• SONAR
  • Updating BIG (classical large orchestra) old MIDI files to record in 5.1
2012/09/13 18:41:29
bgcat57
I have some old cakewalk midi files that I finshed creating almost a decade ago (Orchestral: Ravel, Strauss, Stravinsky, Korngold). These were all created before softsyths and before cakewalk had audio capability (actually they had it by then but it was insufficient for my needs).

Here's the thing, these files are orchestral and big (typically between 40-70 tracks.) They were run through a bank of 8 different syths (7 racks and a keyboard.) The largest of these is 69 tracks, ~2400 measures of music at about 2.9Mb of MIDI data. I was very judicious with expression data since it could so easily overload the MIDI stream. So I wrote CAL programs and used others that would thin out exppression data. Typically removing 90% of the expression events. These were run through an old analog mixer down to two tracks and recorded.

Now I have an updated system and I'd like to create new masters in 5.1 instead of stereo and also have it cleaner via more dependency on the new digital framework. Since my new Keyboard is a 'fully loaded' Motif XF8 w/ 2Gb flash and I'll connect it via firewire for audio and USB for MIDI to the laptop:
3rd gen i7-3820QM (8MB Cache, 2.7GHz not including Turbo Boost 2) 16Gb 1866Mhz RAM, 512Gb SSD, Windows 7 64-bit Ultimate SP1 Running Sonar X1d Producer Extended, Dimension 1.5.

I'll run the synth via USB MIDI connection and record the tracks via the firewire.

Now, I want to resetup and rerecord tracks in groups of 16 through the Motif and eventually build it in chunks until all the tracks are recorded, then mix down to 5.1 (or maybe 7.1) master.

This is my intent.

Any suggestions or caveats to consider so I don't find out that I should have done something else from the begining. I'm not in a big rush since this first file (the largest) took over 18 months to create in the first place (I'm a lover of the late romantic orchestra so I love the complexity and subtlety of the early 20th century compositions.) If you need any clarification, just ask.
Thanks
2012/09/13 20:47:14
Stone House Studios
My first thought is about the Firewire.  Built in to the Laptop? Straight from the Motif through Firewire into the laptop into Sonar?
Will this give you good audio quality?
While taking in MIDI via USB at the same time?
 
I'm fearing a USB - Firewire latency/timing nightmare!
 
Brian
2012/09/14 17:42:48
dmbaer
I'm not clear on what you're proposing to do.  You have the MIDI already on files, right?  Are they standard MIDI files?  If so, just import them into a project.  Or are they some proprietary format that has to be played from one of your old devices?
 
Once the data is in Sonar, the rest is standard procedure.  Step one would be to freeze one or more tracks at a time until you've got audio tracks for everything.  Step two would be the mix down, with interations back to step one when necessary tweaks to individual tracks are identified.
2012/09/14 18:11:39
John
I would abandon the Motif and use soft synths for this. It will probably need some editing but it will be worth the effort. No hardware sound module can match the quality of a sampled sound with basically unlimited layering and articulations. GOP and Kontakt will serve you well. You can augment those with Dim Pro and other synths.

Turning MIDI into audio is not that CPU intensive and you can do it in stages.

Now when I say abandon the Motif you don't have to replace it completely though you may wish to. Use its sounds for sounds that are more or less background in nature. To lend richness or use sounds that are very good from it.

I do the this sort of thing with X1 and an Roland XV 5080 with add on cards. But I rely on GOP, Kontakt and Dim Pro. Not to mention Battery 3.
2012/09/14 18:17:44
John
Also you have 70 tracks. You may be able to reduce that by sending groups of tracks to the same instrument.
2012/09/14 18:27:19
Bristol_Jonesey
Or if you're feeling a bit cash rich - go out and grab a copy of EWQLSO Platinum (or similar)
2012/09/14 20:29:10
bgcat57
 Brian,
I'm not sure yet of the latency issue. My intent is to start with 16 channels at a time and then if there are problems, cut to 8. If that works, I just keep upping the number until I hit the bottleneck then I'll back off 2 (for safety) and go with that. This is an issue to consider though, since the Motif Firewire audio only outputs to FireWire 400 though the laptop could do Firewire 800.

I don't think that the MIDI on USB and Firewire combined should be that much of a problem. Since I can't record more than 16 tracks at a time anyway, I can turn off the additional MIDI info to the balance of the remaining 50 tracks.

I must admit that I never had latency issues when I was running this file in it's entirety (all 68 tracks) through to all 8 synths simultaneously. That was Windows NT with a Pentium processor.


Bobcat
2012/09/14 20:30:32
bgcat57
dmbaer,
My files are old wrk files. I tryout the 'freezing' one or more tracks. It's the creation of the audio tracks and handling them next that will be a big issue.

Bobcat
2012/09/14 20:32:11
bgcat57
John: Since the Motif XF8 is fairly new (so I'm not cash rich now) and has 2 GB flash memory, I can use that and tweak things there. I'm reticent about buying yet more software. If money were no limitation, I'd get $10 Gold set, but then I'd probably have to spend a year setting it up. I Do have Dimension Pro so that's already done. With almost 70 tracks, every instrument doesn't have to be perfect, but when you get to the lightly scored sections, you have to be far more diligent about sound. One of the two primary reasons for so many tracks is that i can control in the (at the time) stereo field. When every instrument has it's own position, the sound is far more realistic. Clustering them together eliminates that. I discovered this through trial an error and learned that the separation is better. Secondly, if you have 4 horns (for example) on one track, its difficult in editing if you want them to fade at different rates. A third and obvious reason was that different synths had different strengths in their sound/sample instrument libraries. For example, the old Yamaha TG-77 still has the most realistic Concert Harp. (As someone who used to play concert harp, I know this.)
I will consider adding Kontakt and Garritan if I start to feel like I'm painting myself into a corner.
Bobcat
2012/09/14 21:52:41
Stone House Studios
I must admit that I never had latency issues when I was running this file in it's entirety (all 68 tracks) through to all 8 synths simultaneously. That was Windows NT with a Pentium processor.

 
But were you recording them bak into the same DAW? 
Sending MIDI out is one thing (to outboard synths) - sending it while simultaneously recording the audio back in is another story!
 
Brian
12
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account