We need better soundfont preset retention going from 3 to 4
Example:
I have an MS3 file; it contains four keyboard parts.
They started as piano lines, but they have been changed to different presets.
(synth brass 4, fast strings, pan flute, halo pad)
The preset numbers are stored in the file; I checked.
When you open the same file with MS4 however, it ignores this and gives you four piano voices, with no indication of what they used to be.
This should be handled better.
Thanks
Comments
As an experiment, I fond an old computer with MU3 on it and I set up a score with 4 piano parts and four of your instrument parts. (synth brass 4, fast strings, pan flute, halo pad) 8 parts all together. I then changed the piano parts to the four instrument parts.
I saved and opened it in MU4. As you discovered, the parts that were originally piano were piano in MU4. But the other four opened properly as the original instruments.
Seems to me that MU4 opens what ever the original setup was. When I read the xml version of both MU3 and MU4 files both list piano.
In reply to As an experiment, I fond an… by bobjp
Thanks for doing this.
Curious: how did you create those specific instrument parts? I don't believe any were choices in MS3, even when listing all instruments.
In reply to Thanks for doing this… by mkjnovak
...and in my file I believe the presets were merely referenced by number
Program=xx or similar
In reply to Thanks for doing this… by mkjnovak
They are indeed in "All Instruments".
In reply to Thanks for doing this… by mkjnovak
I checked again.
Halo and Pan Flute work; the other two not specifically correct.
After going over bobjp's advice, it definitely helps, but it's still not perfect.
Two of the voices can be gotten exactly; two only with confirmation.
This is not helped by the 'choose automatically' setting in 4.
I see no way to know for sure that Fast Strings or Synth Brass 4 has been selected for instance without manually choosing them myself.
This still does not address the biggest fault I see:
I hadn't mentioned: in a lot of my scores I use the bass, trumpet or synth instruments to be able to access channel labeling and get many synth or guitar sounds on the one staff.
It would still be nice if this behaved better.
In reply to After going over bobjp's… by mkjnovak
Some things to consider:
I think that even though MU3 and MU4 share certain things, I treat them as though they almost totally different programs. Consider that earlier versions can't open later files. MU4 tends to claim MU3 files. MU3 can't use Muse sounds. And on and on.
And still we think that because both have MuseScore in the title, that they ought to work together better. I don't believe that is possible or desirable. A great many don't like the things that got left out of MU4. Regressions they are called. I believe some of these things were holding progress back. My personal view, of course. I compose. For my work MU3 sounds are so bad as to "unusable". To use a phrase often aimed at MU4. We each have different needs. People need to use the version that suits them.
One last thing. I also have many scores in Sibelius. When I open a Sibelius score in MU4, I have a lot of things to adjust.
In reply to Some things to consider: I… by bobjp
Fair enough
Frankly, I was bugged by the regressions, still am. I waited this long to try 4 because of it.
Going from one program to another, I expect extra work.
One version to the next ought to be simpler; my $.02.
In reply to Some things to consider: I… by bobjp
Totally agree. It is currently helpful to treat MS3 and MS4 as distinctly separate programs and although there is obviously much overlap in functionality they do meet different needs. Maybe MS5 will bring things together for a 'best of both worlds' solution.
Note:
1. MS3 can be connected to VST3s for improved playback
2. MS3.7 ("Evolution") can open MS4 files
In reply to Totally agree. It is… by yonah_ag
Interesting read:
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/23659
In reply to Interesting read: https:/… by graffesmusic
er...thanks?
That is my issue post I started.
I confess I don't see the direct relevance to this topic though.
In reply to er...thanks? That is my… by mkjnovak
The relevance?
I really don't think that Muse Cy. will develop anything related to soundfonts anymore. The future is Muse Sounds.
In reply to The relevance? I really don… by graffesmusic
Did you read the later posts by Chris and Casper, including:
"...the future of the sound font. (My personal opinion is that it would be awesome to have it maintained again; even though sound fonts might not be able to produce the same advanced playback as the more complicated MuseSampler tech, I see no reason for not welcoming improvements to the sound font as well.)"
I've got to try to be optimistic about the future of soundfonts in MuseScore.
I have so far refrained from showing my cynicism that matches yours frankly for precisely the same reason.
In reply to Did you read the later posts… by mkjnovak
The Philharmonia Symphony Orchestra have made thousands of samples available for free use. You could have a go with some of these to make a soundfont for any of the orchestral instruments for which they have provided samples.
https://philharmonia.co.uk/resources/sound-samples/
In reply to The Philharmonia Symphony… by yonah_ag
Some of these samples were already used a couple of years ago in the open source (sfz) 'Virtual Playing Orchestra' http://virtualplaying.com/virtual-playing-orchestra/ (and probably also No budget orchestra),
together with various other open source samples, e.g. Versilian.
In reply to Some of these samples were… by graffesmusic
Fantastic! I'll give it a try.
In reply to Interesting read: https:/… by graffesmusic
Que?
In reply to Totally agree. It is… by yonah_ag
I tried VST3 orchestras in MU3 and in MU4. They just sound bland to me. Much like the fonts I paid for in Sibelius. Yes they read notation and follow dynamics and other marks That MU4 might ignore. I get it. But 2 things occur to me.
1. Many of the VSTs are too perfect. Too smooth. I write for playback. You'd think that I would want all that. What I want is something that sounds like music. Not sterile playback.
2. Writing for notation only doesn't have to require fancy fonts.
I sometimes have two scores for any given project. One for real players and one to get some kind of musical playback. Playback that the VSTs I've tried can't provide. Muse sounds are far, far from perfect. But they can't be accused of being boring.
In reply to I tried VST3 orchestras in… by bobjp
I mostly agree with bobjp here. MU3 can take quite a bit of work to get VSTs to sound good [or like music according to bobjp] depending on the instrument/style/part. You'd be better off using a DAW and exporting midi from MU3 for playback purposes. And MU4 doesn't yet have the architecture to make VSTs sound good or musical. That is apparently in the works, though.
In that sense, musesounds is the best and kind of the only option.
On the other hand, if you want to use instruments or sounds that musesounds doesn't offer, you're out of luck (in some ways). Mainly just the limited support for midi at the moment (which greatly influences how these work).
The fact that many users will often need 2 scores (one for playback and one for notation) is the only thing that really holds back MU4 imo. That will likely be addressed in MU5 though
In reply to I mostly agree with bobjp… by speedmeteor101
Except that is not what the OP asks: better soundfont preset retention.
In reply to Except that is not what the… by graffesmusic
Of course. I saw the deprecation of soundfonts addressed above, and figured there wasn't much more to add there. Especially since I expect to manually fix most MU3 projects being opened in MU4 for articulation playback, not to mention instruments.
Basically, since VSTs were brought up, I assumed it was assumed they were to be lumped in as 'better than or equal to' sound fonts. In which case, a common viewpoint here, is that the addition/development of musesounds is more important than these regression features such as soundfont retention.
And I was making a case that argument only stands if the necessary tools/features for soundfonts and VSTs are also not in place (given VSTs often require more to control than soundfonts... especially since retention is more of a general file handling matter than it is a playback issue)