Hi,
it is been a while since this matter had been discussed on this list but
currently I'm working on something that covers part of the things that
are discussed here.
I have a blog post which explains some things here:
https://musescore.org/en/user/527826/blog/2016/07/17/weekly-status-update-j
Hi Maurizio,
Would you mind opening a forum post or a new devlist post so we can discuss
this specifically?
I don't know the in and out of grand orgue but it should be possible to
send specific MIDI controllers via staff text when configuring
instruments.xml like this
https://github.com/musescore/
ChurchOrganist wrote
>
> lasconic wrote
>> In any case, it should already be possible to create instruments.xml file
>> to send CC messages at any point of the score to an external or internal
>> synth, even in MuseScore 2.0.3. Anyone tried it already?
> Yes - that was how registrations changes wo
lasconic wrote
> Ok. So I read several time about Igevorse's work on MidiAction dialogue
> but
> I don't think there is any work to merge currently.
> There are no open PR for it
> https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+igevorse+
> So I think nothing has been done. Di
Marc Sabatella wrote
> I don't know if there are any standards for how a
> soundfont might be organized to support the kinds of things you have in
> mind, but if so, we should follow it, if not, we should propose one and
> then it's larger in scope than MuseScore itself and that's fine too. But
>
Hi lasconic,
lasconic wrote
> https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/1083 is about assigning
> channels/ports to instruments. This is definitely possible in master if
> you enable it in Preferences > Score, you can change channels/ports in the
> Mixer.
Forgive me for asking, but in which
I totally agree with the goal of improving the default playback. I think
that would be a great improvement. And I predict that once you work through
the design, you'll end up with something very similar to what I proposed. :)
For example, the assumption that dynamics=velocity clearly needs to ch
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/1083 is about assigning
channels/ports to instruments.
This is definitely possible in master if you enable it in Preferences >
Score, you can change channels/ports in the Mixer.
lasconic.
2016-04-11 16:59 GMT+02:00 Marc Sabatella :
> Michael - obviousl
Michael - obviously I don't know the specifics of what you have in mind,
but I *can* say that this is indeed the sort of thing I mean when I say if
there is to be a grand re-design, it should give thought to how it could
fit within the current model of an internal syntehsizer playng a soundfont
we
I believe this is about this closed and unmerged PR:
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/1083
From: Lasconic [mailto:lasco...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 4:14 PM
To: MuseScore
Subject: Re: [Mscore-developer] Playback abstraction layer
Ok. So I read several time about
Ok. So I read several time about Igevorse's work on MidiAction dialogue but
I don't think there is any work to merge currently.
There are no open PR for it
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+igevorse+
So I think nothing has been done. Did I miss something?
In any
Just a note from the sound design aspect of this.
In order to implement what Peter is trying to do for everyone the default
soundfont would have to be modified extensively in order to have the
multi-velocity splits and other bells and whistles available to be acted on.
With Igevorse's work on Mid
Hi,
Is there someone who's in charge? Who are the core developers? How
do decisions
get made?
David Bolton's post sums up the situation very well. Werner is still the
one writing most of the code. I'm merging most of the pull requests.
In general, there are not many decisions to be made becaus
Let me be more specific, then: I am primarily interested in improvements
that benefit people using the default syntheszier *with the default
soundfont* (which, of course, could potentially be something other than the
current default - if there exists a suitable candidate). The 99% of users
I am ta
On 09/04/16 18:25, Peter Eastman wrote:
> I really need to know whether and how to move forward with this. I think it
> would be a useful feature. It's certainly one that I would like to have!
> But I haven't gotten a lot of encouragement, much less advice on how to
> design/implement it. I'm no
Hi!
I have given the issue of sophisticated orchestral playback from score
editors a lot of thought since VSL released its Performance Tool, back
in... 2007-ish?
In the end, it all comes down to SEANS: Score Editors Are Not
Sequencers. Should they actually be?
Score editors are geared towards
Hi Marc,
This proposal is meant to benefit users of both the internal and external
synthesizers. Let me describe the two particular purposes I would want it
for, since that may clarify where I'm coming from.
I often use the SSO sounds, and they work fine in Zerberus. But it's a bit
of a pain to
I can only speak for myself here, as one of many contributors to MuseScore.
I personally find it hard to get excited about a change that will only
benefit users who are using JACK and external synthesizers. That's
probably less than 1% (most likely *much* less than 1%) of users. I'd be
far more
Hi,
I understand where Peter is getting at, and I think I may be able to clarify
things a little bit more, so that MuseScore core developers, should they see
fit, may think thoroughly about his implementation.
What Peter wishes to implement is something called “soundset file”, or
“dictionary file
I really need to know whether and how to move forward with this. I think it
would be a useful feature. It's certainly one that I would like to have!
But I haven't gotten a lot of encouragement, much less advice on how to
design/implement it. I'm not sure how to interpret that.
I don't really u
There are a few reasons for treating them differently.
First, the built in synthesizers have unique abilities that aren't available
for external synthesizers. Most importantly, we can directly instruct them
to load a soundfont. That isn't possible with external synthesizers, which
may not even u
I'm still unclear as to why you think that Fluid and Zerberus need to be
treated differently from other synths.
The only difference between them and external synths is that there is a file
handling UI directly in MuseScore, so you load soundfonts into them from
MuseScore. In all other respects the
I saw his blog posts, and I'm really sorry his MIDI Actions feature never got
merged. There's some overlap with this feature in the sense that they both
send out MIDI commands, but mostly I see them as independent. I'd like the
ability to insert arbitrary MIDI commands anywhere I want in the scor
OK, my mistake!
I just checked, and his pull for "Assigning MIDI port/channel to
instruments" was merged with master branch on 28 Oct 2015 and these features
are already available (all of them?) on release 2.0.3 (I was using 2.0.2, so
I updated to 2.0.3 and saw the functional MIDI Input option in
Hi Peter
Are you acquainted with the work done by Maxim Grishin (igevorse) on
MuseScore, with respect to MIDI output, during GSoC2014 [1] and GSoC2015
[2]?
Although I couldn't help directly with the implementation, I was able to
discuss some ideas with him, regarding a full MIDI output implementa
I realize I may have been unclear on one point. In all of the above, when I
talk about "MIDI" I'm really talking about "external MIDI devices". Ones
where you just specify a port and channel, and messages get sent there, and
what happens then is completely out of MuseScore's control. Both Fluid
lasconic wrote
> So a big part of your proposal revolves around VSTi and so currently,
> external synth and the use of Jack MIDI, correct?
VSTi would be a nice feature to have some day, but not at all essential for
this. Jack MIDI is fine for my purposes.
Peter
--
View this message in context
I will try to comment further later. Just trying to wrap my head around the
complete picture.
go to commercial packages
Which are not usable in Zerberus because the samples are encrypted right?
So a big part of your proposal revolves around VSTi and so currently,
external synth and the use of Jack
I often use Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra, which also includes a staccato
version of many instruments. But for really large sets of articulations,
you need to go to commercial packages. See, for example,
http://www.garritan.com/UserManuals/GPO5/Content/directory.htm
or
http://www.soundsonline.c
Are there any freely available soundfonts (SF2 or SFZ) that actually do any
of this (provide multiple samples for all these different articulations)?
If so, can you point to some documentation on how they are set up? Or
maybe there are standards for this?
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:37 AM Peter Eas
Yeah, that's about what I figured. And really, it shouldn't matter to
MuseScore what file format a particular synth uses, or even what synthesis
method it uses. What matters is how to control that synth. What interface
should it use, and what sequence of commands should it send with that
interfa
Peter Eastman wrote
> I'm not sure which approach is better. That depends on how the
> synthesizers are implemented, and I'm not at all familiar with the
> MuseScore source code. (I've skimmed it a bit, but that's all.)
Well I can tell you that at synthesiser level both Zerberus and FluidSynth
a
> Have you noticed how this is beginning to sound a little bit like a
compiler? :)
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a
programming language." :)
Peter
--
View this message in context:
http://dev-list.musescore.org/Playback-abstraction-layer-tp7579762p7579767.htm
> I would suggest that you use the soundfont format as the type - eg
or .
I'm not sure which approach is better. That depends on how the synthesizers
are implemented, and I'm not at all familiar with the MuseScore source code.
(I've skimmed it a bit, but that's all.)
I was figuring there would
On 02/04/2016 22:38, Peter Eastman wrote:
> I'd like to propose a change to the playback architecture. It would
> enable a lot of new features, including several that have been
> requested recently on other threads. I'll first describe it at a high
> level, and then if people think it sounds lik
Some comments :)
XML is good.
Not sure about the type="midi".
All the synths you then go on to list use MIDI as their communication
protocol.
Currently MuseScore uses two native synths - FluidSynth and Zerberus which
are SF2 and SFZ respectively.
I would suggest that you use the soundfont form
Ok, here are my thoughts on a possible implementation. This isn't intended
as a finished design, just a starting point for discussion.
Let's start with the file format for describing synthesizers. I propose
using an XML based format. The root tag would be .
Or alternatively, type="fluid" or ty
I just joined the list. So hi! This is a followup to a discussion on the
feature request forum, in which I proposed a change to the playback
architecture:
https://musescore.org/en/node/104296#comment-469066
Let me start by copying my initial post from that discussion, since it
gives context abo
38 matches
Mail list logo
