My own FluidR3 SoundFont for MuseScore 3
Ok. I'm going to say this once, and ONLY once. (I said it a LOT of times in each of the forums). "I DON'T LIKE THE ORIGINAL SOUNDS IN THE FLUIDR3 SOUNDFONT!!!!!"
So far, ChurchOrganist has made better ideas to edit the SoundFont, even though it says "Please do NOT redistribute any of these samples!" Which doesn't make any sense. However, I made a LOT of adjustments to the SoundFont myself.
How about downloading my version of the FluidR3 SoundFont here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2I_8bgGH-Q3Z0YyVGJncnAxYTQ
You can download the License that goes with it and find out more information, and the .sf2 version, and NOT the .sf3 version, but just in case, You can download the .sf3 version if you want to.
And I know that this is the kind of SoundFont I want to hear when I use MuseScore. Maybe for the Default for MuseScore 3.
Enjoy.
PS: I hope it's going to work!!!
Comments
I tried this out on a variety of scores, listening for both overall effect but also soloing various instruments to get a sense for each.
I do like this rather better than some of the other soundfonts posted here. I still am not clear on the licensing, but I'll assume that since that this has been explained in detail, you have therefore carefully checked to be sure your samples are all free and clear. So I will just offer a few specific comments - as I said, overall, I do like it.
My biggest complaint is that the saxophones are pretty weak - thin and nasally. I guess that's an appropriate sound in classical world, but it doesn't work at all for jazz, and of course more jazz than classical will call for saxophones. Would you consider using the original FluidR3 sounds for those? They really are the best for jazz in any freely licensed soundfont I have heard. Or maybe someone else has other suggestions, but I have really checked out quite a few, and it's the saxophones more than anything that are the deal-breaker for many a soundfont to me.
Aside from that, the only other common (in my world) instrument that stands out as notably weak compared to the others is the bassoon. First thing I noticed even before soloing it was how harsh the attack was - it stands out as almost percussive in an otherwise legato ensemble passage. And really, when soloing, it doesn't even sound that much like a bassoon after the initial attack, either - like it's maybe too short a loop? Here again I think the original FluidR3 bassoon is a huge improvement, but I haven't tried as many options, so I can't say there aren't others I'd like as much if you are religiously opposed to using any FluidR3 samples.
The piano is a bit dull as well. Here I don't think FluidR3 is necessarily an improvement - it has way more depth, but it's brighter as well, which is good in some contexts (eg, jazz ensembles) but not so much for solo classical piano music. The one you are using isn't bright enough to be especially good for jazz ensembles nor rich enough to be especially good for solo classical music, so I don't know that there is any context in which I'd have chosen it. There are definitely better options out there. Plenty of other folks have done research here and can hopefully offer opinions.
Aside from these issues, though, again, I do rather like the overall effect, both in the jazz and classical music I tried it with, both small and large ensembles. Nice job!
In reply to I tried this out on a variety by Marc Sabatella
I do have to say, the saxophones need to be balanced. While I don't mind the sound, if I score for concert band, the saxophones dominate and overpower the other instruments.
In reply to I do have to say, the by Elwin
The ideal concert band saxophone sound is indeed the "classical" sound that this soundfont provides, so no surprise you wouldn't mind it for that context. As for balance, this is, I suppose, another issue with trying to have one soundfont that works for all genres - if anything. the saxophones are little *under* the levels they should be for a jazz big band. Not by a lot, and it's pretty subjective so I wouldn't necessarily be arguing to make them louder, but I definitely wouldn't want them less loud.
This just illustrates fact that the appropriate sound as well as balance for different types of ensembles and genres differs, which can have a lot to do with why different soundfonts might be preferred by different people. And maybe we should consider having two separate soundfonts available. Perhaps structured (via SFZ?) in such a way that only the instruments that really need to be different are present in both, we we don't have two huge soundfonts with tons of duplication.
In reply to The ideal concert band by Marc Sabatella
Personally I see the use of monolithic GM2 soundfonts becoming less important now that hpfmn has improved Zerberus so much.
The future I see for MuseScore 3 onwards is the supply of separate instruments using the SFZ format which can be autoloaded from the Choose instruments dialogue.
The GM soundset isn't ideal for our purposes - when, for example, would anyone score anything for Seashore? The world has moved on since the 1990s and better alternatives are available.
All I have to say right now is that the bassoon sound tends to dominate. That was all I could find right now. Balancing the bassoon sound is what's needed.
I will run this through the Tchaikovsky test soon.
Thank you for doing this work on the soundfont Arianna.
I haven't had time to assess it fully, but I see there are a number of improvements.
There are one or two things I'm not sure of - the first is the use of Mellow Grand Piano to replace the original Yamaha Grand Piano. Mellow Grand Piano was a quick and dirty hack of the original Yamaha Grand Piano to give an alternative to users who were clamouring that it was too bright! Consequently it has a lot of the problems inherent in the original samples, not least of which is the excessive mechanical noise present in the samples. I'm pretty sure that we can do better!
Second is the Guitar Harmonics these are from a heavily distorted electric guitar, and so would be completely out of context for a user wanting harmonics for an acoustic or jazz guitar piece.
Also, the size of the file has doubled!
The only big issue is the licence file....
I'm sorry Arianna, but you can't just change the licence to CC0 like that.
In doing so you have violated the terms of the licence supplied with FluidR3Mono which says specifically.....
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
You also haven't included the Copyright notices of the other contributors to the soundfont in violation of this section of the licence text.....
The acknowledgements and copyright notices above should be included in any derivative work.
Frank Wen designated an MIT licence for this, and I'm afraid we're stuck with it.
Well done though on supplying some documentation and acknowledgements. May I suggest that you use the original FluidR3Mono_License.md file as a starting point, and then add your documentation to it. It is simply a text file and will open in Notepad if you're on Windows or the Mac equivalent if you're on Mac. I believe the reason that it is an md file is so it automatically displays on GitHub.
Finally, please will you let us all know what you are doing by opening an issue in the Issue Tracker when you do work on FluidR3Mono, just so we all know what is happening.
In reply to Thank you for doing this work by ChurchOrganist
I think the contributions being made here are remarkable, and represent the ideals that open source software should aspire to.
But- not everyone hates the present default soundfont. Please don't make the mistake that you are in the majority just because everyone that you associate with agrees with you. (There's a sociology term that describes this phenomena, I just can't remember it right now.)
I use Musescore mainly for orchestra/opera transcriptions, and to my ears it gives pretty good results in that genre. (Except for "choir ahhs".) Sometimes I use it "as is", and sometimes I use Timbres of Heaven for the strings or percussion, depending on the character of the piece. If I was doing jazz ensembles, dixieland, marching band, or concert band, I suspect that no single soundfont would be satisfactory and that each genre would need a unique sf.
I am encouraged by a comment (by Lasconic?) in another thread that enhancements in the next release will allow expansion of the zerberus sfz format. It sounds like the instruments will be more "a la carte" than at present. It would be great to be able to choose between several different options for strings, brass, etc. without having to load several different massize files that I only use 2% of each. Plus the increased time for Musescore to boot.
In reply to I think the contributions by marty strasinger
I'm a novice at "sound font hunting" but the first one I tried after having used the Musescore stock font was considerably worse in tone quality. Synthesized sounds are not my cup of tea, however I shall keep looking, as there are so many useful aspects to this program.