nice articleDragonSagoth wrote:@DNA - if you're doing fixes to synths, there is one thing about Davosynth you need to take care of: portamento goes only to higher notes, according to this article:
http://www.transanalog.com/museum/davol ... isint.html
thank youI said about classical to just give an example for my point:Jazz Franco wrote:Some of my fave classical pieces (think Scarlatti or Rameau) were written for the harpsichord, which, I'm afraid is not velocity sensitive.genealex wrote:It's nature that invented a rule that says if something has the same level it sounds emotionless (and annoying after a period of time), so I can't use it the way it is if I want to use it over a long period of time and with the intention to cause emotions to the listener.Aloysius wrote:If you invent a rule for yourself that says you can't use it the way it is, then you can't use it the way it is. Please remember that you invented that rule for yourself or you believed some marketing hype, somewhere along the path of your short life! Nothing more! Nothing less!
Edit: If you still think it's me and not nature, you can listen to a classical piece without level variations and find out.
Of course, that was the main reason it gave way to the piano, still I prefer harpscichord pieces played on the harpsichord, not on some more advanced instrument
True, but then neither Orff or Tiersen composed on a miniMoog. If I want expressive piano I'll play a piano, if I want expressive strings I'll write for strings (or use a sampler, for example) - not bemoan the fact that I can't shoehorn an inappropriate tool into the role.genealex wrote:some music depends heavily on velocity sensitivity: imagine Carmina Burana without the dynamics or a piano piece of Yann Tiersen without the expressive use of the velocity sensitivity of the piano
The only reason is you won't allow them to be expressive, as Aloysius pointed out also. Or maybe they just struggle to enable you to express what you want - again, if I'm trying to compose something sensual sounding I probably wouldn't reach for a melodica, I might try flute or saxophone. OR I might try to compose something for melodica that does sound sensual, just to be stubborn and see if it can be done (sure enough it's possible, just listen to some of the Noir soundtrackgenealex wrote:I still cannot find a reason not to let them be as expressive as they very easily could be.
)How about having a part with dynamics that you d'love to be played with an harp? And the annoying situation: It's technically possible to print the exact sound you have in your head, but you won't be permitted because yesterday's technology wasn't able to reproduce that!XDVarenkor wrote:True, but then neither Orff or Tiersen composed on a miniMoog. If I want expressive piano I'll play a piano, if I want expressive strings I'll write for strings (or use a sampler, for example)genealex wrote:some music depends heavily on velocity sensitivity: imagine Carmina Burana without the dynamics or a piano piece of Yann Tiersen without the expressive use of the velocity sensitivity of the piano
No doubt. What I say though is that there's no reason for a virtual instrument to have such unnecessary limitations. Sure I can overcome them by sampling each note individually and play them through a sampler, but why to have to do something like that with today's technology? Also I think there's no excuse to limit ourselves to "write for specific instruments" in the current age.. (in the view of minding each instrument's limits)Expressive music can be made without velocity sensitivity, but this is achieved by writing within the limitations of the instruments you compose for.
Don't forget that I have already composed and set the context in a detail, and then I choose the final sound, which comes to limit the composition, when it obviously shouldn't.The only reason is you won't allow them to be expressive
Same as above actually..Or maybe they just struggle to enable you to express what you want - again, if I'm trying to compose something sensual sounding I probably wouldn't reach for a melodica, I might try flute or saxophone. OR I might try to compose something for melodica that does sound sensual
I have a lot of confidence when it comes to the value of my music.These are great tools. Maybe you just need to keep searching for the right tools for you though. Or free yourself from the comforting notion that it's the tools that make the music...
synths
I love the way it starts classic and then, unexpectedly, turns modern - it would be a fantastic theme for an x-files type of tv series - wow! Thanks Mate!Mac of BIOnighT wrote:Great track!
Like yours too - sounds as spontanous, fluent and improvise-like as mine sounds (too) tight ass structured and programmed. Maybe I could learn a little from you? 
Thanks for those very kind words, SirJazz Franco wrote:The very moment I read "the X-Files" I clicked the link
Definitely a great track! Reminded me of the Blade Runner's closing titles music as well, if they ever make a revamp of the movie, this would suit perfectly. There's a great deal of composing skills shown imo, quite laconic yet with an impact melody- and harmony-wise.
Thanks for sharing!
I am a little overwhelmed because I usually loose feeling with a tune within 5 minutes after finishing it...if I am lucky enough to finish it before loosing it! 
Sorry for small delay but im just a poor guy who has it's own life too (or maybe I should say work 
) and sometimes it's not easy to spend rest day in synthedit, testing stuff etc. After all I'm not a company and there's family too vstcafe.com. I can assure you that I read every single post in this topic 
Good to hear that - on my Ableton Live Suite 7, also didnt experience any nasty bugs with eSLinethecontrolcentre wrote:Thanks for the update D N A. Will check it out in Live 8 ... What has been changed? I have had no problems with earlier releases as yet.
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2026
