How Long Does Other DAWs Take To Save 20,000 Midi Items?

[IncarnateX]

I was sincerely wondering what was the right way to help.

Just after characterizing his behavior as mixture between procrastinations and OCD? And you think that this does not add up to something like he needs psychiatric help? Think again.

Well, playing devils advocate, who cares? If he can live and be functional with his disorders, let him live. Many ceators/artists had psychiatric disorders, and that didn't prevent them from being great artists (actually, it might even help).

Not that I agree with his working method, but it's HIS method. If he feels right working that way, so be it

Whatever disorders he may have is not for KVR's amateur psychiatrists to decide or take into consideration, period! Don't go there if you do not want to get reported. It is highly offensive to read for someone like me who is well informed about the severe consequences of such disorders.

[harryupbabble]

Just curious, but did you ever heard of a thing called "groove quantize"? I don't have the habit to use quantization, but it was a "very cool feature" in the 90s in any sequencer. What groove quantize does is applying a "groove" to any recorded track (usually we would start with drums, but it could be used on other tracks too), and that way you end up with MIDI informationm that is more "live" (or not live, also mechanic/electronic, like the MPC grooves).

Later, MIDI/audio sequencers even implemented tools/features that were able analyze an audio track and extract a MIDI groove from it, that can be subsequently applied to MIDI tracks. You can still do this in Cubase, although it seems to be harder than it used to be. But applying a groove quantize to a recorded drum track is much better than what you are doing, IMO.

It isn't very straightforward in REAPER either, but it seems possible. https://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=154

When doing this investigation, I realized we seem to have lost some back features during the DAW evolution. Things that we had for granted 15 years ago, seem to be almost gone now.

Anyway, even with the extra work involved, I think this is a better alternative, IMO

Okay, thank you for that. I've bookmarked the link to read it more closely later on. I am guessing that groove quantize would variate the rhythmic feel of my 20.000 midi files. I am already aware of REAPER's humanizer function and the humanizer also alters the rhythm part of midi items. It also also alters midi velocity.

But the thing is I'm not trying to make my 20,000 midi drum patterns ultra-realistic. Semi-realistic midi drum patterns could still sound good with the bass. I've tried it. I'm not worried about instruments being realistic at the moment because as I said before I intend to hire skilled musicians to play my songs, should my songs ever good enough for that.

Besides, if you look at a song like Greensleeves, it doesn't really need the drums or bass. It only really needs the lyrics and the melody for the lyrics. The song Yesterday by the Beatles doesn't even have drums? I'm just trying to make simple songs, which is freaking hard to do because hummability of melodies coupled with memorable lyrics IS hard to do? So yeah I think simple pop songs are deceptively hard to accomplish, even for people who already knows how to do it, like Sting and Paul McCartney and most of those great songwriters of the past?

But still, the bass and drums and other instruments do matter when creating a song, in my case at least, but I don't need them to rival real musicians. They are just there to assist in ultimately creating the lyrics and the melody for the lyrics. Okay I'm off to try other macro recorders/players one more time. And if that doesn't work, time to give up on that and focus on lua scripts maybe. Okay, I have to feed the cat, bye.

[IncarnateX]

Ya know. Sometimes I think we KVR members should look at ourselves in the mirror and ask: Why am I here? Am I here to find and provide inspiration in the name of the blessings of music and artistic freedom or am I here to raise my own status on behalf of other members approaches? Am I here to exchange my views or debate them under the premise that whatever suits me is right in contrast to those who may disagree and therefore are wrong per default?

I am no angel myself and have occasionally dragged myself into the dark side of the musical force during the years, yes, I actually think I once took abusive use of narcissistic personality disorder to characterize a member whose behavior annoyed me. However, as they say: Two wrongs do not make a right! One thing I have learned is that such kind of shit can demotivate my creation of music for months and thus I have found that sometimes you need a long break from KVR to find the inspiration again. So right now I am not speaking about anyone in particular but all of us. Who among you really want to have this effect on your fellow musicians? I have hammered my head in deep regrets when I found that I was on this pathetic road myself. So why not help each other to stay away from it instead? Just saying.

[JoseC.]

It is highly offensive to read for someone like me who is well informed about the severe consequences of such disorders.

So, this is all about you, isn't it?

It certainly doesn't seem to be the case about Harry, whose thread you are so rudely hijacking and trying to get closed, and who, by the way, has all my sympathies whatever his case is. He is a very polite chap, however wrong I think his approach to composing is.

[JoseC.]

I once took abusive use of narcissistic personality disorder to characterize a member whose behavior annoyed me.

OK, this is the last time I am going to post on this issue. You are making clear that this is all about you.

For starters, Harry does not annoy me in the least. And if, that is a big if, I was in the right track when I wrote what I wrote above, I think that what he deserves is patience, and help. If, and that is another big if, you are what you claim to be, you seem to be somehow validating my assumption, so maybe I was right in the first place wondering about the right way to help.

But, anyway, I agree that we all should drop this issue now. Harry has made very clear that he is not interested in any other solution than anything related to his already established procedure, and I have the feeling that this is not going to change, for whatever reasons.

[Hink]

Harry I'm not gonna lock your thread yet but I will start deleting ot nonsense posts

[IncarnateX]

you seem to be somehow validating my assumption, so maybe I was right in the first place wondering about the right way to help.

Don't you dare to use me to validate your amateur psychiatry, mate. I do not agree the least with you. Whatéver you think you can say about Harry in this thread has nothing to do with OCD from my professional perspective.

And no, if it was me I wrote about, this sentence would not apply:

So right now I am not speaking about anyone in particular but all of us.

which I apparently must have written in Danish or Russian for you to miss it.

Now you should stay away from both me and Harry with your patologizing and misguided amateur diagnosis. How dare you to express sympathy from the premise that you were right? You haven't got a clue obviously.

[Hink]

ok, now we've all had our say so let's get back on topic

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[harryupbabble]

Harry I'm not gonna lock your thread yet but I will start deleting ot nonsense posts

Hi Hink. It's up to you and you probably know what is best. But in this particular thread of mine I myself have no objection keeping everything as it is. It's good to know where people stand. And it's good to be able to read what people have said later on. I may not agree with them but it's good to have input from all sources even if negative or seemingly negative. Some seemingly negative input have info in them that could be useful later on. Okay maybe not all, but some.

I wish xoxoxs is here still (is here still?), for example, because even though his comments can be belittling at times, he had fantastic insights in his comments, sometimes, that seem to make sense later on. But I don't know, maybe you see the bigger picture as a mod, and I'm only seeing a small chunk, for sure, of the big picture, and therefore you could make better decisions about these things. But sometimes there are people that make comments that is totally against KVR rules and forces mods to send threads to HPC or whatever. It's not fair to the rest of the thread because it takes time for some people to type long responses (ask Jace, I love reading his posts, I wish I'm that good with words and expression) and all that effort goes down the drain like tears in the rain? I hope that l"tears in the rain" part doesn't make anyone vomit. Or this entire post. Hahaha. Oh, well.

But yeah, I will just have to respect whatever mods decide about these things. I mean there's really nothing to do but that? Some people may disagree and try to do something, if they feel the mod is extremely abusive of their power, but me I'm like "I don't see that." Anyways, thanks for keeping KVR civil. I'm off to continue editing my 20,000 midi files. Be back much later. "Yo, for real, yo", as Ali G. said.

[experimental.crow]

sometimes , a train going into a tunnel is just
a train going into a tunnel ...

[jancivil]

https://groovemonkee.com/pages/free-midi-loops

[LawrenceF]

Interesting … science experiment? To the OP...

The premise of your original ask is technically invalid because 20,000 midi items, if a person was to create 20,000 midi items to try to test that, wouldn't be the same as your 20,000 midi items. That is to say, I'm sure (if I was bored out of my skull) I could make 20,000 midi clips with one note each in them that would save or export faster than 20,000 4 bar or 8 bar clips with lots of notes and CC automation.

What you asked others to test would have no validity really unless they had your same 20,000 midi items. Aside from that, I'm struggling to imagine what 20,000 midi clips would even look like in a typical host.

Anywho, good luck with all of that.

[woggle]

The problem seems to start with the OP not understanding the maths behind what he is trying to achieve and this has led to a very inefficient method for working. That gets compounded by then not considering informed recommendations on how to improve workflow. And then the whole thing gets made even sillier when the OP says he is only wanting to approximate a beat as a guide for musicians to play to. I believe we may have seen similar confusion and stubborn resistance to help from the OP in other threads.

[harryupbabble]

Interesting … science experiment? To the OP...

The premise of your original ask is technically invalid because 20,000 midi items, if a person was to create 20,000 midi items to try to test that, wouldn't be the same as your 20,000 midi items. That is to say, I'm sure (if I was bored out of my skull) I could make 20,000 midi clips with one note each in them that would save or export faster than 20,000 4 bar or 8 bar clips with lots of notes and CC automation.

What you asked others to test would have no validity really unless they had your same 20,000 midi items. Aside from that, I'm struggling to imagine what 20,000 midi clips would even look like in a typical host.

Anywho, good luck with all of that.

I created mine with a macro recorder/player. Here's what I did. I launched the drum generator. With the macro recorder on, I then performed the task or actions (clicked the "randomize" button twice then the "save to midi" button). I used a text file full of numbers for the name of the files that needed saving. I then configured the macro recorder/player to repeat my actions 5,000 times at 15 times normal speed. I forget how long it took but I guess a couple of hours. I did something else while waiting for the macro recorder/player to finish the job. I probably played speed scrabble or maybe mowed the lawn, went to the grocery store, etc. I then did the same thing generating the rest of the files 3 more times on 3 different days.

I am guessing it's not that hard to create 20,000 midi items from your end. For example, just download a one-bar midi drum pattern from somewhere or maybe create your own in your DAW. Snares on beats 2 and 4. Kicks on beats 1 and 3. Two closed hi-hats per beat for 4 beats. Then do manual exponential copying. Everybody knows how to do that, right? But if not then open a folder, copy that one file into there. Press Ctrl + A. Press Ctrl + C then Ctrl + V. Repeat till you've got 20,000 midi files. If manually doing that is too long for you, have your macro recorder/player do the job.

Or I could just upload 20,000 midi files somewhere and people can download it. But I've never done that before. It could probably be done with Google Drive but I'm not sure how to do it. I can find out how to. Shall I? Or shall someone else upload the files? That way every testers uses the same files.

But before I do that, people should find out if their DAWs are capable of batch exporting midi files.

I'm thinking of making a video of me auditioning the midi drum patterns. It's time consuming to make a video but I guess if I am asking people to spend time for a test then I should spend time too.

So who is up for the test? Hey, I gots to know.

[Unaspected]

The problem seems to start with the OP not understanding the maths behind what he is trying to achieve and this has led to a very inefficient method for working. That gets compounded by then not considering informed recommendations on how to improve workflow. And then the whole thing gets made even sillier when the OP says he is only wanting to approximate a beat as a guide for musicians to play to. I believe we may have seen similar confusion and stubborn resistance to help from the OP in other threads.

This is my understanding - Whereby it seems clear that the only way to reduce the save/export time is to change the method. Hopefully some of what can be learned through logical reasoning will then be applied to the next experiment.