source file: mills3.txt Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:36:58 +0100 Subject: MIDI/Audio wish list From: "Patrick Ozzard-Low" Dear All, The `21st Century Acoustic Orchestral Instruments' (for ATS) is still going_ have been hoping to launch in January, not sure if we'll make it. As an Appendix to the discussion paper I had the idea of including a list of features/improvements that would specifically benefit composers and others who use MIDI and digital audio for alternative tunings. Why include this in a paper about acoustic instruments? It makes sense that the two grow together. In the paper I mention the value of making electronic simulations of pieces using ATS, as an aid for (acoustic) performers to learn a new piece. Other purposes: checking the ears, creating the work itself (first and foremost I'm a composer); creating an electronic realisation of a microtonal score of which there's no recording. There are quite a lot of problems with simulation - especially the time it takes... in fact it's interesting how difficult it is to do well. However - I don't own a synth - I don't like them. The unit I use is a Roland S750 sampler, which I bought back in 1991. (_speaking of which microtonal instruments do you have_ my main instrument is an 1890's Bechstein _but unfortunately it's not too keen on being re-tuned _). The Roland is a useful tool, but there are 3 major drawbacks. 1) Limited RAM capacity (18Mb). (The EMU E4 takes 128Mb, but the Emulators don't tune in cents. I think they tune in 1/64th of a semitone, which is unhelpful). 2) There are only 255 partials (=`Keygroups' in AKAI-speak ; `Zones' in EMU-talk). This means, for example, that if one wanted to create a simulation of a string trio in 22-ET, and each instrument is given the (very restricted) range of 3 octaves, that already takes up (3*3*22) = 198 partials. And that's just for, say, a single bowed stroke, so there's not much left over for pizzicato_ let alone simulating a chamber orchestra_ So there's multi-tracking_ There's also the E4 again, which has 1000 zones (or is it unlimited ? But, as I say, the E4 tunes in 1/64ths_ and, there's the Kurzweil K2500_, and Kyma...) 3) But it takes for ever to build these patches- tailoring the samples, naming the partials, assigning them to MIDI note numbers etc. (I work with one sample per note, so a single violin patch may take up to about 32 Mb). And, after all this, the simulation is NOT music. Its just a simulation - stiff, inexpressive, fairly lifeless_ (yes, there's physical modelling, and its getting better_ slowly.) Anyhow, the gist of all this is : my wish list would include things like : Tuning resolution minimum 1 cent, preferably less (any thoughts on this?); Number of Partials (Keygroups, Zones) limited by memory only, not hard coded into the architecture; Include on-board absolute pitch meter (but would put the price up); Macro and template procedures for building unconventional `instruments'; AND - A kind of `kit' mother keyboard with a large number of movable slots into which a user configurable number and arrangement of keys of different sizes and colours could be fitted_ And new types of control for keys (taking the idea of `after touch' further_) The discussion paper will be on the Net, and Emailed freely, but hard copies will also be sent to about 200 major composers, acousticians, instruments builders/manufacturers. If anyone would like to include any ideas in this Appendix please let me know. I'm asking because, as I say, I don't own a synth or a VL, and I'm not really a computer/MIDI buff, so I'm sure some of you will have much better ideas than me. But please don't make any suggestion so technical I won't understand them! (If its OK with you, I would acknowledge the list rather than individuals (?)). Hope that's a good idea. I'm still hopelessly busy, but will get back to you as I can. All best, Patrick Ozzard-Low SMTPOriginator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu From: "Patrick Ozzard-Low" Subject: Favourite recordings PostedDate: 06-01-98 14:49:55 SendTo: CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH ReplyTo: tuning@eartha.mills.edu $MessageStorage: 0 $UpdatedBy: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH,CN=Manuel op de Coul/OU=AT/O=EZH RouteServers: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=notesrv1/OU=Server/O=EZH RouteTimes: 06-01-98 14:49:32-06-01-98 14:49:32,06-01-98 14:49:28-06-01-98 14:49:29 DeliveredDate: 06-01-98 14:49:29 Categories: $Revisions: Received: from ns.ezh.nl ([137.174.112.59]) by notesrv2.ezh.nl (Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2 9-3-1997)) with SMTP id C1256584.004BEF88; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:49:25 +0100 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA29534; Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:49:55 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:49:55 +0100 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA03816 Received: (qmail 429 invoked from network); 6 Jan 1998 05:49:48 -0800 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Jan 1998 05:49:48 -0800 Message-Id: <199801061342.NAA11364@imail.norfolk.gov.uk> Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu