Can music be regenerated virtually?
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
Old idea called 'mod' :). Was the best way of doing music back in the days when Amigas walked the earth. You can get some very nice software http://www.madtracker.org/[^] to make music with this technique. I have heard some pretty decent things done with it, though would be a while before you could match Squarepusher.
-
It's called MIDI...
-- My disbelief is not a belief.
-
Old idea called 'mod' :). Was the best way of doing music back in the days when Amigas walked the earth. You can get some very nice software http://www.madtracker.org/[^] to make music with this technique. I have heard some pretty decent things done with it, though would be a while before you could match Squarepusher.
Hrm.. I wonder if I can find one of the billion versions of Axel Foley. :)
-- My disbelief is not a belief.
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
I think the general term for what you're describing is called Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI) and it doesn't have much to do with waves. ;) That's what Direct Music uses. Other than that, stuff like this is all over the place in programs like Fruity Loops (no ad intended:)) and other synth-like apps. As for a framework, there's got to be one lying around somewhere...
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
Anup Shinde wrote:
Music player framework (MPF)
...codenamed The Harp, later renamed back to MMPF (Microsoft Music Player Framework), then a petition is filed to make it The Harp again, and 5 years later we have The MPF.
:badger:
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
Thanks guys, i got your point....and now my inventions proved waste :(( But I still have question(s) :) MIDI is small size and even plain vocals are small size (they dont need much bandwidth)....then why are the MP3 so big size files (5 MB is big enough) ;P cud be silly question.....but i like asking stupid questions :laugh:
-
Anup Shinde wrote:
Music player framework (MPF)
...codenamed The Harp, later renamed back to MMPF (Microsoft Music Player Framework), then a petition is filed to make it The Harp again, and 5 years later we have The MPF.
:badger:
-
Thanks guys, i got your point....and now my inventions proved waste :(( But I still have question(s) :) MIDI is small size and even plain vocals are small size (they dont need much bandwidth)....then why are the MP3 so big size files (5 MB is big enough) ;P cud be silly question.....but i like asking stupid questions :laugh:
Anup Shinde wrote:
now my inventions proved waste
Did you create anything in the first place that went waste?
-
Anup Shinde wrote:
now my inventions proved waste
Did you create anything in the first place that went waste?
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
Anup Shinde wrote:
Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...
I take it you don't play an instrument yourself? Although there is repetition to a degree you can't fake the subtle inflections of a passionate guitar solo. Long live real music I say. And no, dance music is not real...
-
Thanks guys, i got your point....and now my inventions proved waste :(( But I still have question(s) :) MIDI is small size and even plain vocals are small size (they dont need much bandwidth)....then why are the MP3 so big size files (5 MB is big enough) ;P cud be silly question.....but i like asking stupid questions :laugh:
[oversimplification mode ON] There are two ways of representing audio in a computer: as a waveform (PCM and many more) and as a sequence of instructions (MIDI). Waveforms are accurate, they just note down thousands of times per second the value of the audio wave, and any usual speaker can be used to reproduce them. A single song in wave form easily takes 50 MBs of space. MP3s are an evolution of this technique, with an amazing, lossy, compression algorithm, but they still have to contain the values of the sound wave. There are algorithms with better compression ratio, MP3 is just the most popular. MIDIs on contrary just keep track of the "sheets": notes, instruments, time. Sure they're smaller, but then they delegate the rendering of the audio wave to the listener device. This means that MIDIs do not sound the same across different PCs (try with a pc equipped with different audio cards and you'll hear it by yourself). It's the same difference between a 50$ keyboard and a 30k$ Grand Piano: they do not sound the same, while they both have keys. They're consequently not suitable for hi-fidelity audio distribution. Moreover, it is not possible to create a midi from a waveform (while the contrary is easy), since waveforms are a single signal composed by the sum of vocals and different instruments. And, of course, there's the issue of post-processing filters: many songs we have on CDs are heavily manipulated after recording with various techniques. These filters are not easy to represent with a MIDI notation, while in waveforms we hear their result.
Luca The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
-
Thanks guys, i got your point....and now my inventions proved waste :(( But I still have question(s) :) MIDI is small size and even plain vocals are small size (they dont need much bandwidth)....then why are the MP3 so big size files (5 MB is big enough) ;P cud be silly question.....but i like asking stupid questions :laugh:
Because an mp3 is real music, and a MIDI file is information that a MIDI synthesizer uses to imitate real music.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
[oversimplification mode ON] There are two ways of representing audio in a computer: as a waveform (PCM and many more) and as a sequence of instructions (MIDI). Waveforms are accurate, they just note down thousands of times per second the value of the audio wave, and any usual speaker can be used to reproduce them. A single song in wave form easily takes 50 MBs of space. MP3s are an evolution of this technique, with an amazing, lossy, compression algorithm, but they still have to contain the values of the sound wave. There are algorithms with better compression ratio, MP3 is just the most popular. MIDIs on contrary just keep track of the "sheets": notes, instruments, time. Sure they're smaller, but then they delegate the rendering of the audio wave to the listener device. This means that MIDIs do not sound the same across different PCs (try with a pc equipped with different audio cards and you'll hear it by yourself). It's the same difference between a 50$ keyboard and a 30k$ Grand Piano: they do not sound the same, while they both have keys. They're consequently not suitable for hi-fidelity audio distribution. Moreover, it is not possible to create a midi from a waveform (while the contrary is easy), since waveforms are a single signal composed by the sum of vocals and different instruments. And, of course, there's the issue of post-processing filters: many songs we have on CDs are heavily manipulated after recording with various techniques. These filters are not easy to represent with a MIDI notation, while in waveforms we hear their result.
Luca The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
-
Thanks for the real detailed info. You said that MIDIs donot sound same across diffrent PCs. But WAV audio will sound the same everywhere. Then if I go thru the path MIDI->Rendered WAV->Soundcard, it should be fine ...right?
I'm not sure about what you mean. If you mean "if I copy across computers the rendered WAV, it will sound right", you're right, but you'll be trasferring a 50MB WAV, not a MIDI. Remember that the transition MIDI->Speaker is usually done by the soundcard, in hardware. A software MIDI rendering is possible of course, but home-synthetized instruments will never sound like real instruments, there's too much detail in the acoustic field that is not encoded by MIDI. Can you describe using your own words the difference between a keyboard and a piano? Imagine doing that in mathematical terms...
Luca The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
-
Let me explain...A lot of people are trying to find compression techniques for audio.... I just had a thought if we had a framework like "Music player framework (MPF)" that would have all the musical instruments virtualized. Well that's very much possible . Example Microsoft's Direct Music producer Most songs/music have repetitive sounds...like a drum beat every 2s and a flute played in background... If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression? Vocals cannot be programmed until machines can sing songs, but vocals take only a fraction of memory in the audio file Does anybody know any such kind of work done before? Anyways, today, I did invent two new terms MPF and MPP :laugh:
Anup Shinde wrote:
If we can analyze the WAV audio and therby create a music-player-program(MPP) that would run on MPF, wouldnt that lead to a lot of compression?
Yes, and a lot of loss.
-
Hrm.. I wonder if I can find one of the billion versions of Axel Foley. :)
-- My disbelief is not a belief.
Hahaha, memories!
-
Old idea called 'mod' :). Was the best way of doing music back in the days when Amigas walked the earth. You can get some very nice software http://www.madtracker.org/[^] to make music with this technique. I have heard some pretty decent things done with it, though would be a while before you could match Squarepusher.
-
[oversimplification mode ON] There are two ways of representing audio in a computer: as a waveform (PCM and many more) and as a sequence of instructions (MIDI). Waveforms are accurate, they just note down thousands of times per second the value of the audio wave, and any usual speaker can be used to reproduce them. A single song in wave form easily takes 50 MBs of space. MP3s are an evolution of this technique, with an amazing, lossy, compression algorithm, but they still have to contain the values of the sound wave. There are algorithms with better compression ratio, MP3 is just the most popular. MIDIs on contrary just keep track of the "sheets": notes, instruments, time. Sure they're smaller, but then they delegate the rendering of the audio wave to the listener device. This means that MIDIs do not sound the same across different PCs (try with a pc equipped with different audio cards and you'll hear it by yourself). It's the same difference between a 50$ keyboard and a 30k$ Grand Piano: they do not sound the same, while they both have keys. They're consequently not suitable for hi-fidelity audio distribution. Moreover, it is not possible to create a midi from a waveform (while the contrary is easy), since waveforms are a single signal composed by the sum of vocals and different instruments. And, of course, there's the issue of post-processing filters: many songs we have on CDs are heavily manipulated after recording with various techniques. These filters are not easy to represent with a MIDI notation, while in waveforms we hear their result.
Luca The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
Two things to note about mp3 compression is that it is lossy and use is made of perceptual weighting to determine what to discard. Perceptual weighting means that it tries to find information in the signal that the listener won't be able to hear, and discard it, and because it discards information it is lossy compression. An example of how it works, if during one time segment there is a lot of signal around say 1kHz, relatively little around 3kHz, depending on the weighting rules, most or all of the information of the 3kHz signal will be discarded. This was the result of many listening tests to determine what listeners could distinguish.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
I'm not sure about what you mean. If you mean "if I copy across computers the rendered WAV, it will sound right", you're right, but you'll be trasferring a 50MB WAV, not a MIDI. Remember that the transition MIDI->Speaker is usually done by the soundcard, in hardware. A software MIDI rendering is possible of course, but home-synthetized instruments will never sound like real instruments, there's too much detail in the acoustic field that is not encoded by MIDI. Can you describe using your own words the difference between a keyboard and a piano? Imagine doing that in mathematical terms...
Luca The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
Well you got it right....i was referring to software MIDI rendering... The next line that you say: "MIDI cannot encode everything". I think this takes me back to the main question "Can music be generated virtually"" without loss of the ascoutic field that you are referring to?" I was referring to MIDI as some ppl here claim that MIDI can encode every instrument. (I dont have much knowledge to argue with them in this case) Also real music has noise associated with it.. Say when someone plays guitar...there is also a squeaky sound that you can hear....thats noise and has nothing to do with the actual tunes being played... Synthesized music can eliminate that.... and for the ascoutic range I think that every musical part can be represented as a mathematical equation using sines, cosines, etc...prob is that its very complex...