Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: guitarists: triple play?

Per, do you have a preferred one of them?

-----Original Message-----
From: Per Boysen [mailto:perboysen@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, 5 January 2015 8:06 PM
To: Loopers-Delight
Subject: Re: guitarists: triple play?

I've started with "MIDI guitar" in the late eighties, with the first 
models and have recently been using the GR-55 (+ GK3 pickups), but I still 
prefer none of that but rather playing my usual audio signal into some 
audio-to-waveform converter. These are available as software plugins for 
those who play through a computer and then there are some new digital amps 
sporting these algorithms as well. This gives you a direct monophonic 
synth tone with immediate musicality, i.e. no latency and accurately 
following how you're shaping the tone on the physical instrument.

Some might not like playing monophonic lines but I think that's great for 
live looping because in a few seconds you can build any chord in a looper 
by layering the required number of notes.

Greetings from Sweden

Per Boysen

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 12:45 PM, andy butler <akbutler@tiscali.co.uk> 
> On 05/01/2015 09:35, Diarmuid Pigott wrote:
>> My own experience of MIDI from strings is that the detection of 
>> vibrato and bend and gliss is pretty much dependant on the MIDI 
>> instrument I am using.
> I think there's a bit of a miss-conception going around.
> The Midi instrument actually has nothing to do with detection, it only 
> responds to midi commands.
> By then the detection is already done.
> What *is* important is that the Midi instrument needs to respond 
> correctly in order to interpret the pitch information correctly.
> i.e. the amount of pitch change in response to MidiPitchBend has to be 
> set correctly.
> That's actually rather trivial to set up, as long as the midi 
> instrument supports it.
> For a device like the Fishman the situation is a bit different, in 
> that there may be processing of the audio from the pickup.
> In that case it's obviously possible to pass the audio in some form 
> and get what seems like "perfect tracking", when no tracking has been 
> needed.
> For note detection there's an absolute limit that's never going to be 
> beaten.
> I look at it from a slightly different angle to the usual idea of note 
> frequencies.
> The impulse from plucking the string has to travel up to the fret and 
> back to the pickup before it's possible to calculate which fret was 
> used.
> Using that way of looking at things the Axon system can make a the 
> quickest possible guess at what the note played is, then it uses a 
> more regular analysis to measure the frequency. Should the initial 
> guess be wrong a correction is made to the Note-On that was sent using 
> MidiPitchBend.
> As the Axon system is patented then it kind of looks like no-ones 
> going to get faster tracking without licensing it.
> Warbling on a sustained note occurs when the fundamental of the note 
> fades before the harmonics, so on some instruments there'll be one or 
> two notes that warble every time.
> Just down to the resonance of the instrument.
> If the instrument is specially designed to work with midi convertion I 
> suspect they spend a lot of time working removing any 'bad notes'.
> If there's going to be any improvement over the Axon system it won't 
> be in fast detection of the note, but rather in the ability to keep 
> tracking a note as it dies away.
> andy
> ps. for playing around, the monophonic devices by Sonuus have somewhat 
> slower note detection but are fairly warble resistant.