SToons

jsg

Gusfmm


 
Perhaps to somewhat close the loop, a final comment. I think where I quite agree with you, and I'm glad this totally and nicely aligns with the nature of this thread, and this long-winded cry for Cakewalk to listen to, is that:
 
 

jsg


For those who are committed to MIDI as a medium as I am, working in a DAW's notation is definitely the way to go.

JG
www.jerrygerber.com

Just that SONAR, to me,  is far from being, and as of today, the best suitable and even proper tool for the composer who desires to use the written musical language in the arts of composing music.
 
 
 

 

I'd like to add one last point here.    Gusfmm is comparing a LIVE performance of an orchestra with a RECORDING of MIDI.   This is an absurd comparison as I mentioned a bit earlier because the energies of human beings listening to one another and playing in real time is a very specific form of musical energy that can hardly be duplicated in recordings. 

I clearly did not read Gusfmm's post the way you have. Standard classical recordings also begin with a group of humans playing LIVE. Although Gusfmm states he feels the best way to hear a piece is interpreted live it does not suggest that this should be considered a "fair comparison" to a MIDI representation as it is already stated there can be no comparison, you appear to have fabricated that point. By suggesting Zimmer and his use of RECORDED orchestras in film he is clearly separating LIVE from RECORDED material, for example. By your own standards it would suggest a "fair" comparison would be setting your computer up in a symphony hall and comparing that to an actual orchestra as this is not a RECORDING of midi, it would be LIVE. You appear to be grasping at semantics that have no relation to notation. In all likelihood you two agree on far more than you disagree.
 
I am not speaking for Gusfmm, he is clearly capable. I am suggesting as a forum member that you appear to be trying to run a ghost horse in circles.

Yes...+1
 
  I am not really able to read thru so much material and truly comprehend all this stuff,  but it sure seems like you guys are arguing the same point.

That was my conclusion some time ago. In a way it was getting funny that both were arguing the same thing but didn't see it.

In regards to MIDI composition and orchestral works, here's one of my favorites for anyone who is interested.  It was done using DP and features the old Garritan Strad solo violin.   I think it's somewhat rare to hear this type of emotion in a MIDI piece, but it can be done...
http://www.dankury.com/music/Meditation_from_Thais_arr.Dan_Kury.mp3
 
 

stevec


In regards to MIDI composition and orchestral works, here's one of my favorites for anyone who is interested.  It was done using DP and features the old Garritan Strad solo violin.   I think it's somewhat rare to hear this type of emotion in a MIDI piece, but it can be done...
http://www.dankury.com/music/Meditation_from_Thais_arr.Dan_Kury.mp3
 
 

The feeling and articulation is truly excellent, however I can't help feeling that the violin itself sounds ever so slightly like a harmonica in parts, for instance the phrase at 0:18. 

John


That was my conclusion some time ago. In a way it was getting funny that both were arguing the same thing but didn't see it.

John,  we really are not arguing the same thing.   Gus's argument is that MIDI is not a serious medium for composers, it is a substitute medium for acoustic performances and/or recordings of acoustic instruments.  He calls this, as many do, a "mock-up".  My argument is the opposite, I argue that the virtual orchestra (or whatever we want to call it) is an artistic medium in its own right, it is not a substitute for something else.   I release a CD about every 2 years and for the most part I use digital instruments, i.e. sample libraries and synths, and occasionally live singers and instrumentalists, so I back up my assertions with a heavy investment of time, money and labor.   Why others think we're arguing the same thing might be a way to "make peace", but in fact we are coming from two very different agendas and beliefs about the use of sample libraries and the "virtual orchestra" (for lack of a better term).  It is not about who is right, or who is wrong, but the distinction between these viewpoints should, at least, be acknowledged and understood.
 
Back to the original topic of this thread, it is highly doubtful that Cakewalk will put any real energy into improving the staff view (at least mak it as sophisticated as Cubase's) in any significant way.   Even though this thread has already received over 6000 views, which tells me a lot of Sonar users ARE interested in the staff view issues, Cakewalk apparently has different priorities in regards to what a full-featured, professional DAW should be. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com

jsg

John


That was my conclusion some time ago. In a way it was getting funny that both were arguing the same thing but didn't see it.

John,  we really are not arguing the same thing.   Gus's argument is that MIDI is not a serious medium for composers, it is a substitute medium for acoustic performances and/or recordings of acoustic instruments.  He calls this, as many do, a "mock-up".  My argument is the opposite, I argue that the virtual orchestra (or whatever we want to call it) is an artistic medium in its own right, it is not a substitute for something else.
 

I must disagree. I use a virtual orchestra as a neccessity and despite the fact I have composed professionally I do not have the clout, money, opportunity nor likely the composing chops to warrant the use of a real orchestra. So therefore, the virtual orchestra is not an artistic medium for me, it is a substitution. If I say that's what it is, then that's what it is. It's not your business to define what a virtual orchestra is to me or anyone else. Does that sound reasonable?
 
Now if you want to phrase it in a manner such as "I argue that the virtual orchestra (or whatever we want to call it) CAN BE an artistic medium in its own right, and not a substitute for something else" or " In my compositions the virtual orchestra (or whatever we want to call it) is an artistic medium in its own right, it is not a substitute for something else" that might be a little more palatable.
 
I do not believe Gus has stated that MIDI is not a serious medium for composers, he has rightfully acknowledged that an orchestra and a virtual orchestra are two different things. To suggest he, I or any other composer cares less about their "mock-ups" is quite reasonable but you seem to suggest this is a problem or failing on our parts and that is absurd. Many of my compositions are time-limited, for example if I have to do an orchestral piece for a game company which is due yesterday. If you choose to spend hours, days, weeks, months or years tweaking orchestral pieces as an expression of art that's wonderful and I'm sure you will be successful in your goal but surely you can't expect others to neccessarily share the same goal.
 
As I said, I believe you two share very similiar opinions, the main difference of note is that you seem to feel you need some affirmation that composing without using the performances of an actual orchestra is a valid artform and I don't believe anyone has contradicted that. 
 
Two simple questions: is it a goal of yours that listeners would believe they are hearing an orchestra perform when they hear one of your MIDI compositions? Are you comfortable with someone saying "I really like the composition, it's beautiful, and it kinda, sorta, almost sounds like it was performed by a real orchestra."?
 
As for the topic, I agree with your take on Sonar and their priorities. I've been reading the X1 forum for some time as I soon need to upgrade both computer and DAW (still using 8.5.3) and knowing I would have to almost completely change my workflow as X1 is so different it seems that, unfortunately, now after 15 years I have to "start again" and if that's the case I'm not sure Sonar is the best option for me. The way it stands things aren't looking promising. Logic is looking really good at the moment.

jsg
Gus's argument is that MIDI is not a serious medium for composers, it is a substitute medium for acoustic performances and/or recordings of acoustic instruments.  
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com

I've never argumented such thing. You've either totally misconstrued or simply fabricated such assertion. To the point that I can't help but question the agenda behind some of these posts. Or maybe a revisit of previous posts will help you clarify.

see... I think you guys were making the same point...

Jsg,

It really doesn't matter why some one wants a better Staff View. It only matters that many do. 

Clearly Gus's reason is just as valid as any.

I also strongly believe in the usefulness of MIDI in creating compositions. What sort of composition is again unimportant.

What I see is two members after the same thing but for different reasons.
Nothing wrong with that. 

The feeling and articulation is truly excellent, however I can't help feeling that the violin itself sounds ever so slightly like a harmonica in parts, for instance the phrase at 0:18.

 
I'd imagine the samples can only be tweaked so much from what they really are, so it was probably what the violin actually sounded like at that pitch.   In combination with the room, mic, pre, etc.   
 
But yes, it's really the "feeling" that it evokes that made an impression on me.   If I could write and record something even remotely similar using the tools on hand, in SONAR, I couldn't care less whether it's real or Memorex.   It's just good stuff.