RapidComposer v4 beta feedback and discussion (locked)

[lovemusic15]

Is there a reason why the allow notes is set up in this way. Is it not possible to simplify it and just have it show simple icons, A, B, C sus4 etc.
It's great having new features it just would be nice if you didn't have to look to the manual Or have a steep learning curve.

I understand Rc is very complex but the name surely should be what it represents.

For instance if I want the allowed notes to be sus4 and A D E , shouldn't I just be able to press on that.

Please correct me if I'm missing a vital point of why it has to be set up like that.


RC - Bass Generator Presets 01.jpg
[/quote]

[sj1]

For instance if I want the allowed notes to be sus4 and A D E , shouldn't I just be able to press on that.

Hi. The allowed notes have to be defined in relationship to chord degrees, or scale degrees (or chord Bass note) because the chords are, in general, constantly changing. IOW, a definition in absolute notes (e.g. A, D, E) would be incorrect as soon as the chord changed.

My apologies if I have misunderstood the question or if I'm recapitulating what is already understood.

[lovemusic15]

Appreciate your feedback on this matter.

The problem I have is like most people that invest in this kind of software it usually for one or two reasons one they want something that gives them creative ideas or because they're not classically trained or know much about music theory and want the software to do all the hard work.

This is why AI technology is taking over when it comes to all of these types of software. Because people want to be able to take something they like and recreate similar patterns inside a generator. Exactly like the midi learn feature.

I understand what you're saying in your explanation but at the same time you have other software that are doing the same kind of thing but with very simple dials that do actually what you expect.

Take a look at this video and tell me why rc couldn't incorporate the same sort of dials.

https://youtu.be/Z_5E2zny_VI

I'm happy for you to correct me if I'm wrong. I know RC is great when you want to get really advanced but when you just want to do a simple thing you have to do so many extra steps.


Thanks

[sj1]

FWIW, ever since I discovered that the Captain plugins require you to be online to work with them, I've not spent anytime reviewing or even thinking about them. YMMV.

[BluGenes]

Is there a reason why the allow notes is set up in this way. Is it not possible to simplify it and just have it show simple icons, A, B, C sus4 etc.

I guess you are referring to the bass generator? Yes there is a reason for this. It is using Universal Notation so that the correct note is used. The numbers represent the position in the scale being used. So, a number #3 for example, is the third, a #5 would be the fifth, and so on.

If you would change the scale on the master track, then the note is automatically changed to the correct note.

If you didn't use universal notion, but, rather the actual note names (called absolute notes), then it can't make the change, because you just told it to use just those specific notes.

This whole process is the concept behind RC and is used everywhere in the software. It means understanding the concept of "relative" vs. "absolute". When it's relative, you can change key and scale and get the correct results. Absolute, you won't, unless you know the correct key for the next note in that scale (based on modes).

[lovemusic15]

I appreciate both of you giving me feedback,

You've raised a great point there which I have consistently said many times before, rapidcomposer should be taking advantage of the fact that it doesn't need internet connection and therefore should be as simple to use as captain software along with the option of going deeper for advanced users. I'm sure rapidcomposer would be as popular if not more popular if it was simplified and we concentrated more on suggesting things that will make this software more popular to the masses rather than just for people that sit in this forum.

I've been using this software for over 4 years and in that time I must have seen the same 10 to 15 people talk about it.

Which as a consumer is really sad to see because I don't know any software developer that puts this amount of work into he's software as Attila without gaining real popularity or financial rewards.

The thing with RC is it only needs a couple of tweaks to really make this appeal to a wider audience.

The main thing you need is midi learn function in each generator,/modern rhythms in each generator /simplify some of the settings and put the majority of variations inside the generator to simplify it.

Surely we can all agree that the more people that buy into RC the more videos will appeal online which is beneficial for everyone because as we all know every user brings something new to the table when it comes to workflow and creative ideas.

You said you stopped looking into captain chords because of the internet connection how many people do you think have stop looking at RC because it looks too complicated.

I really hope we can all come together as a community and make RC work in the way people need it too.

[lulukom]

Yes, I agree a lot with the previous post. And on my own I will add ..I would like to say that all the improvements to the generators mostly make sense for the fairly advanced users. Rather, those who spent a lot of time on their development. Tell me how a new user, who has a project for a new composition in his head, can open the program and immediately do: funky bass, house or piano ballads, trap chords, disco drums, etc.? There is only one answer: A sufficient number of generator presets, as for any other music creation software on the market. Can you imagine a synthesizer sold without presets? Without presets as examples to get started with tuning generators, you can tweak them for hours without getting the desired result.

[lovemusic15]

To answer your question lulukom.

This is something that I've been trying to get implemented from the very beginning when I first saw RC I thought it already had this feature, that was one of the main reasons I invested in it.

The solution is quite simple.

If you look at music software like melody sauce or chord wizard/ captain chords they all tell you in there adverts they spent years analyzing famous melodies and chord progressions and entered them into there software, so once you hit generate you're always gonna get something that sounds good or familiar.

So what I'm suggesting is simple and effective

At the moment we have midi learn that analyses One file and then give you variations but imagine if it could analyze more than one file say for instance 10, you would get 10 of your favorite melodies basslines Leeds etc in whatever genre you like and then put them into RC generator, that would analyze them and create new phrases by combination parts from the imported midi.

This idea has already been done by a software called magenta where you import two midi files and it combines both to give you a new Melody

Once you're happy with your generators just save them as Presets.

Think of all the potential customers that are searching online watching tutorials on how to make trap or house music, spending hours when all they really need to do is get hold of MIDI files they like and import them into a generator.

I have so many more suggestions but this is a simplified version.

Working with RC should be like baking a cake you supply the ingredients RC does the cooking.

Now there's no other software out there that's doing what am suggesting. But I know I would rather buy software that can do what I need in seconds rather then spend months or hours of research or playing around with midi files.

[lulukom]

I fully support your view on the development of the program, lovemusic15. I want the same . I would like to play my own midi files and instruct the generators to suggest new variations to me, but based on my own ideas. We can create presets ourselves. I thought about ready-made presets in the sense that it is pointless to move the sliders without being sure what the result will be. If you can use ready-made presets in the synthesizer, then in a program that creates music, other people's ideas are only harmful)).

[lovemusic15]

Hi lulukom,

Really appreciate your support and I completely understand what you're saying about the preset thing feel free to drop me a direct message, I'm happy to brainstorm over some ideas or I have quite a few workarounds with RC that I could show you if you're trying to achieve a certain goal with RC but I definitely think this is something that RC should focus on as it's definitely the future, check out this website I just discovered, before you know it everybody is going to bey using AI to generate music.

Of course if there's anyone else in this forum that doesn't agree with this idea feel free to put your concerns forward as I said before it's about us coming together as a community.

https://www.aimusic.co.uk/?gclid=CjwKCA ... vgQAvD_BwE

[Mykyndryd_]

^^ +1 from me.
I'd love to be able to import a multi track midi file and then generate a new one based on the feel and style of the supplied file.
I see this metaphorically as moving the sliders and dials electronically from the parameters learnt and RC doing the heavy lifting by matching the 'tweak' values to, similar to, what has been supplied.
Tonica Fugata does this to some extent (with limited genre) by 'learning' from a bunch of files. You still have to know what you're doing because, for example, you wanted a holiday season song like Silent Night, you wouldn't use "Slade's Merry Xmas Everybody" as the 'seed' if that makes sense, but as already been stated above, get RC to make musical suggestions based on what you have fed into it. Alternatively, a button with "Write me a killer original hit" would be useful

[lulukom]

Yes, it's certainly fun, about the button for writing a hit))) But when we talk about the prospects for the development of the program, it seems to me that it is always necessary to give specific examples of what we would like to see in new updates. As an example, I can immediately say that I use a lot of effort and tricks to get the harmonic progression I need, there is a lot of manual labor in this work. And so far I would not even want to describe this process, because there are many spontaneous, momentary and intuitive actions in it. For example, I really miss a two-handed presentation of harmony, even if on two tracks (namely harmony, and not keeping the bass line with my left hand). We have already talked about additional master tracks, but so far this is apparently not a development priority. However, the program already has a lot of potential, for example, in terms of rhythms, grooves and quantization, Attila solved these problems superbly and so far I have nothing to add. And yes, of course we look forward to the phrase controllers. Of course, as Mykyndryd suggests, analyzing a multitrack midi file sounds fantastic to me so far, but perhaps it is the midi training of generators and, perhaps, even variations, for creating and saving your own algorithms based on midi files that is the main prospect for the development of the program. Sorry for my English.

[InLight-Tone]

Appreciate your feedback on this matter.

The problem I have is like most people that invest in this kind of software it usually for one or two reasons one they want something that gives them creative ideas or because they're not classically trained or know much about music theory and want the software to do all the hard work.

IMO, if you aren't well versed in Music Theory, Harmony & Composition, you won't get very far with RC. There really aren't any shortcuts to hard work. RC is a wonderful tool if you have the knowledge and skills. If you want the easy way out, then use something like Orb or Captain. Then again, instant gratification is like junk food, tasty but not satisfying nutritionally for your long term health...

[lovemusic15]

IMO, if you aren't well versed in Music Theory, Harmony & Composition, you won't get very far with RC. There really aren't any shortcuts to hard work. RC is a wonderful tool if you have the knowledge and skills. If you want the easy way out, then use something like Orb or Captain. Then again, instant gratification is like junk food, tasty but not satisfying nutritionally for your long term health...
[/quote]


I say this with the greatest respect, you've really got to step into the 21st century.



To sum up your last comment it's a bit like saying



Why drive or take public transport to work when you can walk and have the satisfaction of knowing you used your own legs lol

People used to say producers that make hip hop music are not really producers because they sample other people's music but the last time I checked hip hop music was the biggest selling genre in the world . If you do your research your realise that some of the biggest producers in the world have no idea about music theory and rely on software.

Music is about expression whatever tools you need to help you express yourself you should use them regardless if software gives you inspiration or makes the whole song for you either way you still have to use your own creative mind to find the right sounds and to know whether and melody or baseline is good enough .

I guarantee if both of us used RC with the same generators we're still end up making some think completely different from each other.

The reason why I choose not to use captain chords and the reasons I am suggesting fixing up RC is because the results from both softwares are just generic that's why if you have the option to import your own MIDI into a generator then you're still being creative because you're picking the midi files that you want to be part of that generator.

Definitely appreciate your comment, it did make me laugh.

[lovemusic15]

Really appreciate your support on this idea Mike,

I'm going to make a demonstration video showing all the parts that I think needs to be tweet in RC to work the way it needs to just so everyone will get a better idea.