HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: Problems!!!!!
Date: 7 Apr 92 14:18:21 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Albuquerque NM

In article <204453@unix.cis.pitt.edu> metlay@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu (metlay) writes:
>>>	Je ne sais pas; mais, peut-etre si vous posez le question en anglais,
>>>il y sera plus de personnes qui peuvent repondre.
>>Nishin: Nihongo ga wakaru hito wa, hitori de mo kono guruup wo yonde iru hito
>>iru kai?
>
>Izvinityeh, pozhaluista, no ya dumayu shto etot razgovor ochen' glupui'!
>U nas nyet luchyie temui, kak MIDI ili kotorii K2000 lyche chem Alesis S5?
>
>Kazhetsya, shto vo vsyekh stranakh, nasha samaya ogromnaya problema, eto,
>kak vy skazhitye, 'BANDWIDTH'?

Jeeze.  I come home from Europe desparately wanting to hear some good ol'
English and this is what I get.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       | 
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |    "A man without a newsgroup"
                                     | 
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
From: cem@nmt.edu (Confed. of Electronic Musicians)
Subject: Re: Seq Plus Gold/Cakewalk
Organization: New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:26:11 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.192338.8690@etnibsd.uucp> steve@etnibsd.uucp (Steve Myers) writes:
>Also, in Cakewalk, is it possible to read a file into another file that's
>already open?  Sometimes a rhythm part from an older piece seems perfect
>for the song I'm currently working on but the 'Load' command just overwrites 
>the current file.

Yes.  Use the File/Merge command (and also the File/Extract command) on
page 98 of the 4.0 manual.

File/Merge loads a file into the scrap buffer.  Then Paste it where ever
you want it.

File/Extract saves just the Scrap buffer to a file.

So.....for your situation, File/Extract the rhythm part from the file
that you already have.  Then, File/Merge it to the new file.

Whee!

Alan

-- 
Alan Kerr
Confederation of Electronic Musicians    cem@nmt.edu
New Mexico Tech
Socorro, NM, USA
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
From: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Subject: Synth interfaces (Re: Gear Lust)
Organization: Sony Microsystems Corp, San Jose, CA
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 06:45:31 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.020532.10471@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ercolessi@uimrl7.mrl.uiuc.edu writes:
>None of them: it is that these powerful machines have an awful user 
>interface.

I don't think "awful" is the right term.  To me, most of the interfaces
are "lab coat" interfaces, which are fine for people who know all
the terms and concepts, but lousy for people who know music from
the "aural" side.

>New, creative user interfaces must be given top priority in new
>developments!  

I agree with this.  Sadly, a lot of important work has been lost due
to commercial problems.  Casio's CZ-101 interface taught us that
you can put a familiar face onto an unfamiliar system (subtractive
interface on an FM-based) and add general purpose features (8-stage
EGs with movable sustain and end), but nobody else has made use of
these.  Kawai added a graphic display to the K5, and made some
use of the graphics (in the keyboard scaling page, but sadly not
in the envelopes), but the K5 was not a big seller for Kawai.

Computers provide us with the capabilities to create new user
interfaces and make use of the good ideas of the past, but a big part
of what can be done is hindered by the system exclusive interface
and programming tools.  It's pretty hard to get motivated to experiment
with new interface technologies when you know you have to deal with
decoding manuals, deciphering checksum routines, and debugging hex
strings, and that's assuming you have already mastered the art of
programming the computer itself (thank heavens for MAX and HyperMIDI).

A couple of months ago, I talked a bit out my idea of transformational
editing, but got a pretty cool response.  What other ideas do people
have?  Shape-based parameterization?  Other abstractions?
From: ATONI@ESTEC.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: -- For Jhon Curtis --
Date: 16 Apr 92 10:39:25 GMT
Organisation: European Space Technology Centre (E.S.T.E.C)

Can you plase conatact me to ATONI@ESTEC.BITNET .. I am very interested in your
 K5 software and I tried to send some mail but didn't get any answer !

I want Dr't editor for the K5
and all the 32 banks of patches.

I'll be in holidays till the 27 of April

Andrea TONI

tel int+ (for Holland) 1719/83606 work
 .. Can somebody give me the tel number of John (if any).. please ??
From: kml21025@UXA.CSO.UIUC.EDU (Ken Landon)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: best price wanted
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:33:31 GMT


   
   A friend of mine with limited .net access would like to know where to get the
best price on a Mackie 1604  (envy, envy).

   Any help would be appreciated.

						Ken
From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: What, me whine?
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:42:00 GMT


Whine? WHINE? It seems to me that it is all the Mac users who are doing the
whining as soon as somebody steps on their protected little boxes and spews
a few negatiove criticisms.  Granted, I am new to the Mac.  I am, however,
resaonably computerliterate and I still had problems doing something relatively
simple and commonplace.  Sure, the Mac interface is easy if you know how to
use it.  The same can be said for anything one is attempting to operate.  The
problem I had may have been due to too much ancilary knowledge of computer
operations.  I can't see how somebody who was totally novice would have had
less problems, however.  You know, the only time I ever see anti-computer
bashing posts in this newsgroup is when people attack Macs.  Windows is
continually belittled here, and most people won't even give Atari users the
time of day.  As soon as somebody points out that ther is a flaw in the
computer designed for the Rest of Us, its up in arms.  Well, I often stand
on first impressions.  The Mac might be the perfect toy for people who don't
have any real concerns about MIDI bandwidth, etc.  The fact remains that
I get double the MISI throughput from my 386 system and 64-Track PC than I
get using 1 MTP with the Mac.  Like it or not, that's the way it is.  For
people who believe that they need only 8 OUTS, the better way to go is with
a PC system and a couple of CMS 404s or 444s.  As far as I see it, as soon
as reasonable software is available, Windows/bus cards is the best solution
for systems which can live within the IRQ situation of the ISA bus.  The MTP
and Opcode System-5 (if ever available) will be hampered with the same
serial port multiplexing problem which currently palgues the Mac.  Hell, I 
guess I can laugh at a $4500 mistake, but that is getting awfully close to the
cost ofd a Wave at street prices.  Ask me today where I would have rather
stuck that $4500.

John
From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: Kawai line mixer (8 stereo ins????)
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:39:00 GMT


Alex and anyone else interested:

I have both the Kawai and Rane mixers in my system.  The Rane is slightly more
quiet than the Kawai and I also think that it offers more useable headroom.
On the other hean, the Kawai is more flexible.  It really depends on what you
were actually going to do with the mixer.  I use my Rane as a submix for the
aux outputs (3 stereo pairs) from my EPS-16+, 4 outputs of my MicroWave, and
outputs 1-4 of my K5.  On the other side of the studio, the Kawai basically
served as my percussion mixer and gets inputs from an SR-16, 2 WaveStation
percussion outputs (don't ask), one of the K2000 aux pairs, and 4 of the
outputs from the XD5.  I arrange it this way, even though the Rane is probably
better suited for percussion type headroom than the Kawai, because the Kawai
does have 2 sends (one stereo) and 2 stereo returns.  This makes it easier for
me to put independent effects on more percussion voices than the Rane allows.
Also, the Kawai has a headphone jack, one thing I find missing on the Rane,
but which Metlay insists shouldn't really matter on a submixer anyway.  In
short, both products are fine mixers.  The Kawai is quiet enough so it
shouldn't make a difference (al least 20 dB quieter than Roland and Boss
boards, I would have to say) in 99% of all applications.  Personally, I think
that price is the biggest factor.  The Kawai is reasonably priced and 
definately offers the better performance/price ratio of the two.  In fact,
I think that the Rane mixer is priced much too high for what you get
(especially considering what a Mackie 1604 costs now adays).  If I were
shopping in this price range, I'd give the Mackie 1202 (or whatever its number
is) a listen.  Assuming it is as quiet and dynamic as its big brother, it
would unquestionably be the best choice in a small mixer.

John
From: tmfm@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: How Engineers make music (was Usenet Tape depression sets in)
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:47:50 GMT
Reply-To: tmfm
Organization: University of Florida  (ufl.edu)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

I think you're right, engineers do approach music algorithmically. It
probably is because we are accustomed to work everything exactly, within
precise rules and parameters, and here we are in this game of inspiration,
of unbounded rules.

I had so many problems with my band because I kept (and still keep)
"planning" music carefully, approaching it like a mathematical problem
(okay, this goes here, but... if I put this here, then that goes there,
which means this part must be like this). The rest of my band created
light, "free" songs, totally different from my approach.

However, I believe planned music has an advantage (or is it a
disadvantage?) in that it usually is more complex than simple music
(No, I don't want to get flamed! Please!!! 8-} )

Luis
let@reef.cis.ufl.edu
From: bill@sumax.seattleu.edu (Bill Flowers)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: DidINukeMy Performer in Install?
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:41:35 GMT
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle, WA

From article <9204131541.AA02226@EDDIE.MIT.EDU>, by JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL:
> 
> Welcome to the sad world of Mac-ownership.  Actually, MOTU appears to have
> 

Now, now, let's not inflict one's personal distaste for a particular
unfamiliar product on other novices.  The install was muffed.  Sh*t happens.

[stuff deleted]
>           There was no problem with the install procedure, it turns out.
> The problem was that when I clicked on the system folder, the windo which
> opened wasn't large enough to show the Performer icon.  Now, even Window's
> isn't this stupid so as to not default the window size to one which is
> capable of showing the contents of the directory.  This must be another
> example of Mac-idiocy, I mean, to have to resize a window to see the
> effects of adding a progrm to a folder.
> 
> Maybe its just that I think about computers a little differently than the
> general Mac-user.  This is scarry is bizarre sort of way.
> 

Again, a personal preference, and a dislike based on previous experience
with completely different systems.  Since this is r.m.s. and not
comp.sys.mac or comp.human-factors, I'll just leave you with the statement
that the Mac is different, there are legitimate reasons why it did what
you describe, and the fact that you are a novice at the interface does not
affect its overall value as a tool for making music.

> John

*   Bill Flowers, bill@sumax.seattleu.edu         *   My words,    *
*   Microcomputer Specialist, Seattle University  *  my thoughts.  *
From: webster.henr801c@XEROX.COM
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: re: Phone Number or Location of 'House of Guitars
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:01:17 GMT


> Can someone please mail me or post the location of House of Guitars.?


House of Guitars	(716) 544.3500	Rochester, NY		B,U,


marc webster
From: Randomizer@cup.portal.com (Aron Fingers Nelson)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: ProCussion or D4?
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 08:58:09 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

>I think there has been a rev in the D4;
 when they first came out I perused the manual to
 try and get a grip on the trigger reqs.

Yes, the trigger setups have changed.  The sysex dump has become larger
as of version 1.0.3.  You have more control of the trigger sensitivity
settings.

Aron_Nelson@cup.portal.com
From: fins@radgumbo.Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Schiavi)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: opinions on Fostex deal? (R8 + 812 + MTC-1
Date: 10 Apr 92 22:37:17 GMT
Reply-To: fins@radgumbo.Corp.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: radgumbo.corp.sun.com


I have been investigating this Fostex deal as well.  My questions
are similiar.  I was wondering for any comparisons to the Tascam TSR-8,
which I have seen for around $2700 (this would be without MIXER and MTC-1)
I don't really need the MTC-1, and could pickup a MACKIE 8x2 mixer
for I think around $350?  I don't know how this mixer compares to the
Fostex either??

Any info on these units would be greatly appreciated??

Thanks,

Rich Schiavi
fins@Corp.Sun.COM



In article henr801c@Xerox.com, webster.Henr801c@XEROX.COM () writes:
>
>I've been looking for a good way to get audio into my studio.  This past
>weekend my dealer at Brighton Sound (rochester, NY) told me about Fostex's
>current "special deal":
>
>  An R8 8-track open-reel tape deck
>  An 812 12x8x2 console
>  An MTC-1 MIDI-to-SMPTE converter
>
>  all for $2979
>
.
.
.
>Anybody have comments on the above? on Fostex in general? It sounds like a good
>deal to me for someone who wants to add audio... yes?
>
>thanks,
>
>marc webster
From: pgr@ramandu.ext.vt.edu (Patrick Robinson)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Trepidkeit (was Re: Arsinio and Korg)
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:59:39 GMT

Eirikur Hallgrimsson writes
> In article <3646@vtserf.cc.vt.edu>, pgr@ramandu.ext.vt.edu (Patrick Robinson) writes...
> >Then you haven't been around these parts long enough to remember the Rossi-Korg
> >matter.  Oh, the horror and trepidity of it all... !
> 
> TREPIDITY?  No, I'm not willing to go into the hardcover OED after that one.  I
> know what I wouldn't find.  Trepidacious, certainly.  Trepidity, I'm willing to
> waste bandwidth over.

Hardcover OED?!?  This is USENET!  We isn't even have to use good grammEr and
spell right here, or make any sense and use sentences who go on and on and on
and don't make a points.  See?

Trepidacious?  How about "trepidaciousness"?  Lordy, lordy...

So, I went and looked it up ... but not in the OED.  I didn't even find it in
*Webster*!!  Nor did I find "trepidacious"  :-) , but, lo and behold, "trepidity"
DID appear as a synonym for "fear" in the Webster's Collegiate Thesaurus.

Surprised?

;-}

-Patrick
 pgr@ramandu.ext.vt.edu
From: aa596@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter Haller)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: midi under windows 3.
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:47:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr15.164711.6161
Reply-To: aa596@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter Haller)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, nick@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) says:

>Well, since I'm nowhere near Corporate America that isn't directly relevant;
>why is the huge installed base (as opposed to, say, the Mac's installed
>base of 6,000,000) important for my purposes?
I didn't know that the Mac base was that big. (Everything I've ever read
about the Mac vs MS-DOS is that MS-DOS has a 5:1 advantage over Macs. 
But this is beside the point.) My point is that Corporate America decided that
their computers will by and large be MS-DOS compatible. This means that
Joe employee is most likely to make his home computer a MS-DOS machine.
Now, he may do his accounting, his homework, or his hatemail on this machine.
If he does start into MIDI or Multimedia as a hobby, he will most likely
use his current machine. Developers realize this and will develope based
upon this line of reasoning. This is my policy and companies I have
worked for had the same philosophy (I didn't think this up, I'm just a 
simple programmer.)

>
>   Give it time. Win3.1 just hit the streets. 
>
>How much time? (Rothwell's law, Metlay's corollary.)
Well, enough time. How's that? (How long was it before 'good'
or 'usable' software appeared for any of the other 
platforms when they were released? Also, it shouldn't be
too long, since the learning curve for MIDI has already
been handled by the Software vendors. (Porting my MIDI
code from the Atari ST to Windows was quite painless. This
of course did not involve the User interface, which I am
still designing to 'follow the Microsoft and CUA rules'.)

An Observation: IMHO, I really don't think you care whether
Windows is a good environment. You would just like to see it
fail. This mentality is so prevelant - ie Windows Bashing, and
I just don't understand why. How does Windows threaten your
free choice to use what every system you want? Why bash it?
What I use is what best serves MY needs. I'm not intersted in
your needs - (as a user, not a developer). Use what you
want and I'll use what I want. Leave it at that. As the
cliche goes...

"If you don't have something nice to say, who cares then what you
have to say!"


I await all AR flames!

PCH
-- 
Peter C. Haller				|	'If you do what you 
Imagination Processing Systems		|	have always done,
aa596@cleveland.Freenet.Edu 		|	expect what you have
"Are we having fun yet?"		|	always recieved.'
From: rga@rti.rti.org
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: @ Whats The Best ATARI Sequence Package .. @
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:37:39 GMT
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC

In article <41ugiB2w164w@cyberden.uucp> cyberden!system@nbn.com writes:
>
>*** THE FINAL WORD:
>
>        Hey gals and guys... enough already... the law states:
>
>MIDI Rate = 31.25 Khz
> This = 320 Microseconds per BYTE
>                             ====
>MIDI bytes are 8 BITS.
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>   |       /         |\
>   | H E   \ Y B E R |/ E N       [ cyberden!system@nbn.com ]

Sorry to question THE FINAL WORD, but where do you get 320 us/byte ?

1/31250 = 32us, so 8 bits * 32us = 256us. Have I missed something ?

Randy rga@rti.rti.org
From: John.Roberts@f440.n109.z1.fidonet.org (John Roberts)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: midi classical/nylon-string guitar
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1992 20:06:18 -0500

> Does anyone know any device that will
 
>enable me to convert a classical guitar
 
>to a midi controller? I need the feel and
 
>performance features of nylon strings. 
 
> Is there some kind of optical decice?
 
> Some clever way of coating the strings
 
>near the pick-up?
 
> There is a current thread that has mention
 
>of "Gibson's Widget" or GMT-6. Will one of
 
>these work?
 
 
 
I have a GTM6 which I use with a nylon string guitar
 
with the appropriate pickup installed.  The guitar is
 
a Takamine EC132S. The GTM6 is no longer on the market.  
 
 
 
I love the fact that
 
I'm playing a real gut string guitar.  It uses pitch
 
to voltage conversion, which works quite well. The
 
limits are a sontimes percepti delay for the lower 
 
pitched notes.  The notes from, say 4th string D up
 
track wonderfully.  The stereo cable from the guitar 
 
to the rack mount converter carries both the midi
 
pickup signal (form unknown) and the guitar piezo
 
pickup output.  The guitar audio is available from a
 
1/4" jack on the rear of the unit.
 
 
 
It requires a different playing approach, lots of care in
 
right hand attack and left hand placement.  There is a 
 
tradeoff between attack sensitivity and sustain.  If
 
you set the trigger threshold low, you get great sustain
 
but more unwanted notes due to a tiny string brush being
 
interpreted as a pluck.  With careful setup it's a
 
wonderful, powerful combination.  Another reason I like
 
the real guitar controller is the ability to use the 
 
MIDI module sounds as a background sound, lower in the
 
mix, with the main sound being the guitar.
 
 
 
When shopping for it a few years ago, I tried the Photon
 
converter, which works optically, on a nylon string
 
guitar at a local dealer.  It just was uncontrollable.
 
The low E string always misfired, giving 2 notes for each
 
E played, the false trigger (sometimes a different pitch)
 
followed by the E.  Even though this unit has more 
 
impressive controls and footpedal features than the GTM6,
 
it just didn't do its basic job with the nylon string.
 
 
 
John
From: sells@husc10.harvard.edu (Bryan Sells)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: looking for info
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:52:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Apr16.115206.11160
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard University Science Center


Howdy netters!

I am on the verge of upgrading my home studio.  I would like to ask all of you
to give me your opinions on the gear I am considering (by email, please).  I
would also like to hear from anyone who has actually bought any of this gear
recently (I would like info on where you bought it, how much paid, etc.)  This
would be really helpful and would allow me to stretch out those MIDI bucsk.  It
would help me even MORE if someone out there has any of this gear that they'd like to ai
like to sell.  I'm not against buying used.  Anyway, here's the list.  Hope to
hear from y'all soon...

Mackie 1604 mixer
Emu Procussion
Emu Proteus 1
Korg Wavestation AD
Opcoed Studio 5
S1000 RAM upgrade to 8 megs
Casio CZ101
S1000 digital i/o bus
roadcase

Thanks in advace for input.  Please don't hesitate to drop me a line at:

sells@husc.harvard.edu

or call me at 617-267-1988

BRYAN
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
From: mbl@media.mit.edu (Marc LoCascio)
Subject: Re: MOTU Apparently Now hiring ex Radio Shack Employees for Tech Support
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:07:20 GMT


wow, John, so i guess that you'd say that you're unimpressed with MotU tech
support, then?   ;-)

first off, if people answering tech support phones were programmers or even
knew enough about Mac architecture to answer the kind of questions that you 
were asking, they'd be making alot more money somewhere else.  our tech 
support people (and those of any other Mac software company that i've ever
dealt with) know alot about the basics of running the programs that they 
support.  alot of the questions that they get are of the "what do i do with
this flat plastic thing with the shiny metal flap that was in the box with
the manual for this new Performer thing that i just bought?" variety.  our
support people are great with that sorta question.  ;-)  they are also great
with the vast majority of questions that they get, which are of the "why
doesn't Performer's foo window open in system x.y.z on a Mac IIIzi on
alternate Tuesdays?"  i have no clue when people here and on PAN ask *me*
that sorta thing, since i always run on my SE30 or IIx or Quadra700 with very
simple systems and never have any problems.  (if i did, they'd get fixed in a
hurry.)  our tech support people *should* (and usually do) write down specific
technical questions like yours and pass them on to a programmer for the real
answer.  there are very few questions that you can't get the right answer to
if you explain the question clearly.

as for your specific question -- i don't think that anyone ever claimed that
MTP's in "Fast" mode get data at 32 times MIDI speed.  the sad fact is that 
the Mac UART/MIDI/interrupt structure can only support about 4 times MIDI
speed on the fastest Macs.  (actually, the MIDI "expert" for one of the major
electronic music mags did claim in an article that "Fast" mode supported 32x
MIDI bandwidth.  now *there's* someone to slag for being technically inept.)
you might get slightly increased throughput by hanging an MTP on each port,
but if you try to send two ports of MIDI data to the Mac at 4xMIDI a piece, i
think the Mac wont be able to field all of the interrupts and will start 
dropping data.  if Apple doesn't continue to burden newer and faster Macs
with newer and slower operating systems, perhaps we can speed up the Fast mode
connection some day.  until then, i've never heard anyone complain about the
4xMIDI fast mode bogging down in actual usage.

good luck!  (i think you've made the right choice.)

Marc LoCascio	(mbl@media-lab.media.mit.edu)