Getting closer to realism!

[PolarBear]

Ok. I try to contribute something useful to this forum. As my english isn\'t the best I hope you will not misunderstand what I\'m saying.

Are samples real? Can they be?

It IS possible to have a real sound of an instrument on a computer, but the CPU-power that is necessary for this is not availible yet. My example is a violin. Set the violin also by other instruments.

To get a real sound you have to \"model\" the violin virtually. You have to program a kind of VSTi that knows about every physical detail of the violin. Inside the corpus and outside, the wood, the strings, the bow... I do not want to go in detail here - yeah - everything that makes a violin a violin and not a contrabass or something. The next thing is to program a player. With his abilities to play the violin, his power in his fingers, in his arm and so on. Then you can set the violinists position in a room/hall - and then you get the real sound of it. Hmmm... let\'s see what the future brings, this is nothing for today.

But you can make even a violin more realistic than it is these days. I don\'t think that the highest resolution violin is the best. I don\'t think we need more than 24-bit. Why? When today\'s Audio-CD format was released they decided a 16-bit resolution at 44.100 Hz would be enough. Now tell me that you wouldn\'t say a violin isn\'t recorded live when you listen to the 16-bit recorded CD with quality speakers. An example: Final Fantasy is the best computer graphic shown in a film yet. But nevertheless what resolution it had you would never say that Akira was played by a human actor. The human touch is still missed in those characters. The same is about samples in my opinion: You can do a violin at 32-bit with 88.200 Hz and the live recorded 16-bit CD will still sound better than your sampled violin. It\'s not the higher resolution the more realism you have.

The lack of our today\'s libriaries are more in playability and variations. Ok - we have libriaries with more than 12 layers. But is this necessary? I think so. But the layers are not all: If you play the violion on 5 notes fff you play it all time fff. But you would use only 1 layer. But a real violin sounds different on every note, even if played fff. That is what we call realism. Yeah, GOS offers up and down bowing - right. But only one down bow fff. And let me here remember you that we do not only talk about strings, also think of brass or drums. The autmatically up and down bowing is a good thing, in my opinion it could also be connected with an automatically \"note selector\". Let\'s say 3 different samples per layer and it would be fine. Don\'t blame me for this sampleproducers, i know this would be an unexecutable recording session and twice of the work now spent on a library. The price will be about something nobody wants to purchase for it. But in terms of realism...

To say \"something works great in background\" is not the right way to more realism. If you pay attention to the detail as an advanced listener these parts will sound \"unreal\" to you.

I listened several examples of a solo violin posted by users of this forum. Some have on every note of the solo a long volume fade in. That isn\'t what real soloists would do. They play the solo in one continous line. Expression is not only to volume up and down. The key to expression is the combination of volume with vibrato in my opinion. And remember here that brass can do vibrato, too.

Let me give you one more example. Recently I listened to \"Theme From Cast Away\" by Alan Silvestri. Sorry to take this out of thousands but this is the only one I remember a good example for this. There is an oboe at the beginning playing without any background. Try to extract exact one note out of that line from its start to its end. It\'s impossible. You\'ll hear also the tone played before and the one played after the note you chose. And only one person is playing oboe here. So one thing is also to the composers out there there to pay also attention to the realese of a note. Breathcontrolling is therefore a very nice thing.

And this takes me to my last point. There are already e-violins out there in the world. Why not build a vibrato-controller with just one string and a short line connected digitally with your computer? Or just connect this Midi-violin with your computer? You\'d only need one player instead a full orchestra. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Example for use of e-violin: Either Lord of the Dance or Riverdance as far as I remember.

I\'m really blessed of what is possible today. But there still can be more realism. But we know nothing is perfect...

Be aware of my mistakes... Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 03-27-2002).]

[eliam]

These are highly interesting avenues of reflexion, and I believe we will be reaching the conclusion that a programmed behaviour will always lack the emotional naturalness and intensity of a human being, no matter how sophisticated it is... Can the programmer\'s emotions be charged in the sequenced tracks? That\'s another interesting point... And most of all: would it not be more gratifying to be a musician with a violin in his hands rather than being plugged to an interface? I definitely believe so, but hey! my sampler is my sketching tool, and the opportunity that it offers me as a composer is astounding!!!

[PolarBear]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eliam:
I believe we will be reaching the conclusion that a programmed behaviour will always lack the emotional naturalness and intensity of a human being, no matter how sophisticated it is... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don\'t think so. I think The naturalness of a sound CAN be captured, but right now it isn\'t possible. At least better than it is possible yet. Think back: who told you something about samples 20 years ago? What standard do we have today? The future brings it up... How fast id we get from a 33 MHz- to a 2 GHz-CPU...

And for the understanding of an instrument it is really better to play it yourself. You even learn new things about it if you\'re playing it already 20 years. I\'m sure all musicians agree me with this. But the heck! There is no composer out there that plays every instrument availible in the world. So I have to agree with Damon, who posted this in another thread: \"The thing about expression control is practice, practice, practice.\" And this is not only valid for expression, but also for all other compositional skills.

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[eliam]

I agree with you on every point! We don\'t know what the future holds for us... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif We certainly did not suspect what we\'ve had thus far, even though when we look back it seems that it was \"predictable\" in many ways...
One composer could hardly play all instruments, and even a fraction of them, but if we\'re talking about getting as close as we can to fooling ANY listener\'s hear with a virtual musician, then we surely need 100 or 1000 times the processing power that we have to generate an ensemble, and even with that, we can fool no one\'s Heart!... In the end, I persist
in thinking that there are things which we could never emulate, without passing through the process of procreating a child... We can emulate intelligence, we can emulate musical instruments, we can emulate weather patterns, to name but a few, but we can not emulate the sparkle in a happy person\'s eyes, nor can we emulate emotional sensitivity, and we cannot emulate the sunrays which give us Life. And the day we can do it, then we will have re-created a human form with the ability to receive the Sacred Fire from the Highest Universal Divine Instance, to receive the alchemical Sparkle of Life, and the human has no mastery over that, or at least very few have... The human body IS the ultimate virtual reality interface, and I don\'t think we could create a better one, even tho it might not be impossible, with some help from other Realms...

As to emulate a musical instrument by modelling every physical part of it and everything around, that sounds like something I would use everyday!!

[PolarBear]

I think you\'re right. No personal emotions can be emulated.

I started the thread not to discuss about theories but practice. About what the next outcoming libraries should be on order to get closer to the real thing.

Perhaps somebody here can reply to this also.

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[eliam]

I got carried away, sorry! I think that the next immediate steps are obvious: let\'s look at this in a 2 dimensional perspective: vertically we have the dynamics (from ppp to fff) and horizontally we have the different possible techniques and articulations. I don\'t know how many dynamics are needed to smoothly pass from almost inaudible to very loud. It could be 8, 20, 30? More than that, I guess it would complicate things more than anything else. The other vertical aspect is crescendos and decrescendos. These are tricky, because they can last from very short to very long, start from ff to fff, from p to f, from ppp to ff and so on. Add to that that they can grow (or decrease) in a straight line or in a curved one and any combination of both... Also add that they can be performed with various levels and styles of vibrato, tremolo, glissando, etc. etc. Only with what I just mentioned, there can be weeks of work just to record the sounds, as for editing...

Aside of that, we will need all kinds of bowing (let\'s talk strings!) with many choices of notes for each velocity at each pitch, so that repeated notes won\'t sound mechanical, and to leave it open to fit another sounds (on the same bowing) when one isn\'t satisfying...
So horizontally, it\'s almost infinite, because there are hundreds of different ways to create sounds with an instrument...

Does that go in the sense of where you want the discussion to go? http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[PolarBear]

Hey, I don\'t want to flame anybody for writing something related, I only showed my origin intention http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

But do you really need all articulations sampled? Because this horizontal line, how you call it, is in fact infinte, but if do all the articulations at least 50% of this won\'t be used. Look at that \"Kyrie\" sample in SOV - once used you always know \"ahh - again SOV\".
Crescendo: A crescendo could be done with samples yet very close to real. For example a long crescendo from pp to ff You take the p samples, fade from ppp to p, then fade to a mf sample which slides from p to mf and then fade to a ff sample which slides from mf to ff. It\'s a bit tricky to do, but it works great. And it doesn\'t sound more unnatural than the samples are. Thomes_J is using a cresendo from p to f with only change the volume in his free bamboo-flute demo (at 0:30 - 0:33).

And what I want for the articulations is just a good tool. Tremolo, vibrato or whatever - these CAN be captured with a tool and be used with \"normal\" samples, again you have to know how to use it. Everybody could learn about reverberating, why not about this, too? It isn\'t that difficult it seems.

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 03-29-2002).]

[eliam]

I\'m not certain that all lenghts of crescendos could sound natural through this crossfading technique, but it can certainly be a good option in many cases...
Indeed, the more we will have a varied articulation palette, the least proportion of all the sounds will end up being used, that\'s a fact, and that\'s also what could make a track sound nice and organic, because of the wide variety of sounds available.
For sure my projections are a bit extreme, but if we push the limits of sampler-based possibilities, then I think that we will see more and more this type of extremely complete (maybe overly) kinds of sample libraries, provided that we can have efficient interfaces permitting the programmer to easily choose which samples are appropriate. It\'s also about new kinds of softwares which could emulate certain aspects of a given instrument\'s playing and leave the final polishing to the artist... I\'m extrapolating here, but to efficiently use a library with 20 layers and 50 articulations, we will need tools to help us find our way through it...

BTW, I never felt flamed in any way and was happy althrough this thread!!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[pantonality]

Here\'s something I discovered from using the virtual modeling capability of the Yamaha EX5. The more realistic the model the more you have to be able to play like a real player. Add to that that there really aren\'t very many truly convincing models. The EX5 saxes are pretty good for sounding like Kenny G, but they won\'t grunt and growl like the real thing. The trumpet model will flub a note, but getting a soft round sound is impossible. Frankly the models are still far from realistic enough for me and when they are I\'ll have to spend all my time practicing and give up composing all together.

So having essentially giving up on modeling I\'m back to sampling. Polar Bear asked, \"Are samples real? Can they be?\" I would answer that it\'s a matter of degree. I have GOS, it isn\'t perfect, but it\'s gotten me a lot closer to convincing realism than I was 4 months ago. Could it be better? Certainly! But I can make convincing music with it. See my other thread on this forum for an example.

The bottom line is there are only so many hours in a day. With my recently acquired sample libraries I have enough to keep my otherwise busy life, totally packed for quite some time, just learning how to use them. There\'s not enough time to perfectly emulate an orchestra. With samples we can get close, hopefully that will allow us to write music that someday will be performed by a real orchestra. For me I need to concentrate on what I can do and not worry about what I can\'t do.

Steve http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler (\"http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler\")

PS. Please listen to \'Today is a Gift, orchestral version\' at the above page

[PolarBear]

Well, pantonality has something I\'m verry interested in, the EX5. Unfortunately it is something I don\'t want to invest 3000 bucks in, thinking of its lack in speed (disk-drive speeded scsi-interface...), and also only 8MB flash memory are possible in it (not to be unfair, 64MB RAM is also possible, but you have to uplaod all again if you turn off the system - with that disk-drive speed http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/frown.gif ). Nevertheless I like it someway. I don\'t know anything about if all the EX5-synthesis (right term?) is already availible for a computer.

Ok I\'m getting away... I really like the things that you can do with that station. But I think it is not usable in an orchestral work nor to emulate/model any acoustic instrument.

pantonality, composing is one thing. I wonder how people could compose for real orchestras only using paper and pencil. They can imagine the right tones. Based on what? They heard something (here are real instruments meant) and repeat this in their brain. Unless it is complete or not, in you\'re brain it would sound real. What is the differnce to sampling? If we can catch that sound in the brain, would we have a real sound? I can\'t answer this question myself unfortunately. I\'m not a genius. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

But something I can do is think of a complete orchestra playing great melodies. But I can\'t focus one single instrument without loosing others. And I can\'t remember what I thought about. Too complex http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif So I\'m not a paper/pencil worker...

That leads me to the opinion that I only remember complete passages I heard somewhere and create my own sound out of it. Isn\'t this sampling? Or used sampled things?

I hope you can follow me... If not, please ask!

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[thesoundsmith]

[quote]
...something I discovered from using the virtual modeling capability of the Yamaha EX5. The more realistic the model the more you have to be able to play like a real player. Frankly the models are still far from realistic enough for me and when they are I\'ll have to spend all my time practicing and give up composing all together.
So having essentially giving up on modeling I\'m back to sampling...
[\\quote]

Ah, there\'s the rub. What\'s a keyboard player to do???

The problem with samples is that they are static photographs of a moment in time. The problem with modeling concepts is not just that you have to learn how to play like the instrument, but rather that the technology has not progressed and kept pace with current hardware.

The Yamaha VL70s and EX5s use computational power that is primitive compared to today\'s 2GHz processors. What is needed is a sofware physical modeler that includes a database of characteristics of typical (and atypical) materials used to create musical instruments. The resonance factors of brass vs. rosewood vs. silver, etc. expressed in terms that could be used by a serious musician \"Give me a pipe 3.72 ft long, tapering from 1/4\" diameter to 3/8\" at 3.4 ft, curving to a bell 4.6\" in diameter made of 2mm thick BRASS02 (the brass used by Yamaha in their orchestral trumpets.) pitch control by three virtual valves at optimal point - or specify the location - to yield an equally tempered tuning at room temperature. Mouthpiece to be end-blown single reed,\" etc., etc.

This can be produced, but the problem is these is such a small market, as you have to take the time to LEARN it, BOTH how to create and how to play.

No market, no product.

Back to square one. Build it with all menu-selected options, thereby severely limiting the available timbres. Been there, done that. VL1m.

So it goes.

Dasher

[eliam]

I think that market or not, we will get to this type of modelling someday, hopefully before we expect, simply because once it\'s developed with the proper interfaces, every serious composer will want to use such an amazing tool to create all kinds of instruments, known or unknown, and have them play what they want!!

But the interface is of uppermost importance to easily use the virtual instruments at the fulness of their capabilities... I don\'t know how to approach this question though... How to get the feeling of an instrument and then transmit to the computer the data corresponding to the intonations, vibrato, intensity, etc. etc. I remarked that often when I compose, one thing that really helps me to build the voicing and dynamic direction of a musical phrase is to sing it and use my vocal musicality to figure how a violin (or any other) will play a certain passage. This is of tremendous help for me and could be a part of the answer. A computer could analyze a sung melody and replicate the same intonations but transposed on any modelled instrument. Or even from an instrument to another this could be feasible, although still a compromise, because the uniqueness of the final instrument could not be completely respected...
Ultimately, the interface should be a replica of the physical instrument, and actually BE the physical instrument to convey its true feeling and specific possibilities, but then again, back to the start...
Are my thoughts too far out or do they resonate in any mind?

[PolarBear]

Ok. That\'s too simple to say nowadays it isn\'t possible to get ALMOST real sounds. Back to sample libraries away from futere dreams: Let me show you what I think of just with the example of the free trumpets by Marteen... I do not doubt in the quality of the samples. I really like them very much. No offense to you, Marteen!

I don\'t think somebody will call this library not playable. You can choose from 7 different lengths. But if you choose the patch for staccato trumpet, there is no variation in itself. Play 5 times A-3. Hear 5 times the same init, 5 times the same sound unless you don\'t change the volume. I don\'t know a trumpet player who can play 5 notes with exactly the same pressure. Also I don\'t know one who can play every 5 notes exact 1.3 seconds long. Again: really great trumpets!

I guess I repeat a bit to prior posted, but I want to point my suggestion: I think it is no problem for today\'s programmer to put in a \"randomizer\" which sets certain values a bit different to the sets for the previous tone. Not to change the sound at all, but same notes would be at least slightly different.

Not long ago a violinist visited me. She doesn\'t know much about computers and sampling. I played the best sampled pieces I know (Bill Brown, Simon Raven and also others). Meanwhile I putted in some real soundtracks. (She is more classical-oriented so she didn\'t know these...) To the question \"Real or not?\" she always knew the right answer... She said the problem with the sampled pieces is that all the strings sound always the same. No \"personality\". If every note is changed a bit, I think it would help a lot...

Let\'s talk strings for a short time: Sure she missed a lot about vibrato... This can also be solved in my opinion: sample not 16 strings at once but put e.g. 4 players together in one session for all. Once you have orchestrated you could set them together again. You could do vibrato not only once on 16 player but at least 4 different vibratos just on the 1st violin section. Now to the 2nd violin and so on and so on...

This all would effect twice the work you have today for a complete library... There will be a market for this; I don\'t think money is the problem if you really GET what you are looking for.

eliam: I don\'t expect to get THE REAL sound out of the box. Yet it will be cheaper to record a complete orchestra than to develop such high-interested software (and hardware...)

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

PS: Can somebody please tell me the meaning of IMO and IMHO? They are used so often here... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Thanks... Where can I find an explanation for those mnemonics?

[eliam]

IMO=in my opinion, IMHO=in my humble opinion, AFAIK=as far as I know, BTW=by the way.

Polarbear- I\'m not expecting to see my extrapolations manifested in the next few years, but that\'s not the point, because the title of your post is \"getting closer to realism\"... You could have called it \"getting closer to realism with the tools that we are accustomed to use today\" if you wanted the discussion limited to it! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif No offense here, we\'re sharing thoughts, and all is fine!

Your point of randomizing repeated notes is absolutely relevant and not difficult to get going right now, provided that we have the appropriate samples and practical means to activate this function. We could simply assign this function to a controller and when we want the alternation to occur, give it a certain value. We should be able to try different randomized combinations so we can choose another if we\'re not satisfied with the one first given. Of course, there should also be the possibility to manually select the sample we want to hear, if the auto mode fails to give us the right thing...

This is exactly in the line of thought of what I call \"broadening the horizontal span\" of a sampled instrument or section.

[thesoundsmith]

And this is the problem with the current state of sampling-each sample, no matter WHAT it is, or how well it was recorded, is a static snapshot. Randomizing certain facets of the sample (pitch+/1 2 cents, attack envelope, vibrato rate (if LFO, which everyboady hates...) will help, but the only true answer on the horizon is the modeling concept.

Don Buchla once made a statement to the effect that, \"...we are creating something here that we are requiring someone to dedicate their life to learn. We had beteer, therefore, create something worth a person\'s life...\"

The violin has been shown to be worth it. The keyboard also. Is the Yamaha VL-70m? How about Gigistudio? You decide, it\'s your life.

Dasher

[eliam]

Absolutely. And how would you approach the interface aspect of modelling?

[thesoundsmith]

The interface is certainly worthy of another entirely other topic. But I\'ll give you my personal quick vision. Note that this is how I PERSONALLY would want it. YMMV (your mileage may vary.)

-------------
Definitions:

PATCH - a complete sound, assumed (for this discussion only) to be a recognised orchestral or world instrument, like piano, trumpet, violin, sitar. Could be a sample set, a synth patch, a physical model, whatever. I\'m limiting the definition so we can discuss know discrepancies and performance requirements.

CONTROLLER: a single device which is capable of generating some for of signal which modifies an aspect of a PATCH, typically a MIDI event like note on/off, CC7, pitch bend, etc.

GESTURE: an activation of a CONTROLLER - press a synth key, turn a mod wheel, blow into a wind controller, etc.

----------------

Foundation-(also the final goal): To have a single, unified set of controls that are consistent among the various instruments and classes of instruments, so that, for example, vibrato is produced by one controller gesture and translated into any patch in such a way that the resultant change to the sound is the same (a vibrato of plus/minus 25 cents at 6.35 Hz, for example.)

-------------------------------
Assumptions-because I\'m a keyboard player, I\'m going to establish the piano keyboard model as the initial physical primary generator of note-on, note-off events. This allows initial re-training to be minimalized, and admits polyphonic performance when relevant. It does NOT preclude additional note-selection/note-on generators, perhaps a short six?-string controller (like the Ztar?) to allow for up-down strum, muting, and other \'stringy\' gestures. Another primary ingredient would be the breath controller.

Part of the controller\'s Patch definition would be a MODE command which determined when and how a note would be produced-in Strum/Pick mode, the depression of a \'piano\' key would not trigger a Note-on event until a string were struck. Likewise in \'Blow\' mode, the key-down event would not trigger until a minimum of breath were detected (continuous breath would, of course, qualify, and as a Giga controller, might also be programmed to produce a Keyswitch that selected Continuous (Legato) vs Initial attack.

Of course volume and timbre pedals, aftertouch, etc, would become an integral part of this melange of controllers, along with ribbon controllers like those on the Kurzweil 2500/2600 (the large one could be used to emulate bowing techniques and the small one already makes a great ptich-bend (vibrato) controller), and a set of pads for percussive control. We\'re talking an enormous programming effort both on the part of the interface develop AND the user. But the end result would be a single (complicated but consistent) interface tool that one could use to create any aspect of a modeled or sampled patch.

It would take time to become proficient, but with enough programmable characteristics, this I/F could handle all the requirements for any instument I can come up with.

---------------------
Bottom line:

MODES:
Keyboard - note on-off via keyboard, volume, sustain, sostenuto by pedal.

Pluck - note selected by keyboard, voiced by string pluck/mute.

Bow - note selected by keyboard, voiced by pressure along ribbon controller for various attack styles either ribbon gesture or keyswitch, aftertouch or ribbon pressure for bow strength

Blow - note selected by keyboard, breath controller trigger/volume, small ribbon vibrato, aftertouch timbre.

A patch would select MODE, MIDI program change/bank select, perhaps MIDI cable output select (to use modeler and Giga or other sampler side-by-side) and pre-set all CC values.
----------------------

Granted, this is a long way from completion, but it IS something which CAN be designed/built using existing technology, and requiring nothing more than the desire to make it work and a LOT of programming time.

Any ideas, follow-up, volunteer programmers/hardware assemblers please form a line at the forum gate http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

(Hope this didn\'t get too crazily OT)

Dasher

[eliam]

Wow! that\'s something! If I understand correctly, the way to work with the interface would be whether
1. to play the notes on the keyboard with one hand and with the other hand (or mouth) use the appropriate interface to modulate the various parameters, or
2. to play the notes on the keyboard first and then use the right interface to \"humanize\" the track at a second passage.

I find your ideas interesting, and they will require lots of dedication and ingeniosity from whom will bring them to life in order to achieve the desired results, especially if we use these in the sampler domain. Because then, how would we simulate the countless kinds of attacks, vibratos, slides, etc. possible on any instruments?
I think that the modelling avenue would be more indicated because we would not deal with static sound snapshots but rather with flexible, real-time, infinitely modulable sound source matrix which we could alter as we like, unlike samples...

I\'d be curious to know more about the efforts made to model actual instruments and the possibility to translate the interactions of their components(strings, wood, fingers, etc.) into more compact algorythms in order to have them working in our computers... but as Polarbear said in the first post, it would require a calculation speed far beyond what we got. This shall come sooner or later...

[thesoundsmith]

Eliam, you said,
[quote]
If I understand correctly, the way to work with the interface would be whether
1. to play the notes on the keyboard with one hand and with the other hand (or mouth) use the appropriate interface to modulate the various parameters, or
2. to play the notes on the keyboard first and then use the right interface to \"humanize\" the track at a second passage.
[\\quote]

Sort of. RE#1- If you play synthesizer now with gesticulation controllers (aftertouch, mod wheel, foot pedals) this is a slight-to-moderate step further. We\'ve alreay defined most of the controllers on the current crop of synths-between the \"everybody\'s got \'em \" mod wheel, aftertouch and pedals, to the mid-range ribbon controllers a la Kurzweil, to the breath controller and over-the-top Ztar (still not sure if it\'s their device I\'m referring to) plucked string controller and the Roland D-beam. We just need to define yet another standard (isn\'t this fun?) for parameters and interfaces, like GM only for controller assignment (GMC?) , and get agreement on a \'degree of control\' standard-for example, GMC vibrato is specified so full control (127) results in a 1/2-step deviation from current pitch, at a default rate of 4.6 Hz. GMC timbre is defined as having 0-127 controller range viewed as -64 to +63, with 0 being a mf tone, -64 being the pp tone and ff (or fff for some of us...) as +63. It would be up to the manufacturer of the tone generator to verify compliance with GMC standard.

End goal result is you move the mod wheel 50% of its travel and the same degree of vibrato would arise out of all GMC-compliant instruments. Yhe NATURE of that vibrato could vary greatly, depending on the instrument, but the quantifiable deviation amount would be the same regardless of instrument or manfacturer, as it is now with pitch bend.

RE #2-for wind instruments and plucked instruments, the striking of the \'piano\' key would not, in and of itself, generate a MIDI note-on message, though it may very well generate both the pitch and the initial velocity. It just wouldn\'t send out the note-on until an appropriate comtroller were \'activated.\'

[quote]
I find your ideas interesting, and they will require lots of dedication and ingeniosity from whom will bring them to life in order to achieve the desired results, especially if we use these in the sampler domain.
[\\quote]

Yes, it would require the same dedication as to any musical instruent mastery. Ideally (and this is really the entire point of the controller) it doesn\'t MATTER what you\'re controlling-analog synth or polyphonic modeling sampler, they should all respond in conceptually identical ways as far as possible. The trick is to make all electronic instruments, regardless of tech level, operate the same way (i.e., the heyboard maps to the control components of each device

[quote]
Because then, how would we simulate the countless kinds of attacks, vibratos, slides, etc. possible on any instruments?
I think that the modelling avenue would be more indicated because we would not deal with static sound snapshots but rather with flexible, real-time, infinitely modulable sound source matrix which we could alter as we like, unlike samples...
[\\quote]

I totally agree that physical modeling is the only way to ultimately nail the creation process. But with continuity of controller parameter sets, the result is predictable on any GMC-compliant device. Some devices will be more transparent then others, but all would follow the road map laid out by the master controller.

FWIW.

Anyway, let\'s keep making music, even if it\'s with those out-of-date nstruments piano and drums!

Dasher

[eliam]

After reading your post a few times, I think I begin to understand where you\'re going with that, although not completely...

I\'ll just try to resume what I see. Those are the parameters we wish to control:
-Attack
-Release
-Vibrato
-Pitch bend
-Dynamic(ppp to fff)
-timbre
-etc.

We want to have a way to modulate these parameters in function of each other as well as independently, depending of the situation. We want to create a unified control correlation, which would be a standard setting structure for all the sound-generating instruments, which we could adjust and fine-tune as we like afterwards, of course.

Let\'s examine each parameter:
-The attack\'s strenght in general is proportional to the dynamic of the note, although this is variable, and must be controllable independently.
-The release is not the same from instrument to instrument. For the piano, the resonance is proportional to the strenght of the note, but not for the wind instruments. Should this be specified in the new midi standard? I believe it would be appropriate.
-The vibrato stands alone and should be controlled independently.
-The pitch bend\'s properties is different for each instruments, and these properties could also be pre-mapped in the instrument\'s programs and controller patch.
-The dynamic is similar in pattern for every sound.
-The timbre variation is highly specific to each instrument and could be controlled through filtering or by triggering different samples.

The only device that I see which would easily modulate these variable is a midi control box or something similar. Most of the work would be to examine the properties of the sampled instruments and decide how these would be matched to the values generated by a midi control interface. Let\'s take the attack: We would need a few strenghts of attack for each dynamic in order to make it vary naturally as well as envelope modulation to smoothly pass from one to the next.
For the vibrato, this is quite a challenge: how could we accelerate it\'s speed fluently, while making a crescendo? This I can\'t figure out, can you? I mean without LFO of course! But could vibrato be eloquently emulated? Mmh... I doubt it, but why not?

So, all this has to be sorted out and all the parameters correctly assigned so that on my midi box I can control them all through faders, smoooothly... And this would be included in all sample library and synth? Wow, what a trip!!!

[thesoundsmith]

You\'re pretty much on board with my \'proposal\', with a few modifications. Let me try and adress this point-by point. BTW, I need to state up-front, these comments are those of a player with some technical knowledge (and probably an equal amount of misinformation!) trying to propose an enhanced standard for performance. I\'m not stating the law, just some \'it-would-be useful\' ideas.

----------
I\'ll just try to resume what I see. Those are the parameters we wish to control:
-Attack
-Release
-Vibrato
-Pitch bend
-Dynamic(ppp to fff)
-timbre
-etc.
\"

You got it. All musical sound (including klangtone and noise sounds to be used in a musical context) use some or all of these for expression.
----

We want to have a way to modulate these parameters in function of each other as well as independently, depending of the situation.

If I understand you, generally the anwer is yes. Mostly the parameters are independent, but certain functions require combined attributes - e.g., volume and brightness in a brass patch (but not in an organ.)
----

We want to create a unified control correlation, which would be a standard setting structure for all the sound-generating instruments, which we could adjust and fine-tune as we like afterwards, of course.

Exactly - a one-parameter-set-fits-all by adjusting the degree of fit to the instrument, and the user could re-adjust to his/her performance style afterward
-------

Let\'s examine each parameter:
-The attack\'s strenght in general is proportional to the dynamic of the note, although this is variable, and must be controllable independently.

I\'m not sure what you mean by strength here. The maximum amplitude and the speed of the rise are independent, and while they directly correlate in general, some instruments (like a tongued flute attack) can combine fast rise with lower amplitude.

In terms of GS sampling, this is one of the concepts I assign to keyswitching (and this may be something to seriously consider for specialized controllers-back in the 70s, when digital oscillators were making the rounds of designers, I mocked up a hex-pad control device for the CMJ/Snell oscillator that used the bottom row of four buttons to select articulation, which today GS would keyswitch.) - Synthesizer (sample player or \'analog\')control would not as easily respond to this type of control without the synth being designed to work that way, they would by current design, apply attack dynamic and speed either as a constant or combined parameter (fast attack and loud, slow attack and soft.)

There are exceptions (I believe Kurzweil is one) and those can be treated by allowing velocity to control dynamic, while some other parameter (keyswitch, ribbon, mod wheel, breath control) to control attack speed.

This is one of the more volitile of the parameters, and depends greatly on the instrument being performed. Guitar-no speed change, attack strength via \'pluck string control\'. Trumpet - attack speed and volume by breath. Etc, etc.
------

-The release is not the same from instrument to instrument. For the piano, the resonance is proportional to the strenght of the note, but not for the wind instruments. Should this be specified in the new midi standard? I believe it would be appropriate.

If I understand this, I partially disagree-virtually all instruments have body resonance proportional to the amplitude, how it is specified is a function of the patch\'s volume control. Piano volume is solely via attack on the MIDI note-on, but the resonance of the instrument body AND the other strings is directly in proportion (and subject to pedal up-down, which again is not a controller issue. Wind and bowed instruments change timbre (and body resonance, in this scenario) directly proportional to amplitude and instrument-specific rise time (it takes a certain amount of time for the body resonance to develop, this will vary from instrument to instrument due to construction materials and techniques.)
But you used the term \'release\', and I\'m not sure of the relationship to resonance except for piano string resonance. If that is your reference, then I understrand, and agree with the point. This would be an interesting enhancement, a MIDI control that said (act as though youo\'re getting louder\' - but I have always taken the stance that we have CC11 for that purpose (not that it\'s been implemented!)
---------------
-The vibrato stands alone and should be controlled independently.

Absolutely! This is one of the real biggies for expression, and this is why I like the small ribbon controller concept for many instruments (and breath control for the others.) A ribbon sending small pitch bend and pressure-for-volume adjustments would play very much like the human playing the real thing, and virtually all vibrato-type articulations could be processed.
-------

-The pitch bend\'s properties is different for each instruments, and these properties could also be pre-mapped in the instrument\'s programs and controller patch.

Agreed.
--------------

-The dynamic is similar in pattern for every sound.

I don\'t understand. If you mean volume, bowed instruments played without breath control need some way to crescendo, probably (in my setup) ribbon or foot volume (though foot is clumsy), guitar and piano can\'t legitimately get louder after the initial attack (sustained electric guitar is a different ax).
---------------

-The timbre variation is highly specific to each instrument and could be controlled through filtering or by triggering different samples.

Agreed, see above.
-------------

The only device that I see which would easily modulate these variable is a midi control box or something similar. Most of the work would be to examine the properties of the sampled instruments and decide how these would be matched to the values generated by a midi control interface. Let\'s take the attack: We would need a few strenghts of attack for each dynamic in order to make it vary naturally as well as envelope modulation to smoothly pass from one to the next.

Here is where we look at the initial sound design, and move out of the direct realm of control by the user. The proposal would have to be \'ratifed\' or bought into by the manufacturer for this to happen, OTOH, if the controllers were built and sold, there would be some pressure from the user base to conform. Kind of Catch-22, but so was MIDI 1.0...
--------------

For the vibrato, this is quite a challenge: how could we accelerate it\'s speed fluently, while making a crescendo? This I can\'t figure out, can you? I mean without LFO of course! But could vibrato be eloquently emulated? Mmh... I doubt it, but why not?

See above-the short ribbon controlled pitch bend/amplitude-by-pressure device puts extremely expressive vibrato directly at hand. Indeed, this is the heart of my proposal. and the easiest to fulfill. Sample with no vibrato, and play it into the performance with the ribbon. I\'ve done it, it works beautifully.
----------------

So, all this has to be sorted out and all the parameters correctly assigned so that on my midi box I can control them all through faders, smoooothly... And this would be included in all sample library and synth? Wow, what a trip

It would seem so, but I believe that mostly it\'s not that difficult. Just lots of small steps, and absolutely no new technology at all.

Further comment is welcome. Disagree as you wish-my main desire from all of this is the ribbon vibrato control. Currently Roland\'s AX-1 (and soon the AX-7) have the pitch ribbon, KW supports the short ribbon but it needs a MIDI Solutions Mapper to convert CC15 to pitchbend outside of the KW, and Korg has a short ribbon, but I don\'t know what it does/does not do. Add the breath controller, and all that\'s left is a good sound source. (Or, just a VL-70m and a Wind-X!)

Dasher

[eliam]

I\'m not familiar on how this tactile ribbon actually works; could you explain a bit more?

When I said that the dynamic pattern is similar for all instruments, I just meant that the relation soft/dark and loud/bright is universal.

About vibrato, without being an expert, I experimented simulating a vibrato by modulating pitch/volume/brillance through a lfo, and even though I attained interesting results, I am not fully satisfied with it. The amount of tweaking and fine-tuning can make the difference, but I was wondering how you proceeded to reach satisfying results.

As for this whole discussion, what emerges is the need to form a research panel which would lay down an experimental blueprint of the general structure as well as the specific requirements of such a unified multi instrumental, multi controller and musically ecstatic scheme! After some r&d and some testing, we would submit our unifying theory to all the major players in the samplers/synths/software/sound libraries industry for approval. I think that the real weigh into having them accept it is a strong customer request and some pressure for such a treaty to be signed. I also think that it is about time for all the actors in the field to work hand in hand to produce the most efficient high quality tool for users, because it is certainly not what we\'re used to see from big companies! (Usually.)

Thanks for discussing this with me, because these ideas are truly the future of sound desing and interfacing, and can be applied to the sampler domain as well as present and future sound modelling tools, for it all works the same!

And more than that, it would certainly be feasible to create the necessary programmed architecture for actual soundbanks to be \"poured down\" into it. Of course, to fully exploit the possibilities the libraries would have to be made to be perfectly fit, but we have to start somewhere! And once everyone\'s using it, WE the users will be able to dictate how thing shall work, for the benefit of everyone involved, and this is democracy!

I\'m really enthusiastic about what we\'re talking about and I\'d be glad to put some energy to help this to emerge!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[PolarBear]

By now we do nothing emerge... Sorry for calling you back on earth... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Look at open DivX ;-) vs. DVD - that\'s like the way you want to go... but in this field more programmers are interested than in sampling... Perhaps we get it someday!

I feel a bit shamed for not contributing... But the terms are a bit out of my region... My english isn\'t that good and I don\'t want to be misunderstood (again). In general I agree with you, Dasher.

Just one thing about the vibrato (flute can also have a vibrato...) - and that\'s the thing: a flute is near to analog generated tones - right? Why not record vibrato and non-vibrato flute and see what\'s changing? Concerning strings it would be more difficult though - but what\'s for sure: volume has nothing to do with vibrato. For non-experts: If you play a string instrument volume is controlled by the pressure of your bow on the string, and a bit by the spped your bow moves. Vibrato is done on the string - you \"shorten\" the string and \"large\" it again - by an different amount of time. I can\'t explain what effect this takes in corpus of the instrument and on the tone you hear after - but it has one. Also I don\'t think brilliance would be an effect. I tried alot on this on real instruments, but the heck I can not describe what it really is about.

Regards http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-08-2002).]

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PolarBear:

- but what\'s for sure: volume has nothing to do with vibrato. For non-experts: If you play a string instrument volume is controlled by the pressure of your bow on the string, and a bit by the spped your bow moves. Vibrato is done on the string - you \"shorten\" the string and \"large\" it again - by an different amount of time. about.

Regards http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-08-2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hansi. I haven\'t read all of the posts here but that comment caught my eye because I\'m not so sure.

Certainly on many instruments volume (or at least volume plus whatever else is going on) does have \'something\' to do with vibrato.

Singers, wind players, electric guitarists all seem to use (or often use) volume as a \'component\' of vibrato.

Regarding string instruments (that you play with a bow) while there doesn\'t seem to be a conscious \'decision\' to use volume, I wonder whether the movement itself causes a slight \'damping\' effect? And does the player really apply the exact same amount of pressure across all the continuous notes between the high and low points of a vibrato - I don\'t think so (a little less pressure or a little more \'skin\' should trnaslate into a variation in volume).

And at the \'low\' and/or \'high\' points in the vibrato you get a little more \'volume\' than when the finger is \'sliding\' between the two. Certainly, depending the the type of vibrato the player is after, I\'m certain that many players \'feel\' that that is what\'s happening (sometimes).

And usually vibrato has a kind of \'attractor\' that the player is building the sound around. I think all this stuff is very \'fuzzy\'. I suspect that \'fuzzy logic\' might eventually become a useful tool when trying to correlate gestural information with almost nebulous musical phrases.

Vibrato is so personal and so unique, even within a single player\'s style; and almost infinite variations exist within the player according to the moment in which he expresses him/herself through his/her instrument.

I\'m not convinced that examining waveforms tells the whole story. I think the relationship between the player, the space, the humidity, the audience, the player\'s aural perception of what he is producing; even his inner-self. I know that sounds a bit dumb because a waveform is a waveform, but surely music is a relationship between the sound and the interpreter of that sound (i.e. the listener). Consequently, vibrato facsimiles (at least facsimiles that can be generally applied) are a difficult area.

Of course you could always just waggle your finger about: in fact I remember watching Julian Bream, the guitarist, and one of his tricks was to lift the guitar up and wave it around after a final chord; not just for showmanship either, it was a special \'vibrato\' he was after (try that with your Steinway). So if you can\'t waggle your finger, you could always waggle your instrument.

Interestingly, when I play a patch that has a particularly nice vibrato on my Ztar, I find myself actually waggling my finger as if I were producing the vibrato
(of, course maybe you don\'t find that interesting at all; perhaps I\'m just a headcase).

[KingIdiot]

\"natural sounding\" vibrato is indeed more than jsut pitch changing.

Its more than simple tremolo as well. Its a comlex mix of multiple frequeny deviations. Add in the fact that the deviations are different each player and piece and day,... and well... yah http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[PatS]

For your amusement:

Science and the Stradivarius (\"http://www.pucp.edu.pe/~fisica/espec/articulos/stradivarius.htm\")

Good Vibrato (\"http://physicsweb.org/box/world/13/4/8/pw-13-04-09fig8\") (pun intended, no doubt)

Pat

[thesoundsmith]

Great. King, you got it in one. Z6, likewise.

Hansi, here\'s what happens. Vibrato (as has been stated above) is a complex, composite signal deviation (change from flat, unmoving) tone. Wind players use breath and lip/tongue variations to change BOTH pitch and frequency. Some instruments, like the bowed strings, don\'t have the volume component as obviously (but if you look at the recorded signal, you will see a small amplitude component.)

The ribbon controller responds to pressure and position on a ribbon, like this:

A-----B-----C

If you place your finger exactly on B and move it side to side like it was a string, you attain a pitch shift which exactly duplicates your \'vibrat-ing\' action.

Likewise, if, as you wiggle, you press on the ribbon in rhythm with your wiggling (which is actually normal, it\'s difficult to do this WITHOUT changing pressure) you will prodice a second component which can be mapped to amplitude (not CC7, controlling the entire amplitude, but CC11 for example, expression, which can be set to give amplitude change without losing the initial level.)

This \'plays\' exactly like you stroke the sting with the left hand, and voila-true vibrato. No LFO involved...

The difference in how we approach this is the difference between Ben Webster and John Coltrane (along with umpty-ump other factors, of course!!)

To build a functional ribbon controller - take one KW2500 or 2600. Add the MIDI Solutions Mapper. Map CC15 to pitch bend. Map the ribbon slider to CC15 (default) and pressure to CC11, or to use with Giga, set it to 16. Set your synth to respond to the pitch bend AS pitch bend, and the other parameter as additional amplitude of the primary envlope. Yer done! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif

Dasher

[Z6]

Dasher, I see you are right on top of this.

Pat, great article. I always wondered when modern violin makers would start fire-bombing concert halls in frustration.

Of course, what about when we want a virtual yodeller? Do we build the complete Adam\'s apple, and more importantly, do we have to wear silly trousers?

These are the kinds of questions that have plagued humankind since man first got a really good squelchy bass sound from bashing his enemies\' intestines against the wall of his cave.

What about emulating singers who\'ve got such wide vibratos that you can\'t even tell what note they\'re supposed to be singing?

I\'m half-deaf in my left ear because of one of those.

And what\'s the deal with sopranos? Have you got have big breasts to be one? How do we build that into our models?

And what about age? After sixty-five or so, everything in life gets more shakey, including vibrato. Do we build time into our model?

I used to know a guy who always \'vibratoed\' the keys when he played harpsichord. I wanted to kill him for this. Is there any court in the land that wouldn\'t have seen the crime as completely justifiable? When he played recorder, his head waggled around the instrument like a little dog in the back of a car. I had to be restained on many such occassions I can tell you.

You may think it\'s all about waveforms, but I\'ve lived through the effects of unwanted vibrato and it is not pretty.

I, for one, will resist any attempt to bring more vibrato into this world. It may be beautiful in the right hands, but wanton vibrato may cause serious damage to your health.

It took us years to rid the world of Edith Piaf, and only offers of movies could tempt Barbera Streisand away from her beloved wah vibrato.

Let us not build virtual vibrato systems that may auger such attrocities as Celine Dionesque settings on your new Kurzeil.

Have pity.

[PolarBear]

I didn\'t want to have this avalanche of posts here... But it had to be if I re-read my post: I claimed vibrato non-volume-related. Hmmm.

Yeah, you\'re right King, \"\'natural sounding\' vibrato\" is really a difficult thing. It is not about to be explained in one sentence. Also you said it, Z6: \"usually vibrato has a kind of \'attractor\' that the player is building\".

Vibrato

Which one? String vibrato (violin, viola, cello, contrabass), woodwinds vibrato, brass vibrato, (e-)guitar vibrato? All are different, for its own very complex. I don\'t think even the best physician could explain it exactly to the point. Otherwise we would knew it http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Ok. Time to be honest: I play the contrabass (doublebass) for almost five years now. Don\'t blame me for my prior posts I did not care much about instrument theory yet. I wouldn\'t call myself a professional - I really doubt it - it\'s more a hobby. This caused my statement: \"Vibrato has nothing to do with volume\" - for its own it is truly wrong. But the player of a stringed instrument (doublebass or violin is similar enough for this - although in other fields there are very significant differences) can not control the volume by the bow with the speed of a vibrato. Yeah - right - it would be part of a long vibrato. Next: The first thing a teacher would tell you about vibrato is, that vibrato is NOT to \"waggle\" around on a string. A vibrato is a very-hard-to-control thing, but it has to be controlled to sound awful. It takes uncountable hours to exercise to be a professional. Some have the skills, some recognize they have not.

Back to this volume thing again. I read the \"Good Vibrato\" posted by PatS. That reminded me one issue: the string is vibrating from that time on you move the bow on it. It takes some time until the string response to your bow action in the beginning, until the string vibrates \"regular\", just a few milliseconds. No move of your fingers, no noticeable vibrato. Pitching the note by slide your finger up and down on the string would cause an effect on the vibrating string. That was the thing I recalled by reading this article. Isn\'t the most of the vibrato in the overtones? These are unregular, too, as long as the string does not vibrate regular. Probably I\'m wrong here, but vibrato has also something to do with this attack time. I don\'t know how many guys here play an instrument of the string section, perhaps somebody just can add what I\'m passing by here.

Regards. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

PS: How do you guys manage to be here so often AND do your job? I don\'t have the time to read all this here and reply to it... Probably you do not sleep ever or have a day with 48 hours... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-09-2002).]

[KingIdiot]

edit ooops

[This message has been edited by KingIdiot (edited 04-09-2002).]

[thesoundsmith]

Z6, I suggest eBay. Locate a Yamaha YC-45D combo organ. These had a keyboard that allowed you to wiggle the keys sideways to produce individual \'vibrats.\' It was actually quite expressive for its time...

And Edith (and her sister Rice) were always guaranteed to bust eardrums.

PatS, thank you for that wonderful article on violin modeling. That will become a permanent* part of my \'how to synth\' collection as soon as I get to my home computer.

Dasher

* Permanent - until my hard drive dies and my backup fails-probably next week!

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PolarBear:
Z6: \"usually vibrato has a kind of \'attractor\' that the player is building\".

Vibrato

Which one? String vibrato (violin, viola, cello, contrabass), woodwinds vibrato, brass vibrato, (e-)guitar vibrato? All are different, for its own very complex. I don\'t think even the best physician could explain it exactly to the point.
[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-09-2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I meant a \'strange attractor\'. It\'s a term used in fractal mathematics and I probably misused it. And I meant all vibrato, regardless of the instrument.

As far as \'waggling\' goes, I know of what I speak. I have a rather magnificent waggle that has been commented on many times by people who have never even seen my arse.

I don\'t think you should try to delineate the argument to assumptions about professionals and amateurs. Some of the greatest musicians I have ever heard are amateurs.

Yes, it is a waggle. If you want to wax lyrical about it then you can call it something else. Some people waggle well, and some not so well. I would have thought as a double-bass player that you\'d be more obsessed with trying to play in tune; that instrument is an absolute killer to play in tune, and you need hands like a Stevedore to even get a note out of the thing.

I play namby-pamby guitar, so I waggle a lot. But if I\'m trying to be B.B King my waggle gets much sharper with hardly any flattening of the note at all. If I\'m playing classical my waggle will vary according to the piece I\'m playing; and the waggle will be altogether different; even to observe; one might be mostly lateral, while the other whangs the string this away and that away.

But essentially, and this is the point; there is an all encompassing \'thing\' that we all recognize as vibrato, there is no mistaking it; from the warbling old ladies in the church choir to a cellist at the height of her powers to Steve Vai, who\'s vibrato leaves anyone who ever picked up an electric guitar feeling somewhat inadequate.

But that self-similarity contains a whole universe of variation. No need to even think about different instruments; a single player playing a single style on a single instrument might stymie the cleverest of general vibrato emulator designers (should any exist).

I only piped up because you were talking about \'experts\' knowing that volume was not a component of vibrato in string playing. I have no idea what a waveform of such looks like, but I have lugs and it sounded fishy to me.

Personally, I want one of those deals that Dasher talked about; something I can waggle with.

If you play double bass you might never find out too much about vibrato (I make the assumption that one finds out about music by playing), not because your vibrato is not fine or the instrument is somehow incapable, but it keeps you stuck.

For example, while you cite the vibrato not starting until the bow moves, that\'s not actually what often happens is it? Especially with bigger string instruments: the player often starts the vibrato before the bow touches the strings, therefore the music starts before the audience or a tape recorder detects it. I think this is significant and an obvious example of music being more than sound in a very concrete way (regardless of whether what we now define as Physics sees the sound as not existing until the bow moves): The music exists before the sound. Just as thought must exist before it is thunk.

There is an interesting parallel in the article Pat cited. The author talked about the \'waveform\' collapsing. This is the same thing that happens in reality itself when something is \'perceived\'. The quantum waveform collapses into concrete reality.

The article talks about the player\'s ability to control and sustain this waveform as the \'secret\' to vibrato. I call it waggling your finger about: it is the same thing except the author is choosing to use slightly more rigorous language for the occasion.

If you weren\'t aware of the volume component of vibrato emanating from your very own waggles, I\'d suggest trying an instrument like slide guitar; massive fun and it teaches you how the vibrato itself often becomes the note (that \'fuzzy\' thing, that \'strange attractor\'). Or listen to some Ry Cooder playing the simplest, and some of the most beautiful, music ever played - pure vibrato; almost no tonal center, quite luverly.

Or you could always try Bass-slide?

As to your question; where do we get the time? Why, we manufacture it in our time machines, of course.

[eliam]

http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
We could (simply!) create a virtual vibrato module emulator which could be a component of a future program, so that those who want to create vibratos for various occasions could simply share their patches...

As I mentioned, we\'ll have to determine the point where it becomes easier to learn to play the instrument than to mess around with interfaces and emulations... But as usual, we might have to go a bit too far before we realize that we\'ve reach this treshold...

polarbear, I\'m sorry if you felt misunderstood in my earlier comments for I appreciate you starting this thread for it\'s interesting, and your english isn\'t bad at all!!

Be at peace! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[PolarBear]

Z6 - thanks... you explained to others what I tried to say. I have to learn english before I post more. Now. Because I just cannot express what I want to. What you said was almost the same I would.

Sure, you can call it \"waggling around\". I just repeated my teacher\'s words: \'Please stop that waggling - play vibrato!\' Yeah the heck it is difficult to get a tone out of that monster, but playing in tune is IMO easier than with a violin, concerning the range on that string between the tones. And you get monster vibrato out of it, IF you have hands like a Stevedore http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif And sorry again - but double-bass players have to use vibrato almost all the time: Long notes need vibrato, like on a violin. Perceiving it is another thing.

Overflying the article Pat cited I just another example came into my mind with this vibrato thing: Moving the bow down the string for 5 sec with (almost) the same pressure and speed would cause a tone at same volume over 5 sec. Hope not to be wrong here again http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Do the same again with exaggerative vibrato. Stop by 3.0 sec at highest point of vibrato and last this without vibrato the remaing seconds. Compared it to the first non-vib tone: Is it louder or softer than this one? Do it by stopping at the low point of the vib: Again - louder or softer?

My experience is that the higher points of the vibrato are louder, the lower tones softer if you play them with the pressure on th bow. Perhaps I reconfirm what you said, but that was what I misunderstood - the volume controlled by the bow and the volume caused by vibrating...

By the way - I do perceive volume changes - and there are some even on this silly doublebass - like said above my statement in the upper post standing for its own is truly wrong!

\"Or you could always try Bass-slide?\" - sorry - don\'t get your intention?

Hope I stated my opinion precisly. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

Oh - and... I have only a time compressor, no factory http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/frown.gif

[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-10-2002).]

[PolarBear]

Aargh... One more... I\'m tired so I forgot to mention this:

Ribbon is a cool thing - Can get near to vibrato with this IMHO. But I don\'t know for what you need the pressure control with that ribbon? Changing pressure on my doublebass strings would cause nothing than either a scratchy tone or a flagoulette (hope you understand this) when set to the right point.

Ah and also this - jazz bassists really do much wibrato on pizz bass! Sounds \"cooler\" http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Hansi http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PolarBear:
Z6 -

By the way - I do perceive volume changes - and there are some even on this silly doublebass - like said above my statement in the upper post standing for its own is truly wrong!

\"Or you could always try Bass-slide?\" - sorry - don\'t get your intention?


[This message has been edited by PolarBear (edited 04-10-2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your English is excellent, no need to even mention it (in fact..... no, I won\'t go there - as they say on Jerry Springer).

Bass players have my undying respect. The instrument is underrated and often underused (at least jazzmen pushed it to the fore). And how do you guys lug it around? What a nightmare.

And playing it? You need arms like Popeye and fingers that can crack walnuts to even get started. (Maybe we should send Pat to a bass-playing proctologist to make sure he gets his money\'s worth?)

\'Bass-slide\' was just me wondering how it might sound using a \'bottleneck\' or \'slide\' on a bowed bass.

By the way, I only scanned the previous posts and apologize if I misconstrued any of your intentions or comments.



[This message has been edited by Z6 (edited 04-10-2002).]

[thesoundsmith]

I used to know a guy who played both electric bass and acoustic in Washington DC in a Coffehouse in the mid-sixties. He played \'bottle-neck bass\' with a full wine bottle (to get the weight he wanted, he said an empty bottle just buzzed...)

Bear, the Kurzweil short ribbon controller is right below the pitch bend and mod wheels (on the 2500/2600), There is a long ribbon above the jeyboard, but it does not do pressure. The small one does, and that pressure can be mapped to envelope generator amplitude. It taks some practice to get the feel, but the combination can be VERY expressive and articulate; it can exactly express the vibrato you desire/create on your bass. I personally prefer the feel of the Roland controller pitch ribbon, you can stand the keyboard up like a cello and the vibrato is expressed exactly the same way, But no volume change, and the keyboard REALLY sux. Feels like the keys are due to break off at any instant.

Dasher

[PolarBear]

I think Chris Barber\'s Jazz band was it: Watched them here in my small town... Bassist was great... also drummer (still laughing because that joke thread here ;-)

And together... They had a piece only bass and drums... And then the drummer began to hit with hit stick every thing on his drums but not the usual platforms... i.e. crash mount or chair... while bass playing solo, he turned around and drummed on the strings of the bass... hey THAT was cool... bassist grabbed chords and single notes - really awful. Never saw this again anywhere... ;-)) Cannot describe the sound, too... just remember it was cool. (that time I didn\'t strike the bass ;-) Just because you mentioned that \'bottle-neck bass\'.

I can ensure you Z6 you don\'t need arms like Popeye to play a doublebass... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Ok it needs a time to get the feeling on it, and also first weeks you\'re plagued with muscle ache... Just found out for easter concert not to play for a month is bad for play and muscles. Also your fingers need a bit of flexibility... But it works...

Thought on play e-bass, too, but never tried yet.

My question now is: What controllers for realism are availible yet? I know ribbons now, pitch control, of course keys on the keyboard, breath controller... list to be continued...

Still awake... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
Hansi

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PolarBear:



I can ensure you Z6 you don\'t need arms like Popeye to play a doublebass... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Hansi<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I still wouldn\'t arm-wrestle you for money:-)

[RobertKooijman]

With the current state of sampling technology, the issue has indeed become more and more to control the many sound shaping properties, i.e. to control modulation.

In an old Keyboards article there was some mention of a revolutionairy controller by Don Buchla, to be marketed by Emu. We\'re still waiting...

One thing that can be concluded from this thread is that for (even halfway) realistic vibrato, an LFO straight mapped to pitch does generally more harm than good.

The suggestion of using a (small) ribbon controller that modulates both pitch and amplitude (or expresssion) is a nice one.

But what to do if you don\'t have a Kurzweil or the like?

In cases where vibrato only modulates the pitch upwards, one might use aftertouch adding an offset to pitch. Problem is that applying aftertouch in a controlled and subtile manner is close to impossible.

If you look how (channel) aftertouch is implented from a mechanical point of view, then there might be some scope for experimentation. On the Fatar 88 weighted key keyboard, it\'s essentially a single stroke of foam that gets pressed by the keys to a single resistence sensor, both covering the whole keyboard range.

Just thought it might be worth trying to take a small part of this outside of the keyboard, and make some kind of pressure sensor with it. Think of a small rubbery hole where you stick in your finger (lets try to keep it serious just a little longer). If you press down slightly, pitch goes up. If you press either towards the side, amplitude or expression changes slightly. The whole thing should of course feel reponsive, and not result in a Repititive Strain Injury Syndrome as typical aftertouch does (or editing controller events manually using your mouse;-))

What I\'m trying to suggest is basically that the more easy and intiutive physical interaction with a controller is, the more likely it is you will actually use it with benefit.

The Pitchwheel is a good example of how things should not be done. It\'s dominance has probably something to do with the low manufacturing costs of just putting a plastic wheel on a potentiometer axis. But can it be considered intiutive?

I haven\'t seen yet a \'fingerhole\' type of MIDI controller. Theroretically, you can modulate 3D from here by applying pressure up, down or below.

Some conductive foam used for protecting sensitive electronic components, followed by some high-impendance OpAmp cirquitry, powered from and fed into a standard analog MIDI potentiometer controller might do the trick. Auto-nulling and feedback cirquitry can minimise drift and unwanted hysteresis.

A modified drum-pad might surve the purpose as well. Any volunteers for taking one apart and re-molding it for continuous controller purpose?

All the best, Robert