Transforms to convert the major and minor scales to a Hajaz scale (also
called Egyptian Minor or Hungarian minor) would be nice for an instant
middle-eastern flavor to a melody. I'm trying to remember the exact change
from minor to get this scale. I know you lower the second scale tone, but
I've forgotten the other one. (raise the seventh? That might be it, but I'm
not sure)

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Raymond Grote
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 4:09 AM
To: QWS list
Subject: Re: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi
applications?

The problem with melodic is, when going up the melody line has a normal 
sixth and seventh found in a major scale, and when going down it is lowered 
to a natural minor scale. I could try making one to see how well it works.
Another thing I was thinking of, how about a transform for inverting 
melodies, so if you wanted harmony, you could just run the inversion 
transform you needed and have an instant harmony track? I'd have a route to 
first and second inversions for major and minor. Anyone have suggestions for

transforms? I really am into them now that we brought it up.
If I send in transforms, how should I send them? Should I attach a file 
containing the data, and call it transforms.ini or something like that, that

way I'm not overwriting anyone's user transform data? Or should I just paste

it in a message and hope the line breaks don't interfere?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Leonard de Ruijter" <[email protected]>
To: "QWS list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 4:04 AM
Subject: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?


>  Good idea there with the major to minor. I've also thought about
>  creating those, since there are more then one major to minor So if
>  you'd like to share them with us, that would be great.
>  transforms possible, harmonic, melodic and such things.
> -- 
> Regards,
> Leonard de Ruijter
> Playing in the dark
>
>
>
> Monday, August 8, 2011, 9:53:32 PM, you wrote:
>
>> I fully agree with you there. Once I loaded in a 15 minute file, and was
>> looking for different things with the find function. It found something 
>> at
>> the very end of the file instantly. I've never! had to wait for anything 
>> to
>> be processed or found in qWS. Even notepad with text files sometimes 
>> makes
>> you wait, but maybe that's because text files can be bigger than midi if
>> they're long enough. But the same can be said for midi too. I get the
>> impression there's no real size limit with QWS, because i've tried to 
>> push
>> it several times, I've loaded 200 k midis and it didn't complain. The 
>> only
>> time it did, was when I tried to load in a final fantasy midi and it said
>> the midi wasn't a valid midi file or something, so I went into Synth Font
>> and resaved it, and then it opened fine. The sound was unaltered too, in
>> that there were no changed controllers that i could tell, nothing really
>> missing.
>> By the way, I've made a new major to minor transform, it sounds more
>> natural, instead of changing the major sevenths to minor sevenths, it 
>> keeps
>> them where they are. So it's more of a harmonic minor scale now but the
>> minor -sevenths in the original untransformed data are still preserved.
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Onj" <[email protected]>
>> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 3:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?
>
>
>>> good morning.  I cannot begin to tell you just how much of a proponent I
>>> am for QWS.  I'm probably the second longest user of QWS in the world. 
>>> I
>>> produced my entire album with it.  Recently I went to Birmingham in the
>>> UK, not Alabama, and tought it to some students in Priestley Smith 
>>> school
>>> for the blind.
>>> From the feedback I got at the end, it helped them quite a lot, and we
>>> produced some videocasts for the school intranet.  If or when I get
>>> permission, I will share those on-list with you all, so you can 
>>> hopefully
>>> benefit from that also.
>>> I was only there for one school-day but the students were receptive and
>>> did really seem to enjoy the demonstrations I put fourth.  One of them 
>>> was
>>> of course, the famous note-transform.  I played the very well-known
>>> nursery rhyme old Mcdonald in F major, and used the major to minor to 
>>> turn
>>> it into something rather different from the original.  Picking something
>>> that people know quite well for demonstration purposes really hellped to
>>> get the point accross I feel.
>>>
>>> Although other DAWs have such features, how many of them are as easy to
>>> use or to find as simply visiting the tools menu?  How many programs are
>>> forgoing menus entirely in favour of nasty ribbons or toolbars and 
>>> saying
>>> bye bye to keyboard shortcuts?  too many imho.
>>>
>>> the fact that I can run a basic set of synths on a Netbook and take QWS
>>> with me literally anywhere with access to a qwerty keyboard and write 
>>> down
>>> ideas is a huge bonus to me.  What I think is that a rather large 
>>> section
>>> of modern computer users have very little pacients and if the product 
>>> has
>>> no fancy graphics they dismiss it out of hand after 3 minutes of using 
>>> it.
>>> Truely it is their loss, not ours.  We know what we have.  We utilise it
>>> to the best of our abilities and for myself, I'm very glad QWS came into
>>> being.
>>> For a free product, very few things come close in the midi world, of
>>> matching it.  Note I said midi, not midi and audio, for we all know QWS
>>> does not support audio.
>>>
>>> Lastly, the size of the program and lack of CPU.  Both are practically
>>> non-existant, even with 32-channel midi files.  Responsiveness. Fast
>>> forward and rewinde in other daws and see what happens.
>>>
>>> That's really that for now, but just my thoughts on this Monday morning.
>>> Thank you for reading.
>>>
>>> From: Nicole Massey <[email protected]>
>>> on Sunday, August 07, 2011 10:52 PM
>>>
>>>> I haven't installed it yet, because I'm still waiting on some 
>>>> assistance
>>>> to
>>>> get one of my USB keyboards out of the storage space my studio is in at
>>>> the
>>>> moment, but I have read the manual end to end.
>>>>
>>>> One thing that struck me was its similarity to older DOS based
>>>> sequencers,
>>>> in that the approach tends to give you a lot of tools to work with
>>>> without a
>>>> lot of focus on bells and whistles. There's a very large list of things
>>>> it
>>>> will do to MIDI, but it leaves a lot of other stuff to other programs.
>>>>
>>>> In the computer programmer world, such a program is called a "gerbil."
>>>> The
>>>> mental picture is a small gerbil busily running in its wheel, doing 
>>>> what
>>>> it's supposed to. Such programs are nice to find, because they handle
>>>> things
>>>> rather well.
>>>>
>>>> One of the points I like about QWS is that everything is done using a
>>>> standard MIDI file. This takes a step or two out of porting the 
>>>> sequence
>>>> to
>>>> a notation program if you need it, or to  a DAW should that be your
>>>> intent.
>>>> I plan to use QWS for my MIDI work while my studio is deconstructed for
>>>> construction of the building, as I still have work I want to get done
>>>> right
>>>> now, and dragging a seven foot tall rack full of modules and support 
>>>> gear
>>>> into the house (with three steps to get inside, too) doesn't seem to 
>>>> make
>>>> a
>>>> lot of sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
>>>> Raymond Grote
>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 4:18 PM
>>>> To: QWS list
>>>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?
>>>>
>>>> That's a good point. What I was trying to figure out is why QWS is so
>>>> scary
>>>> to a sighted person. It's nothing graphical, it just lays itself out in
>>>> front of you and you have to do what you need with it. And it doesn't
>>>> have
>>>> as many functions but that's because it's only for midi, not even sheet
>>>> music which I could care less about it. I'm sure there are other 
>>>> programs
>>>> for it when I need it that I could use in conjunction with QWS. As I've
>>>> said
>>>>
>>>> the only reason I can even think of is that it doesn't have any quick
>>>> presets that you can just click or modify like some DAWs do.
>>>> In any case, even though QWS's usage is simple, mastering it is not. 
>>>> I've
>>>> had many people try QWS and play with it and figure out how easy it was
>>>> to
>>>> transpose or change to a different instrument, for example. But they 
>>>> know
>>>> nothing about midi or theory. So it's even simple enough for them, and
>>>> that's a good thing. If they're satisfied with it, then let them be. I
>>>> really don't see how much simpler the interface could get.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Leonard de Ruijter" <[email protected]>
>>>> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 4:43 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Hey Raymond,
>>>>
>>>>  I have to say that qws seemed quite complicated to me when i started
>>>>  working with it. Another thing, which is a big credit to Andre, as
>>>>  soon as i started listening to some of his tutorials, i found qws
>>>>  getting more and more interesting for me, and understood more of
>>>>  it. For example, i've played with note transform for several days
>>>>  after i listened andre's tutorial concerning this. I use qws for every
>>>>  sequencing work i have to do now, and it works great. Lots of
>>>>  functions qws has i miss in daws, for example the quick note editing
>>>>  and midi assignments. So may be it's an idea to point
>>>>  the daw-lovers to Andre's tutorials. One remark i also have to make
>>>>  is that some of my sighted friends found qws quite scary as well, but
>>>>  that's more about how they found it look like, and as it is mainly
>>>>  used by blind musicians, i don't care.
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> Here's an interesting question. When I learned QWS,  I didn't
>>>>> have anyone to help me out with it, just the setting up the keyboard
>>>>> part. And I had to learn most of the tools and functions myself.
>>>>> While I am a decent musician, I don't consider myself better than
>>>>> everyone. But  QWS just came natural to me, a little more than I had
>>>>> expected. There are  sighted people I know that know way more than I
>>>>> do, who use other programs  which are not at all accessible. They
>>>>> have a whole workstation in front of them,  and they can do way more
>>>>> than impport midi data and play it back, they can tweak  pretty much
>>>>> every synth and effect peramitor there is. Whether they actually
>>>>> know the ins and outs of it I don't know, but it sure seems like
>>>>> they  do.
>>>>> Now the question. I know people who are impressed  with the work
>>>>> I do, contrary to my opinion, lol. but, they wanted to know how I
>>>>> did it, but they're sort of geared into something like I said above
>>>>> and I'm not  sure exactly how to approach QWs. I initially said,
>>>>> "The manual's really good,  you should understand it." I was under
>>>>> the impression that QWS's features  were pretty familiar to any midi
>>>>> sequencer that knows what they're doing, and it  would be
>>>>> ridiculously simple. But then an hour later they'd uninstall because
>>>>> it  was either too complicated for them or too slow. I then realized
>>>>> that QWS  and a DAW are pretty different, QWS is like Notepad, where
>>>>> it doesn't offer  amazing functions with one clikc. You have to use
>>>>> the thirty or so tools that it  provides you, in the way you want
>>>>> them, not go by some factory of presets  already made for you and
>>>>> tweak it from there.
>>>>> So am I even partially right? Is QWS really  complicated from
>>>>> that standpoint, or could it be lack of patience? We've all  seen
>>>>> what Andre can do with it, I myself found it hard to believe that he
>>>>> used  QWS at first since I'm nowhere near that level.
>>>>> Maybe some of you here have had similar experiences  and can give more
>>>>> insight.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>>>>
>>>> for archived list posts, see
>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>>>>
>>>> for archived list posts, see
>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>>>>
>>>> for archived list posts, see
>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>>>
>>> for archived list posts, see
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>
>> for archived list posts, see
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
>
> for archived list posts, see 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] 

To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com

for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com

for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Reply via email to