Mod wheel editing is annoying!

[SeanHannifin]

Well, I've been working on my latest piece (a 7:30 largo :D ) and I am quite annoyed with my method of mod wheel editing. Of course, it makes the piece much more realistic, but it sure is a lot of work, and I am wondering if there is or ever will be an easier way.

There are actually two ways I've tried mod wheel data. I use Overture because it came with GPO, and I certainly don't have the money for a nice sequencer right now. The first method is to use the keyboard's mod wheel and simply record, but this is very annoying because I have to go through the song many times to record the mod wheel info for each individual instrument. The other way is with the good old mouse and a bunch of clicks, but it never seems to sound as quite the way I want it when I draw a curve, listen to it, redraw it, quite an annoying process.

Another problem with both methods is that it can be hard to hear how the mod wheel info of one instrument affects the orchestration/sound to all the instruments together. For example, I might make the violin sound too quiet, but I don't discover this until I get the trumpet louder, then I have to go back and edit. Finding the right balance can be laborious.

However, composers for live orchestras never have to worry about mod wheel stuff, because humans will naturally add dynamics.

So, my question is, could a program be developed that could develop mod wheel info automatically (based on certain given information of course)? For instance, if I have the Violins I playing forte, in a live performance, they might start quiet but build up to forte, unlike a computer program, which just starts at forte and sounds unnatural.

Another issue is that our minds can often point out the . . . what to call it? . . . the "key" points in a melody or phrase, the points which seem to need highlighting, the important parts. If the computer user could just tell the computer which notes to highlight, or to build up to, wouldn't it be wonderful if the computer could just generate the mod wheel info from that?

Or is this kind of stuff already available in software I can't afford?

Or is it just plain impossible?

I have so much homework to do, but I really want to finish the piece . . .

[Styxx]

You are not alone my friend. Modwheel data in GPO is a labor but necessary for a good finished product. I believe someone once asked if there were a draw tool that can be used in real time like a pencil and paper. Hmm, maybe I am dreaming. I've never used it in Overture but often use modulation in Cubase SE. It is actually quite accurate but that's not to say one doesn't go in and edit anyway. I think all of us do regardless due to our inner desire to have it sound perfect!
As for all the other ideas you have, I guess that will not come until voice command is perfected (whenever that happens). Still, a good controller should yield at least 75% satisfactory results.
I just finished the second act of a musical and brother all the modulation editing!
As for balancing, try the volume of each instrument. It usually works for me.
Good luck!

[jesshmusic]

Finale's Human Playback handles the MOD wheel stuff pretty well. Well enough for me since I don't need a super realistic MIDI performance. If I put in crescendos, then they work with out having to do any programming.

And Sean, I will tell you that if you want to get Finale, you can get the big, fat student discount. It cuts the price in half. You just have to figure out how to get that much moola. ;)

[lontas]

Sean,

Although it is possible create software that automatically determines mod wheel expression, I wouldn't recommend it. Since drawing the data with the mouse doesn't satisfy you, a computer program to do the same probably wouldn't either. I would recommend you keep on doing it with the keyboard's mod wheel. It does take a long time to get it just right, but the good news is, you get better at this over time. Pretty soon you'll be doing it without thinking about it.

Chris

[joaz]

I feell very ambivalent about the whole mod wheel thing.On the one hand its a clever piece of programming that introduces whole new levels of realism,on the other,I spend so much time editing mod wheel data(among other controllers) that I sometimes feel more like an accountant than a composer :mad:
regards

[SeanHannifin]

Hmmm . . . Finale's human playback . . . I'll look into that! I could buy it with the student discount, but I gotta prioritize all this software I want! There's Kontakt 2, the new Garritan products, now Finale (and also, thanks to you, Mr. Hendricks, Animation Master! :D :D ) And first I need an income! :eek: Definitely can't have them all . . .

Drawing in the data with the mouse is satisfying, just for the price of a lot of time. I'm lazy! :D If there's anything automatic out there, I'd love to try it, if it doesn't cost too much (which is pretty much any cost :o ) Hopefully, however, I will get used to it, I guess.

Joaz, I know how you feel! :( However, I guess we don't have much of a choice . . .

It would be cool if some kind of automatic mod wheel generator were to come with GPO, no? :)

[loogoo]

Although using something automatic to set mod wheel data is certainly an attractive idea, you have to realize that manipulation of the mod wheel (especially in GPO) is an integral part of the performance and I would find it very difficult to leave that up to some automated system. With GPO YOU are the performer and the labor involved is part of being the performer. After all, it is your music and it should also be your expression. I'm not meaning to sound pompous or self-righteous about this but the reality is that nothing will rise above the mediocre unless some work goes into it. ;)

Since you are using Overture, have you thought of using the dynamic markings and hairpins to set an initial, overall mod wheel map for each instrument and then tweak from there? (forgive me if you have already thought of this).

[DPDAN]

Loogoo is exactly correct, a computer can not possibly know or calculate the expressiveness that the instrument should have at any given moment like you can. Allowing the computer to do a task that is so critical will certainly result in a computer generated lifeless result. All these goofy features that are showing up in music creating software these days, are a bunch of crap, and just intended as marketing bull by their manufacturer. To many prospective buyers, they read this and think "hmmmm, that would make it really easy". Making great sounding music is not easy, especially when it all comes out of a computer. I do admit, it is getting easier with Gary Garritan's new technologies, but it's still a task that should not be attempted by the faint of heart, or lack thereof :)

I always start a new midi track by placing a steady line of mod wheel data in the track from beginning to end, then I play in the notes on the keyboard. After I have all the notes correctly placed, and the length and phrasing of each and every note perfected, I then go back and erase the mod wheel data, and record new mod wheel data with the "overdub" feature turned on. This overdub feature should be available in every sequencer. It allows all the existing data like notes to remain, but new additional data can be added, such as mod wheel, pedal, and pitch for slides etc. Playing in the new mod wheel data afterwards allows you total freedom to make the instrument sound exactly the way you want. If you mess up a part, go back to a break between notes, erase the mod wheel data from that point on, and replay the mod wheel data till you get it right. That's what I do anyway.

Of course, there are many different ways to accomplish a finished product. Wasting time trying to play the notes, mod wheel data and the sustain pedal all exactly at the right time is pointless, but that's just how I like to do it. Try it, I think you might like it.

After re-reading some posts here, it appears as though my information here is useless if you are not using a sequencer. Sorry if that's the case.

dpDan

[SeanHannifin]

Hmmm . . . perhaps this gets into the philosophical/theoritical subject of what computers are and are not capable. If I give my music notation to a live orchestra, they will automatically humanize it, and I don't think they're using magical dust from God that only humans can have. :D If a human can do it, a computer can do it! We just have to figure out how.

In certain pieces, mod wheel data can get pretty complicated, and I don't think that should be left up to the computer, at least not with our current technology. But with a simple melody, I don't see why it isn't possible.

[DPDAN]

Sean buddy ol pal, God doesn't have any magical dust, I was just agreeing with loogoo that the computer will not be able to create the proper expression that we are hearing in our head. Certainly, computers can already create random values, but it won't have the specific expression we want. I don't agree with your statement "if a human can do it, a computer can do it" when did computers get so smart? And, if they are so smart, why do we have to tell them what to do? I also don't think there is anything complicated with mod wheel data. :p

Dan

[Tom Hopkins]

If I give my music notation to a live orchestra, they will automatically humanize it, and I don't think they're using magical dust from God that only humans can have. :D If a human can do it, a computer can do it! We just have to figure out how.No, those musicians in that live orchestra are using decades of experience acquired through thousands of hours of practice, practice, practice. Be wary of removing too many of the creative decisions and placing them in the "hands" of generic interpretation algorithms. Besides, the hard work is good for you - yes, even the tedious hard work (I'd say ESPECIALLY the tedious hard work.) With experience you will find that you can work more quickly on many editing chores but some tasks are inherently time-consuming and concentration-demanding; at least if you do them right. Part of the satisfaction of completing a difficult task is knowing that you put in the time to accomplish it. It is exactly the same thing as diligently practicing an acoustic instrument many hours a day for years. The benefits of investing the time are beyond calculation. Avoid the temptation of "instant gratification." There's valuable information to be gathered in the process of editing. Even editing mod wheel data forces you to think hard about interpretive changes, note by note, phrase by phrase, and instrument to instrument. You'll be a better musician for it. It's called "paying your dues" and the "dues" for a computer musician are a little different than for other things musical.

One last thing, since so many people here seem to be movie-centric: There's a line in a movie called "A League of Their Own" that is relevant. At one point our heroine says to the coach, "It's just gotten too hard." And the coach replies, "It's supposed to be hard. It's the HARD that makes it great."

Tom

[dewdman42]

Maybe the new Kontakt2 scripting engine will be useful here?

[efiebke]

I love the Mod Wheel. . .

Just finished the last of three large projects. This last one was a long and pleasant challange. The GPO's use of the Mod wheel with the Cubase SX 3 was sheer pleasure in "creating" the "right" sound. As expected, I also spent LOTS time editing/fine tuning the sound using SX's midi editing functions. (Of course, this is time well spent. ;)) Within the SX program, I've grown to appreciate the "Edit-In-Place" function. It gives a great visual cue of the midi-data input from the mod wheel (and the other midi information as well). If you don't have Steinberg's SX 3 program, I highly recommend trialing it. Check out its "Edit-In-Place" function. It's one powerful feature. I don't know if the "Edit-in-Place" feature exists with the other Steinberg sequecing/audio recording programs. I would hope so. If not, it's one feature worth the extra $$$ for the upgrade.

Happy composing and sequencing, folks! :)

Ted

[cptexas]

Sean, do you have a sequencer?
If you do, I would highly recomend you use it instead of the bundled Overture. I don't understand how any of Steinberg's products work, so I've unsucessfully tried to understand the bundled Cubasis, and I can't help you there.

A terriffic sequencer (mine!) is Cakewalk Music Creator. It can do just about everything except you can't do much in the way of audio editing, but you can record, import, and export audio from a different source. My outdated version (2002) is pre-VSTi, so I'm stuck with DXi and all of it's artifacts, but everything is OK for the final mixdown. Maybe the 2005 version has VST, I really don't know. My copy of Music Creator was $40. Quite a steal. I highly recomend it. It's very logical and easy to use, and comes with a MIDI interface! (at least mine did)

Do a search, on the forums and the web.


Back on topic.....


When I do my mod work I just draw all of the values and use a common center point. ppp=30, pp=40, p=50, etc...

YAY!!! Dinner time!

g2g!

-Chris

[trentpmcd]

I haven't read all of the replies so somebody may havve said this.

I just started working in Overture. Here is how I handle this -

First, make sure you use a lot dynamics markings, you know, ff, ppp, mf, etc. Also hairpins.

After you put one up, double click on it. This will bring up a dialog. Make sure it is changing the modulation. Check the level. You will need to change the hairpins.

Now listen - 95% of the work should be done. Any mod-wheel stuff will be just fine tuning. What I do is then export to midi and import into Cubase (you can use Cubasis which came with GPO). I then fine tune the modwheel data there.

Seems to work well for me.

BTW - if you were composing for real instruments you'd still need to do this - they will follow your dynamics to the letter so make sure you have the balance set with your dynamics, not your mod wheel magic.

[jesshmusic]

BTW - if you were composing for real instruments you'd still need to do this - they will follow your dynamics to the letter so make sure you have the balance set with your dynamics, not your mod wheel magic.

This is very true. Especially in modern music, the performer should be treated by the composer almost like a computer. If you want a specific dynamic, expressivness, or articulation it must be in the music. The performer should not be relied upon to do what you want exactly. If you write a big, long held out note with no dynamics or hairpins, then the performer will play the note at one dynamic.

We can take this further. Turns and ornaments should be written out as well, because different performers will interpret them differently. They can be written as grace notes so that there is still some freedom of rhythm.

This is not a knock on performers, it is just that us modern composers don't write music with assumptions anymore. We put in different harmonies, rhythms, scales, etc. I am not talking about atonal, either. Even music with regular old fashioned triads.

Sean, on the subject of Finale Human Playback, you can listen to my demos because I don't edit the MIDI hardly at all. I just compose my dynamics and articulations carefully. That way Finale doesn't have to interpret anything on its own. My demos are not as good as the guys who go through and tweak the MIDI and play their parts using a keyboard as Gary recommends, but I don't think they are bad, either. :D

[SeanHannifin]

I don't agree with your statement "if a human can do it, a computer can do it" when did computers get so smart?
Yeah, not a lot of people do . . . But the human brain is a computer in a way. Unfortunately I cannot prove you wrong though, at least not yet. :D I still believe it is possible, though.


No, those musicians in that live orchestra are using decades of experience acquired through thousands of hours of practice, practice, practice. Be wary of removing too many of the creative decisions and placing them in the "hands" of generic interpretation algorithms. Besides, the hard work is good for you - yes, even the tedious hard work (I'd say ESPECIALLY the tedious hard work.)
I know hard work is good for me, and I do admit I'm looking for an easy way out. :D Still, I wouldn't say mod wheel data is the creative element I'd like to focus on. When a human plays, they don't look for the right value between 0-127, so I'm not particularly fond of doing that myself. I mean, without dishwashers, dish washing would be harder, and perhaps good for you, but I'd rather have the dishwasher and spend my time focusing on something else. I wouldn't say having a machine do it would take out the human aspect at all. When I listen to a GPO piece, I want to say "this music sounds great!" not "this music must have taken forever on the mod wheel" :D


Sean, do you have a sequencer?
All I have is Overture, and that does allow you to draw in mod wheel data. I don't have the money for anything better right now :( :D


First, make sure you use a lot dynamics markings, you know, ff, ppp, mf, etc. Also hairpins.
Yep, I do that too, though what I've found is that to acheive the balance I'm looking for, the markings rarely seem realistic, so I try to keep them as simple as possible.


This is very true. Especially in modern music, the performer should be treated by the composer almost like a computer.
I'm not sure I want to write like modern composers . . . :D When I look at a Mozart score, all he has is the ff, pp, p, f, etc. sometimes the cresc. , >, < and stuff. The performers must use their ears (and what they've learned from practice) to play the piece. They will use the dynamic markings, but not exactly. They will add in humanistic elements naturally. These natural dynamics should be able to be studied and easily added to computer renditions. :)

[FredProgGH]

The mod wheel was picked to be a real time controller and data entry device- hate to say it but the best thing is to use one while you play parts on a keyboard. Try it and you will soon LOVE the mod wheel!! What you're trying to do is make a sketch by affixing small shreds of graphite to a sheet of paper instead of using a pencil. :D :D
The important thing is you're doing what you have to do to make music and it's working!

[loogoo]

This is a lively debate isn't it? Regarding your statement about treating performers like computers and that human nuance can be studied and placed in a computer context... well...

Having been a performer most of my adult life all I can say is that given a room full of performers, there will never be an absolute consensus as to what the value of p vs mf vs fff will be. There will be myriad interpretations for any given dynamic marking and since computers don't have ears (yet) you as the composer/conductor still have to have the final say. I doubt very much that Mozart even with his seemingly minimal dynamic indications gave an orchestra music to play and that his reaction to their first play-through was "sure, whatever...". I'm certain he had a lot to say about exactly how loud f should be and so forth. As for having to concentrate on 0-127 values for mod wheel data, at least most sequencers and Overture allow you to draw in that data graphically. I've given up trying to use GPO with Sibelius primarily because it requires you to enter specific numerical values for it's midi controller data - really labor-intensive!

[jesshmusic]

I'm not sure I want to write like modern composers . . . :D When I look at a Mozart score, all he has is the ff, pp, p, f, etc. sometimes the cresc. , >, < and stuff. The performers must use their ears (and what they've learned from practice) to play the piece. They will use the dynamic markings, but not exactly. They will add in humanistic elements naturally. These natural dynamics should be able to be studied and easily added to computer renditions. :)

It doesn't matter what style you are writing, unless you are an expert in 18th century music composition, you are still a modern composer. You have to give musicians instruction, or you may not recognize your piece. ;)

[Joseph Burrell]

Sean, hopefully the new intelligent programming options will alleviate some of the work inherit in creating realistic midi mockups. However, you must know that if your work is simply being 'prepared' for the player, all this editing is of almost no value. Simple dynamic markings will give you an idea of what the final piece will sound like played live. However, if your midi rendition will be a final version with your players living in the virtual domain, then you may as well resign yourself to the fact that there will be some editing involved in the realm of the midi controller. There's not a sample library alive that allows you to place notes down and get a wholly realistic rendition when you hit 'render.' Its just not going to happen. They all involve some certain amount of care and dedication on the part of the user.

[FredProgGH]

Sean, hopefully the new intelligent programming options will alleviate some of the work inherit in creating realistic midi mockups. However, you must know that if your work is simply being 'prepared' for the player, all this editing is of almost no value. Simple dynamic markings will give you an idea of what the final piece will sound like played live. However, if your midi rendition will be a final version with your players living in the virtual domain, then you may as well resign yourself to the fact that there will be some editing involved in the realm of the midi controller. There's not a sample library alive that allows you to place notes down and get a wholly realistic rendition when you hit 'render.' Its just not going to happen. They all involve some certain amount of care and dedication on the part of the user.

I agree. Even if you have a very form of AI that puts its idea of dynamics and phrasing into the piece you're still going to have to edit that to get exactly what you were looking for out of the final piece. Until they invent a computer that reads minds, anyway. Even with live players performing a piece, what is the conductors function in rehearsal?? It's basically to edit the performance data of the orchestra... :D

[Styxx]

Actually Sean, looking back on my external sequencing midi days, it would have been nice to have the modulation feature then. All the nights spent editing velocity and volume just to get a fraction of expression like we get with the modsquad wheel.
So, what was I saying anywho? Oh, yeah ... still a nice feature. I take mine to the beach every Saturday ... oh, wait! Sorry, wrong thread.
Ah, yes ... modulation wheel I feel has lesson the editing workload. Yes? No?:D

[SeanHannifin]

Well, I'm certainly not looking for something to do all the work for me, I do realize that until Garritan Mind Reader Orchestra comes out I'll always have to do tweaking. But something to make it easier should still be possible.

Oh well, I'll stop whining and get to work . . . :D

By the way, thanks for the responses! I love the professionalism of this forum. :)

[Edi]

...

However, composers for live orchestras never have to worry about mod wheel stuff, because humans will naturally add dynamics.

. . .

...and are you not human? After all, if you would expect that dedication to your work by live musicians, why would you not want to give it yourself? :)

Seriously though. The real problem is that when you use these computer tools to write music you are not only writing the music but you are performing it also. This is where Tom's remarks are so pertinent: you cannot expect to play all parts anywhere near as well as a collection of instrumental specialists can. On the other hand if you do aspire to do this you surely must expect it to be work. Indeed the musicians would have to work quite hard and listen to one another to perform your work.

The good news is that you can opt to not deal with the performance aspects. Use Finale or equivalent and let your output simply be a traditional score for others to play with all their skills acquired through long labor.

(On a practical note, I don't know if you have tried this, but I sometimes record the individual voices without modwheel. Then I overdub the modwheel in a separate pass over each instrument. I really enjoy doing it that way.)

my own view is by analogy to furniture making. I have found from time to time that I have desired an article of furniture and have not been able to find it commercially. So I design it myself and then build it. Since my skills and patience are limited, I end up with a good design(score), but not so good execution(performance). I do have the option of having it professionally built from my specifications(real musicians). On the other hand the kind of rough, handmade quality sometimes has a virtue of its own. :)

Ed

[Styxx]

By the way, thanks for the responses! I love the professionalism of this forum. Huh! Where? :D

[SeanHannifin]

Huh! Where? :D
;) :D :confused: :o :) :cool: :eek:

[SeanHannifin]

This is where Tom's remarks are so pertinent: you cannot expect to play all parts anywhere near as well as a collection of instrumental specialists can.
Why not? Will it ever be possible?

[efreitag]

Why not? Will it ever be possible?

Well, for example just imagine the differences between stylistic periods. You could write down the same melody (and with the same dynamic etc. markings), yet professional players would interpret it differently when you told them that it was a piece of baroque, or romantic, or jazz music!
If you think that one day what you want will be possible, then why not have computer software compose the music in the first place?
On the other hand, I´d appreciate the software being able to make something like a first educated guess about dynamics etc.... :D

[SeanHannifin]

Well, for example just imagine the differences between stylistic periods. You could write down the same melody (and with the same dynamic etc. markings), yet professional players would interpret it differently when you told them that it was a piece of baroque, or romantic, or jazz music!
That would make the computer program even better! Nothin' like a list of styles to choose from . . .


If you think that one day what you want will be possible, then why not have computer software compose the music in the first place?
It's been discussed in that chat room, and I believe it is possible. :) I guess that's another topic . . .

I think computers are already very good at composing certain styles of music . . . if you know what I mean . . . :rolleyes:

[Richard N.]

That would make the computer program even better! Nothin' like a list of styles to choose from . . .



Finale Human Playback, which gets better in each version, already has this.

[Edi]

Why not? Will it ever be possible?


perhaps someday...but meanwhile our clocks are ticking... :)

Ed

[jesshmusic]

Finale Human Playback, which gets better in each version, already has this.


Yes, Sean, you are describing all of the functions of Finale's Human Playback pretty much. Little if any MIDI tomfoolery required. As I said before, all of my recordings are played by Finale Human Playback. I never play things in with my keyboard, because that doesn't fit my compositional technique. (Hard for me to compose my special counterpoint on the fly and I also can't play the keyboard like a violin, but I do know how to write for a violin)

On a side note, I find it funny that you who seems to be a rebel of music rules, wants to badly to compose the most rigid style of composition besides baroque. If you want I can tell you exactly how to accomplish this, but I know you won't like it. ;)

[SeanHannifin]

Yes, Sean, you are describing all of the functions of Finale's Human Playback pretty much. Little if any MIDI tomfoolery required. As I said before, all of my recordings are played by Finale Human Playback. I never play things in with my keyboard, because that doesn't fit my compositional technique. (Hard for me to compose my special counterpoint on the fly and I also can't play the keyboard like a violin, but I do know how to write for a violin)
Well, in that case, perhaps I will save up for Finale. :)


On a side note, I find it funny that you who seems to be a rebel of music rules, wants to badly to compose the most rigid style of composition besides baroque. If you want I can tell you exactly how to accomplish this, but I know you won't like it. ;)
A rebel of music rules? :D :D I don't mean to be . . . I probably wouldn't sound like such a rebel if I had a real music education. :o My interest in music and composition is still very new, I am sadly not one who took music lessons at an early age, or even had much interest in music until high school.

Yes, tell me how accomplish it! I might not like it, but it will be good for me (I hope). :D