RapidComposer Tutorial Videos! 15 total

[HiEnergy]

Now waiting for that price drop after the new version is up...

EDIT: Price dropped. Now 150 US$ really makes me consider buying RapidComposer. Waiting for my next bank account statement.

[donato]

Now waiting for that price drop after the new version is up...

EDIT: Price dropped. Now 150 US$ really makes me consider buying RapidComposer. Waiting for my next bank account statement.

I'm also ready, but I would like to get feedback regarding stability within Mavericks...Additionally I'm having difficulty deciding which version to go for! The full version is significantly more expensive, and I'm not sure if it's worth it for me. Anyone who has compared them extensively care to comment?

[VariKusBrainZ]

Try the demo, dont rely on others perceptions.
Small user base and all that

[HiEnergy]

Unfortunately my first tryout with the RC2.5 demo on Windows XP was very unsatisfactory.
It didn't cooperate with the ASIO driver of my Creamware DSP hardware and even made my computer crash and restart.
At least it worked as a VST in Live once.

Sorry, at the moment Rapid Composer seems unusable for me, as much as I like the ideas behind it.

Those were the bugs/problems I encountered:

- ASIO error with Creamware Pulsar DSP hardware
- crashes/"blue screen" when switching from MME to ASIO
- one crash in VST mode in Live ("Live stops after this message box is closed")
- trying to use a melody generator gives an error message "Melody generator not found in browser"

[musicdevelopments]

That is too bad. It is obviously an ASIO problem. I don't know how I could test with Creamware DSP hardware. What was the exact message when ASIO Error appeared? Was it 'getChannels failed' or 'getBufferSize failed' or 'Failed to create buffers'? I could send you a test version that logs ASIO messages to a text file that may help.

I already removed the "Melody generator not found in browser" message, as the demo version does not have it.

Thanks,
Attila

[HiEnergy]

Please send me a debug version. I'll PM you my mail address. Thanks in advance.
What other features are omitted from the demo version?
I'd really like to test the melody generator as it is a unique feature of Rapid Composer that sets it apart from its competitors like e.g. Synfire.

[como baila]

Please send me a debug version. I'll PM you my mail address. Thanks in advance.
What other features are omitted from the demo version?
I'd really like to test the melody generator as it is a unique feature of Rapid Composer that sets it apart from its competitors like e.g. Synfire.

I think there is a lot more than the Melody Generator that sets RC apart from Synfire. First, for full versions, RC's intro price of $149.00 versus Synfire's $1000.00.

Back to the Melody Generator, Andre of Synfire has posted in their forums that he has never developed a melody generator because the doesn't think there are any algorithms good enough to be worthwhile. There has been a lot of discussion of RC's in his user base ... so that might change.

Another key difference is that while Synfire is an incredibly powerful program it can also be bewilderingly complex ... and in many peoples' opinions, unnecessarily so. The Artificial Intelligence (AI) which is used for the interaction of tracks or voices requires that each track be defined in terms of GM instrument voices and then in its role in the composition, e.g., chords, keyboard melodic, soloist, etc., to take advantage of the programs strengths. This is all understandable and not too great an effort with the streamlining of this in recent versions ... but it does add a layer of fiddling before you can get to your music.

More pertinent to this comparison is that the AI is designed to do what Andre thinks it should ... generally acceptable, but sometimes limiting.

On the other hand, absent the AI, RC permits you to do exactly what you want with each voice ... requiring only Human Intelligence (HI) to blend your tracks/ voices for your arrangement. It is in this regard, simpler, more powerful and more intuitive.

Also, the direct use of midi as either freestanding or VST is a significant difference. Synfire has the most convoluted system of hosting VSTi on a per patch basis (because it must know which GM instrument and compositional role each patch will play for the AI) and once a patch is used, the same patch cannot be used twice in the same composition. In my view, who wants to spend hours and hours getting all their patches defined when it has already been done with patch scripts and routing in their DAW? Not me.

There is a system of 'drones,' which are like mini VST wrappers for placement of Synfire's output into a DAW, which is again mind-bogglingly complex ... although the developer does persist in efforts to make this more streamlined and less difficult, with limited success to date. Also, due to the developer's worry about copyright infringement, while you can import midi data, the process of converting it from notes to phrases ends up making most note lines verge to the bland and generic ... so the phrases lack precision, 'oomph' and musical utility.

Finally, while the program permits now direct assignment of 'track' or 'device' properties, i.e., GM instrument type, compositional role and note range, to any midi port/ channel, the program still insists on installing its audio engine, whether you want to use it or not.

Despite these issues, I like and value Synfire ... but I love RC! The immediacy and intuitive nature of the program in its current development is outstanding. There are still areas where I think there could be improved user control over the GUI, but that development appears to be marching along nicely in the right direction.

I'm finding both the Melody Generator and the Thirds Generator extremely inspiring. One thing that is not readily apparent is that phrase and/ or generators can overlap in a track. Try a 32 bar pattern. Add a Melody Generator (MG) to beat one and 'ghost' it, (Alt+Shift+L-Click Drag) to bar 17. Drag a new MG to bar 4 and 'ghost' to bar 20 and repeat two more times beginning at bar 8 and 12.

You can regenerate the notes on the originals, but you can make independent variations on each one including the 'ghosts.'

In a few minutes, you won't believe how much fun you are having and what great sounds you are creating.

[HiEnergy]

... so the phrases [done with Synfire] lack precision, 'oomph' and musical utility.

https://soundcloud.com/hienergy/hienerg ... che-arbeit
All tonal parts (not the drums) in this track were composed using Synfire. Wouldn't call this "lacking precision and musical utility"...

Now I'm eager to experience what can be achieved with Rapid Composer after Attila has tamed it to be less crash-happy.

[como baila]

... so the phrases [done with Synfire] lack precision, 'oomph' and musical utility.

https://soundcloud.com/hienergy/hienerg ... che-arbeit
All tonal parts (not the drums) in this track were composed using Synfire. Wouldn't call this "lacking precision and musical utility"...

Now I'm eager to experience what can be achieved with Rapid Composer after Attila has tamed it to be less crash-happy.

I didn't say that Synfire's composition was lacking in precision and musical utility ... I said the imported midi translated to Synfire phrases were so lacking.

If you try to import midi clips that follow a stylized, genre specific type of melody or rhythm line, think folk music styles ... Synfire changes them to something very generic and unlike the original midi unless you laborious do the 'static' import route from the 'take.'

I also didn't say you couldn't rework them to something more satisfactory in the Synfire Editor ... I just said that the importing of midi translated to Synfire phrases has much 'lost in translation.'

I'd also say that the RC Phrase Editor is infinitely more useable and musically intuitive then that in Synfire.

Do you disagree?

[HiEnergy]

I didn't say that Synfire's composition was lacking in precision and musical utility ... I said the imported midi translated to Synfire phrases were so lacking.

If you try to import midi clips that follow a stylized, genre specific type of melody or rhythm line, think folk music styles ... Synfire changes them to something very generic and unlike the original midi unless you laborious do the 'static' import route from the 'take.'

I also didn't say you couldn't rework them to something more satisfactory in the Synfire Editor ... I just said that the importing of midi translated to Synfire phrases has much 'lost in translation.'

I'd also say that the RC Phrase Editor is infinitely more useable and musically intuitive then that in Synfire.

Do you disagree?

I don't disagree. Just have to test Rapid Composer after Attila has fixed the problems that make it almost unusable for me. I'm in contact with him and he's very friendly and highly responsive.

Still think that phrases in Synfire are better reusable as they're less dependent on harmonic context when properly prepared.
I fully agree that preparing meaningful and musically sensible phrases in Synfire involves lots of work (correct harmonization from the take and proper figure recognition), but Synfire's sophisticated library management helps you with features like on-the-fly reharmonization and testing the phrase with temporary progressions.
One point where Synfire is miles ahead is separation of form and content. You can transfer progressions, figures, rhythmic structure, velocity data, controllers and whatnot between phrases, containers and documents in no time.
Synfire's concepts dealing with containers and inheritance of musical properties are just ingenious, though hard to grasp for me at first.
Now I don't want to miss parameter vectors, containers and inheritance any more.

I think Rapid Composer is much simpler and more DAW-like than Synfire. Time will tell what it's good for.

[como baila]

Still think that phrases in Synfire are better reusable as they're less dependent on harmonic context when properly prepared.

I'm not sure how you draw this conclusion ... perhaps because you have not worked with RC phrases?

All phrases in both are 100% dependent on harmonic context. Perhaps you mean something about a phrase extending past a key change ... but even this is unclear as to whether one or the other is better.

Once the phrase is available in a library I do not notice any difference in how they are 'translated' by the programs to the directing harmonic structure.

Now, if you mean that phrases from one track to another interact with each other via the AI, then I understand and agree.

However here is also a great limitation of Synfire: you cannot specify which phrases you want to have controlling harmonic position over the others. In RC you do this directly by what you choose.

I think Rapid Composer is much simpler and more DAW-like than Synfire.

'Simple' is an ambiguous word when used as a value judgment. RC is certainly simpler to setup, simpler to use and absent all the complications of devices inherent in Synfire. Whether 'simpler' is better in any context is another value laden judgment. Certainly in science 'Occam's Razor' has long held the day: when two explanations adequately explain something, the simpler one is to be preferred.

[themixtape]

Apples to oranges, my friends. Let's just make some awesome MIDI tunes!

[como baila]

Apples to oranges, my friends. Let's just make some awesome MIDI tunes!

Hmmmm ... I don't know. Maybe MacIntosh to Red Delicious? Chevy to Ford? I think both programs are in the same category.

[dusted william]

Is the Mac VST 64bit?

It shows up in 32 bit Live, but not 64 bit LIve.

I only ask because this happens sometimes with 64 bit plugins. I'm not sure why.


-dw

[dusted william]

crap. the demo is not version 2.5

-dw