE Subject: Looking for MMT-8? This is _not_ a for sale ad, before anyone flames me! I remember a while ago some people were looking for an Alesis MMT-8. When I picked up my K2000S this week I saw one on the shelf at the store. It's just been refurbished by Alesis. If you want more infor, drop me a line. Arne -- Arne F. Claassen On the Web: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "[I]f a license was required to drive your synth, there might be less of a need for these newbie-type questions - then again, we'd have to deal with a Department of Transportation (Workstation?) - aaahhhhh!" - Jeff Schultz ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Dec 1994 20:46:34 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Arne Claassen ISE Subject: K2000 help needed Hey... I just picked up a used K2000S for an incredible deal. But I have yet to figure out how much RAM was in it. The previous owner claimed 10 MB, but i'm not sure, whether he was referring to 10 MG of combined ROM and RAM, i.e. 8 MB ROM and 2 MB RAM. The Master page shows 10400 (or so) KB of samples. Is that the RAM or ROM and RAM combined? Does anyone know where in the beast I can check the RAM? The manual has not been helpful in that respect. BTW, I'm running 2.07. What aer the advantages to going to 3.0 and what is the cost? Thanks... Arne -- Arne F. Claassen On the Web: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "[I]f a license was required to drive your synth, there might be less of a need for these newbie-type questions - then again, we'd have to deal with a Department of Transportation (Workstation?) - aaahhhhh!" - Jeff Schultz ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Dec 1994 20:53:27 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: ** Bouncer ** Subject: Re: K2000 help needed >Hey... I just picked up a used K2000S for an incredible deal. But I have yet to figure out how much RAM was in it. The previous owner claimed 10 MB, but i'm not sure, whether he was referring to 10 MG of combined ROM and RAM, i.e. 8 MB ROM and 2 MB RAM. The Master page shows 10400 (or so) KB of samples. Is that the RAM or ROM and RAM combined? Does anyone know where in the beast I can check the RAM? The manual has not been helpful in that respect. Congratulations on your purchase of your K2k (wow, we didn't even have to wait for 10 followups to start talking Kurzweil again, :-) Sorry... Anyways, back to your question about the amount of onbaord RAM: Yes, the numbers shown in the Master Page represent the amount of RAM (I don't believe there's a way to tell from the front panel a total amount of ROM on board, though I don't have my manual in front of me). >BTW, I'm running 2.07. What aer the advantages to going to 3.0 and what is the cost? Thanks... You might want to check out the following FTP site for the rest of the info: Site: bach.nevada.edu Directory: /pub/k2000/text -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 574 Jun 16 1994 9bit.simms.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 391 Jun 23 1994 cdrom.mechanisms.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 1492 Jun 22 1994 fx.ctrl.list.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 2499 Jun 16 1994 gain.stages.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 2007 Jun 16 1994 hd-kit.install.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 5217 Nov 13 22:27 k2500.txt.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 9662 Jun 16 1994 k2k-faq.01.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 12426 Sep 15 13:10 k2k.faq.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann wheel 2606 Jun 23 1994 k2k.products.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 493 Jun 16 1994 klib.advert.from.EM.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 1572 Jun 16 1994 klib.advert.from.author.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 2344 Aug 10 06:07 klib.info.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 1132 Jun 16 1994 klib.review.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 1375 Jun 16 1994 listserv.cmds.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 16630 Nov 22 22:51 listserv.survey.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 760 Jun 16 1994 northstar.samples.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 6547 Jun 16 1994 options.txt.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 1420 Aug 8 17:21 pc88.specs.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 johann other 3140 Sep 22 06:29 v3.01.specs.gz ps. The files are all Gnu-Zipped, but you should be able to download them just fine by requesting the file *without* the .gz extension (they should auto-decompress for you on-the-fly) Cheers, Billyb (** Bouncer **) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:58:36 +1900 From: "L-Soft list server at LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU (1.8a)" Subject: File: "EMUSIC-L LOG9412A" To: xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 02:00:35 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mICHAEL Subject: Re: K2000 help needed In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 28 Dec 1994 20:46:34 -0600 from The 3.0 software gives you much better diskdrive access and utilities primarily. It also enhances your sequencer as I understand it. Michael in Chattanooga. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 03:11:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Subject: putting it all together. I have been collecting synths and samplers for some time now. I now have an farely powerfull lineup of equipment old and new when recent pices of gear concidered. My problem is that I paid no real attention to Effects, Mixdown, or Vocal paths to persue. Could some one try and outline a good basic package. Where should I use Exciters, Enhancers, Harmonic devices, and the like in a way that benifits me? Do I really need these things at all? What would a decent individual studio on a buget include when doing Dance, Tech no, Industrial. The previously mentioned does not exclude my personal interest s on my current group effort project. I also enjoy strong, and stange alternat ive kinds of stuff. Well what ever help, descriptions, outlines, what ever would be great. Thanks all, Ladies and Gentlemen. I see the light but it seems really far away. from Michael in Chattanooga ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 05:03:25 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Darren M. Cutlip" Subject: Re: putting it all together. Hey Micheal- If your music is good then you should'nt worry about having absolutely everything. I got a independent record deal myself, and I use minimal gear. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 10:54:08 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Josh Karnes Subject: sync I need to sync my Tascam PortaOne with my MIDI gear (Mac, KAT, U20, etc.). Unfortunately, the local dealers (whom I trust about 50%) tell me that there is NO WAY that I can make SMPTE work with dbx on a 4-track cassette. Also, they have declined my offer to hire them to modify my PortaOne to disable dbx on one channel (permanently). Here are my obvious questions: 1. Is there a way to make SMPTE work on a dbx cassette? If so how? Has anyone actually done it? 2. If no on 1, then does nayone know how to omdify a PortaOne to disable dbx on one channel? 3. If no on 1 & 2, then is there another type of sync that will work? Thanks, Josh Austin, TX ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 10:59:38 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Josh Karnes Subject: Re: putting it all together. I would agree. Plus, there is a (good) trend in today's music to back away from the super-over-effected sounds of the 80s and get "back to nature"; less reverbs, delays, etc. I have NEVER used "exciters" or "enhancers" in any studio, from 24-track "professional" studios all the way down to my own 4-track home studio. I'd say get your hands on a good multi-effects module like an SE50 (Boss) or a Quadraverb for miscellaneous effects, and a good ole Alesis MIDIverb II for good reverb sounds. Don't lean on technical superiority or effects to mask mediocre or bad music. The regular way things sound will generally be good enough. Josh Austin, TX ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 11:10:19 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Price Subject: Re: sync <1. Is there a way to make SMPTE work on a dbx cassette? If Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List Comments: HOLIDAY THOUGHTS From: JOEL STERN Subject: HOLIDAY THOUGHTS Good God...looks like Santa Claus brought dozens of adolescents computers with internet accounts but no spelling checkers... Oops... don't know what got into me. What I was trying to say was, er, oh never mind... Joel Stern stern@email.loc.gov ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 22:49:58 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Davvid Brooks Subject: Re: ESI32 HI, An ESI 32 is the new EMU sampler. It can be expanded to 32meg RAM with standard MAC simms.at 1500$, SCSI OPTIONAL, It's 33% of the cost of an EIII (also by EMU). picking mine up next week, iI turned down a deal for an EIII last week. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 19:22:14 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tom Jordan Subject: Re: A place in the performing arts? >>>I would like to probe the list for comments on the appearance of "ONE MAN/WOMAN BANDS". Lately I've been accepting gigs that contract for just the use of my synthesizers and my vocals. Although the synthesizer can reproduce an acceptable full band sound, many people in the audience being entertained don't realize what is happining in such a production. I have had people come up to me during breaks and comment that my kareoke performance was great, or that my boom box has a nice sound to it. I find myself rendering an explanation of midi and sequencers to non-musicians only to confuse them even more about what they were listening to. >>Curious isn't it? Absolutely unspectacular! :< I do an educational presentation about how all of our equipment makes the sounds we all hear - plus you gotta have a creative human being. So, I have a bit of an edge on getting their appreciation. Just to add to your expressions of baffled frustration: On several occasions I have had kids tell me that when they grow up they want to be a DJ. Excuse me if I slam someone's job here, but these kids think that the person at the radio station is MAKING MUSIC!!! And the admiration and glory (?) is going to the cool voice that pushes the play button. Sort of like Quentin's karaoke admirers :-) Tom Jordan Wired for Sound! - computer music for kids ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 09:20:00 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: putting it all together. Hi Michael, >Where should I use Exciters, Enhancers, Harmonic devices, and the like in a way that benifits me? Do I really need these things at all? Most of these devices are designed to 'synthesize' harmonics of the signal to which they are applied. Some work better than others; some are quieter than others. If your sounds are a bit dull, then try to figure out if it's because of the programming or if the synth is inherently dull. Then you might like to get your hands on an Aphex or similar unit, just to see what it does. Don't buy before having had a play with one, lest you get stuck with a lemon or with something you didn't need in the first place. In future, I suggest you send these messages to synth-l@american.edu, which is subtitled 'gearhead' or something like that. There will be more people there who know about this stuff, and yoou won't upset the emusicers who want to talk about electronic music but not gear. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 09:13:30 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Fickes Subject: DRUM MACHINE SOFTWARE I'm starting a project that will involve a great deal of drum programming. Does anyone have a suggestion as to a good application for creating drum patterns? Thanks for your help ! Terry Fickes Columbus, Ohio ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 09:24:09 GMT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List Comments: FINAL HOLIDAY THOUGHTS From: JOEL STERN Subject: FINAL HOLIDAY THOUGHTS >some of us were wondering what happened to you lately. Nice to I didn't think anyone cared. Actually, I have a pretty primative terminal here at work, with no spell checker, and I'm constantly going back to correct typos - but at least I can scroll back. OK, some emusic content. I heard some samples from a Korg Wavedrum that may just make a believer in physical modeling out of me. I'll say a bit more on synth-l about this, since that's probably the more appropriate forum. Joel Stern stern@email.loc.gov ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 13:43:04 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Damon Law Subject: eMusic and What?! Happy New Year all you silly musicians and experimental sound synthesis manipulators! Drinking & Driving is... stupid. Damon Law ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 21:21:26 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Subject: Re: putting it all together. In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 29 Dec 1994 05:03:25 -0500 from What exactly would you concider minimun gear ? I' sure there are things I've missed that I don't know I missed. I have almost no effects processors for example. Michael in Chattanooga ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 13:56:16 CST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Michael D. Whitten" Subject: Re: sync Josh Karnes wrote: >need to sync my Tascam PortaOne with my MIDI gear (Mac, KAT, U20, etc.). Unfortunately, the local dealers (whom I trust about 50%) tell me that there is NO WAY that I can make SMPTE work with dbx on a 4-track cassette. Also, they have declined my offer to hire them to modify my PortaOne to disable dbx on one channel (permanently). Here are my obvious questions: >1. Is there a way to make SMPTE work on a dbx cassette? If so how? Has anyone actually done it? I use a Tascam TSR8 tape deck with a Dr.T. Phantom smpte/midi synchronizer. Ch 8 is dbx-defeatable for smpte track striping. The dbx in ON position actually works better than dbx in OFF position. Instabilities and dropouts occur with the dbx switched OFF, but no problems occur whatsoever with the switch in ON. Go figure. I leave it on. Michael ---------------------------------------------------------- Michael Whitten | m-whit2@vm1.spcs.umn.edu | mw@lenti.med.umn.edu | "Sentience is over-rated." ---------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 31 Dec 1994 08:35:07 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: A place in the performing arts? Hi Tom and others engaged in this thread, >On several occasions >I have had kids tell me that when they grow up they want to be a DJ. .... but these kids think that the person at the radio station is MAKING MUSIC!!! No they don't. They probably mean DJ as hip hop star! The hip hop DJ does much more than the radio DJ, and, even if we do not like the sound of the result (or all the macho posturing rapped over the top of it), we might begrudgingly acknowledge that there is a high degree of skill required to manipulate sound bytes from such low-tech items as turntables. If you haven't seen this done (and without the aid of samplers or backing tapes) you've missed something. Check it out. (Am I about to be flamed for raising the spectre of hip hop here!? Anyone object to comparisons with musique concrete?) Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 16:36:03 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "E.W. Hobie Hodge" Subject: Re: A place in the performing... I saw Terminator X and public enemy last night at the fillmore in San Francisco. There's a DJ extraordinaire. It's definitely a valid form of musical expression in my book. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 16:42:38 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "E.W. Hobie Hodge" Subject: binhexing Have any of y'all tried sending .wav or mac sounds through internet gateways? I'm on AOL and you can send stuff like this readily to other aol users, but the mail gateway to internet on aol allows only text files. I have a pal who sends me photographs, but they are binhexed, that is changed with software from binary to hexadecimal text, then i have to decode them to view them. I'm thinking that as an addition to discussion of electronic music, it would be nice to listen to short pieces to further our wordy points. They would have to be short I think, as sound files can get quite large in terms of kilobytes. Any thoughts on this idea? --Edub@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 18:17:49 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Subject: Re: ESI32 In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 29 Dec 1994 22:49:58 -0500 from What kind of price was the EIII you turned down? What model was it? Michael in Chattanooga ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 19:58:18 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: John Hildenbiddle Subject: MIDI FTP Sights (or BBS numbers) Does anyone know of some FTP sights where some of the following files can be downloaded: Kurzweil samples Ensoniq SQ1+ patches (instruments) Roland JV-80 patches (instruments) Roland SCC1 patches (instruments) SoundBlaster AWE32 samples (.SBK files) Advanced Gravis samples (.PAT files) ...or anything else pertaining to MIDI! Thanks in advance. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 17:11:31 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: ** Bouncer ** Subject: Re: MIDI FTP Sights >Does anyone know of some FTP sights where some of the following files can be downloaded: Sure, here's some for you: >Kurzweil samples bach.nevada.edu /pub/k2000/sounds/* ftp.wit.com /music/lists/kurzweil/sounds/* >Roland JV-80 patches (instruments) ftp.otol.fi /pub/music/midi/patches/JV80/jv80-gm.lzh wagner.musicnet.ua.edu /pub/music/patches/jv80/* -- Billyb (** Bouncer **) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 20:39:14 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Jason Subject: Re: A place in the performing... I have done a one man band show for years, A midi Grand piano with seven synths, a drum machine and sequencer. I explain it before I start, then give examples by playing a few parts throughout the show. People enjoy learning what they're hearing and I think appreciate the sounds more as I try to tell them to listen for different sounds in certain songs. I make sure they know I'm not a member of Milli Vanilli !!! Sincerely, Elton Jason ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 20:26:40 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "E.R.M. (Editions de la Rue Margot)" Subject: New WWW Home Page! Just a quick message to let all of you know of a fantastic new HOME PAGE. The HOME PAGE belongs to E.R.M. (Editions de la Rue Margot), a 20th Century 'New' Classical CD label, and features fabulous full color graphics, audio file excerpts from recent CD's and some interesting information. You can access them at: http://www.interaccess.com/users/numusic Their regular e-mail is: numusic@interaccess.com I'm sure that each of you will enjoy this new HOME PAGE. (In case you are interested, special rates apply to libraries and institutions, and you may order via e-mail, fax or by 'snail-mail'. E-mail us regarding discount rates.) E.R.M.'s phone numbers are: (312) 935-1676 or (708) 559-0805 FAX. Address is: E.R.M. 3712 N. Broadway #264 Chicago, Illinois 60613 Catalogues are available on request. A very best New Year to you all... Paul Harvey, Office Manager ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 22:03:14 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Davvid Brooks Subject: ESI32 this is the deal i turned down. EIII 2K. 4/40. I CAN BUY an esi23 by EMU, for that much with 10meg ram and 1.2gig HD. so i left it where it was and am happy with my decsion. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 22:38:26 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mICHAEL Subject: Re: DRUM MACHINE SOFTWARE In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 30 Dec 1994 09:13:30 -0500 from I don't know what computer type you are using if it is a PC there are currently only 2 choices I know of. If you a running Dos then the best choice is Drummer by Coolshoes, Soundware has a pretty good deal on it. I can not find their number at the moment but it is listed in nearly every keyboard mag. The other choice if your running windows 3.1 or better is Rythm Brainz normal or Plus. It is best to get it from the manufacturer right now because they just droped the prices. I got the Plus version shipped COD to me for 83.00$ or so. Their number is 408-267-5464. I much prefer the Drummer interface but it is less friendly and supports only a limited array of devices. The Rhythm Brainz Plus has its limits too. They are however the only real choices out there that I know of. If you find more or better options please share them with me. I have both of these products so I can help answer any questions you might have. Good Luck from Michael in Chattanooga. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 23:09:54 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mICHAEL Subject: Re: ESI32 In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 30 Dec 1994 22:03:14 -0500 from Are you aware that the base unit has no SCSI, nor digital outs/ins. By the time you add these options your talking 1800 or so. 10 meg will mean you add 2 4m eg simms priced around 325. There are fewer outputs and acording to Emu more limited editing options. The filters are also different. It is a very nice machine and it sounds great. It is being terribly over rated in my opinion. By the time you pay EMU upgrade prices you could carry home a S2800, or a ASR10 if you kick in just a little more. The Akai CD3000 is pretty nice as well, a bit pricer though. Peavy will be producing the SPplus as of January. This puppy is awsome, 32 voices, 128 Meg Ram upgradable using Mac Simms. 16 voice multitimbre. It has 8meg base I believe they said. It can sample in stereo from inside its own box no SX needed anymore. It will read a huge veriety of formats and is the only machine that has fully implimented SCSI sample exchange standard called SMDI, which they devloped. Turtle Beach and Sound Forge suppor t it. It has been used by the K2000 for a very long time now, Peavy placed th e idea in the public domain. It is way cool and the Mac and Pc both can take ad vantage of the SCSI exchange to beat MSD speeds big time. This thing has built in effects too. And price, well lets say EMU will not be happy. Feel to add the money and grab a stock ESI32, thats about the differnce, it will pay to check this thing out I promise. Good Luck, Peavy will share as much as they can about their equipment. Michael in Chattanooga. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 31 Dec 1994 13:07:27 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tim Loepp Subject: Re: sync Just wondering, why not use FSK? I've got two 6trk Sansui cassette decks synced together giving me 10trks (I have to use one track in each deck for the FSK). I also have dedicated one other track for syncing to the computer. So, I have two deck totaling 12trks, three ofthe tracks are striped, and I have 9 analog tracks left. If anyone is interested, I'm using a "SmartSync/midiman" to write and read the stripe for the computer, and a "Sansui/SY-1" for writing and reading the stripes for the decks. Can't remember how much I paid for the Sansui stuff (probably too much), but the SmartSync cost about $100.00. Forevrl8 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 09:05:14 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: sync Hi Forevr18 (that's a rather optimistic name!) >Just wondering, why not use FSK? FSK is entirely dependent on the tempo of a song because it follows MIDI clocks. They are sent per quarter note (24ppqn if I remember correctly). If you have a sudden and marked tempo change, the clock message at the boundary of the two tempi does not say anything about when the next clock will arrive, so the sequencer following the FSK pulse will not know about the tempo change until the first pulse *after* the tempo change. In my experience, this can be very noticeable. On the other hand, if your songs have only one tempo, there's no problem. SMPTE/MTC is better because the sequencer resolves each note to a specific time rather than trying to interpolte between two clocks; it can only assume that the current tempo will continue, a fact which will only be confirmed when the next clock arrives. MTC comes in regularly: @ 25 fps, for example, every 100ms (set up as 'quarter-frame' messages), so is better than FSK for fine tempo control. The tempo control resides with the sequencer, not with the device generate or sending the sync signal. This thread might be better on synth-l, where the more practical issues of gear arise. Emusic-l is more for discussing electronic music issues or algorithmic composition or processes and that sort of thing. Anyone disagree? Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 01:11:31 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Piet van Oostrum Subject: Midi files/software archives on the Internet There is a list of ftp and mail server archives with MIDI documentation, programs and music on the Internet. Also enclosed is a list of MIDI and electronic music related mailing lists. The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl [131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/archives or by mail from mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used. The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers archives around the world, in music/midi/archives. Version: $Id: archives,v 1.112 1994/12/13 13:29:14 piet Exp $ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 01:11:33 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Piet van Oostrum Subject: Computer Music bibliography There is a bibliography on synthesizers, midi, computer and electronic music that I have collected from various sources. I have tried to bring some structure into it, but not all books will fit into a single subject. NOTE: I haven't read these books, and the comments are from other people. The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl [131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/bibliography or by mail from mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used. The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers archives around the world, in music/midi/bibliography. Version: $Id: bibliography,v 1.25 1994/09/08 12:24:00 piet Exp $