USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
ken
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

ken
I have installed jOrgan 3.16b with the English Cathedral disposition 1.04--4 keyboards & pedal. I currently have 2 Yamaha YPT220 keyboards. I have one connected to the midiport on soundcard emu1212 to the great, the other thru USB uno to the solo. I can get the keyboards to play together and individually for awhile, but quickly the solo starts to disappear or get very erratic, and the great also starts to die. The broken-up sound was identical on the monitor keyboard for the Solo. I don't seem to be able to designate the channel for the solo--it occupies #1 with the great--the program won't recognize the keyboard on channel 2, 3, or 4. This must be causing a conflict with polyphony?! After playing around for awhile, I noticed the solo had an invalid velocity error of 81--and the program erased the solo keyboard on the monitor. I reinstalled the disposition, but the conflict is starting up again. I have the latest beta version of jOrgan. Sound to 100watt 5.1Onyko receiver and HiFI system is connected to output of emu1212. 1) will the two separate inputs automatically cause a conflict--that is, one usb, the other thru the soundcard? 2) what is the proper channel assignment for a 4m+pedal organ, or EC 1.04? 3) do I need all USB or all midiport/soundcard inputs? 4) I notice that this emu1212 soundcard is not on the "working list" in the jOrgan install PDF. Am I going to have to acquire another soundcard? This is a double card (one plugged in, the harnessed to it) 5) which soundcard is the most available and affordable? 6) do I have to disable the Dell native soundcard? Computer is Inspiron 530 with 6G RAM dual processor. 7) I will shortly have a pedal and 2 more keyboards. I need to know which direction to go before I get into a bigger mess. I would appreciate any help I can get with these problems. Ken
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

John Reimer
Administrator
Ken,

It strikes me that your post may belong on the main jOrgan Forum, and not this "Sound" one, as I don't think that your problems are related to the particular disposition you are using. Also, although Sven set up this Sound Forum to keep soundfont and specific disposition posts separate from more general jOrgan discussions, it does seem that it is being ignored by a number of people, as a number of posts have appeared on the main forum which properly belong here. Therefore, your problems may be overlooked if you do not post about them on the main forum.

I can't help you with your soundcard questions, but one of your problems may reside in the MIDI to USB cable which you are presumably using with one of your Yamaha keyboards. Some cheap cables have been found to produce problems, ESPECIALLY with Yamaha keyboards (I have read). I would suggest that you check what messages it is sending, using the jOrgan monitor, or using MIDI-Ox.

John Reimer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

grahamg
If you are using Ubuntu/Debian Linux with fluidsynth 1.1.5 then there
is a bug in the polyphony settings that would cause behavior like
this. There has been a fix issued but the DEB installer is not in the
Ubuntu repositories.

If you are on Windows, then it may still be a polyphony/soundcard
configuration issue, particularly as you state "The broken-up sound
was identical on the monitor keyboard for the Solo."

1) No. There are two discrete MIDI inputs, so IF they are configured
as two separate inputs in jOrgan then there will be no conflict.
However, IF you are using the MIDI-Merge function in jOrgan with both
devices, then they will be 'in conflict', BUT the behavior would be
that both keyboards would be playing the same division.
I don't think that this is your problem.

2) There are no 'proper channel assignments'. Use the jOrgan Customize
wizard to configure the disposition to your system. (If you need more
help with this just let us know)

3) No. If your soundcard MIDI port is working correctly then it is
fine to use, same goes for USB-MIDI cables. These are operating system
device connections and make no difference to jOrgan so long as they
are configured correctly.

4) Hundreds of soundcards are not on the 'list'. The list is simply
those soundcards that users have reported as working. Your emu1212
should work very well once you learn how to configure the fluidsynth
element properties in jOrgan.

5) Use what you have. Let us know what operating system you are using
and we'll guide you as how best to configure things to get better
performance

6) No, you don't have to, but if you are not using it for anything
then it is wasting CPU resources and should be disabled.

7) It depends... If you have multiple pure MIDI inputs then it is a
good idea to get a hardware MIDI merger like the MIDISPORT 4x4 -
4-In/4-Out USB Bus-Powered MIDI Interface. I run three (different
brands) USB-MIDI cables.

Kind regards,
GrahamG

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk
ken
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

ken

Hi Graham: Thanks so much for your reply.
Forgot to mention using Windows Vista 64bit, 6G RAM, dual processor.
Using the wizard has not helped this situation. Well, first
two problems. 1) Bad sound/polyphony, even on 1
keyboard( gt on Midi port connection).
2) The keyboard on USB is not recognized by
jOrgan if I assign it a different channel.  Even tried
reversing channels, no luck.
   The sounds on the English Organ and American Classic
Skinner 104 are wonderful, but they don't add up.
The more stops I put on, the weaker the ensemble becomes.
At one point, the festival trumpet on Solo, by itself, turned
into a harspsicord, or didn't play at all--big sound just disappeared
as I played it.

  I downloaded the free edition of Hauptwerk, and
have polyphony problems with it also, although I
was able to connect the keyboards easier and didn't have delay issues.
Used the St Ann's Mosely and also the Paramount Theater organ --
with the same result.
  A couple of weeks ago when I first started to experiment, I
was using the American Classic Skinner 104. The Yamaha
keyboard input had a 1/4 second delay, and was adding extra
afternotes--almost impossible to play. The jOrgan keyboard didn't
show this problem. This delay has disappeared,
 but polyphony problems became more obvious with the English organ.
I think I will try to reinstall the Skinner 104 and see if it still has delays.
I can't say for sure if the latest jOrgan beta version has cleared up
the delays, but we'll see. 
  I guess this sounds rather confusing, and I getting so many versions
of this and that on my system, I going to have to clean house pretty
soon. I expecting a midi-merge in the mail put together by a
retired engineer, John Kinkennon in Vancouver, WA. He has a
website up on the web, and has converted a number of organs.
I don't know if this will help. I just don't understand why
the polyphony goes to pot. On Hauptwerk there is a built-in
polyphony, gain, and memory meters. None of them seem
to be taxed--in fact they hardly register--but that Mosely organ
is small--10-12 ranks per manual.
  What a worldwide enterprise this is! I'm getting help from you in
South Africa, and John is in Washington state. Also have a
friend in SW Colorado--he's in a smoke cloud these days. I'm on the east coast
in USA, New Jersey. Near a lot of great organs, including the
Wanamaker, Girard College, Riverside Church, St. John the Divine,
St. Thomas, NYC, St. Mary's NYC, St. Bart's NYC, St. Patrick's NYC, Sacred Heart,
Newark, NY, and Yale University--All fabulous Skinners except
SH Newark and the Wanamaker. Do you know about these
instruments? Would be glad to send you some clips.
  Any noodling on this issue is greatly appreciated--it's either very
complex, or very simple, overlooked item.
Sorry for the long-winded email.
All the best, Ken Barta








On 6/18/2012 3:11 AM, grahamg [via jOrgan] wrote:
If you are using Ubuntu/Debian Linux with fluidsynth 1.1.5 then there
is a bug in the polyphony settings that would cause behavior like
this. There has been a fix issued but the DEB installer is not in the
Ubuntu repositories.

If you are on Windows, then it may still be a polyphony/soundcard
configuration issue, particularly as you state "The broken-up sound
was identical on the monitor keyboard for the Solo."

1) No. There are two discrete MIDI inputs, so IF they are configured
as two separate inputs in jOrgan then there will be no conflict.
However, IF you are using the MIDI-Merge function in jOrgan with both
devices, then they will be 'in conflict', BUT the behavior would be
that both keyboards would be playing the same division.
I don't think that this is your problem.

2) There are no 'proper channel assignments'. Use the jOrgan Customize
wizard to configure the disposition to your system. (If you need more
help with this just let us know)

3) No. If your soundcard MIDI port is working correctly then it is
fine to use, same goes for USB-MIDI cables. These are operating system
device connections and make no difference to jOrgan so long as they
are configured correctly.

4) Hundreds of soundcards are not on the 'list'. The list is simply
those soundcards that users have reported as working. Your emu1212
should work very well once you learn how to configure the fluidsynth
element properties in jOrgan.

5) Use what you have. Let us know what operating system you are using
and we'll guide you as how best to configure things to get better
performance

6) No, you don't have to, but if you are not using it for anything
then it is wasting CPU resources and should be disabled.

7) It depends... If you have multiple pure MIDI inputs then it is a
good idea to get a hardware MIDI merger like the MIDISPORT 4x4 -
4-In/4-Out USB Bus-Powered MIDI Interface. I run three (different
brands) USB-MIDI cables.

Kind regards,
GrahamG

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://jorgan.999862.n4.nabble.com/USB-midiport-keyboard-install-conflict-tp4655230p4655233.html
To unsubscribe from USB/midiport keyboard install conflict, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: USB/midiport keyboard install conflict

grahamg
Hi Ken,

For your system I would recommend that you use a different audio
driver. The version of fluidsynth that comes with jOrgan's Window's
installer only has the default dsound driver interface, which is prone
to high latency and the problems that you are experiencing.

Go to the Fluidsynth with PortAudio WDM/KS section of
https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/jorgan/index.php?title=Instructions_on_using_the_PortAudio_driver_in_the_Fluidsynth_Extension
and download the fluidsynth-1.1.4-wdmks.zip, and follow the
instructions on how to install and configure jOrgan's Fluidsynth
element to use it. If you need more help with getting it working just
send me a personal email and I will sorted.

Once you have the WDM/KS driver working then we can increase the
Polyphony settings of the Fluidsynth element, and that will improve
your experience with the ACO and full Tutti.

Kind regards,
GrahamG

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Tuning of samples

David Gritter
In reply to this post by grahamg
I have been making GIG files from the Burea and Pitea wav files that are
created when installing the Grand Organ version.  I decided to re-tune
the Burea samples so they could be combined with other samples at 440
pitch, and in the process I checked the tuning of Pitea stops as well.  
I found the following had been done to these samples:

Celeste ranks were purposefully tuned so that they did not beat with
their associated rank

Tierces, etc were tuned exactly on equal temperament pitches rather than
an exact 5th harmonic of the 8' stops.

I think some of you were involved in managing the Pitea and I was
wondering if this was done explicitly for Grand organ?  Is there some
mechanism in GrandOrgan that corrects the pitches again when played?  
What about for Jorgan.   I am assuming one would normally want the GIG
or SF2 file to be properly tuned so Jorgan doesn't need to provide
corrections, or is the standard means to leave them as I found them tuned?

Dave Gritter
Milwaukee, WI, USA




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

grahamg
Hi David,

I was involved with both the Burea and Pitea,but not in the final
tuning of alll the samples.

When it comes to tuning samples there are two schools of thought -

a) leave all the samples in their original state and then use the
sampler to correct them
b) re-tune all the samples to equal-temperament /  concert pitch and
then use the sampler to adjust that to a non-equal temperament and/or
non concert pitch tuning if required.

I believe in both the Burea and Pitea sample sets the samples have
been tuned to equal-temperament / concert pitch (or close enough).

Yes, GrandOrgue can re-pitch ranks/notes, and in the Pitea release I
know that Lars used this feature for some of the ranks.

jOrgan does not make sounds - so I'm assuming that you're asking
whether Fluidsynth can also 'correct the pitch' - and the answer is
that the Soundfont itself will contain pitch corrections if they have
been programmed in.

One big question: How are you determining what the samples are tuned
to? Are you playing the samples through a tuning application or
reading the wave header hz value? If you are using the wave header hz
value then you are not getting the true pitch of the actual sample but
the pitch that GrandOrgue/Hauptwerk will use to filter and transpose
the note from.

Kind regards,
GrahamG

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

David Gritter
Thanks for the information.  This all appears to make sense. So if the
samples are tuned in the SF2 for fluidsynth, it makes sense for me to do
the same thing in the GIG file.

I did indeed run the samples out a sound card from the gigastudio editor
into a tuner.  One of my major objections to windows is there's no way
to route sound from one application such as the editor to another
application like a windows based tuner.   Such a simple thing to do in
linux.


On 07/11/2012 12:52 AM, Graham Goode wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> I was involved with both the Burea and Pitea,but not in the final
> tuning of alll the samples.
>
> When it comes to tuning samples there are two schools of thought -
>
> a) leave all the samples in their original state and then use the
> sampler to correct them
> b) re-tune all the samples to equal-temperament /  concert pitch and
> then use the sampler to adjust that to a non-equal temperament and/or
> non concert pitch tuning if required.
>
> I believe in both the Burea and Pitea sample sets the samples have
> been tuned to equal-temperament / concert pitch (or close enough).
>
> Yes, GrandOrgue can re-pitch ranks/notes, and in the Pitea release I
> know that Lars used this feature for some of the ranks.
>
> jOrgan does not make sounds - so I'm assuming that you're asking
> whether Fluidsynth can also 'correct the pitch' - and the answer is
> that the Soundfont itself will contain pitch corrections if they have
> been programmed in.
>
> One big question: How are you determining what the samples are tuned
> to? Are you playing the samples through a tuning application or
> reading the wave header hz value? If you are using the wave header hz
> value then you are not getting the true pitch of the actual sample but
> the pitch that GrandOrgue/Hauptwerk will use to filter and transpose
> the note from.
>
> Kind regards,
> GrahamG
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> jorgan-sound mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

John Reimer
Administrator
David Gritter wrote
One of my major objections to windows is there's no way
to route sound from one application such as the editor to another
application like a windows based tuner.   Such a simple thing to do in
linux.
 
David,
I am having no trouble under Windows 7 in measuring the pitch of files opened with Audacity, using AP Tuner. Currently I find I have to feed the audio output from my laptop into the microphone input (no line input provided). AP Tuner gives a screenshot over time, and even allows the pitch of individual harmonics to be measured. From memory, I think it gives me accuracy to plus or minus 0.2 cents. It is not a free program, and some would even call it overpriced, but I couldn't do without it when measuring the pitch of recorded sounds, which tend to wobble around a bit, and so the time-related screenshot is invaluable in this situation.

John Reimer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

grahamg
In reply to this post by David Gritter
Hi David,

Jack for Windows can be used to create a software connection between
to ASIO capable audio applications.

But certainly not as simple as life in Linux ;)

Kind regards,
GrahamG

On 7/12/12, David Gritter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for the information.  This all appears to make sense. So if the
> samples are tuned in the SF2 for fluidsynth, it makes sense for me to do
> the same thing in the GIG file.
>
> I did indeed run the samples out a sound card from the gigastudio editor
> into a tuner.  One of my major objections to windows is there's no way
> to route sound from one application such as the editor to another
> application like a windows based tuner.   Such a simple thing to do in
> linux.
>
>
> On 07/11/2012 12:52 AM, Graham Goode wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> I was involved with both the Burea and Pitea,but not in the final
>> tuning of alll the samples.
>>
>> When it comes to tuning samples there are two schools of thought -
>>
>> a) leave all the samples in their original state and then use the
>> sampler to correct them
>> b) re-tune all the samples to equal-temperament /  concert pitch and
>> then use the sampler to adjust that to a non-equal temperament and/or
>> non concert pitch tuning if required.
>>
>> I believe in both the Burea and Pitea sample sets the samples have
>> been tuned to equal-temperament / concert pitch (or close enough).
>>
>> Yes, GrandOrgue can re-pitch ranks/notes, and in the Pitea release I
>> know that Lars used this feature for some of the ranks.
>>
>> jOrgan does not make sounds - so I'm assuming that you're asking
>> whether Fluidsynth can also 'correct the pitch' - and the answer is
>> that the Soundfont itself will contain pitch corrections if they have
>> been programmed in.
>>
>> One big question: How are you determining what the samples are tuned
>> to? Are you playing the samples through a tuning application or
>> reading the wave header hz value? If you are using the wave header hz
>> value then you are not getting the true pitch of the actual sample but
>> the pitch that GrandOrgue/Hauptwerk will use to filter and transpose
>> the note from.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> GrahamG
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> jorgan-sound mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> jorgan-sound mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

DellAnderson
In reply to this post by John Reimer
Hi John,

There is a way to do this on Windows without the line out - line in
kludge -- someone recently told me how but I cannot remember the
specific details.   If memory serves, it is in the area where you set
sound card (I am not currently on a Windows 7 machine so unfortunately
cannot give you the details).   It MAY be sound card dependent (this
person was using an AlienWare Dell Laptop) but the settings section of
Windows, not the sound card driver proper IIRC.

It's not easy to find, but DOES work (has been tested).  If you have not
found by Monday I will ask and find the answer for you (I am leaving for
the weekend).

We certainly do not want your fine work ruined by an analog passage
through line out/line in!!

best,

Dell

On 7/11/2012 11:32 PM, John Reimer wrote:
> Currently I find I have to feed the
> audio output from my laptop into the microphone input (no line input
> provided).



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

John Reimer
Administrator
DellAnderson wrote
There is a way to do this on Windows without the line out - line in
kludge
Thank you, Dell, I would be interested to hear what you can find out. However, my method of using an audio lead between the laptop headphones out and microphone in applies only to the actual measuring of pitch, and has no influence on the quality of the samples as such.

JohnR
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

DellAnderson
OK, I asked how to do a virtual audio patch in Windows 7.   This is by their memory not actually in front of a computer, so please understand if a step is missing:

Windows 7 -- record playback (virtual connection setup):

CONTROL PANEL --> SOUND icon ---> RECORDING tab --> right click "SET AS DEFAULT"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

DellAnderson
Sorry, I missed a step.   Please revise my post to say:

How to do a virtual audio patch in Windows 7.   This is by their memory not actually in front of a computer, so please understand if a step is missing:

Windows 7 -- record playback (virtual connection setup):

CONTROL PANEL --> SOUND icon ---> RECORDING tab --> right click REC PLAYBACK --> choose "SET AS DEFAULT"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

John Reimer
Administrator
Hi Dell,

It works nicely.
Thank you very much.

In my case under "Recording" I am offered either "Microphone" or "Stereo Mix", and after right-clicking on the latter, I choose "Set as default" as you have advised.

JohnR
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tuning of samples

DellAnderson
Hi John,

Terrific!  Glad it worked for you.   I suspect the variation has to do with variation of OS (Win 7 Professional is what we use here), sound card make, model, and driver.

best,

Dell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

engineering data for voicing an organ

David Gritter
In reply to this post by David Gritter
I am trying to refine the voicing of my organ based on quantitative
data.   Does anyone know of any studies, books, papers, that quantify
the expected sound pressure levels of organ ranks, either in absolute
levels or relative to other ranks of the same organ?   Specifically I am
interested in establishing the correct sound pressure relationships
between, say, the 8',4', 2' and mixture stops as a beginning.  
According to Audsley, these should be in appropriate relationship to
each other so that individual frequency components decrease with
increasing frequency, but he provides no numeric data.   On the other
hand, several sampled organs I have listened to have the 4' principal at
higher sound pressure levels than the 8', and many baroque style organs
appear to carry this forward to the 2' and mixture as well.  I would
expect that different schools of organ building would have different
philosophies about this, but no one I've found from any school of
thought has quantified their philosophy.

If such data does not exist, does anyone have any ideas about how to
create such data?  My thinking has been to pick a particular note (say
middle C) of the great (or hauptwerk, hoofdwerk, or equivalent)  manual
8' diapason or principal as a reference level.  Then I would
characterize this and each other rank by their relative sound pressure
level to this note over the range of the keyboard (to see how sound
level varies with pitch) and to establish curves for each stop relative
to the chosen reference level.  My inclination is to use dry samples and
an RMS value of amplitude (equivalent to Z weighted sound level) for
sampled or synthesized organs and a Z weighted sound meter averaged from
several locations or continuous movement of the meter large enough to
reject standing wave phenomena when making measurements of a real pipe
organ.

Any thoughts or comments?

Dave Gritter
Milwaukee WI USA

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM
Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly
what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app
Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: engineering data for voicing an organ

grahamg
Hi David,

What you are referring to is typically called 'voicing' and in pipe
organ companies this function requires special training in listening
and adjusting the pipes. It is also a rather individual skill, so one
can sometimes listen to an organ built by a particular company and
know who the voicer was (for instance the Casavant company has a
'Phelps' period where Phelps was the main voicer and the tonality of
the organs built during that time period are distinct from those built
before and after).

Voicing is an art form. The same pipes would be voiced differently in
a different room due to the acoustical differences encountered.

All of that being said, there are things that have been written that
will help you.

See:
http://www.pykett.org.uk/digitalaidstovoicing.htm

Then there is a post on the Hauptwerk Forum by jcrowley:
----------------------------
Hi,

Just to put my "2 cents" into your post. . .and regarding something
very ephemeral and subjective.

The organ voicer uses manipulations to the physical pipe against the
most important stop of the whole organ; the room that it resides in.
It is their job to make each pipe sound free, natural, and to optimize
the tonal egress so that it sounds comfortable, while paying attention
to attack noises, the sustaining portion and then finally the release.

Working with Hauptwerk is very similar only the main voicing has
already been completed by the organ builder and voicer. The sample set
creator has intimate knowledge of the instrument so they can voice the
sound files similarly by noting how the original sound felt in the
room and through a good headset you should be able to experience their
efforts.

Voicing for your particular location is performed in the same manner
because you will use your "room" to judge the quality and cohesiveness
of the sound samples so that they "open-up" for your acoustic setting.

Your main goal when adjusting the voicing for your room is to check
for harmonic differences between adjoining notes; they shouldn't be
too different, then also check for volume consistencies. You should be
able to play something contrapuntal such as a Bach fugue or trio
sonata on a single stop and be able to hear all of the voices clearly
not only horizontally but vertically as well.

Each stop is regulated by the voicer of the organ from within itself,
then with other pitches, then with other stops of the same pitch. As
you add the layers of stops if you can clearly hear all ascending
notes. Descending is usually not an issue. No single note should stand
out.

When you begin start with the Great - Principal 8', starting at middle
"c" adjust the first tone so that it feels "natural" in your
environment. Then proceed chromatically upward. After you have
competed a cluster of notes check each one against the others
chromatically then diatonically. Once you've competed an octave, play
all types of chords, no note should stand out in any chord and should
sound "as one", the while playing the chords hold the bottom and top
notes down while iterating the middle note. You should hear its
entrance and exit but it should not stand out. Then hold the top two
notes and iterate the lowest note of the chord, then hold the bottom
two notes and iterate the top note.

Each time you play the third note it you should be able to hear its
entrance and exit from the chord and when all three notes are played
it should sound as if it is really one note. Then when you get several
octaves completed, run scales ascending and descending, again no note
should stand out, you may have to adjust the harmonics or volume. Each
rank has its own shape and depending upon the room and acoustical
environment dictates whether the bottom portion of the rank is voiced
a little lighter, or the top end similarly this all depends upon
absorption, diffusion, reflection of the surfaces (among other aspects
as well).

Next add the Octave 4' and voice that just so you can hear it relate
to the Principal 8' and that when both are drawn together it sounds as
one stop. Voice the Octave from within itself and as it relates to the
Principal 8'. Refer to the original disposition via headphones to see
how they work together. As you progress remember that everything must
relate to the Great Principal 8'. When voicing the other 8' stops use
the Octave 4' as a comparison, then back again to the Principal. When
both 8' stops are drawn you should note the texture changes and should
be able to discern the entrance and exit of the stop being drawn but
neither should stand out.

This is a mighty task but well worth the effort.

So that said, even with a romantic disposition your goal is to be able
to clearly hear all pitches against the rank itself and when playing
contrapuntal music you can hear all the parts clearly.

When you have completed the Great Organ, move on to the other
divisions. Each stop of the other divisions still have to relate to
the Great Principal as well as the division they reside in. In general
with a Tutti on the Positiv played against the Great Tutti, you should
be able to distinctly hear individual notes and lines with each
manual. As you add stops in succession they should only be a tad bit
noticeable with few exceptions. When toggling the Positiv to Great
coupler with Tutti's on both manuals you should hear the distinct
"crown" of the Positiv
in addition to the strength and bravura of the Great.

The Swell Organ as my old college organ buddy once said. . ."should
sound like a caged lion". It adds depth and a "gutsy-ness" and should
in American Instruments anyway, be nearly as strong volume-wise as the
Great Organ. Overall the bottom end with full Tutti shouldn't sound
"muddy".

The American Choir is sadly the weakling and for the most part it will
add more colour to the full ensemble but not much in strength. There
are as always, exceptions to this rule. The American Choir relates
more to the Swell than to the Great but in any instance you still
should be able to hear individual stops and other combinations with
either the Great or Swell.

So you see, it all relates back to the room. If you have noticed a
disposition from a Classic French instrument, you will see how
remarkably the Pedal division supports the entire massive manual-werks
with only a smattering of stops, because the Pedal division is the
hardest to regulate because it must too relate to all other stops and
combinations of stops but the organ builder has taken this into
consideration especially with resonant and reverberant rooms. The
French Pedal generally only has a Soubasse 16', Flute 8', Cor d'Nuit
4' and then the heavy reeds, because the room supports the lower
registers well and the voicing doesn't have to be aggressive or overly
loud. The Soubasse must relate to even the softest of stops and yet
hold it's own with the full plenums on the manuals.

Years ago when the Sipe organ at Luther College was installed (1977),
organ aficionados were aghast that the pedal contained the following
stops; Principal 16', Octave 8', Choralbaß 4', Hohlpjip 2', Mixture V
(2 2/3'), Contra Fagott 32', Posaune 16', Trompette 8', Clarion 4'. No
Flute or Subbaß 16', 8'. But I have never played on any other
instrument especially in an American venue where this worked
perfectly. The room is very resonant and was designed around the
organ, not the other way 'round as is customary here in America. The
Principal 16' worked with even the softest stop and stop combinations,
and it really was outstanding with the Tutti and other louder
combinations. If you needed an even softer 16' we would use the Great
- Bourdon 16' and couple that to the pedal.

Well, I digress. . . I hope this post was of some help to you!

All my best,

Jeffery
------------------------------------------

Hope that helps!

GrahamG

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM
Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly
what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app
Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Graham Goode
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
VPOs with jOrgan, LinuxSampler, Fluidsynth, SFZ, GrandOrgue, NI Kontakt, and Hauptwerk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: engineering data for voicing an organ

David Gritter
Thanks for these references.  In particular the book "Baroque tricks"
referenced by Mr. Pykett
looks interesting.   While my ultimate interest is in voicing, as you
say, my more immediate concern is to develop a quantitative feel for the
typical sound levels of different stops as they are expressed by
different voicing or design philosophies.   Mr. Beach replied to me
separately, for example, with relative sound levels that Audsley
expected, but a quick look at some of the available jOrgan dispositions
in a dry environment indicate a significant deviation (probably for good
reason) from those numbers.

On 10/16/2012 01:57 AM, Graham Goode wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> What you are referring to is typically called 'voicing' and in pipe
> organ companies this function requires special training in listening
> and adjusting the pipes. It is also a rather individual skill, so one
> can sometimes listen to an organ built by a particular company and
> know who the voicer was (for instance the Casavant company has a
> 'Phelps' period where Phelps was the main voicer and the tonality of
> the organs built during that time period are distinct from those built
> before and after).
>
> Voicing is an art form. The same pipes would be voiced differently in
> a different room due to the acoustical differences encountered.
>
> All of that being said, there are things that have been written that
> will help you.
>
> See:
> http://www.pykett.org.uk/digitalaidstovoicing.htm
>
> Then there is a post on the Hauptwerk Forum by jcrowley:
> ----------------------------
> Hi,
>
> Just to put my "2 cents" into your post. . .and regarding something
> very ephemeral and subjective.
>
> The organ voicer uses manipulations to the physical pipe against the
> most important stop of the whole organ; the room that it resides in.
> It is their job to make each pipe sound free, natural, and to optimize
> the tonal egress so that it sounds comfortable, while paying attention
> to attack noises, the sustaining portion and then finally the release.
>
> Working with Hauptwerk is very similar only the main voicing has
> already been completed by the organ builder and voicer. The sample set
> creator has intimate knowledge of the instrument so they can voice the
> sound files similarly by noting how the original sound felt in the
> room and through a good headset you should be able to experience their
> efforts.
>
> Voicing for your particular location is performed in the same manner
> because you will use your "room" to judge the quality and cohesiveness
> of the sound samples so that they "open-up" for your acoustic setting.
>
> Your main goal when adjusting the voicing for your room is to check
> for harmonic differences between adjoining notes; they shouldn't be
> too different, then also check for volume consistencies. You should be
> able to play something contrapuntal such as a Bach fugue or trio
> sonata on a single stop and be able to hear all of the voices clearly
> not only horizontally but vertically as well.
>
> Each stop is regulated by the voicer of the organ from within itself,
> then with other pitches, then with other stops of the same pitch. As
> you add the layers of stops if you can clearly hear all ascending
> notes. Descending is usually not an issue. No single note should stand
> out.
>
> When you begin start with the Great - Principal 8', starting at middle
> "c" adjust the first tone so that it feels "natural" in your
> environment. Then proceed chromatically upward. After you have
> competed a cluster of notes check each one against the others
> chromatically then diatonically. Once you've competed an octave, play
> all types of chords, no note should stand out in any chord and should
> sound "as one", the while playing the chords hold the bottom and top
> notes down while iterating the middle note. You should hear its
> entrance and exit but it should not stand out. Then hold the top two
> notes and iterate the lowest note of the chord, then hold the bottom
> two notes and iterate the top note.
>
> Each time you play the third note it you should be able to hear its
> entrance and exit from the chord and when all three notes are played
> it should sound as if it is really one note. Then when you get several
> octaves completed, run scales ascending and descending, again no note
> should stand out, you may have to adjust the harmonics or volume. Each
> rank has its own shape and depending upon the room and acoustical
> environment dictates whether the bottom portion of the rank is voiced
> a little lighter, or the top end similarly this all depends upon
> absorption, diffusion, reflection of the surfaces (among other aspects
> as well).
>
> Next add the Octave 4' and voice that just so you can hear it relate
> to the Principal 8' and that when both are drawn together it sounds as
> one stop. Voice the Octave from within itself and as it relates to the
> Principal 8'. Refer to the original disposition via headphones to see
> how they work together. As you progress remember that everything must
> relate to the Great Principal 8'. When voicing the other 8' stops use
> the Octave 4' as a comparison, then back again to the Principal. When
> both 8' stops are drawn you should note the texture changes and should
> be able to discern the entrance and exit of the stop being drawn but
> neither should stand out.
>
> This is a mighty task but well worth the effort.
>
> So that said, even with a romantic disposition your goal is to be able
> to clearly hear all pitches against the rank itself and when playing
> contrapuntal music you can hear all the parts clearly.
>
> When you have completed the Great Organ, move on to the other
> divisions. Each stop of the other divisions still have to relate to
> the Great Principal as well as the division they reside in. In general
> with a Tutti on the Positiv played against the Great Tutti, you should
> be able to distinctly hear individual notes and lines with each
> manual. As you add stops in succession they should only be a tad bit
> noticeable with few exceptions. When toggling the Positiv to Great
> coupler with Tutti's on both manuals you should hear the distinct
> "crown" of the Positiv
> in addition to the strength and bravura of the Great.
>
> The Swell Organ as my old college organ buddy once said. . ."should
> sound like a caged lion". It adds depth and a "gutsy-ness" and should
> in American Instruments anyway, be nearly as strong volume-wise as the
> Great Organ. Overall the bottom end with full Tutti shouldn't sound
> "muddy".
>
> The American Choir is sadly the weakling and for the most part it will
> add more colour to the full ensemble but not much in strength. There
> are as always, exceptions to this rule. The American Choir relates
> more to the Swell than to the Great but in any instance you still
> should be able to hear individual stops and other combinations with
> either the Great or Swell.
>
> So you see, it all relates back to the room. If you have noticed a
> disposition from a Classic French instrument, you will see how
> remarkably the Pedal division supports the entire massive manual-werks
> with only a smattering of stops, because the Pedal division is the
> hardest to regulate because it must too relate to all other stops and
> combinations of stops but the organ builder has taken this into
> consideration especially with resonant and reverberant rooms. The
> French Pedal generally only has a Soubasse 16', Flute 8', Cor d'Nuit
> 4' and then the heavy reeds, because the room supports the lower
> registers well and the voicing doesn't have to be aggressive or overly
> loud. The Soubasse must relate to even the softest of stops and yet
> hold it's own with the full plenums on the manuals.
>
> Years ago when the Sipe organ at Luther College was installed (1977),
> organ aficionados were aghast that the pedal contained the following
> stops; Principal 16', Octave 8', Choralbaß 4', Hohlpjip 2', Mixture V
> (2 2/3'), Contra Fagott 32', Posaune 16', Trompette 8', Clarion 4'. No
> Flute or Subbaß 16', 8'. But I have never played on any other
> instrument especially in an American venue where this worked
> perfectly. The room is very resonant and was designed around the
> organ, not the other way 'round as is customary here in America. The
> Principal 16' worked with even the softest stop and stop combinations,
> and it really was outstanding with the Tutti and other louder
> combinations. If you needed an even softer 16' we would use the Great
> - Bourdon 16' and couple that to the pedal.
>
> Well, I digress. . . I hope this post was of some help to you!
>
> All my best,
>
> Jeffery
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Hope that helps!
>
> GrahamG
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM
> Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly
> what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app
> Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> jorgan-sound mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct
_______________________________________________
jorgan-sound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jorgan-sound
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: engineering data for voicing an organ

John Reimer
Administrator
David,

Graham's post should indicate that what you are trying to do is very complex indeed, and is a function of the voicer's own tonal preferences, to say nothing of the room where the organ is to sound. In the case of computer organs, we have to factor in the characteristics of the loudspeakers as well.

In voicing my Earlwood organs, my practice has been to voice each preset for loudness regularity note-for note across the range, but this will inevitably display any preferences I may have regarding "melodic voicing", where there will be a slight increase in loudness as the notes ascend. After getting a preset to my satisfaction, I will then set its loudness relative to the foundational stop it will mostly be used with. Because of the variables I mentioned in the first paragraph, ideally each user should use a soundfont editor to bring the results into line with their own preferences, and the effect of loudspeaker characteristics and room acoustics.

JohnR