![]() A true AI should be interactive meaning that as you get closer to what you seek you should be able to tell it “More like this” and variations should be a logical extension of this. I have all the melody generators out there as well. I think it would be a good tool and certainly much more affordable then Synfire. It is not intuitive in anyway and requires lots of clicking around. And you can drag and drop chord progressions from scaler into Rapid Thanks for your reply. For example, you can take the ‘performances’ from Scaler and import them as phrases to be used in Rapid Composer. In the meantime, Rapid Composer and Scaler work quite well together if you understand what each can do. But I suspect that, given the resources at Davide and co’s disposal, other ideas which evolve the product more incrementally will be preferred by them as a ‘safer’ development strategy. I agree it would be great if it could do it. My guess is that introducing the ability for the user to define and edit melodies within scaler would be quite a significant task for the developers. Scaler’s first emphasis is on identify scale and chord progressions, and the melodic part has only developed later with the addition of ‘performances’ as an alternative means of playing chord notes rather than simply playing or strumming the notes of a given chord. Rapid Composer by Music Developments (which in my view is much more accessible than synfire, not to mention cheaper) has a similar idea with what it calls phrases. ![]() And the core idea is of melodies being defined independently of the chord/scale they are played in (what synfire calls a ‘figure’), so that a chord/scale has to be specified before any ‘figure’ can be turned into actual notes. ![]() As noted earlier, the issue is that the basic idea of synfire is great, but the software tries to do too much which is “daw like” and dilutes that basic idea. Despite that, I just couldn’t get on with it. I may continue on and on, it's really fascinating to see the similarities, but will stop here intentionally.I have tried the demo of synfire twice and spent a significant amount of time reading the manual and trying to get familiar with its workflow. Wonders of evolution (new music) happens by variation (happy accidents) of DNA and selection on basis of a fitness criteria (= sounds good). The enormous variety of nature is based on small building blocks on the level of DNA and its environment. DNA is expressed (= rendering) into proteins which happens by genetically hard rules (harmony) and also epigentic environmental factors (parameters). Same in nature, where DNA takes the same role like figures. Biologic functions (= final music) are driven by proteins, encoded by DNA. They encode pitch relation but are not rendered MIDI yet until a seperate rendering step is done. The insight is that Synfire's concepts (encoding building block by figures, late rendering into notes based on harmonic context and parameters) is basically extremly close to natural genetic principles which has created the enormous variation in living nature. Is hopefully embraced, because to me its extremly encouraging about Synfire and its potential to explore new territories. Might feel a bit strange in this music dominated community. I am a trained chemist and do music just as hobby. I just had an insight I want share.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |