----- Original Message ----- From: "James Malone" <[email protected]>
To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 9:04 AMSubject: Re: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?
Indeed we do. I was also thinking of say, Dorien? Of course one would hardly ever use it, but it would be there for a bit of a laugh. Will even make it myself when I get round to learning how to do so. Dunno why, but something about that scale fasinates me. Lol :) On 8/9/11, Raymond Grote <[email protected]> wrote:Funny you mention that, about a half hour ago I thought of doing that myselflol! Musicians think alike I guess. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Onj" <[email protected]> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 7:10 AM Subject: Re: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi applications?Hi. My suggestion for submission is send in a txt and say at the top of the document, disable wordwrap.Then paste each transform you want into the userxfrm.ini file and hope itworks.That should work, as the list does support attachments, just not very bigones for obvious reasons. Cheers. From: Raymond Grote <[email protected]> on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 10:08 AMThe 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 inversiontransform you needed and have an instant harmony track? I'd have a routetofirst and second inversions for major and minor. Anyone have suggestionsfor 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 waslooking for different things with the find function. It found somethingat 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 keepsthem 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 AMSubject: 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 proponentIam 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 weproduced 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 anddid really seem to enjoy the demonstrations I put fourth. One of themwas of course, the famous note-transform. I played the very well-knownnursery rhyme old Mcdonald in F major, and used the major to minor toturn it into something rather different from the original. Picking somethingthat people know quite well for demonstration purposes really hellpedto 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 QWSwith me literally anywhere with access to a qwerty keyboard and writedown ideas is a huge bonus to me. What I think is that a rather large sectionof modern computer users have very little pacients and if the producthasno fancy graphics they dismiss it out of hand after 3 minutes of usingit.Truely it is their loss, not ours. We know what we have. We utiliseit 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 practicallynon-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 PMI haven't installed it yet, because I'm still waiting on some assistance toget one of my USB keyboards out of the storage space my studio is inat 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 whatit's supposed to. Such programs are nice to find, because they handlethings rather well.One of the points I like about QWS is that everything is done using astandard 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 forconstruction of the building, as I still have work I want to get donerightnow, and dragging a seven foot tall rack full of modules and supportgearinto the house (with three steps to get inside, too) doesn't seem tomake a lot of sense to me. -----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On BehalfOf 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 soscaryto a sighted person. It's nothing graphical, it just lays itself outinfront of you and you have to do what you need with it. And it doesn'thave 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 saidthe only reason I can even think of is that it doesn't have any quickpresets 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 totranspose or change to a different instrument, for example. But theyknow nothing about midi or theory. So it's even simple enough for them, andthat'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 startedworking 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 offunctions qws has i miss in daws, for example the quick note editingand midi assignments. So may be it's an idea to pointthe daw-lovers to Andre's tutorials. One remark i also have to makeis 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'thave anyone to help me out with it, just the setting up the keyboardpart. And I had to learn most of the tools and functions myself. While I am a decent musician, I don't consider myself better thaneveryone. 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 Ido, who use other programs which are not at all accessible. Theyhave 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 muchevery 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 Idid it, but they're sort of geared into something like I said aboveand I'm not sure exactly how to approach QWs. I initially said, "The manual's really good, you should understand it." I was underthe impression that QWS's features were pretty familiar to any midisequencer that knows what they're doing, and it would beridiculously 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 usethe 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 seenwhat Andre can do with it, I myself found it hard to believe that heused 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.comfor archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.comfor 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.comfor archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.comfor 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]
