Hi
Firstly, I'm loving the Melda stuff. I upgraded to the Complete Bundle and it is amazing.
I'm trying to use MRhythmizer, triggering the different effects with Midi. I have this set-up in Bigwig (latest version 4) but the Bitwig Midi notes don't match the midi notes in MRhythmizer.
At first I thought it was just an octave out but it seems to get 'confused' when changing between Time, Volume and Filter - the results even change, making it unusable.
I've used midi triggering in Bitwig with other plugins and not had this problem before.
Any ideas?
MRhythmizer(MB) and Bigwig - Midi doesn't match
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 353 posts since 7 Mar, 2020
Update: After some tinkering, I hit the midi panic button and this seemed to fix the issue...? I think it's all working fine now and I understand the '1 octave out' note naming issue. Hopefully all good from now on...
CHEERS
CHEERS
-
MeldaProduction MeldaProduction https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=176122 - KVRAF
- 14019 posts since 15 Mar, 2008 from Czech republic
Hmmm, what to you mean by that exactly?
-
- KVRian
- 879 posts since 12 May, 2019
C-octave naming is not standardized across the music industry. Traditionally, the piano dictates the octave. That means the first C on the left of a piano is C1 and the one which falls between the bass and treble clefs, middle C, is C4. Bitwig, apparently, is using the middle C=C3 convention. This is also what Ableton uses. Yamaha was the first to do this.
Personally, I prefer C4 as middle C for a few reasons. First, it aligns with a piano which is a physical reference. This is in accordance with the metric system where physical properties determine derivative measures, i.e. a kilogram is based on a physical object, unlike a US pound. Secondly, it makes it so that the Zero Octave is the crossover between audible and inaudible frequencies - another physical-property based metric.
C0 is about 16.375Hz which, if played at concert volume, can be heard. Frequencies below that, which would fall in the negative octave range, such as B-1, are progressively inaudible. Since this is so, it makes more sense to use negative numbers for things like keyswitching. By contrast, C1-B1 (the First Octave) contains frequencies from 32.75-61.75Hz - musically-useful frequencies. Since we start counting with the digit "one", it therefore makes sense to label notes we use in practice with "one".
Most pianos go down to A0 (27.5Hz) and a standard-tuned five-string bass goes to B0 (30.875Hz). Hence, Zero is the crossover range between useful/audible and useless/inaudible.
Interestingly, Ableton's EQ (before version 11 or 12) used to only go down to about 32Hz. Indeed, many audio engineers will filter above this frequency to eliminate rumble (which is what 32Hz sounds like) to increase headroom and volume. Furthermore, it's not a given that audio reproduction systems will output much of this bandwidth without a subwoofer.
While we're adorning the mantle of fun facts, here's a curious article from a piano forum: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=61633.0 Unsurprisingly, some of the forum members seem unclear about what frequencies relate to specific pitches. They mention that even some pipe organs will simulate a 32-foot pipe by instead playing the first two overtones.
Granted, there are uses for infrasonic (sub-audible) frequencies: one we know very well in our trusty Low Frequency Oscillator. Another is, like the Bösendorfer, a sort of enhanced sympathetic resonance. Finally, we have infrasonic effects in movies and some music. Still, since we're talking about rates at 16Hz or less, I think we can all agree that this is a sort of 'sonic basement'. For the reason that we can consider these notes to be 'underground', I say that we should designate them as negative. Why call them 'negative two'? Seems like a, well, double-negative to me and a bit excessive. That's what the C3 naming convention does, though.
This is an old debate which can never be settled. The reason is that it is somewhat arbitrary, i.e. there is no 'fact' to agree upon. I think I give strong support for C4. As far as I know, your average non-computer musician will know middle C as C4 because of the piano reference.
Though I never fully understood why Yamaha decided to call it C3, thereby giving negative numbers to a piano's lowest notes, it does seem to appeal to some people. You can search this forum for more discussion including which DAWs support which conventions as well as why you might also use C5 as middle C.
I'd like to add that Melodyne, Reaper, and Melda all use C4. Since I consider these three softwares to be among the best, I am happy to be in good company.
At the end of the day, be happy that there's consistency within each ecosystem.
Personally, I prefer C4 as middle C for a few reasons. First, it aligns with a piano which is a physical reference. This is in accordance with the metric system where physical properties determine derivative measures, i.e. a kilogram is based on a physical object, unlike a US pound. Secondly, it makes it so that the Zero Octave is the crossover between audible and inaudible frequencies - another physical-property based metric.
C0 is about 16.375Hz which, if played at concert volume, can be heard. Frequencies below that, which would fall in the negative octave range, such as B-1, are progressively inaudible. Since this is so, it makes more sense to use negative numbers for things like keyswitching. By contrast, C1-B1 (the First Octave) contains frequencies from 32.75-61.75Hz - musically-useful frequencies. Since we start counting with the digit "one", it therefore makes sense to label notes we use in practice with "one".
Most pianos go down to A0 (27.5Hz) and a standard-tuned five-string bass goes to B0 (30.875Hz). Hence, Zero is the crossover range between useful/audible and useless/inaudible.
Interestingly, Ableton's EQ (before version 11 or 12) used to only go down to about 32Hz. Indeed, many audio engineers will filter above this frequency to eliminate rumble (which is what 32Hz sounds like) to increase headroom and volume. Furthermore, it's not a given that audio reproduction systems will output much of this bandwidth without a subwoofer.
While we're adorning the mantle of fun facts, here's a curious article from a piano forum: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=61633.0 Unsurprisingly, some of the forum members seem unclear about what frequencies relate to specific pitches. They mention that even some pipe organs will simulate a 32-foot pipe by instead playing the first two overtones.
Granted, there are uses for infrasonic (sub-audible) frequencies: one we know very well in our trusty Low Frequency Oscillator. Another is, like the Bösendorfer, a sort of enhanced sympathetic resonance. Finally, we have infrasonic effects in movies and some music. Still, since we're talking about rates at 16Hz or less, I think we can all agree that this is a sort of 'sonic basement'. For the reason that we can consider these notes to be 'underground', I say that we should designate them as negative. Why call them 'negative two'? Seems like a, well, double-negative to me and a bit excessive. That's what the C3 naming convention does, though.
This is an old debate which can never be settled. The reason is that it is somewhat arbitrary, i.e. there is no 'fact' to agree upon. I think I give strong support for C4. As far as I know, your average non-computer musician will know middle C as C4 because of the piano reference.
Though I never fully understood why Yamaha decided to call it C3, thereby giving negative numbers to a piano's lowest notes, it does seem to appeal to some people. You can search this forum for more discussion including which DAWs support which conventions as well as why you might also use C5 as middle C.
I'd like to add that Melodyne, Reaper, and Melda all use C4. Since I consider these three softwares to be among the best, I am happy to be in good company.
At the end of the day, be happy that there's consistency within each ecosystem.
Last edited by Hexspa on Tue Nov 30, 2021 6:15 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
- KVRian
- 1067 posts since 3 Jan, 2020
It would be nice if software simply let you choose which middle C you want. REAPER does, but unfortunately Bitwig and Melda don't. They probably hard-coded it in a lot of places, so it would be troublesome to add this option now, but it still sucks to constantly translate between Bitwig and Melda in my head.
-
- KVRian
- 879 posts since 12 May, 2019
I agree wholeheartedly. This is an area where Reaper had stellar foresight.Held wrote: ↑Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:31 pm It would be nice if software simply let you choose which middle C you want. REAPER does, but unfortunately Bitwig and Melda don't. They probably hard-coded it in a lot of places, so it would be troublesome to add this option now, but it still sucks to constantly translate between Bitwig and Melda in my head.
Let me reiterate, besides everyone agreeing, I think that choice is the next best option; perhaps it is even the best option. Barring that, I am content with the convention being consistent within one ecosystem.
