KVR Audio

Sorefingers · Post by **Sorefingers** » Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:03 pm

Hs any one tried this? What is the purpose of it exactly? Is it basically auto tune for songwriting? The description says it helps with chords, melody, etc.

http://www.re-compose.com/liquid-notes- ... tware.html

gnu23 · Post by **gnu23** » Tue Dec 25, 2012 3:57 pm

http://vimeo.com/34463235

Pretty much explains it. It works with MIDI, not audio.

julioelgenio · Post by **julioelgenio** » Tue Dec 25, 2012 9:13 pm

I downloaded the demo... but I don't know if I should buy it, sounds neat though, and with the Christmas special it'd be a nice addition... would you get it?

stixman · Post by **stixman** » Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:57 pm

if your planning on getting cubase 7 they've got chord finder included! I've got LN but don't use it as much as I should, I tend to use EZKeys more

HalliB · Post by **HalliB** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 12:35 am

I'm using Logic and Live, I won't buy Cubase, its not worth the money - especially version 7.
I switched from CB 5 to Logic and I am happy that I got rid of Steinberg.

However, I bought Liquid Notes a month ago and I am quite happy with it.
I use it extensively because my music is quite harmony driven. It provides me with a tidy interface and let me experiment quickly with new chord constellations. I am not sure, but as far as I know, Cubase 7 has no chord detection - has it?

Problem is, in Live I cannot use multi track export, so for now I create multi tracks in Logic and use it with Live just for single harmony tracks. However, the Liquid Notes support is great very friendly and they replied, a multiple single track import will be available soon. Then it should be possible to import a group of single tracks and treat it like multi-track.

So far it was worth the money.

Edit: One last recommendation: Routing isn't necessary, use the internal synths of LN - they are ok for messing around. After re-importing to Logic my synths are there again.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:58 am

the purpose of it is to provide a person with functions to do such as obtain chord substitutions that can't be arsed to do that bit of thinking themselves. "Reharmonization has never been easier!" Sure, let a program be a substitute for your mind. The future is now.

HalliB · Post by **HalliB** » Fri Apr 26, 2013 11:55 am

jancivil wrote:Sure, let a program be a substitute for your mind.

Did you try it? It doesn't take any action for you, it just recommends fitting chords, the control is at you and your ear.

chordprogression7 · Post by **chordprogression7** » Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:22 pm

Yet again another invention that claims to do wonders for your music by doing away with all musical skills and relying on something external that seems to pull off all kind of magic tricks.

I remember the same thing when many years ago I bought my first digital multitracker. I thought: 'wow, I can cut and paste a verse, a chorus, whatever, and place it in a different point in the musical structure'.

It never worked. I realized that I just didn't write music like that. It feels very unnatural to create music by cutting and pasting bits or clicking mouses.
This stuff works in theory, but it never does in practice, for the reason that there's no substitute for a trained human ear and a trained musical mind, and there never will be. I'd rather invest in a good harmony book or take music lessons.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Wed May 01, 2013 8:14 pm

HalliB wrote:
jancivil wrote:Sure, let a program be a substitute for your mind.
Did you try it? It doesn't take any action for you, it just recommends fitting chords, the control is at you and your ear.

I know what it does. It recommends options you bloody well should have at hand yourself. Instead of the reasoning process, a well-informed process, a program gives you buttons to push instead. The trial-and-error way is fine up to a point, but 'reharmonization' is more of an art form and one's choices have an internal logic to them, a musical reason to 'substitute'. Convincing re-harmonization also involves well-thought through voice-leading/part writing.

If one cannot come up with these options from knowledge about this, one has no business in the composing game. You need to be advised how far distant this chord is from what you have? How much control do you really expect to bring? It markets itself as if for professionals in a hurry as well as for the know-nothing, but no one worth a shit needs this thing. This is a crutch, a great way to cheat yourself out of the experience of learning how to walk with your own two feet. Being ambulatory is preferable to being crippled, I say.

There are people that feel entitled to a result they can get approbation behind while finding it appropriate to skip the work and the journey that being good at music demands. You can kid yourself, but if you do not have the knowledge of why this/that choice makes sense, it's in all probability going to show on you. Do you think good painters are using paint-by-numbers quality of strategies? Think about it. Know your palette.

ATW10C · Post by **ATW10C** » Thu May 09, 2013 6:18 pm

composing relates to melody.
the rest is arranging.

Functional · Post by **Functional** » Mon May 27, 2013 11:05 pm

jancivil wrote:
HalliB wrote:
jancivil wrote:Sure, let a program be a substitute for your mind.
Instead of the reasoning process, a well-informed process, a program gives you buttons to push instead.

This program could have been a perfect framework for a learning program that focuses on chords and the logic behind and in them. Kind of shame that it's all about simplicity nowadays.

I have to agree, even as an amateur, that this kind of stuff kills out the theoretical and fundamental aspect of music. Especially the digital scene - soon EDM is probably 100% about sound design instead of the 99% it is right now.

Even if it's based upon the fact that it gives you options, it promotes tunnel vision. Instead of thinking about the arrangement as a whole, you're just picking a chord and then the next one that suits best for you. I can't see people understanding modulation through that way, for example. And I've seen similar tools before (an app for iPhone iirc) and while it was fun to play around with back then, I eventually got rid of it. It felt too bland for me to even use while I'm at the bus to check a progression out.

JoeyT · Post by **JoeyT** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:06 pm

HalliB wrote: If one cannot come up with these options from knowledge about this, one has no business in the composing game.

Agreed but Im in 2 minds about it. I remember some photographers saying a similar thing when photoshop arrived... "Just pressing buttons"

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Sat Jun 08, 2013 1:31 am

Photoshop and this, is not analagous.

even if I granted that it was somehow, there is an enormous difference between someone with a photo-retouching background using it and say me using it.

liquid notes gives you options that you should not need a machine to present to you. if you don't know how distant something is - this is not artificial intelligence, it's just some options out of a range of difference - you need this, which means you need a crutch before you ever took your baby steps.

just, say, no.

ZildjianAVC · Post by **ZildjianAVC** » Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:54 pm

Here's a healthy attitude for those complaining in here:

If it helps you make better music, use it. If it gets in your way, don't use it, and by extension don't complain when other people use it, because you had the option to and didn't. Because music consumers will decide whether they like a song or not, and we have no right to say whether or not a certain tool should exist. That's how art has always been, and always will be.

Everyone complaining in here is probably using a computer to produce, when back in the day there were people just like you complaining "oh great, now any idiot can make a recording and give it away, music is dead." Yet you're making music today. So just don't worry about it, and make your music the way you want it to be. If people choose to listen to music with "stupid, seemingly artless chord progressions", then maybe you have the wrong perception of what an "artful" chord progression actually is, or you're making music people just don't care about. Which is, of course, perfectly okay

lingyai · Post by **lingyai** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:30 pm

ZildjianAVC wrote:Here's a healthy attitude for those complaining in here:

If it helps you make better music, use it. If it gets in your way, don't use it, and by extension don't complain when other people use it, because you had the option to and didn't. Because music consumers will decide whether they like a song or not, and we have no right to say whether or not a certain tool should exist. That's how art has always been, and always will be.

Everyone complaining in here is probably using a computer to produce, when back in the day there were people just like you complaining "oh great, now any idiot can make a recording and give it away, music is dead." Yet you're making music today. So just don't worry about it, and make your music the way you want it to be. If people choose to listen to music with "stupid, seemingly artless chord progressions", then maybe you have the wrong perception of what an "artful" chord progression actually is, or you're making music people just don't care about. Which is, of course, perfectly okay

You're quite right, but unfortunately you're in the wrong place, because "live and let live" doesn't compute in this sub-forum. Same endless loop of vitriol from the same fossilized reactionaries.