A Visual Example of a song
- Thread starter alexk
- Start date
Goran
Forum Member
i don't think so, sorry.
long answer: a cubase song file (.all) is not self-contained; audio files are held in a separate (per project) pool (which can be massive - especially if the song is loop/audio based and/or you're using better-than-cd-quality samples). then there's the plugins and soft synths - some save settings separately from the associated song file; likewise, samplers will only store references to samples. finally, you'd have to have all the plugins (totally identical versions, too) referred to in the file.
so other than midi data, you wouldn't be able to see anything, and that midi data would be useless without the exact sounds that generated them in the first place, though i guess you could still study this as long as the embedded tracks/parts were sensibly named. however, with exception of note on/off events and a few universal controller types and messages, most of this midi stuff would be highly specific to the synth that produced it (regardless of whether it's a software or a hardware synth).
so now you know why no one answered your question even though you asked this several times already. it verges on the silly side of things but that's cool, everyone was a beginner once - it's just that explaining this takes time
if you're looking for some advice to get you started, check out the recent bassline thread (i think you've posted there yourself so you should know which one i'm talking about) and read nik's post, that's quite enough to get you started. have fun, learn and explore
long answer: a cubase song file (.all) is not self-contained; audio files are held in a separate (per project) pool (which can be massive - especially if the song is loop/audio based and/or you're using better-than-cd-quality samples). then there's the plugins and soft synths - some save settings separately from the associated song file; likewise, samplers will only store references to samples. finally, you'd have to have all the plugins (totally identical versions, too) referred to in the file.
so other than midi data, you wouldn't be able to see anything, and that midi data would be useless without the exact sounds that generated them in the first place, though i guess you could still study this as long as the embedded tracks/parts were sensibly named. however, with exception of note on/off events and a few universal controller types and messages, most of this midi stuff would be highly specific to the synth that produced it (regardless of whether it's a software or a hardware synth).
so now you know why no one answered your question even though you asked this several times already. it verges on the silly side of things but that's cool, everyone was a beginner once - it's just that explaining this takes time
if you're looking for some advice to get you started, check out the recent bassline thread (i think you've posted there yourself so you should know which one i'm talking about) and read nik's post, that's quite enough to get you started. have fun, learn and explore
Check these files out. They aren't exactly psy and there are no effects or any plugins automated but they are well known songs. Only one is in Cubase format but it is basically just a midi file as are the rest. It isn't going to teach you how to use filters, delays and reverb but it will show you some song structure and you can always experiement by throwing on some effects and checking the difference.
O
Ott^
Guest
A Logic song I have been working on with Colin Oood.
[Sorry Col - its been a busy week. I haven't been surfing for sick porn - honest..!]
[Sorry Col - its been a busy week. I haven't been surfing for sick porn - honest..!]
here's what i'm currently working on - screenshot taken about a week ago, misses out all but 1 midi channel also
http://www.dartrecordings.co.uk/flute_auto.gif
http://www.dartrecordings.co.uk/flute_auto.gif
norty303
Member (Todger)
Aaaah, Colin, I can see you're problem, the 303 track takes up less than 1/2 of the tune..............
But really, my tracks are currently less than 1/2 as complicated but I work hard hard to compress as much into single tracks as I can. Maybe that' where I'm going wrong....
BTW, the Logic screen dump looks much nicer....(but then I'm a Logic user..) :P
Incidentaly, I once had to try to notate a Logic tune on paper for an HND music assignment, using whatever method i felt most appropriate.....it was an absolute bugger trying to explain filter, resonance and lfo changes in a static format..
But really, my tracks are currently less than 1/2 as complicated but I work hard hard to compress as much into single tracks as I can. Maybe that' where I'm going wrong....
BTW, the Logic screen dump looks much nicer....(but then I'm a Logic user..) :P
Incidentaly, I once had to try to notate a Logic tune on paper for an HND music assignment, using whatever method i felt most appropriate.....it was an absolute bugger trying to explain filter, resonance and lfo changes in a static format..
O
Ott^
Guest
My subtle humour is wasted on you lot...
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
Reconstructed
Member
...or perhaps Amputee Sex is now widely recognized as a fundamental part of production?
It's about damn time, Amputee Sex as a tool of better sound design should have been recognized years ago.
It's about damn time, Amputee Sex as a tool of better sound design should have been recognized years ago.
JPsychodelicacy
Studio Elf
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin OOOD @ Mar 12 2004, 08:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Voice of Cod: "It's Just A Ride" [/quote:76efa76420]
No prizes for guessing the sample you're using in *that* one then.
J.
No prizes for guessing the sample you're using in *that* one then.
J.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Colin OOOD @ Mar 13 2004, 03:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Any chance of some track names with that? Maybe a timeline? [/quote:f189b2c428]
me?
oh go on then have a new screenshot
since the last one i've mixed a bunch of stuff down but nuendo has decided i'm not allowed any more new audio channels, so i'm deleting no-longer-used stuff and putting them there, so its all a total mess and not remotely organised.
me?
oh go on then have a new screenshot
since the last one i've mixed a bunch of stuff down but nuendo has decided i'm not allowed any more new audio channels, so i'm deleting no-longer-used stuff and putting them there, so its all a total mess and not remotely organised.
O
Ott^
Guest
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (soliptic @ Mar 13 2004, 04:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> its all a total mess and not remotely organised. [/quote:55fda52c3a]
Having looked at that, I can't tell you how pleased I am not to be working on it with you.
Good luck.
Having looked at that, I can't tell you how pleased I am not to be working on it with you.
Good luck.
O
Ott^
Guest
Hehehe...
To be fair though, any reasonably complex tune looks like a total dog's breakfast on SX/Nuendo. They really fucked up that automation/instrument folder/VST Effects track bit of the GUI.
So - let me get this straight.
For one track of synth pad I have;
1. A midi track containing the note information.
2. A VST Instrument track for automating synth nobs etc.
3. A VST Effect track for every plugin on that instrument.
and each parameter shall have it's own dedicated track too.
Gives me a fucking migraine.
Logic 5.x gives me all that tweakability in ONE arrange track, with a handy drop down menu to choose which parameter or combination of parameters I wish to view.
Most elegant.
Now if only it sounded as good as Steinbug, I wouldn't need this sodding mixer and rack of dusty old junk....
:crazy:
To be fair though, any reasonably complex tune looks like a total dog's breakfast on SX/Nuendo. They really fucked up that automation/instrument folder/VST Effects track bit of the GUI.
So - let me get this straight.
For one track of synth pad I have;
1. A midi track containing the note information.
2. A VST Instrument track for automating synth nobs etc.
3. A VST Effect track for every plugin on that instrument.
and each parameter shall have it's own dedicated track too.
Gives me a fucking migraine.
Logic 5.x gives me all that tweakability in ONE arrange track, with a handy drop down menu to choose which parameter or combination of parameters I wish to view.
Most elegant.
Now if only it sounded as good as Steinbug, I wouldn't need this sodding mixer and rack of dusty old junk....
:crazy:
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ott^ @ Mar 14 2004, 05:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> So - let me get this straight.
For one track of synth pad I have;
1. A midi track containing the note information.
2. A VST Instrument track for automating synth nobs etc.
3. A VST Effect track for every plugin on that instrument.
and each parameter shall have it's own dedicated track too.
[/quote:9b56ccab54]
Well actually no thats not straight
For one track of synth pad you would have:
- one MIDI channel containing the note (+cc + aftertouch + whatever) info
- one channel for that instruments output, with all channel parameters (volume, send levels, etc) and the channel's insert parameters (eg, ohmboyz D1 filt cut) available via a menu in that.
- one global "plugin automation" channel, with all plugin automation parameters for those plugins not attached to a channel (ie, master fx, send fx, and instruments) available via a menu in that. This would handle my V-Station FiltEnv Depth, but also my S1 NuendoReverb Predelay.
So, no, each parameter doesnt get its own track, you can flip between them in the menu on a single track if you want. I just have expanded them with the [+] to have a track each because i wanted to see multiple parameters against each other... so the track bloat is my fault. I could easily show only one track and use the menu, or indeed hide the automation altogether.
For one track of synth pad I have;
1. A midi track containing the note information.
2. A VST Instrument track for automating synth nobs etc.
3. A VST Effect track for every plugin on that instrument.
and each parameter shall have it's own dedicated track too.
[/quote:9b56ccab54]
Well actually no thats not straight
For one track of synth pad you would have:
- one MIDI channel containing the note (+cc + aftertouch + whatever) info
- one channel for that instruments output, with all channel parameters (volume, send levels, etc) and the channel's insert parameters (eg, ohmboyz D1 filt cut) available via a menu in that.
- one global "plugin automation" channel, with all plugin automation parameters for those plugins not attached to a channel (ie, master fx, send fx, and instruments) available via a menu in that. This would handle my V-Station FiltEnv Depth, but also my S1 NuendoReverb Predelay.
So, no, each parameter doesnt get its own track, you can flip between them in the menu on a single track if you want. I just have expanded them with the [+] to have a track each because i wanted to see multiple parameters against each other... so the track bloat is my fault. I could easily show only one track and use the menu, or indeed hide the automation altogether.
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ott^ @ Mar 14 2004, 05:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Now if only it sounded as good as Steinbug, I wouldn't need this sodding mixer and rack of dusty old junk....
:crazy: [/quote:5e0bf9898c]
Mate... that 'sodding mixer and rack of dusty old junk' is one of the things that gives your productions an edge IMO, and forces you to work in the way you do. I agree, the SX mixer is particularly transparent, but you try doing a mute-button arrangement on it, even with a control surface... :crazy: Also, 'boosting at 2k with one band and cutting at 2k with another' doesn't change the sound in a pleasing yet indefinable way... it doesn't change the sound at all, so there's another technique out of the window. You've got the best of both worlds at the moment (plus from my point of view it makes collaborating good fun and very interesting) so can yer bleedin' whining and get on with the job!
Mind you, SX v3.0 can't come soon enough...
:crazy: [/quote:5e0bf9898c]
Mate... that 'sodding mixer and rack of dusty old junk' is one of the things that gives your productions an edge IMO, and forces you to work in the way you do. I agree, the SX mixer is particularly transparent, but you try doing a mute-button arrangement on it, even with a control surface... :crazy: Also, 'boosting at 2k with one band and cutting at 2k with another' doesn't change the sound in a pleasing yet indefinable way... it doesn't change the sound at all, so there's another technique out of the window. You've got the best of both worlds at the moment (plus from my point of view it makes collaborating good fun and very interesting) so can yer bleedin' whining and get on with the job!
Mind you, SX v3.0 can't come soon enough...