![]() ![]() Those from F#3 (15_F#2_4th) to G#4 (29_G#3_2nd) are muffled as if filtered.For example, octal 11 would be 00H, 12 would be 01H, etc.Īnd, yes The program change and bank change numbers in the picture are correct. Numbering should begin with 00H and increment sequentially. This should have no effect on the numbers used for patch change. Some instruments number their internal patches in octal numerics. The ability to reassign programs to a given program change number should be part of an instrument's capabilities. And I have been using it for yearsĬite (from Complete MIDI MIDI 1.0 Detailed Specification page:18) Information is not wrong, but the source is wrongly remembered.Īltough some manufacturers use 1-128 (eg: Roland GS) and some others 0-127Ġ-127 representation (for technical reasons) are also used in Soundfont editors and most (old?) MIDI editors. :PĪs a result, instead of "GM" there, you can replace it with "Internal Numbering", "0-Based Numbering". After all, it seems like I'm confused too. However, this is what confuses many years between users (GM, XG and GS or Internal numbering and External representation). I wrote it as I remember it They use 1-128 as the external representation but Internal numbering is always 0-127 ![]() ![]() I think you can get a very high quality soundfont as a result of this effort. Once you find the right set-up, then the rest is very easy. Therefore, it is important to keep the volume at a certain level while recording. it might be nice to leave a space at the top by entering a lower value of at least 0.9 or 0.85.īut while doing this, make sure that there is not a huge level difference between the raw samples. There is an input box in the normalization window. It is not easy to hear, but a familiar ear detects it. Is it possible to see a raw sample (or several samples) that has not been normalized (and no other process)? Because in some samples, there is some kind of a bad digital frequency fall-off in the middle. This means, to me, that the samples are over-filtered or over-processed. I don't know if it is caused by other strings that are not well muted or somewhere else.Īlso, although you have recorded with a microphone, I cannot hear any ambient sound. In B_5, there is still a sympathetic resonance towards the end of the recording. These samples are much better than the previous ones: And every subsequent operation/process on the samples will reduce the timbre/clarity of the sound. ![]() Because the level of unwanted noise (eg: "hiss" sound) will also increase. The closer the recording to the ideal level, and the less processing on the sample later, the better.īut still, if the recording level is too low and there is no way to prevent it, you will also need to perform a noise removal process. (I think you have a preamp since you use a condenser microphone.) There is always a way to increase the record gain.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |