| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009 Posts: 323 |
SID music software recommendations?
Hi SID freax...
I am wondering what the general opinion is with what
the most popular or most recommended piece of software
is to use to write music for the SID in 2009?
>> Adam/Usagi << |
|
... 24 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts.... |
| |
Stryyker
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 468 |
"Your argument, is bollocks." is bollocks itself. Somehow you know how everyone learns.
I found messing around with music players, coding them etc. helped me learn a lot.
"The best editors were coded by the musician himself, to fit his own needs." - you can read other information in to that. The musician knows how the magic numbers on screen work with the SID registers.
Then again I make rather low quality music so I know nothing about this.
Adam: What sort of editors are you comfortable? Many like the trackers as they give a more visual representation of timing. Some like duration based players like DMC and SYNC (my favourite.) |
| |
Stainless Steel
Registered: Mar 2003 Posts: 966 |
Unfortunately, no one can give you a reasonable answer to this question.
It depends alot on your own experience and which editor makes the most sense to you. Try out a few and see which one fits you best.
I tried a couple (Music Assembler, JCH, Voicetracker, Futurecomposer, 20cc Editor, Goattracker) and finally ended up with SDI.
Simply because it had a lot of demotunes to examine and GRG helped me a lot getting started (And it came with lots of recomendations).
|
| |
Tim Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002 Posts: 467 |
Agreed with what Stainless said,
Adding to that:
My advice for first time sidders.. go for a tracker based program! Mostly because it's similar to the logics of other trackers..
You could try DMC of course.. but.. if below does not seem appealing, don't even bother:
snd.01 (sound #1)
dur.04 (duration of note)
c-1 (actual note)
snd.02 (sound #2)
dur.02 (duration of note)
c-5 (actual note)
c-5 (actual note)
snd.01 (sound #1)
dur.04
c-1
etc.etc.etc.
I used if for years, and yet it drove me nuts synching the three channels (and i usually ended up visually drawing out all 3 channels of my tunes onto paper). Same goes for many other players with similar logics.
for the above example a tracker would look something like this:
c-0 01000
--- 00000
--- 00000
--- 00000
c-5 02000
--- 00000
c-5 02000
--- 00000
c-0 01000
--- 00000
--- 00000
--- 00000
the above in a page would contain 3 of these next to eachother, one for each channel, so far easier to visualise what you are working on and how one channel translates to the others 2 time wise.
I'd suggest Goat Tracker, but that's because I do not know SDI to be honnest.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 11360 |
Quote:Nobody becomes a better graphician by coding their own Koala painter prog.
Your argument, is bollocks.
nobody becomes a better musician by choosing the most sophisticated editor either. but as much as every decent painter spends a while on getting familiar with the properties of various types of paint and canvas, it will benefit even a not-yet-terribly-good musician to spend some time on getting familiar with his instrument.
Quote:Musicians either have born talent for doing music, or they train hard and learn it, or they suck.
except this isnt so much about beeing a good musician. it is about learning every possible detail of your instrument to be able to fully use it.
Quote:If you learn to use all features of a good editor, you really have no reason to code it yourself.
The best editors were coded by the musician himself, to fit his own needs.
and don't these two lines somehow contradict each other? :)
i still say, if you want to do good sid music, you gotta know the sid very well. and one very good way to learn about the sid is to write some little programs that make some sounds. (and i never said someone should make his own editor, thats kinda pointless indeed). like cadaver said, even playing around with the basic programs from the c64 manual is a good way to understand many important things.
and to come back to the original question, i always recommend goattracker... not because it has the most sophisticated player, but because it is very easy to use and generally seems to be a good starting point. and you can always switch to SDI (or my secret favourite: sonic's mod of the x-ample tracker) or whatever later once you start hitting the limits of gt, which will almost certainly take a while for a beginner.
|
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009 Posts: 271 |
I can compose a tune in my head but there is no way I can create a tune with it on a c64. I can imagine an image and I can create the image as good as I am able to in koala... The border to know koala is very much less then the border to know a sid tool or editor in my mind. I meen it must be harder to understand editors that are made up by numbers than an editor where one can move joy and paint in realtime... So this matter is closed for me... I have melodies but when opening a sid tool I am lost even before I start.. I dear a music artist or want to be... to open koala and I guess he will come alot further in less time than I will in a current state of the art sound tool. |
| |
SIDWAVE Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002 Posts: 2238 |
Groepaz: do more tunes
PAL: you dont try hard enough, to get your music from the head, into the music program. :)
Perhaps live playing is better for you. Take real lessons, learn to play. When you are a bit trained piano player, it will be a lot easier for you to make music on a computer. |
| |
Soren
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 547 |
I can only agree with people who think it pays off to code your own musicroutines. It worked for me, very well indeed. But ofcourse it's not like that for everyone. Some are able to just choose an editor and use it to the max. When I first started making 8-speed tunes, I am quite sure there weren't any decent tools for that. Having 256 steps long wave+freq tables for each instrument, when needed, and things like that. :-)
|
| |
Linus
Registered: Jun 2004 Posts: 639 |
Groepaz: I am curious, what are the limits of GT? Still haven't found them ;) |
| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009 Posts: 323 |
Quote: Groepaz: I am curious, what are the limits of GT? Still haven't found them ;)
... and nor have I! I currently use about 3 to 4 different versions of GT (as mad as that may sound) - and be able to sequence digital samples to play along side without any problems - but it seems to be the most comfortable for me to use as I origianly spent my early years composing music on the Amiga using trackers. To me, music editors which are too complex to get a tune out screws up the writing process for me. If i've got an idea, i want to get it out without the hassle.. GT with MIDI support would be a dream come true... Hello Cadaver? ;)
>> Adam/Usagi << |
| |
Soren
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 547 |
Linus: haven't you complained a few times about things not working too well after packing a GT tune? :-)
A limitation COULD be when doing multispeed, that there is only one wave+freq table, or am I wrong? :-) Still hats off for a very fast player. That has made things easier for demo coders a lot of times :-)
Besides I am quite happy with my shapeable and modulateable vibrato routine :-) |
Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |