The VSTi That I Would Pay $1,000 For

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

jancivil wrote:
wagtunes wrote: All I'm asking for is the same quality in technology for human voice synthesis but for whatever reason, this seems to be the cutoff point as far as acceptance goes. Sample libraries, yes, human vocal synthesis at the same quality, no.

I find this hypocritical. I don't see the difference between somebody who spent years learning to play the violin and somebody who spent years learning to sing.

So I'm open to somebody explaining to me the "ethical" difference.
You have moved the goalposts. This is not the same premise as in the OP.

I for one have tried to go into explaining the ethical issues of the notion in the OP. This is a different matter. I endeavored to cover this difference in my words before.

However, while I do not play, eg., the saxophone, no member of the sax choir, I have WORKED WITH saxophones and deeply. So I am able to produce a convincing sax solo, which is a bit special, out of that. I have spent some time watching orchestras and working for an orchestra and the choice of that job is a no-brainer. Setting up the orchestra and schlepping its gear about in a truck. So I know from the real here as well. I think contact with people is good. It occurs to me that music comes from people much of the time. I don't hate people to the extent as you have stated.

I've upset people numerous times here insisting you need to have an instrument, one at least, under your belt before you feature yourself as ready to write. I'm consistent. My idea I think is coherent and this was not my worst writing, I think my objections were conveyed well enough to grasp.
I'm truly trying to understand your post but I guess I must really be dense because I really don't know what you're trying to say.

You say I "need to have an instrument under my belt before I feature myself as ready to write." I guess what you mean is I need to know how to actually play an instrument before I can write for it. Well, I took piano lessons. I actually can play the piano. I learned guitar. I can play guitar. Not great, but well enough to at least pass on a recording. I could play you some of my guitar stuff but you're probably not interested so I won't bore you with it.

I have also played drums in a band. Well enough that they didn't throw me out of the band. Of course these were personal friends so that helped as well.

Point is, I do play instruments. I mean before all this technology I really didn't have a choice.

So does that qualify me to be able to write music? I just want to get that much out of the way first before we continue this discussion any further. Because if you feel it still doesn't, then I guess we don't have anything else to talk about.

And, no offense intended, but regardless of your personal feelings about whether or not I should be permitted to write for a particular instrument depending on whether or not I can play that instrument, this is still a free country and I can do whatever I want as long as I don't break the law. That doesn't make me immoral just because I want to pull up a violin VST (I have never played violin) or any other instrument just because I never played it.

Wanting a piece of software that "plays" a human voice (and I actually did sing at one point in my life so I guess that does qualify me there) doesn't make me immoral either.

So maybe I'm just not understanding what it is you're trying to say. And if so, I will take all the blame for that with my stupidity and ignorance.

Post

wagtunes wrote:
Tj Shredder wrote:I don't see any moral problem with what tools you or anybody uses. There is no moral problem, there is a musical one. If some one claims a given technology would put a musician out business, I'd say, it most likely was not a musician. No technology can replace a musician. Of course you can hire a instrumentalist for filling sound into a recording. That one could be replaced by technology filling sounds into a recording. As a musician you could also play everything yourself, but that is exactly the same amount of work as if a band would play all together, no actually its more work... That would even create employment...; - )
Okay, so then do you have a problem with my request for the software I'm looking for if it could emulate a human singing voice as closely as say Chris Hein's solo violin emulates a real violin? Because right now, the technology isn't even close to that level and there are people who do have a problem with what I'm looking for.
As put here, I have no problem at all.

I did express that I felt that, in the larger sense (my goalpost) automation of work means unemployment.
Now, Vocaloid isn't putting any singers out of work even for a moment. Me choosing to use the soprano sax in WarpIV Music Hollywood Winds on 'Ray Dio IV' rather than Chris Kennedy meant a definite lack of 100 bucks in his pocket for quick work. I'm nobody so it doesn't matter what I do really.

But when Frank Zappa chose working with the synclavier in the context of shelling out 100s of thousands of dollars to the LSO was a choice to not work with people and to not have to pay people, including stagehands and avoidance of their union and attendant restrictions. I feel that the brass section which came back lit from a break he comments on in liner notes maybe could use a longer break if you get my drift.

But if we ever do make it to the point where what we'd all recognize as a particular musical personality in the form of a singer (the maximal affect in terms of a personality) we've gone some ways we haven't so we cannot fully project the ramifications. As stated in the OP, it was disturbing to me.

It's funny how you've moved off that to something quite more reasonable while never acknowledging the resistance to that. NB: there is no you vs me, personally, SW. I argued against the idea.

Post

wagtunes wrote:
jancivil wrote:
wagtunes wrote: All I'm asking for is the same quality in technology for human voice synthesis but for whatever reason, this seems to be the cutoff point as far as acceptance goes. Sample libraries, yes, human vocal synthesis at the same quality, no.

I find this hypocritical. I don't see the difference between somebody who spent years learning to play the violin and somebody who spent years learning to sing.

So I'm open to somebody explaining to me the "ethical" difference.
You have moved the goalposts. This is not the same premise as in the OP.

I for one have tried to go into explaining the ethical issues of the notion in the OP. This is a different matter. I endeavored to cover this difference in my words before.

However, while I do not play, eg., the saxophone, no member of the sax choir, I have WORKED WITH saxophones and deeply. So I am able to [...]

I've upset people numerous times here insisting you need to have an instrument, one at least, under your belt before you feature yourself as ready to write. I'm consistent. My idea I think is coherent and this was not my worst writing, I think my objections were conveyed well enough to grasp.
I'm truly trying to understand your post but I guess I must really be dense because I really don't know what you're trying to say.

You say I "need to have an instrument under my belt before I feature myself as ready to write." I guess what you mean is I need to know how to actually play an instrument before I can write for it. Well, I took piano lessons. I
It's as though you zeroed in on the one thing you want to contend with and the rest of what I wrote VANISHES.

It's the universal 'you'. It's written in the context of me saying that to people before. I can't do better than this. If you can't, well life is short. It's not my fault you choose to be this selective with a post and get it that wrong.

I played guitar and percussion. I played trumpet for part of fifth grade and then needed orthodontic work and that was the end of that aspiration. So I would be a hypocrite to say that. But I am 100% consistent here.
Last edited by jancivil on Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post

jancivil wrote:
wagtunes wrote:
Tj Shredder wrote:I don't see any moral problem with what tools you or anybody uses. There is no moral problem, there is a musical one. If some one claims a given technology would put a musician out business, I'd say, it most likely was not a musician. No technology can replace a musician. Of course you can hire a instrumentalist for filling sound into a recording. That one could be replaced by technology filling sounds into a recording. As a musician you could also play everything yourself, but that is exactly the same amount of work as if a band would play all together, no actually its more work... That would even create employment...; - )
Okay, so then do you have a problem with my request for the software I'm looking for if it could emulate a human singing voice as closely as say Chris Hein's solo violin emulates a real violin? Because right now, the technology isn't even close to that level and there are people who do have a problem with what I'm looking for.
As put here, I have no problem at all.

I did express that I felt that, in the larger sense (my goalpost) automation of work means unemployment.
Now, Vocaloid isn't putting any singers out of work even for a moment. Me choosing to use the soprano sax in WarpIV Music Hollywood Winds on 'Ray Dio IV' rather than Chris Kennedy meant a definite lack of 100 bucks in his pocket for quick work. I'm nobody so it doesn't matter what I do really.

But when Frank Zappa chose working with the synclavier in the context of shelling out 100s of thousands of dollars to the LSO was a choice to not work with people and to not have to pay people, including stagehands and avoidance of their union and attendant restrictions. I feel that the brass section which came back lit from a break he comments on in liner notes maybe could use a longer break if you get my drift.

But if we ever do make it to the point where what we'd all recognize as a particular musical personality in the form of a singer (the maximal affect in terms of a personality) we've gone some ways we haven't so we cannot fully project the ramifications. As stated in the OP, it was disturbing to me.

It's funny how you've moved off that to something quite more reasonable while never acknowledging the resistance to that. NB: there is no you vs me, personally, SW. I argued against the idea.
I understand. And as I'm a nobody, nobody is going to care if I use a vocal software to sing my songs. However, as I won't be the only one with access to this software, yes, who knows what's going to come of it, depending on how great the software really is. Could it conceivably cause a producer to go with "canned" vocals over hiring a singer? I guess that's possible. Does that mean that this singer is out of work or at least out of one job? Probably. But isn't that happening already? Aren't there some producers who opt for orchestral libraries over a real orchestra? Certainly there is less work for orchestras today than there was during a time when this technology didn't exist at all.

In all the years I worked for a living, I lost many jobs because of obsolete tech. In fact, it seemed like I could never keep up with things. I'd learn something and a year or two later, it was obsolete.

I'll be the first to admit that we don't live in an ideal world. Every technological advance means somebody is out of a job. It's been like that for as long as I can remember.

Selfishly, and yes, I admit, selfishly, I can't worry about that. All I care about is that I want to produce songs that people won't cringe when listening to because the vocals sound like something out of Nightmare On Elm Street. So yeah, if I can get software that is as technically advanced as today's top sample libraries (as unlikely as I still think that is because of the complexities of the human voice) I'll buy it. I'm not even sure I have a price limit unless it's totally out in the stars (like $10,000 plus) and simply ridiculous to even consider. But a grand? Yeah, I'll spend a grand for such a piece of software. Maybe even 2 grand. Heck, I've spent more than that on synths back in the day when an Oberheim 4 Voice cost $3,995. If something is important enough to you, yeah, you'll spend the money.

Again, I doubt what I want, to the degree of accuracy that I want, is ever happening in my lifetime, if at all. So I don't think anybody here has anything to worry about.

Virtual singers will not be taking over the world.

Post

wagtunes wrote:And as I'm a nobody, nobody is going to care if I use a vocal software to sing my songs. However, as I won't be the only one with access to this software, yes, who knows what's going to come of it, depending on how great the software really is. Could it conceivably cause a producer to go with "canned" vocals over hiring a singer? I guess that's possible. Does that mean that this singer is out of work or at least out of one job? Probably. But isn't that happening already? Aren't there some producers who opt for orchestral libraries over a real orchestra? Certainly there is less work for orchestras today than there was during a time when this technology didn't exist at all.

In all the years I worked for a living, I lost many jobs because of obsolete tech. In fact, it seemed like I could never keep up with things. I'd learn something and a year or two later, it was obsolete.

I'll be the first to admit that we don't live in an ideal world. Every technological advance means somebody is out of a job. It's been like that for as long as I can remember.
It's inevitable. The problem is people's adaptive capacity and for menial work, a lot of people are SOL.
Nobody needs a fake singer like people need to pay rent and eat though. So this advance, just like getting AI to be a fake composer, is unnecessary. It's the human species exploring and pushing which would seem to, in itself be good. However, ETHICS. Which is not your interest, it appears.
wagtunes wrote: Selfishly, and yes, I admit, selfishly, I can't worry about that. All I care about is that I want to produce songs that people won't cringe when listening to because the vocals sound like something out of Nightmare On Elm Street.
Your songs at wagtunes' corner make me cringe, because the mix is bloody harsh. Nothing personal whatsoever but no one is saying it and I think deep down you are enough of a musician to suspect it so I'm saying it. This is true of the things you have on youtube. Synthetic Japanese voices are the least of your worries from where I sit. I'm too old to beat around the bush with people, sorry.
wagtunes wrote: So yeah, if I can get software that is as technically advanced as today's top sample libraries (as unlikely as I still think that is because of the complexities of the human voice) I'll buy it. [...] If something is important enough to you, yeah, you'll spend the money.
Sure, and more power to you, incl more buying power.
wagtunes wrote: Again, I doubt what I want, to the degree of accuracy that I want, is ever happening in my lifetime, if at all. So I don't think anybody here has anything to worry about.

Virtual singers will not be taking over the world.
No and this is way, way down the road technically and could signal really an advance in evolution. So I put that frame around my thinking here <thought experiment>.

Post

jancivil wrote:
wagtunes wrote:And as I'm a nobody, nobody is going to care if I use a vocal software to sing my songs. However, as I won't be the only one with access to this software, yes, who knows what's going to come of it, depending on how great the software really is. Could it conceivably cause a producer to go with "canned" vocals over hiring a singer? I guess that's possible. Does that mean that this singer is out of work or at least out of one job? Probably. But isn't that happening already? Aren't there some producers who opt for orchestral libraries over a real orchestra? Certainly there is less work for orchestras today than there was during a time when this technology didn't exist at all.

In all the years I worked for a living, I lost many jobs because of obsolete tech. In fact, it seemed like I could never keep up with things. I'd learn something and a year or two later, it was obsolete.

I'll be the first to admit that we don't live in an ideal world. Every technological advance means somebody is out of a job. It's been like that for as long as I can remember.
It's inevitable. The problem is people's adaptive capacity and for menial work, a lot of people are SOL.
Nobody needs a fake singer like people need to pay rent and eat though. So this advance, just like getting AI to be a fake composer, is unnecessary. It's the human species exploring and pushing which would seem to, in itself be good. However, ETHICS. Which is not your interest, it appears.
wagtunes wrote: Selfishly, and yes, I admit, selfishly, I can't worry about that. All I care about is that I want to produce songs that people won't cringe when listening to because the vocals sound like something out of Nightmare On Elm Street.
Your songs at wagtunes' corner make me cringe, because the mix is bloody harsh. Nothing personal whatsoever but no one is saying it and I think deep down you are enough of a musician to suspect it so I'm saying it. This is true of the things you have on youtube. Synthetic Japanese voices are the least of your worries from where I sit. I'm too old to beat around the bush with people, sorry.
wagtunes wrote: So yeah, if I can get software that is as technically advanced as today's top sample libraries (as unlikely as I still think that is because of the complexities of the human voice) I'll buy it. [...] If something is important enough to you, yeah, you'll spend the money.
Sure, and more power to you, incl more buying power.
wagtunes wrote: Again, I doubt what I want, to the degree of accuracy that I want, is ever happening in my lifetime, if at all. So I don't think anybody here has anything to worry about.

Virtual singers will not be taking over the world.
No and this is way, way down the road technically and could signal really an advance in evolution. So I put that frame around my thinking here <thought experiment>.
FWIW, I'm not so full of myself that I hear music on the radio and then listen to my music and think it's anywhere near the same league.

Having said that, every little thing I can do to make my music sound better, no matter how small, is something I need to do.

And you know what? I'm just going to leave it at that.

Post


Post

You have to admit this thread is a novel way to get people to a soundcloud page
Don't feed the gators,y'all
https://m.soundcloud.com/tonedeadj

Post

melomood wrote:You have to admit this thread is a novel way to get people to a soundcloud page
Believe me, it wasn't my intention. I just had an idea for software that would help me a lot given I can't sing and Vocaloid sounds like, well, like Vocaloid.

I never expected things to go south the way they did.

Post

melomood wrote:You have to admit this thread is a novel way to get people to a soundcloud page
isnt thats with every thread where Wag appears :D i really suggest to change soundcloud to youtube and monetise it.

Post

wagtunes wrote:
melomood wrote:You have to admit this thread is a novel way to get people to a soundcloud page
Believe me, it wasn't my intention. I just had an idea for software that would help me a lot given I can't sing and Vocaloid sounds like, well, like Vocaloid.

I never expected things to go south the way they did.
Tbh you put your soundcloud alot, alot too much in fact, you are the only one who puts so much of your soundcloud stuff just to prove some point. And even tho you dont expect for things to go south, they eventualy do and its everyones fault but yours :lol:

Post

Elektronisch wrote:
wagtunes wrote:
melomood wrote:You have to admit this thread is a novel way to get people to a soundcloud page
Believe me, it wasn't my intention. I just had an idea for software that would help me a lot given I can't sing and Vocaloid sounds like, well, like Vocaloid.

I never expected things to go south the way they did.
Tbh you put your soundcloud alot, alot too much in fact, you are the only one who puts so much of your soundcloud stuff just to prove some point. And even tho you dont expect for things to go south, they eventualy do and its everyones fault but yours :lol:
Look, I am trying to remain civil here. Hink came in and basically told me to cool it. But it seems you just can't let it go. And he wonders why I hate this place so much.

Now can we please just have a rational conversation from this point on, unless you just want to spend the rest of the thread dumping on me.

It's your choice. But I'm not going to get sucked into the flame wars anymore here. If you want to discuss the pros and cons of the software I suggested, fine. If not, we have nothing left to say to each other.

Agreed?

Post

Such a plugin would be a slap in the face of all talented singers.
Why not simply accept that you are not a good singer, just like most people do?
When your body is slow and weak, there is no point in wanting some sort of bionic body enhancement just so you can become a football player. People would consider it unfair...
(This thread should be moved to the Everything Else forum.)

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:Such a plugin would be a slap in the face of all talented singers.
Why not simply accept that you are not a good singer, just like most people do?
When your body is slow and weak, there is no point in wanting some sort of bionic body enhancement just so you can become a football player. People would consider it unfair...
(This thread should be moved to the Everything Else forum.)
Then I suggest that everybody who cannot play the violin accept that they are not violinists and not buy violin sample libraries and not use violins in their work. Same for trumpets, flutes or any other instrument that they are incapable of playing.

It works both ways my friend.

What I'm asking for is no different from people going out and spending $8,000 on the Vienna collection because they want to sound like the New York Philharmonic.

Post

Can anyone tell which orchestra's string section a sample library emulates? Especially if it is played by different people? When you have 10 orchestras playing the same piece under the same conductor, one could hardly tell which is which.
Also, a string section or orchestra is more like a choir, where many voices are fused into one and thus no longer recognizable.

Any human voice is unique, though. With solo voices/instruments you can easily tell the difference. One can't emulate a violin virtuoso in a DAW, not even with an expensive sample library.
Or take the bass. You can have all the samples in the world, you just can't faithfully emulate someone like Marcus Miller, who kind of becomes one with his bass and plays it the way a singer sings.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”