Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Per-note performance dynamics - please! (Read 8677 times) previous topic - next topic

Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Hi everybody! For my first-ever posting to this forum, I'd
like to talk about a wish I've had since NWC 1.3f, when I
became a registered user...

...that is to have per-note performance dynamics - note
properties, if you will - available from within NWC. In a
prior life, I created hours of sequences using Personal
Composer for DOS (ran in Hercules graphics mode; anyone
remember that? ;-) One of the great features of PCD was the
ability to specify MIDI note velocity, volume, etc. note-by-note, if desired. This had nothing to do with ornamentation - you could indicate an accent, and have *this* note accented just a bit more than *that* one - made an incredible difference in the final quality of hand-sequenced scores (my specialty). NWC's multi-point controller and fixed-value dynamics are very
cumbersome, by comparison.

I appreciate the design ideal of having *every* score or
performance element have a visual counterpart - but that
gets limiting if you want to implement performance dynamics
on a note-by-note basis.

How about it? Anyone else want this feature?

And what's going on with NWA, anyway? Been quite a while since the last NWC update. Not a complaint, just wondering... ;-)

Peace!
Ben

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #1 –
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Drake Donahue wrote:

> dynamics are not fixed-you can assign any 0-127 value to volume and/or
> velocity-fff at 0,0 if you wish-
> MPC's give similar flexibility during a note if your card/synth supports
> Perhaps macros would reduce the cumber? - or cut and paste from a
> "utility staff"?
>

Thanks for your reply. Yes, you can assign any 0-127 value to volume
and/or velocity - in fact, you MUST assign a specific, absolute value!
That's what I mean by 'fixed'. A relative dynamic would allow you to
indicate that a specific note property be adjusted by an amount relative
to its current value - accenting (or diminishing) a note (or series of
notes) within a NWC crescendo, for example. The way it is now, you have to
update EVERY SINGLE DYNAMIC and EVERY SINGLE MPC to raise or lower the
overall volume of a passage - very labor-intensive.

I transcribe things like the Brandenburg Concertos using NWC, so I really,
really need a system that allows very fine control of performance
dynamics.

Ben

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #2 –
I not sure of your final product - I assume that you are notating some previous work by transcribing and entering note data in NWC - I guess for the purpose of performing this with an orchestra. For this NWC is a great tool.

If you are transcribing to produce a midi file or the sound of the transcribed work perhaps you should be using some other product that allows the use of expression controller 11, graphic insertion of velocities or variation of individual note velocites in an event list.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #3 –
I am indeed creating MIDI files from my notated scores.
And I do use other products - specifically, Cakewalk Pro -
to add the kind of detailed performance dynamics I want.
The problem is that I can only get my data into CakeWalk
by exporting from NWC as MIDI. Once I edit the file in
CakeWalk, I can't go back to NWC except by re-importing
from the MIDI file, which causes me to lose all my
formatting, bars, slurs, etc.

Check it out, people - there *are* notation-based products
that allow per-note performance dynamics to be entered -
they tend to be much more expensive and resource-intensive
than NWC, which is my favorite editor. I want my favorite
tool to better support the work I'm doing. Saying 'use
another product' is not particularly helpful.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #4 –
OK
Use NWC if you want to print a score.
Use Cakewalk to produce the midi file.
What else do you want do do?
Or do you want the functionality of Cakewalk built into NWC at the same low registration price?

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #5 –
I don't think giving every note its own set of properties should be all that difficult. I would like every note, and every other insertable object, to have at least two properties: "Display (print) this note but don't play it" and "Hide (do not print) this note but do play it".

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #6 –
Barry Graham:

>Use NWC if you want to print a score.

NWC is more than just a score printing tool. You may not
use it for more than this, but I do.

>Use Cakewalk to produce the midi file.

As previously noted (hah!) once the score has left NWC as
a MIDI file and been edited, it can't be brought back while preserving all the work that's been put into it.

Suppose you had a word processor that would only allow you to edit, or print - and once you had printed a document,
you couldn't edit the text again, just change formatting,
unless you wanted to retype it.

>What else do you want do do?

I want to use one tool to do my compositions, not two
semi-compatible ones.

>Or do you want the functionality of Cakewalk built
>into NWC at the same low registration price?

No. I don't use a fraction of Cakewalk's functionality; the bulk of my work is done in NWC. All I use Cakewalk for is performance dynamics. This is functionality that would enhance NWC, give NWC capabilities found in other products of its type (notation-oriented sequencers), and not be terribly difficult to implement - we're talking about a different interface for entering MIDI controller messages that NWC already supports.

It's obvious you think NWC shouldn't do anything more than what it already does. I'm happy it meets your needs so handily.

Peace,
Ben

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #7 –
Ben,

You have all my sympathy for your wish for a note properties box in which you can specify single note velocity either absolutely or relatively to the preceding notes.

I only fear this could be a burden to the programmer since this could entail a major rewriting of NWC.

But your message and Barry's reply raises an important issue: what is NWC, a printing tool or a playback tool?

It is obvious for me that NWC was born as a printing tool, but all the efforts put in it to have a decent playback, and the release of NoteWorthy Player plus the built-in compressed format have changed the status of NWC in that it is now an efficient way of transmitting music by the Internet. Music intended to be played and not only to be printed.

If this is so, it would be great that NWC would adquire some features traditionally in the realm of sequencers like Cakewalk which are, I think, not so difficult to implement. Access to more MIDI controllers (expression, reverb and chorus), a multi-point controller tool with more points, and support for track delaying (like the Time+ column in Cakewalk). These additions would enhace the playback abilities of NWC so that *.nwc files would be better fitted as a medium of music sharing.

It's not that NWC should become a sequencer. I think you shouldn't think in events and ticks to make good MIDI transcriptions and performances. NWC is ideal in that it allows a much more musical thinking. But some additions from the sequencer world would be really welcome.

And just because NWC is no longer just a music printing tool. So I think, at least.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #8 –
Ramón,

Thanks for a cogent reply. :-)

>I only fear this could be a burden to the programmer
>since this could entail a major rewriting of NWC.

As a professional software developer, I don't think so - most music file formats store data as a stream of symbols, MIDI events, etc. Things like volume and velocity control messages are already present in the stream. To implement "note properties," NWC would simply insert a "set" message before the note, and a "reset" message after. The kind of data being saved is no different from what NWC already does.

>It's not that NWC should become a sequencer. I think you
>shouldn't think in events and ticks to make good MIDI
>transcriptions and performances. NWC is ideal in that it
>allows a much more musical thinking. But some additions
>from the sequencer world would be really welcome.

I submit that NWC already *is* a sequencer - one whose origins are in notation entry, rather than MIDI stream capture. I wholeheartedly agree that events and ticks are less expressive than notation - that's why I'd rather use NWC than Cakewalk for my creative work.

>And just because NWC is no longer just a music printing
>tool. So I think, at least.

I agree. For me, NWC crossed that line when it acquired MIDI recording capability - a feature, incidentally, that I've never used. Never needed it. ;-)

Peace,
Ben

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #9 –
I agree that it would be excellent to have per-note
dynamics settings. One reason I don't think has been
stressed (n.p.i.) here that it would be nice to be able
to have differing volumes, attacks, etc. on notes in the
same chord, to bring out one of two voices on a single
staff. Right now that is impossible.

- seb

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #10 –
Steve,

I have used the "experimental" (Eric, you'll never walk alone ... :) overlay feature to do this precise thing, having one voice doing something different (and at a different velocity) to another voice on the same clef. Apart from the other (well!) documented gripes about this feature, it does do this particularly well. One could argu, I guess, that ANY note should have any arbitrary velocity assignable to it, but in reality, it is normally only one note in a chord that wants to ring out there. Using Fred Nachbaur's guitar technique, (hidden staves implementing what's written), you can actually do exactly what you want. It gets back to what overheads are you wanting to make what is written sound exactly as you want it (which is of course our Paradise!)

Andrew

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #11 –
I too would like per-note settings. But right now, because I have the need, I would settle for "don't print this rest" property...

I have a score in which I need the layered staff feature in order to notate a odd combination of short and long notes. (I can notate this on one staff, but due to the way NWC counts the notes, the measure length is not correct even though it looks correct when printed.)

I have rests in all the measures except where the layered notes need to be in the 2nd staff. (That is the cheater's way out, I know, I could fool with hidden/muted staves instead.) If I could just say "hide print" on each rest in the 2nd staff, then they would layer together nicely for printing purposes, AND they would play back correctly as I wouldn't be doubling notes up (and having to fool with dynamics and MPC's to adjust the volumes.)

Seems like a simple solution that will allow good playback AND good printing... what say all of you? Am I on the right track, or am I missing something important? Let me know.

Sue

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #12 –
Hiding individual items for printing has been requested before. If you haven't put this in the wish list, please do so. The more people that officially request a feature, the more likely we are to get it quickly.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #13 –
The visual appearance of a score is much less important to me than how it sounds when played back. Control of graphical output (on-screen or printed) is an entirely different function from control of MIDI output. I hope the distinction is clear to anyone adding "note properties" to the wish list... ;-)

Be careful what you ask for - you might not get it!

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #14 –
A few randomish thoughts:

1) I'm not sure that this was what Ben was asking for, but since it has been mentioned (by Steve Bacher): does Midi allow one to vary the dynamic of one note in a chord using a single voice? Or would an extra voice be required? i.e. if we are asking for NWC to allow one or more notes within a chord to be emphasised, would this be implementation of an existing Midi feature or would it be facilitation of a workaround to overcome one of the shortcomings of Midi?

2) How useful is Midi as a distribution medium? The capabilities of devices varies greatly. If Ben gets his wish and can add the subtle variations in note dynamics would I notice the difference if I played one of his efforts on my SB16? If I did notice the differences, would the diffences I notice be the ones that Ben intended? Would the subtle effects be subtly different even on high quality midi boxes from different manufacturers?

3) I come to NWC from the notation angle. I use NWC to play my compositions and arrangements - but only as a low quality preview of what they might sound like when I get some musicians to play them. I leave the subtleties of performance to the musicians.

If I was asked to vote on whether to give priority to improving NWC's notation capabilities or to improving its sound reproduction capabilities, my vote would go to getting the notation right every time. Let's hope there doesn't have to be a trade off between the two objectives.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #15 –
Yes, Stephen, you have my vote. I too use Noteworthy primarily as a notator, and to help me learn vocal parts. The more complications built into the package, the longer it is likely to take to set a piece. Admittedly the 'extras' could be set up as options, but there is always the temptation to fiddle ..... If I was looking to produce an orchestral performance, I would be inclined to set the basics in NWC then export the MIDI to a good sequencer for fine tuning (as per Barry in reply 4).

Peter

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #16 –
Stephen Randall,

Thanks for your reply.

>does Midi allow one to vary the dynamic of one note in a
>chord using a single voice? Or would an extra voice be
>required?

As far as I know, MIDI control messages (velocity, volume, etc.) affect all notes assigned to a channel - in NWC, the relationship of channel to staff is one to one. By assigning the notes in a chord to different staves, it would be possible to use different channels for each note, and thus to send different control messages. Unfortunately, in NWC, this is a lot of work. I've done this with one transcription (the March from Beethoven's 9th, adapted from the Carlos version); I wouldn't be in a hurry to do it again. Very labor-intensive.

A better solution to achieving a similar effect is to have an additional staff which contains only the accents. While this is workable in some situations, it doesn't address diminuendos, and gets cumbersome if you want to achieve the effect for a lot of channels.

Note (hah!) that I'm not suggesting that NWC support multiple channels per staff; this really would be a significant change to the way note data is compiled into MIDI data. The addition of per-note (really, per-channel) performance dynamics is much simpler.

>i.e. if we are asking for NWC to allow one or more notes
>within a chord to be emphasised, would this >be implementation of an existing Midi feature or would it
>be facilitation of a workaround to overcome one of the
>shortcomings of Midi?

A good question, but no - the issue is the granularity of data entry interfaces for features that NWC *already provides*. The existing dynamic and MPC interfaces are suitable for passages, perhaps measures at most - not phrases.

A change to NWC performance dynamics that would extend MIDI nicely would be the specification of relative, rather than absolute, controller values.

>2) How useful is Midi as a distribution medium? The
>capabilities of devices varies greatly. If Ben
>gets his wish and can add the subtle variations in note
>dynamics would I notice the difference if I played one of
>his efforts on my SB16?
> . . . [snip] . . .

Hundreds of thousands of MIDI files are available for download off the Net. Major software works from major publishers ship with MIDI soundtracks. It might not be CD quality, but for computer-based multimedia, MIDI is a very viable distribution medium.

The ultimate effect of my note-level performance tuning would seem to depend on my skill as a transcriber, wouldn't it? ;-) Your SB16 is certainly capable of reproducing my efforts - I refer you to the soundtracks of LucasArt's 'Dark Forces', Raven's 'Hexen II', or Maxis' 'SimCity 3000' for some recent examples of commercial MIDI work that range from decent to amazing.

As for the benefits of having such control within NWC - you can hear it for yourself, if you play an instrument that can output MIDI velocity and volume along with note data: write out the notation for a simple piece (try a Scarlatti sonata, if you're into Baroque) in NWC. Add all the dynamics and MPCs you like. Now, record your own performance of the same piece, using your instrument. Quantize to the same resolution, and compare the recording with the transcription.

>3) I come to NWC from the notation angle. I use NWC to
>play my compositions and arrangements - but only as a low
>quality preview of what they might sound like when I get
>some musicians to play them. I leave the subtleties of
>performance to the musicians.

That's cool - but that's you. I don't have access to musicians to play my transcriptions, or the technical skill (not to mention equipment) necessary to perform and record them myself. I'm not asking for NWC to overcome the limits of MIDI transcription - just to support a more precise way of expressing my intentions, within the limitations of the medium.

Thanks for your reply; sorry to run on and on. You raise some good points. ;-)

Peace,
Ben

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #17 –
Peter,

>If I was looking to produce an orchestral performance, I
>would be inclined to set the basics in NWC then export the
>MIDI to a good sequencer for fine tuning (as per Barry in
>reply 4).

And as per my reply - that's fine, except where do you draw the line between dynamic and score-based "tuning"? The problem is exacerbated when you can't readily transfer your work back and forth between NWC and the "good sequencer." Note, BTW, that you're not using the latter for anything resembling "sequencing"...

I'd love to hear from somebody else who's attempted a serious transcription of an orchestral score using NWC - am I the only one? If anybody would like to hear some early attempts, from about a year ago, see the Music page at http://www.bebweb.com.

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #18 –
Well I don't know how "serious" it is, but you might want to look at my work with The Magic Flute (particularly the overture), also there's Adam Bodkin's treatment of a movement from a Mahler symphony, and a few other such entries available at the Scriptorium http://noteworthy.beyondtheweb.com

Re: Per-note performance dynamics - please!

Reply #19 –
It is possible to have different velocities on different notes of the same chord on a common channel.
Velocity - unlike volume - is attached to the Note On message at the attack.

Volume is assigned to the channel.
All notes respond to a velocity increase on the channel - although if you want to hear this on a sustained note you will need a wavetable sound card.

I would prefer NWC to become THE first class notation processor that it promises to be.
For the arrangements I write (big band, jazz octets, etc.)
NWC does a pretty reasonable job of score and part production but it does not allow swing quantizing, track slips or the subtle velocity pushes I require if I need to make a midi file of my arrangements.So I use software that specializes in midi file creation and editing.

But I dont expect Eric to build this sort of functionality into NWC - I can happily get by using other software.
Once the arrangement is written, the parts printed or hand-copied and the midi file created I dont have a need to re-import the midi file back into NWC.

High-end notation software is extremely expensive compared to NWC but NWC only requires a few additional tweeks to reach the standard of print-out I require.
In the meantime it's the best value shareware notation package around.