(Mailing List Recent Archive)
This web-page allows you to view most posts sent to the jOrgan-User Mailing List from mid-July 2021 onwards, and is read-only. To post a Reply or start a new Topic, you need to be registered with the Mailing List. For instructions on registering and using the Mailing List, click HERE. Your post will normally be sent immediately to all subscribers, but will not appear here until the web-page is updated. This is done manually, and perhaps once a week. Some topics may not appear, if considered not archive material. To contact the Compiler of this web-page, send a post with the Subject Line, “To the jOrgan Link Compiler”.
The main jOrgan-User archive can be accessed HERE, or the jOrgan-Sound archive HERE. If you click on a month, you need to scroll down to see the result. Don’t overlook the Search facility at the left.
SCROLL DOWN TO VIEW THE FULL LIST
jOrgan website for new users Sticky Post
Mac OS x xi xii by Marc Allen Most recent post on 2021-12-31 3 replies Merry Christmas and Win 11 by Les Knoll Most recent post on 2021-12-27 5 replies Season's Greetings by John R Most recent post on 2021-12-25 8 replies Problem when creating FS reverb by John R Most recent post on 2021-12-24 2 replies Does spearing Burea samples improve them? by Jan Flikweert Most recent post on 2021-12-24 20 replies 32 bit jOrgan and fluidsynth by Marc Allen Most recent post on 2021-12-20 2 replies Most realistic sounding samples. by Kevin J King Most recent post on 2021-12-19 2 replies suggestions mixtures polyphone? by Jan Flikweert Most recent post on 2021-12-18 17 replies Mailing List Rules by JohnR Most recent post on 2021-12-18 6 replies how much correction in cents when tuning a stop? by Jan Flikweert Most recent post on 2021-12-17 7 replies jOrgan pup live usb not showing midi devices. by Kevin King Most recent post on 2021-12-15 4 replies Reverb w/fluidsynth 2.2.1 controlled by Qsynth w/jOrgan by Marc A Most recent post on 2021-12-13 1 reply New Features for jOrgan by John R Most recent post on 2021-12-08 8 replies jOrgan 4.X by Les K Most recent post on on 2021-12-08 2 replies Using Switch to monitor midi activity by Pascal Most recent post on 2021-12-08 2 replies Thomaskirche Leipzig Sauer Organ VPO Disposition by Chris P Most recent post on 2021-11-27 7 replies Fluidynth failure on mac osx big sur. By Julie P Most recent post on 2021- 11-24 7 replies velocity by JanF Most recent post on 2021-11-22 15 replies new user by RickW Most recent post on 2021-11-20 6 replies Editing Skins by GrahamW Most recent post on 2021-11-15 3 replies XML and parsing internal structures by Julie P Most recent post on 2021-11-13 15 replies Reverb by JohnB on 2021-11-13 jOrgan to use open jdk instead of Oracle Java? by Jonathan A Most recent post on 2021- 11-11 9 replies Call for mac users re jOrgan downloads by JohnR Most recent post on 2021-11-10 12 replies Processing workflow for soundfonts by Julie P Most recent post on 2021-11-10 7 replies
Malware False Positive for Website by JohnR Most recent post on 2021- 11-08 20 replies
Connect multiple instances of fluidsyth with jackrouter of Rearoute by Jan F Most recent post on 2021-11-10 9 replies Dutch romantic organ reverb/chorus by Jan F Most recent post on 2021-10-30 16 replies Fluidsynth 2 jOrgan 4 by Jan F Most recent post on 2021-10-28 15 replies Enjoy our Music by JohnB on 2021-10-27 A Lynn Walls' Video on jOrgan from 2009 by JohnB Most recent post on 2021-10-18 28 replies Creative sound font bank and Linuxsampler gig by Jan F on 2021-10-18 01:13 Creative Soundfont-Bankmanager Cache-memory limited to 1968 mb by Jan F Most recent post on 2021-10-12 1 reply Convolver for Legacy Organ by Pete T Most recent post on 2021-10-16 5 replies convert sf2 to Linuxsampler sfz/gig by Jan F on 2021-10-13 Comparing GIG and SFZ with Linuxsampler by Jan F Most recent post on 2021-10-13 16 replies
jOrgan w/Fluidsynth vs. Hauptwerk by Les K on 2021-10-09
An interim replacement for the Nabble Forum by JohnR Most recent post on 2021-08-08 4 replies
jOrgan Linuxsampler by JohnB Most recent post on 2021-10-07 12 replies Fluid synth distortion by Nick P Most recent post on 2021-10-02 2 replies jOrgan Generic Sound and CoolSoft Virtual Midi Synth by JohnB Most recent post on 2021-10-02 10 replies "Great Organ" virtual pipe organ software by JohnB Most recent post on 2021-09-30 3 replies Problems with Fluidsynth Backends on Windows 10 by JohnR Most recent post on 2021-09-29 25 replies jOrgan and options by RickW Most recent post on 2021-09-30 3 replies
jOrgan on YouTube by ChrisP Most recent post on 2021-09-28 19 replies
Question re Mailing List by JohnR Most recent post on 2021-09-04 5 replies
Win 7 issues by DennisW Most recent post on 2021-09-03 4 replies
Max Reger Documentary at Fugue State Films in UK by Marc-Paul on 2021-07-28
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR
This website has been created to make it easier for internet users to discover jOrgan and to start using it. Its main pages are HOME, STARTING, ADDING, GALLERY, F.A.Q., THIS SITE and CONTACT.
The web address is https://jorgan.info
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-07-19 18:21
Hi
all,
Tried looking but no luck…
Is it possible to take a
MIDI input from a virtual cable and somehow send it to a sound font
(rank) directly without stops? If so, could someone give me some
pointers please?
The reason: I want to use jOrgan as a box
of ranks with a number of fluidsynth soundfonts, each soundfont an
individual rank. eg. Diapason comes in on channel 1 to a
diapason rank. Flute comes in on Ch2 to flute rank in a second
instance of fluidsynth etc
Obviously I can do this with Qsynth
without jOrgan but it but the advantage of jOrgan is global control
of reverb level etc.
Regards
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-07-20 12:27
GrahamW,
yes,
what you describe is possible. What you need is, probably,
found at the following website http://www.synthfont.com/
Check
it out, first, and if that is not what you are looking for, perhaps,
we need more explanation about what you are trying to do.
If you have a Creative Labs soundcard that loads soundfonts by means of the Soundfont Bank Manager, it is possible to play the soundfonts directly from that application, or it can be used with a MIDI sequencer program, (there are free ones on the net), selecting the program change numbers for individual presets in the soundfont.
JohnB
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamG on 2021-07-20 16:02
Hi
GrahamW,
Conceptually this could be accomplished with
jOrgan.
You would need a Keyboard element for each MIDI channel,
linked up to a Stop-Rank-FluidsynthSound elements group. With the
Stop set to Activated.
Does that make sense to you?
GrahamG
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-07-20 16:32
Thanks GrahamG.
That makes sense. I'll try that.
GrahamW
From GrahamW on 2021-07-21 11:44
Hi all
Tried that and it works except for one thing. I have a keyboard set to Ch1, a stop that is always on, the rank and the soundfont. It responds to notes fine.
However, the Tremulant on my console sends a program change (192) with the appropriate patch change on the same channel. Can I get that patch change to happen because it does not at the moment? Do I perhaps need to add a Tremulant element to do the patch change? Can that trem element engage and disengage itself by responding to the PC message?
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-08-01 14:41
Hi All
I've managed to get this working (Yay!)
Just for information....
Each rank has the following elements: keyboard -> stop -> soundfont rank -> soundfont, plus switch filter for patch change (trem) if needed.
The stop is on and set to infinite to enable this setup. The switch filter is set to respond to the patch change command coming from the driving console and implements that patch change. These are grouped into Main, Solo and Tuba/Diapason with Tibia 1, Tibia 2 and Vox as individuals.
Altogether, there are 27 tuned ranks plus traps.
Why not just use Qsynth?
Because I want the sound that 1 fluidsynth instance per rank produces. jOrgan is MUCH better and faster than Qsynth at doing this. It also allows me to control reverb on an overall basis using a setup that Graham Goode uses with chamber reverbs plus overall reverb. Swell control is very easy. Balancing ranks using the jOrgan "Customise" is far superior.
But why do this at all?
Also, though it may be a little heretical to some on a jOrgan list ;),I prefer the interface and functionality of Miditzer. Also, the 260SP specification suits me perfectly. I have everything working now including Pizzicato couplers because Miditzer handles that without jOrgan needing Pizzicato. Along with that, I designed the interface graphics for Miditzer so I have skin in the game. Once Jim Henry releases the upgraded 260SP I will be content. My console is also set up to drive Miditzer.
Just to complete the picture, I run Ubuntu Studio with Fluidsynth 2 pre-installed along with Jack (and Zeta-rev1 if I want it). Miditzer runs just fine in WINE (and is not slowed down since Fluidsynth is turned off). All ranks are sent using VirMIDI which is a kernel module virtual sound card with 4 virtual hardware MIDI cables. jOrgan and JACK just see them as hardware inputs and outputs. So does WINE/Miditzer.
QJackCtl is set to start automatically and runs a script after it has started to open jOrgan then Miditzer. The patchbay auto-connects everything so I boot up and the whole organ starts. Similarly, one push on the power button and the system shuts down. All this runs on a 2014 Mac Mini into a Marantz multichannel amp that has a DSP setting to virtualise a stereo signal to 5.1 surround.
Now I just need to start playing again to get the rust out of the joints. My wife has threatened to invite a bunch of friends over for a Theatre Organ concert. Currently, we are under strict COVID lockdown and will be for several months - time to practice!
BTW my Accomp manual is actually a weighted key 88 note piano so my piano rank is a Steinway and is velocity sensitive. Great and Solo are standard 61 note and pedalboard is full 32 note AGO spec.
Cheers
GrahamW
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DennisW on 2021-08-02 03:11
Hi Graham,
Thanks for the information. I had thought that Miditzer had stopped 260 development years ago. Glad to hear it's being upgraded. I am presently unable to run 64 bit programs on my organ computer (XP Home edition). I am stuck unless I am willing to replace the touch monitors and the midi interface to a more modern operating system and I really don't want to spend the money to do so. The old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies here.
I have always liked the 260 Miditzer for playing a theatre organ. I have made a couple of Jorgan attempts that didn't turn out to my liking and haven't spent the time needed to build one I am happy with. I have instead a very nice classical organ with over 300 ranks on 7 divisions (3 floating). It uses fluidsynth and soundfonts for over half the ranks and a Roland Integra7 sound module for the rest. I also use a smaller organ comprised of about 115 ranks from mostly the Integra7 (including about 10 or so soundfont ranks) with 4 divisions to play mostly jazz and modern pieces. These feed an AGO spec three manual organ I built several years ago.
Good luck with your project and again, thanks for the information. It looks like a great organ build!
Regards,
DennisW
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-08-02 08:44
Hi Graham,
Interesting to hear of your project. Sounds like a great set-up.
Looking forward to hearing some tunes from you. I loved your early Miditzer tracks.
Regards,
Rick
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-08-03 15:07
Hi Dennis
On 2 Aug 2021, at 3:11 am, Dennis wrote:
Hi Graham,
Thanks for the information. I had thought that Miditzer had stopped 260 development years ago. Glad to hear it's being upgraded.
Restarted recently and the upgrade is to 64bit.
I am presently unable to run 64 bit programs on my organ computer (XP Home edition). I am stuck unless I am willing to replace the touch monitors and the midi interface to a more modern operating system and I really don't want to spend the money to do so. The old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies here.
Absolutely!
I have always liked the 260 Miditzer for playing a theatre organ. I have made a couple of Jorgan attempts that didn't turn out to my liking and haven't spent the time needed to build one I am happy with. I have instead a very nice classical organ with over 300 ranks on 7 divisions (3 floating). It uses fluidsynth and soundfonts for over half the ranks and a Roland Integra7 sound module for the rest. I also use a smaller organ comprised of about 115 ranks from mostly the Integra7 (including about 10 or so soundfont ranks) with 4 divisions to play mostly jazz and modern pieces. These feed an AGO spec three manual organ I built several years ago.
That sounds like a great setup.
Good luck with your project and again, thanks for the information. It looks like a great organ build!
BTW forgot to mention that the centre channel is a full (Bass & Treble) set of Conn Organ Pipes, L and R are Jamo towers (this doubles as my HiFi system for classical music). Rear speakers are 6inch two ways that I built myself and there's a 12inch 150W sub to round things off.
Unlike you Dennis, I just want one instrument that matches my console. As my Dad used to say :"Good as a bought one!"
Cheers
GrahamW
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-08-03 15:11
Hi Rick
On 2 Aug 2021, at 8:44 am, greenfox4075@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Graham
Interesting to hear of your project. Sounds like a great set-up.
I'm very happy with it.
Looking forward to hearing some tunes from you. I loved your early Miditzer tracks.
They were fun. I've just been able to come back to the organ after retirement. Teaching got so demanding, I had to let the organ go.
Cheers
Graham
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-08-03 15:49
Forgot this for anyone interested. Initial draft screenshot of proposed new Miditzer260SP.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TAMZ1nvPojiQPb8dWaQ7IaF1ik_aOjJS/view?usp=sharing
Cheers
GrahamW
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamG on 2021-08-03 15:52
Oh that does look awesome :)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DennisW on 2021-08-03 15:53
Wow, very impressive!
Regards,
Dennis
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-08-03 18:30
That is quite a console!
Regards
Rick
From GrahamW on 2021-08-29 17:00
Hi Rick
I had sort of forgotten those early tracks. I've put them on soundcloud just for "historical purposes".
www.soundcloud.com/graham-wykes
Cheers
GrahamW
greenfox wrote:
Hi Graham
Interesting to hear of your project. Sounds like a great set-up.
Looking forward to hearing some tunes from you. I loved your early Miditzer tracks.
Regards
Rick.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-08-29 23:49
My understanding is that jOrgan is a relay - for virtual organ or pipe organ. Where do the ranks come from?
I have never been able to get anything to work past the first note, in YEARS of trying.
What is playing now sounds like Miditzer . . .
I could never get Miditzer to work either.
I haven't tried Raspberry pi, yet . . .
Graham Wykes wrote:
Hi Rick
I had sort of forgotten those early tracks. I've put them on soundcloud just for "historical purposes".
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From greenfox on 2021-08-30 10:40
Hi Pete
My suggestions would be:
Miditzer is the easiest place to start. It is a self contained installer and doesn't rely on any extra software prerequisites (on a Windows computer). Once downloaded you should be able to immediately select a stop or default combination and play (and hear) a note just clicking your mouse on the graphical keyboard.
If you have any troubles email me direct and we can work through any issues.
jOrgan is a MIDI Relay, but the install package also installs Fluidsynth (and some basic Fluidsynth SF2 sound files) so it does become a functioning package. Users can choose to not use Fluidsynth if they have and know how to setup an alternative sound engine.
jOrgan needs Java and Java must match the "bitts" (32 or 64) of the version of jOrgan you are installing. If you have both 64 and 32 bit Java, then the most recently installed version of Java must match the version of jOrgan you are trying to run (because there is something in the install process of Java that sets which version of Java is active by default). Having both versions of Java (and jOrgan for that matter) causes all kinds of complications and is not for the faint hearted (or less than supernurds). In an ideal world, the jOrgan installer should look for the Java prerequisite and install it or update it as needed.
Further to this, the Windows jOrgan installer installs jOrgan (by default) in the "Program Files" area of Windows. This was OK for XP, but ever since Windows has had security measures to block writing to files in this area. Users really need to move any working files to "Documents" or at least somewhere Windows will allow files to be written. If users don't know which files to move, it is best to move the entire jOrgan package to a working area in Windows. This should have been modified in the installer at least 10 years ago, but is still there as a trap for new players all these years later. (the joys of working with free open source software)
jOrgan on Raspberry Pi (or any Linux operating system) is again complex and only recommended for supernurds. The audio environment in Linux is a steep learning curve for anyone not at least a little experienced in Linux and wanting a challenge on their hands.
Regards
Rick
PeteT wrote:
My understanding is that jOrgan is a relay - for virtual organ or pipe
organ. Where do the ranks come from?
I have never been able to get anything to work past the first note, in
YEARS of trying.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-08-30 18:33
Hmm. I have not used windows in 20 years, only Linux. Maybe I could do it in Windows, but I have no windows computer so . . .
From GrahamW on 2021-08-30 19:40
Hi Pete
Since you are familiar with Linux...
Make sure you have JACK Audio Connection Kit installed along with QjackCtl
Install Java (OpenJDK). I think you need at least version 11 but perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
Install jOrgan
Download a disposition - I would suggest you start with the Barton or the Freedom Morton models at https://sites.google.com/site/savirtualorgans/jorgan-dispositions
You start QjaclCtl first, then jOrgan. Once that is up, you open the distribution you want to use.
An alternative is the jOrgan Pup LiveCD at https://sites.google.com/site/savirtualorgans/jorgan-pup . This has Rick's Christie disposition on it as well as a great bunch of classical organs.
Apart from this, I second everything Rick has said.
(I have my own reasons for combining Miditzer and jOrgan and FYI, I use Ubuntu Studio)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RoyR on 2021-08-30 20:40
Hi, Pete,
You say you never get past the first note. Does the first note play forever? If so, check that your keyboard element recognises both Note Off and Note ON, Zero Volume as note off, it's an ancient trap that many fell into.
Have fun,
Roy. (UK)
PeteT wrote:
My understanding is that jOrgan is a relay - for virtual organ or pipe
organ. Where do the ranks come from?
I have never been able to get anything to work past the first note, in
YEARS of trying.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-08-30 23:23
Interesting question. Actually, the first note kinda crashes the computer and then I have to restart it.
RoyR wrote:
Hi, Pete,
You say you never get past the first note. Does the first note play forever?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RoyR on 2021-08-31 01:13
Hmmm... That sounds kinda final! *:)) laughing
I'm not much help in general since most problems seem to revolve around Fluidsynth and I used external hardware synths. Not doing much at all these days as the old Anno Domini moves on, 82 not out at the last count!
Have fun,
Roy. (UK) MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc-Paul on 2021-07-28 10:08
Greetings
Fugue State Films has just released a 6 hour documentary on Max Reger in 3 parts. The first part is being offered to view for no charge until middle of July. There is a lot of discussion about his Organ work.
Google search Fugue State films and you can get the information.
I own the documentary they shot on “The Genius of Cavaillé-Coll” and there are lots of other interesting films.
Regards
Marc-Paul
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
An interim replacement for the Nabble Forum
From JohnR on 2021-08-04 11:16
Hi all,
It is regrettable that jOrgan no longer has public accessibility to our discussions. I have
put together an interim replacement, until such time as we have a proper forum linked to the
Mailing List.
It has some rough edges, and I have to strike a compromise between no quirks and the time it
would take to eliminate them.
The link is https://jorgan.info/link.html (Altered to this, 9th Sept 2021)
Best wishes,
JohnR
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-08-04 12:45
Cool. Reply list to see if it works :-)
Regards,
Pete
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-08-04 14:21
Seems OK. Good.
Regards,
Pete
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DaveT on 2021-08-07 23:50
JohnR,
Thanks for all your work. This should work as a reply.
Wow, that's some Miditzer260.
Dave
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-08-08 11:41
DaveT wrote: John R, Thanks for all your work.
Dave,
It was your email to me a few weeks ago that prompted the creation of this interim solution. We hope that it's not long before a forum, linked to the Mailing List in much the same way as Nabble was, can take over.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Malware False Positive for Website
From JohnR on 2021-10-04 12:35
Hi all,
Regarding the jOrgan-User Link web-page, I have somewhere seen the suggestion that to access the
Mailing List archive, one needs to be registered. I have placed a statement in the top part of of
the Link suggesting that it may be necessary to be registered. For obvious reasons I have never
been able to test that out for myself, so I recently asked one of my daughters to do it for me.
I gave her the Link web address (https://jorgan.info/link.html - which is the new, simplified
address) and today when she tried it out, the security program she is using told her that the site
is "unsafe", lacking the "certificate" that would prevent such a warning. In a phone call she
reported this, and I asked her to ignore the warning and to go there anyway. She was able to access
the archive via the hyperlink I have provided there, indicating that one does not have to be registered.
The web address in question has of course the same domain name as the jOrgan Discovery website.
I think it was Google who some time ago labelled that site as unsafe, and when I contacted whoever
it was, and explained that "jorgan" formed part of the domain name of a very old dodgy site that
was to do with the musician and not with our program, they remedied that label problem very quickly.
Have any of you ever received a similar warning regarding the website or the Link web-page?
I might add that every three months or so, a "certificate" turns up in my Inbox regarding the
jorgan.info website. Jonathan, who hosts the website, has never, to my knowledge, told me what
I am supposed to do with it.
Any ideas?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-10-04 12:57
Hi John,
The certificate you don't need to do anything all that does is make sure the site uses https
instead of http.
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Richard J on 2021-10-04 13:29
John,
Your website uses Let's Encrypt certificates. It is a free SSL certificate, but in stead of the
typical 2 year you would get with a paid SSL certificate, Let's Encrypt SSL certificates expire
every 3 months. Most webservers using Let's Encrypt SSL certificates use their automated certificate
renewal program called CertBot. As long as CertBot is configured correctly, you should only receive
a notification that your SSL certificate is expiring, and CertBot should automatically renew it
before the 3 month expiration.
Most modern web browsers like Google Chrome will warn a user if they attempt to access a website
with an expired SSL certificate. This warning can also appear if the user's PC clock is incorrectly set.
-Richard
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-04 15:16
Richard and Jonathan,
Thank you Richard, for your explanation of the certificate and Jonathan, for your assurance that I don't
have to do anything about it.
For what it's worth, the most recent certificate, declaring it to have been updated, arrived two days ago!
There has never been any suggestion that Jonathan's settings have failed to have it updated.
However, it remains a puzzle why my daughter received that warning, which was obviously unfounded,
as the site does have the certificate! I still need to hear from anyone who has received that warning
recently. I received such a warning when trying to access another website last week. In this case
I had used "https:// ", when in fact the site required "http:// ". Just a few minutes ago I tried
the jOrgan Discovery website using "http://" , only to find that my Chromium browser changed it
immediately into "https:// ", and of course took me to the site.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-10-05 00:55
Yes... I just ignore it... like any software problem that's not telling us
the truth. Or any big Pharma.
LOL
Forgive please... I know it's an issue for new users.
Marc-Paul
Jonathan A wrote:
“I am curious to understand if anyone else got such a warning”.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A 2021-10-05 00:57
You have to be very careful though they are there designed to protect you from any possible
malicious sites.
Will try and see if I can replicate the issue
Marc A wrote:
“Yes... I just ignore it... like any software problem that's not telling us
the truth. Or any big Pharma”
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-10-05 00:57
Just tried on my phone and it redirected without issue
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-10-05 17:48
Hi All
Google Chrome in particular seems to like giving this warning when it gets http where the code
contains redirects but It doesn't seem consistent. I found that I had to use 301 redirects from
the hosting control panel so that the browser does not even try to read the page. It just jumps
directly to https.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-10-07 04:28
Hi Graham,
What version of chrome are you on?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-05 08:54
Hi all,
Yesterday I signed up for an internet security service from my ISP. I am now finding
the jOrgan Discovery website (jorgan.info) blocked. It is the same security service
which my daughter has, and which I mentioned in a previous post.
Jonathan, can anything be done about this?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-05 22:59
JohnR., I have no difficulty in accessing the www.jorgan.info website this morning.
ALL pages are accessible, so, perhaps, your problem is a local one. With the nature of the internet,
it is difficult to determine whether a particular, access problem is due to one's ISP's maintenance
schedule, a storage server, etc. If your daughter was having a similar access problem,
it may be local.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-05 23:32
Hey all,
I will carry out a test when I have the chance and connect to an Australian vpn server
to simulate me being in Australia if I see that the site doesn't log Australian internet
providers have blocked the site for some reason.
As soon as I have an update I'll let everyone know
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-05 23:04
JohnR., would you happen to know if the www.jorgan.info website is, physically,
stored on one single server, for example, in Australia, or if the worldwide web (www.)
works on the basis of back-up, storage servers around the world? That is, is it
possible that I am accessing an identical jorgan.info website that is stored on a
server in the U.S., whereas, you might, normally, access it from storage in Australia?
Perhaps, other members have more information about how this works or whether there is,
always, ONLY a single storage device for any given website??
Thanks.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-05 23:21
Hi john it is on my server which is based in Germany. There was maintenance being done
by the provider.
Please note that I am sponsoring the hosting as well as the domain as my contribution
to the community.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-11-06 05:23
Hi, Jonathan
This is greatly appreciated. :-)
Chris Pearson
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-06 06:49
Thank you all for your concern. I should have been more precise. Yes, the jorgan.info
was being blocked by my ISP's security service, but I was able to access it by ignoring
the warning. And today, it is not being blocked, meaning that the service has "got the
message" (I hope), and will no longer warn me about our website.
What is of more concern to me, is that yesterday I was unable to update anything on the
site, which I am trying to do almost every day, in updating the Link webpage. This is quite
separate from the other issue. Jonathan knows about the problem, and so perhaps the
problem will only be temporary.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-06 08:12
Hi all,
The warning message I got about our website was purely local. It needs no investigation
by Jonathan. I forget whether there was another, separate report of such warnings.
but I think there was one. However, it is clear that something about our website was
triggering the warning, and it has been suggested that the redirection concerning
http/https may be the reason. THAT is the particular issue which needs to be investigated:
What caused this problem in the first place?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-08 15:46
Morning All,
Just ran some scans on the jorgan.info files john sent me and I am not picking up anything
out of the ordinary which indicates a false positive for malware.
just to confirm you sent me all the files associated with the site is that correct
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-08 16:25
Jonathan wrote:
"just to confirm you sent me all the files associated with the site is that correct"
Hi Jonathan,
Yes, what I sent you was a collection of all the site's files.
I might add that I have downloaded the files myself and checked them with Windows Defender
and also with Avira (which has a good reputation for detecting malware). It was all clear
in both cases.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-08 16:36
Good Morning John,
Thanks for the confirmation. I believe this issue is an open and shut case.
If you guys need anything else do not hesitate to reach out.
Regards,
Jonathan MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DennisW on 2021-08-28 10:19
Greetings,
I am trying to upgrade to win 7 pro 64 bit from win xp 32 bit. I downloaded the 64 bit version of jOrgan 3.21.1 but cannot get fluidsynth recognized by jOrgan - I get the “fluidsynth failure” error message. I tried jOrgan 4.0 and was able to get sound out, but the quality is not as good as I have under win xp. I have fooled around with number and size of buffers and can hear no discernable difference between 8/256 and 2/2048 and most everything in between - latency isn’t an issue. The volume settings in the customizer are at .5 or less. The sound card seems to be operating satisfactorily as I can play music using windows media player and it sounds great. I have both 32 and 64 bit java programs - latest versions installed.
Any ideas as to where to look next would be appreciated.
Kind Regards,
Dennis
From JohnR on 2021-08-28 16:08
Dennis wrote, 'I downloaded the 64 bit version of jOrgan 3.21.1 but cannot get fluidsynth recognized by jOrgan - I get the “fluidsynth failure” error message.'
Dennis,
The usual view is that it is O.K. to have Java 32-bit and Java 64-bit installed at the same time, but having more than one version of jOrgan installed at the same time should be avoided. Are you observing this rule?
I should add for the sake of other readers that Dennis and I have been discussing his problems by email for a couple of days. He did have a problem with distortion using jOrgan 4, but this was solved when I suggested dropping the gain and increasing the buffer settings. However, he says that the quality of the sound with his Windows 7 computer is not up to the standard of that achieved with his XP, and this is something we need the List members to give an opinion on. (I have no problem myself with the quality of sound from later versions of Windows subsequent to XP.)
Our emails prompted me to try jOrgan 3.21.1 on my Windows 8.1 laptop, and I got it to work well, both with and without the use of the 64-bit "ALL" backend. (This was not entirely my experience yesterday, when the backend portaudio did not seem to work, but it certainly worked for me today - although not with a disposition having 3 instances of Fluidsynth, where getting portaudio to work on one instance of Fluidsynth had the effect of silencing the other two instances altogether, even when they were still set to dsound.)
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DennisW on 2021-08-29 01:18
When I originally tried jOrgan 3.21.1 it was the only instance on the computer and it didn't recognize fluidsynth. I then installed jOrgan 4 and was able to get 4 (with John's help) to recognize fluidsynth even though I did not uninstall 3.21.1 However, as stated before the sound quality is not up to that achieved with win xp.
Should I just forget about win 7 64 bit and go to win 10 64 bit?
Regards,
Dennis
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on Sep 2, 2021-09-02 13:47
DennisW wrote: "The sound quality is not up to that achieved with win xp. Should I just forget about win 7 64 bit and go to win 10 64 bit?"
Dennis,
If you are getting excellent sound with your Win 7 computer using the music player, I think you are unlikely to have an improvement by installing Win 10 instead. The only suggestions I can make is that you observe the "only one version of jOrgan installed at the one time" rule, and that you reduce the Fluidsynth gain a little more. Also, I would make sure that the number of buffers used is not fewer than 8. So 8/512 or 8/256 should give you very good results. (The speed of your CPU suggests to me that you should be able to use 8/256 without any problems.)
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From DennisW on 2021-09-03 10:21
Thanks John,
I’ll give it a try.
Regards,
Dennis MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-03 09:52
Hi all,
I have not yet become comfortable with using the Mailing List, as for years my preferred method was to read and send posts using the Nabble Forum. This morning I sent what I thought was a reply to the List, but it seems it went only to Dennis, who had sent the post to which I was replying.
I had clicked on Reply rather than on Reply All, as I was advised recently that this was the correct thing to do.
My question to seasoned users of the Mailing List is, in replying to a post, do you click on Reply, or on Reply All?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From PeteT on 2021-09-03 10:57
Reply goes to the sender, Reply List goes to the list. Reply All goes to both the sender and the list.
Not all email clients support all three options. Or not on the same menu.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From MarcA on 2021-09-03 13:49
In Outlook 2016 I type Reply List in the "what do you want to do" and Send.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RoyR on 2021-09-03 18:03
Hi, John,
I don't do it often enough to remember these days, this was sent by just clicking the reply arrow icon.
Have fun,
Roy. (UK)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-09-03 20:44
I use Gmail, and have my default send option set to Reply All.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-04 12:22
Thank you to Pete, Marc-Paul, Roy and Rick for your help. "Reply All" or "Reply List" get the most votes, but note Roy's practice of using "Reply", which shows that things are not quite clear-cut.
I did a little investigating, and I concluded that "Reply" sends to the whole list, but only if the SourceForge web address is used. The reason my email went only to Dennis, was that it was his address that had turned up in the address window, and I didn't notice this.
So the safest thing is simply to use "Reply All" etc.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Problems with Fluidsynth Backends on Windows 10 From JohnR on 2020-12-26 05:10:14 Hi all, I have verified Andrew's inability to use the backend (I used 1.11 64-bit, with Java 8 64-bit and jOrgan 3.21 64-bit) with Windows 10. I consistently get the "Unable to create fluidsynth" problem when switching from dsound to portaudio. This is happening on two Windows 10 machines which I tried. There is no problem with dsound. The problem does not occur using my Windows 8.1 laptop. Andrew and I have had a short email exchange. In my last email I told of an incorrect uploading of at least two backends which I had discovered: the zipped files unzip to produce a folder containing a sub-folder. The sub-folder is the one which should be copied to the Program Files/jOrgan/lib/fluidsynth folder, but a lot of people, including myself at first try, would not realise this. I emailed Andrew suggesting that this would be the cause of his problem, but unfortunately I have found through my own tests that it is not so. My tests suggest that if one unwittingly copies the "outer" folder into the /lib/fluidsynth folder, opens a disposition and uses the Configuration appropriately, and then tries to switch from dsound to portaudio (and subsequently saves it), that disposition is permanently marked with an inability to be used with a backend, even on Windows 8.1 . It is surprising that it has taken this long for the problem to be reported. Has none of the regular jOrgan users come up with it? (Perhaps we all use Linux, as I do with my Rasp Pi's. My Windows use of jOrgan has been confined to dsound for a long time.) I am moving the posts in the "jorgan" thread to this new thread, to keep it all together under a more appropriate heading. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-26 09:54:57 I have just noticed that jOrgan 3.20 was used with the W 8.1 laptop, but 3.21 was used with the two W 10 computers. Tomorrow I shall repeat the tests using 3.20 on one of the W 10 computers. This may establish whether the difference in results was due to W 8.1/W 10, or to jOrgan 3.20/3.21 . JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2020-12-26 20:32:05 John R. said, "It is surprising that it has taken this long for the problem to be reported." I reported this quite a while ago. However, the reply I got was, essentially, since dsound worked, I should not worry about using portaudio. So, I have been using dsound ever since. At present, using jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 (64-bit), with the Fluidsynth Portaudio ALL version 2.1.0 by Graham Goode, I have alternatives of output of MME, DirectSound, ASIO, WASAPI, WDM-KS on both the onboard (Realtek) audio and the Creative Labs Audigy 2 ZS with the Windows 10 WDM driver from the Audigy RX, although I am using the dsound driver, not the portaudio. I can try it using the portaudio driver and will let the forum know how that works out. I have noted before that the joystick Gameport driver that is included with the Audigy RX driver from Creative Labs works with Windows 10, which means that the Audigy 2 ZS soundcard which has the older MIDI DB-15 connector can be used with a MIDI IN/OUT cable to connect a keyboard instrument. This is convenient for older keyboards that are not USB. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2020-12-26 20:37:34 With the portaudio driver, it is only possible to load ONE soundfont. This is fine for dispositions which have only one soundfont. The dsound driver allows multiple instances and I regularly use a disposition that uses 11 soundfonts. I believe the Wanamaker has more soundfonts than that and that the European Organ does, also. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From AndrewW on 2020-12-26 21:37:55 I’m glad I’m not the only one to have this issue at least I know I’m not crazy. I was only trying to get away from dsound to try to reduce latency. I’m messing with the Morton set and response seems very slow. I’m running grandorgue and with the better audio drivers installed latency is minimal or the same as asio out of my Hauptwerk setup. The raspberry pi setup of jorgan is intriguing. How is latency and sound quality if I go that route? Andrew ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-26 22:05:22 AndrewW wrote “The raspberry pi setup of jorgan is intriguing. How is latency and sound quality if I go that route?” Hi Andrew, My use of Raspberry Pi for my home console use was due mainly to aesthetic reasons (appearance in a public part of the house) than technical, but quite apart from that, I have reasons to believe that I am unusually fussy when it comes to latency and sound quality, as most of my organ playing over the years has been confined to small tracker instruments, where close proximity to the pipes was the case. I find that the RPi satisfies me totally on these two issues. Bear in mind that my hearing is 81 years old, but I can still hear sounds which some of my organ friends of similar age can no longer hear. One detail re latency is that I do use jack as the audio driver, and I think that this may give better results than pulseaudio or alsa. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-27 01:49:22 JohnR wrote “My tests suggest that if one unwittingly copies the "outer" folder into the /lib/fluidsynth folder, opens a disposition and uses the Configuration appropriately, and then tries to switch from dsound to portaudio (and subsequently saves it), that disposition is permanently marked with an inability to be used with a backend, even on Windows 8.1 .” Hi all, Further tests indicate that the above statement may not be correct. However, I am now in a position to give a fuller report. I loaded jOrgan 3.20 64-bit onto one of the Windows 10 computers. I continued to get the same "Unable to create Fluidsynth", whether I used the 1.6 ....ALL 64-bit backend or the 1.11 ....ALL 64-bit backend. I then loaded jOrgan 3.21 64-bit onto my Windows 8.1 laptop and had success with portaudio using either of those two backends. My conclusion is that trying to use the existing 64-bit "...ALL" backends leads to failure on Windows 10 computers. JohnB has reported above that he has had success on W 10, but he has confined his use to dsound. We now need to hear from any jOrgan users who have had portaudio success on a W 10 computer using one of the fluidsynth backends, and to give us fairly complete details. I lack the knowledge to take my research any further. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2020-12-27 04:32:56 John R., I have tried jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 64-bit with fluidsynth portaudio ALL 2.1.0, portaudio 19 built with ASIO, WASAPI and WDM Kernel Streaming (WDM-KS). Consistently, I can use only ONE instance of Fluidsynth with one soundfont. Multiple instances for multiple soundfonts do not work. The portaudio driver does work with either onboard (Realtek) audio or the Creative Labs soundcard, again with only one instance of fluidsynth and one soundfont. So, it must be true that dsound is the only driver which allows multiple instances of Fluidsynth and multiple soundfonts. Perhaps, Graham Goode can tell us why the limitation of one instance of Fluidsynth/one soundfont exists for the portaudio driver. I have a vague recollection that he may have done this in the not too distant past, but can not recall the reason for the limitation. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-27 07:09:37 JohnB wrote “John R., I have tried jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 64-bit with fluidsynth portaudio ALL 2.1.0, portaudio ...... The portaudio driver does work with either onboard (Realtek) audio or the Creative Labs soundcard” Hi JohnB, Thank you for that report. I find that very encouraging, but also a bit mystifying, why the backend works with jOrgan 4.0 beta on Windows 10 machines, but there are problems on Windows 10 with earlier versions of jOrgan and the appropriate backends. Perhaps we shall hear from other jOrgan users to help us fill in the details. Now all we need is for the Fluidsynth people to eliminate that annoying modulation from their new and improved reverb. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From GrahamG on 2020-12-27 07:48:30 I’m away on holiday at the moment so can’t test anything, however, ASIO should be the only backend that is limited to one instance of Fluidsynth, as the ASIO specification gets exclusive use of the sound device. WDM-KS, WASAPI, and Dsound are all Windows driver layers, and should be able to share the device. GrahamG ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2020-12-27 12:20:27 Graham, thanks for the input. I tried the portaudio driver with the WDM-KS and it only allows ONE instance of Fluidsynth with one soundfont. However, as I said, the dsound driver allows multiple instances and soundfonts without a problem. I think I asked you whether there was any significant difference in sound output quality between portaudio and dsound drivers. I have used them both with onboard (Realtek) audio and Creative Labs soundcards and seem to recall that portaudio used to capable of multiple instances of Fluidsynth and soundfonts, but do not recall with which version of jOrgan or Windows operating system this capability may have become limited. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From greenfox on 2020-12-29 10:23:58 Hi John and jOrgan list members As you may have guessed from my silence, I have not done much with jOrgan of late, however I have set up to test this latest feedback. My daily work computer (and what I run jOrgan on) is Windows 10, Java 8 (271) (I started with Java 8 241 then upgraded to 271 with no change in results) I report no problems with jOrgan 4.0b1 64bit with Port Audio backend PortAudioALLa64 V2.1.0 using WASAPI I report no problems with jOrgan 3.21b3 64bit with port Audio Backend fluidsynth1.1.11_64-bit.dsound.pa.WASAPI.1.1 V1.1 Using jOrgan 4.0b1 I confirm that WDM-KS works but only using 1 instance of Fluidsynth. Other options in Port Audio settings had distorted output or no output. These versions of jOrgan and back ends were downloaded previously, not fresh for this testing. Regards Rick ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2020-12-29 13:47:01 “Other options in Port Audio settings had distorted output or no output.” I failed to mention that, when I gave my report on jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 64-bit with fluidsynth Portaudio ALL 64-bit using WDM-KS. The output was distorted. Originally, when the portaudio backends were added, I was under the impression that portaudio was supposed to be a better quality sound than dsound. However, consistently, I have found that dsound gives more functionality in terms of number of soundfonts allowed and my expectations with respect to sound quality are satisfied with dsound. I have always used “speakers” for the output of both onboard and added soundcard audio. I have read numerous articles that assert that digital SPDIF (optical) is the best quality audio output, but it requires a digital amplifier with SPDIF connector and the cables for that, and the output is digital to analog conversion (DAC) which is what the PC does, anyway. So, it seemed unnecessary. Perhaps, GrahamG can look into these issues when he is back from holiday and has the time to do so. Incidentally, Audacity wave editor, which I used exclusively to record and edit the wave files which comprise my soundfonts works best with settings of MME (driver), “What You Hear” (recording), Mono or Stereo, and “Speakers” (output). There are two alternatives to MME driver. They are Windows DirectSound and Windows WASAPI. Does anyone know what the difference, if there is one, is between Windows DirectSound and Windows WASAPI and Fluidsynth dsound and WASAPI? I am thinking that it is merely what is included with a specific program and must be the same and copiable (by licence) a Windows Driver Model for inclusion in any individually developed program that requires it. Am I way out in left field?? JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-30 01:06:52 JohnB wrote “on jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 64-bit with fluidsynth Portaudio ALL 64-bit using WDM-KS. The output was distorted.” Thank you to JohnB and to Rick for doing these tests. In my own case, I have had good success on one of the W 10 machines with jOrgan 4 beta 1 and its ALL backend, when choosing portaudio as the audio driver. The Fluidsynth Properties audio device options were many, but contrary to both their reports, with WDM-KS I had good sound, and with WASAPI I got the "Unable to create Fluidsynth" problem message. All the other options gave good sound and latency. I was using Java 8. Certainly I had to increase the buffer numbers and size to get this result, but not at the expense of latency, which I judged to be good. I suspect that this W 10 computer has a fast CPU, but I have no knowledge of its specifications. All this shows that there is no consistency, and people will just have to use whatever works for them. At the moment, it is clear that there are excellent options, if people are prepared to choose between jOrgan 3.20, 3.21, 3.21.1 , or 4.1.0 . Perhaps when Graham returns home from holidays, he will be able to shed some light. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-30 04:31:09 Here is a footnote to my previous post: On the W 10 computer (with jOrgan 4.beta 1 etc.), I opened a disposition with 3 instances of FS, after plugging in a USB soundcard (ATR2USB). I made the following selections using portaudio driver and various audio devices. With MAN I set to MMM: Speakers (ATR2USB) [[or to WDM-KS Speakers (ATR2USB) (either worked) ]]* and MAN II and PED both set to MMM: Headphones (High Definition Aud), I had good results with two stereo channels! (4 audio channels) That is, MAN I was heard only through the headphones I had plugged into the ATR2USB card, while MAN II and PED were heard only the the headphones I had plugged into the computer audio output socket. This may be very good news for people wanting to have multi-channel audio. However, I got the "Unable to create Fluidsynth" problem message when I tried to use WDM-KS or WASAPI. JohnR * See next post. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2020-12-30 05:08:28 Sorry. I now think my reference in the footnote to the WDM-KS working in one instance (i.e. to the ATR2USB soundcard) was incorrect. Both WDM-KS and WASAPI produced the "Unable to create Fluidsynth" message. So you should delete all the material between the double square brackets. The other (successful) results were correct. JohnR NOTE: The posts which follow are actually from another thread, but I have included them here as they are relevant to the present thread. (JohnR) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2021-01-09 19:45:25 I have installed jOrgan 3.21 with the Fluidsynth 1.1.11, both 64-bit and I am only given the option of portaudio for a driver and one choice of device, 21 Windows direct sound Speakers Creative Audigy 2ZS WDM, and I am not able to load a soundfont at all. Any suggestions would be appreciated. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2021-01-09 22:33:57 JohnB wrote “I have installed jOrgan 3.21 with the Fluidsynth 1.1.11, both 64-bit” JohnB, I assume that you are using Windows 10. We also need to know exactly which backend file you are using. How do you know that it was FS 1.1.11 which came with jOrgan 3.21? I apologize if my question is simply showing my ignorance, which is more than possible. ;-) JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2021-01-10 01:01:33 John, yes, I am using Windows 10, 64-bit and with jOrgan 3.21 I tried both Fluidsynth 1.1.11 dsound. portaudio and the older 1.1.6, and with both, I had the portaudio driver, no option for dsound, and only one choice of device, the same as with 1.1.11. The 21 Windows direct sound Speakers Creative Audigy 2ZS WDM. I have reverted back to jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 which works just fine. Thanks. JohnB ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2021-01-10 03:20:55 JohnB wrote “I have reverted back to jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 which works just fine.” Hi JohnB, Thanks for that report. I think that's a good decision, if you feel you can live with the Fluidsynth Version 2 reverb until (hopefully) they improve it. I was going to suggest that you try installing jOrgan 3.20, as there have been no problems being reported with it, and I'm not aware of any pressing reason why 3.21 should be preferred over it. By the way, it has occurred to me that in your previous post, when you mentioned Fluidsynth 1.1.11, you were referring to the backend and not to Fluidsynth. There is still the problem of at least one of the Fluidsynth backends set up for download from the SourceForge site being a folder "within" a folder, and I have been caught out by that issue more than once, the most recent occasion being yesterday! And this was after becoming re-acquainted with it only two or three weeks ago. Perhaps this can be remedied for us before long. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From LeeH on 2021-01-10 05:26:58 I do not have a folder named default to substitute them in to. What am I missing that is supposed to have this folder? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2021-01-10 07:15:43 LeeH wrote “I do not have a folder named default to substitute them in to.” Hi LeeH, If you are using Windows, the "default" folder is found in the \Program Files\jOrgan\lib\Fluidsynth\ folder. If Linux or a mac computer, the matter does not arise, in the sense that the backends are for Windows only. However, in those systems, there will be a "jorgan/lib/" folder where it can be found. JohnB's method is to replace the existing "default" folder (which has the details needed for dsound), with another one called that but with the Backend folder there instead. That is not the method recommended by Graham Goode in his tutorial on using the backends, but it will work if done correctly. There may be advantages one way or the other, but they are not of great importance. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnR on 2021-09-25 11:32 With this post I am reviving a thread from last Dec/Jan investigating the use of the backends with Windows 10 computers. I did some further tests a few days ago using a Windows 10 Home Version 20H2, and came to the conclusion that the results differ somewhat depending on the computer being used and precisely which version of Windows 10 is installed. The one clear result I came up with in these recent tests is that for this particular entry-level computer that I was using, if one wants to use a backend instead of the native dsound, the only version of jOrgan I could get to work was 4.0 Beta 1 (released only in 64-bit). JohnB and RickW had slightly more success, namely with jOrgan 3.21 or 3.21.1 , but that success would still have to be called “patchy”, and does not seem to line up with what GrahamG was expecting. There is Windows 11 just around the corner. I feel that with any Windows version later than 8.1, the only safe way to run jOrgan and be confident of having good latency, is to use a computer with a very capable CPU, and not depend on the backends at all. Or if backends cannot be avoided, then jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 (or later) should be used, but with no guarantee for multi-channel audio except the normal 2-channel stereo. I intend to add a notice to Graham G’s backend tutorial advising this choice. JohnR ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2021-09-25 17:38 JohnR, I am, still, running Windows 10 64-bit with a 2.9 Ghz CPU, 8 GB RAM and an SSD, jOrgan 4.0 Beta 1 64- bit with Fluidsynth 2.1.0 Backend by Graham Goode. I have never had it crash and it causes no problems, whatsoever. Several months ago, we discussed the problem of Reverb in Fluidsynth 2.1.0, particularly, the factor of amplitude of the playback of the audible cycle of the looped wave-file by the LEVEL counter/slider when raised above, approximately, 0.15, when the other counters/sliders, ROOM, WIDTH and DAMPING are set to 0.0. This is noticeable, and worse so, when any of the REVERB settings from Concrete Block to Cathedral Church are used, especially, on sustained chords. If a piece of music moves right along, it is not so much of a problem. I don't know if the folks at Fluidsynth are aware of this, but it does not seem that they could NOT be, or if anything is being done to address it. I believe this problem might be intrinsic to looped wave files with respect to the notion of "steady state." Auto-looping can be the source of the problem, but, for a while, some years ago, was superior in realism to the sterility of fixed, loop points of short length, producing steady-state tone as from a continuous-wave, oscillator circuit. I used to loop all wave files with the same loop points (eg., 508-558, length of 50) to avoid the annoying modulation. I realize that this was unrealistic, but it avoided the annoying modulation. I believe there is an ideal length to a wave file and that there are ideal loop points and that more research needs to be done in regard to the effect that amplitude (Reverb Level, in particular) has on the modulation in playback. This, really, needs to be addressed. Is REVERB LEVEL, really, nothing more than amplitude modulation of the looped, wave files in ranks? It would be difficult to go back to a prior version of jOrgan and Fluidsynth 1.0, simply because of the fact that I have saved dispositions to the 4.0 Beta 1 and they, of course, are not backward compatible. After working with these things for 20 years, I have to say that there is, still, nothing like the real thing. I have been impressed with much of the sound that I have heard from organists on youtube who have good Hauptwerk setups. I watch several different, British organists who use it and they do sound remarkable. I don't know if they ever tried jOrgan or any of the downloadable dispositions. I don't see a great deal of user material on youtube by jOrgan users. John Beach ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From JohnB on 2021-09-25 17:50 I believe that I, also, made mention, several months ago, of the fact that, in Polyphone Soundfont Editor, Version 1.9, the REVERB feature which consists of the same elements LEVEL, ROOM, WIDTH and DAMPING as Fluidsynth in jOrgan, does NOT produce the same effect problem with amplitude modulation of the wave file. The tone is steady and unmodulated (no audible, cyclical revolution of the looped wave file) throughout the entire compass of the keyboard when played in Polyphone 1.9. This is as it should be, and it would be good to know whether later versions of Polyphone which may use Fluidsynth 2.1.0 have the same problem as in jOrgan 4.0 Beta 1 with Fluidsynth 2.1.0. JohnB MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From ChrisP on 2021-09-26 03:31
Hi, All
"I don't see a great deal of user material on youtube by jOrgan users."
John B,
I'm doing my bit, or I would like to think so.
Yes, it would be nice to see/hear other performances.
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-26 10:13
How many people who are techie enough to put together a jOrgan instrument are artistic enough to play
a performance on it? Need to collaborate with others, might not be that social to do it.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-26 11:59
Chris, Pete,
I searched for "Chris Pearson" on YouTube and got a guitarist. I searched for "jOrgan", and mostly but not
totally got Jorgan, a performer of popular music of some sort. So how do we find you, Chris?
Pete, I agree with you. jOrgan users are not the typical organist-type. I have tried to wave a banner for
jOrgan on The Organ Forum, without overdoing it, because the vast majority of organists use Hauptwerk,
and it is the only one they know about (or want to know about, I sometimes suspect).
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-26 13:47
If I can ever get something to work I will get it up on Youtube if I have to PAY an organist to record
it! Problem getting a system together, though . . .
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-26 15:39
Hi all,
Please correct me if this way of reply is not good.
When you enter the keyword to search "jorgan" in Youtube, please ignore the
listed suggestions and enter.
I had some recording on youtube. That is found by jorgan jan Flikweert.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-26 16:22
If you can find it, please post a link. Thanks.
On 9/26/21 1:39 AM, Jan F wrote:
“jorgan jan Flikweert”
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-26 16:25
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jorgan+jan+flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-26 22:34
Sadly, Jan seems to be a singular minority with regard to performances made with jOrgan dispositions,
and, ironically, the search on youtube which brings up Jan's jOrgan tutorials about Rodgers organs
adapted for use with jOrgan stop changes, is followed, almost exclusively, by examples of Hauptwerk
Virtual Organ program-related stuff. I think that Fluidsynth's reverb is a fairly serious drawback for
those purists who might, otherwise, consider the benefits of jOrgan with respect to any realism of
pipe organ digital reproduction or emulation. Has anyone ever done a serious comparison between the
sound output quality between jOrgan and Hauptwerk. (I know that GrandOrgue is considered to be
a near-equivalent program and uses the same sample sets.)
The fact that jOrgan is free, open source software does not seem to make much of a difference.
Hopefully, the problems of Fluidsynth Reverb will, someday, be overcome. I did notice that several
new releases have been made to Fluidsynth since the 2.0.1 release that Graham Goode provided backends
for earlier this year or late last year. They are, now, up to release 2.18, listing the changes made
on the fluidsynth website.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-26 22:53
Hi all,
To avoid misunderstanding: My recordings are not using Fluidsynth.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-26 23:03
Jan, in other words, you are using "Generic Sound" or Creative Sound instead?
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-26 23:10
Yes, Generic sound with Linuxsampler
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-27 08:02
What ever happened to the idea that "jOrgan is a relay"? So you can control pipes or virtual ranks
with it?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Al S on 2021-09-27 08:45
I had trouble sending. Let me know if this comes through this time...
Al
NOTE (added by JohnR): The Archive Link is not set up to reproduce graphics or internet
link addresses. Al's post has these links, which were current at the time of posting. You will
need to copy and paste them to a new tab in your internet browser:
https://youtu.be/8bn9CtfxC64
https://youtu.be/dqd8tdwX-xI
https://youtu.be/qzG9xxDt-_o
https://youtu.be/1lsffhfHQr8
https://youtu.be/J7zwteaolNg
https://youtu.be/gGze0jU0eQ8
https://youtu.be/FdLqwOHJLuQ
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-27 10:34
Hi Al,
It certainly came through. I have just thoroughly enjoyed watching and hearing Part 1 of your videos,
kicking myself that they have been up for almost ten years, and this is the first time I have been
aware of them.
I want to add the links to my jORGAN DISCOVERY website GALLERY page, so I shall be back in touch
with you about that. I can't imagine a better advertisement for jOrgan than what I have just seen.
Thank you so much. And this was only Part 1! I must make the time to watch the other videos! I see
that only 210 people have watched Part 1. We can do much better than that, as my website is the
main portal to jOrgan on the internet, with over 200 visitors each month, and increasing all the time.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-09-27 13:25
JohnB said:
“Has anyone done a serious comparison between the sound quality of jOrgan and Hauptwerk?”
I own several Hauptwerk sample sets, both freeware and purchased, and a rather complex jOrgan
disposition for a 3/25 theater organ. I have actually done a comparison using the same samples
on each system. I first did a comparison after installing Fluidsynth back ends and doing an
A/B test. I felt the sound quality was equal for both systems, but additionally, there was more
of a three dimensional quality with Fluidsynth, a depth I do not hear in Hauptwerk installations.
At least with theater organs, there is a warmth and ‘chamber depth’ with Fluidsynth I do not
get with other systems, six-figure Allens included.
Part of it may be my speaker system, too; I never compared other speaker systems. My reverb is
from Creative Labs, part of the software suite that comes with their sound cards, so obviously
my sound cards are Creative Labs, too. My soundfonts are a collection of samples from jOrgan,
Hauptwerk, and other sources including Allen and Walker instruments, so it’s all custom.
Occasionally I will play some Hauptwerk sample sets, then go back to my jOrgan disposition
to compare. JOrgan is hands down my main axe. I have to be able to ‘build’ and customize my
own instrument. No fun otherwise.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-27 14:14
JohnR said:
“ Al's post has these links”
Yes, it sounds very nice. Thanks.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-27 16:28
Pete T wrote:
"What ever happened to the idea that "jOrgan is a relay"?
Pete,
The word "relay" has a couple of technical uses. In this case think of a "Relay Station", which might
be used to pass on a message to a further station. jOrgan is able to pass on MIDI messages to some
other station (such as a sound engine or a decoder to control some pipes, or some physical stop
switches, etc.), and to do all kinds of useful things in addition, all eventually involving MIDI
messages, which may effect changing the images on the computer screen, along with much else, of course.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-27 23:47
First, Les, thanks for your input. I know you have had a lot of experience and I think it is invaluable.
Something jOrgan users may not realize, who do not have Creative Labs Soundcards, is the superior sound
output that they give with the use of Generic Sound in jOrgan. Those who have CL cards and who can use
the packaged EAX Reverb application that comes with them will find that sound is not only better
articulated but the reverb is far better than Fluidsynth. One very superior aspect is the complete
elimination of boominess of bass notes causing distortion which is a serious drawback in Fluidsynth.
Used CL cards are available on eBay and, personally, I would recommend that anyone who wants, should look
for and try to get an Audigy 2 (ZS) and use the Audigy RX (5.0) drivers with it. Use the latest software
applications that are downloadable from Creative Labs, but DO NOT install the drivers. They will NOT work
in Windows 10. What you want are the Soundfont Bank Manager, and the EAX Reverb Console for the Audigy.
Then, download the Audigy RX (5.0) drivers and, after extracting the files, navigate to the WDM (Windows
Driver Model) folder and look for the Windows 10 driver and install that. You can, also, install the
CTgameport.sys file which will allow an older MIDI cable with the DB15 connector and MIDI-IN/MIDI-OUT Din
connectors. The Audigy gives very high quality sound output with a realism that is needed for the
articulation of pipes.
Jan may, also, want to give some input on what he is using with Generic Sound which may be of interest
and helpful to users who are seeking to improve sound output quality.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From ChrisP on 2021-09-28 01:39
John, John, Pete, Jan et al
John R, I use the alias of "jorganuser" on YT. https://www.youtube.com/user/jOrganuser/videos
"Fluidsynth reverb"
The vast majority of my recordings use convolution reverb, mainly ReverberateLE as I found the
built-in reverb to be lacking.
"Comparison of Sound, jOrgan v HW".
Having sampled an organ years ago and produced the sf for jOrgan I found that the quality of the
reeds suffered badly in sf, with no deterioration in HW.
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-28 02:39
Hi all,
For me HW was no option.
Because it is not easy to create your own disposition
The quality of the commercial dispositions is not always good checking with SPEAR
Quite not clear if you buy a complete organ
I have a digital organ which contains 95 stops, so why buy. I created samples of my own organ.
For me an important part of jOrgan is the memory. I use it for each piece of music.
Kind regards,
Jan F MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan and options
From RickW on 2021-09-29 09:20
My thoughts on jOrgan and options
jOrgan was the answer for me about 12 years ago when I wanted to create my own specific virtual organ
to replicate a specific local instrument.
There was a steep learning curve and some very generous helpers in this community to achieve this.
jOrgan is a very powerful and efficient MIDI Relay, with a user customisable Organ focused Graphical
User Interface. There is no limit to what it can do in this field. The integration with Fluidsynth
provides a starting point to achieve an actual sound output, and there are many more options if you
wish to experiment.
I also had an aim of wanting to share my creation with others, but have found this a constant battle
with many people interested, but few getting a functional result.
The Windows installer for jOrgan is stuck at about Windows 98. It loads files in places Windows has
deemed illegal for more than 10 years.
The Windows installer should also check for the current installed version of Java to advise of
conflicts/incompatibility.
I am now planning to move to a new stage in my VPO evolution, which will involve recording and
editing real sample recordings of my chosen local instrument. I will be reliant on the permission
of a not for profit organisation to do this work, and feel obligated to make the project provide a
financial return to the organisation with the responsibility of maintaining the instrument.
To achieve this goal, I have no option but to use a platform that will guarantee the security of the
samples and insure there is no way they can be shared or copied without the purchase of a licence.
I see no option but to use the big "H".
Regards
Rick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-29 12:14
On 2021-09-29 09:20, RickW wrote:
"My thoughts on jOrgan and options"
Hi Rick and all,
Rick, thank you for your post explaining why you plan to create a Hauptwerk VPO rather than a jOrgan
one. I also thank you for the many contributions you have made to our discussions, and in other ways
too, over the years. Your explanation is helpful to us, as it moderates any hurt and regret we may
feel at losing one of our valued members. Of course, what you are planning to do does not have to
mean that we lose your contributions altogether - there are certainly precedents where long-standing
members of the jOrgan community have done and perhaps are still doing what you propose to do, and
they have maintained their presence with us.
The one thing I wonder about in your post is the statement that the jOrgan Installer places files
(and their folders) in places which are illegal. As far as I am aware, the Installer places them
in one of the Windows Progam Files folders. When I install Java on a Windows computer, I think that
is where at least one Java folder turns up. Is that also illegal?
The question of expecting to be paid for one's work is another issue altogether. I have made no secret
of the fact that I believe for both musical and engineering reasons that jOrgan is better than any of
its current VPO "competitors". For this reason, I would be very open to any scheme that would use the
jOrgan operating system along with some means of making the sound samples in use unable to be copied.
This could be a program with another name, but which makes no secret of the fact that it uses jOrgan
as its "works", and it requires the user to pay something for the program and for any VPO dispositions
which will run on it. I have no idea whether there are straightforward means to prevent the copying of
the samples, and I suspect that it could be quite difficult to set up.
Readers should notice that I said at the start of the previous paragraph that I was referring to my
belief or "opinion". After a lifetime of preaching sermons in a public situation (a church where anyone
can in most normal circumstances enter) I have learnt to be very careful in the statements I make. If
I have ever stated that jOrgan is better than its competitors, that would have been in an off-moment,
and it certainly deserved to be challenged.
In posts to the Mailing List, it is quite common to read that "X" sounds better than "Y", and quite usual
to see no reason being stated. I rarely query such things when I read them, because I regard such things
as empty remarks. An improvement would be to state, 'To me, "X" sounds better than"Y" ', but again, if no
reason is stated, for me the whole thing falls flat.
Therefore, I feel obliged to say briefly just why I prefer jOrgan to the other VPO programs. This is
something I have usually tried to avoid doing, as the last thing I want to do is to start a flame war.
From a musical angle, speaking as a player, I suspect that the use of release samples inhibits the
production of a natural-sounding finish to the note (or chord) when the note has been played in a
staccato or semi-staccato fashion. I find the effect with jOrgan very natural-sounding when playing
that way, but I can't say the same thing when, for example, I play the GO demo organ. The effect
strikes me as being unnatural and even weird. Whether other sample-sets do the job any better, I have
no idea. But I note that the "higher-end" makers of sample-sets for Hauptwerk provide multiple release
samples for their high-paying customers, and I assume that the reason for this extra work and expense
is to avoid the problem I have mentioned. I suspect further that there are many makers of sample-sets
who have no thought of providing those extra release samples, for reasons which I totally understand.
From an engineering angle, I hate unnecessary effort and expense to produce a given result. In a world
where I believe resources need to be shared more fairly and responsibly, I am amazed at the need to
install RAM of 32 or 64 GB in computers just in order to play a VPO effectively.
I shall stop there.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-29 16:47
JohnR., I agree with your comments concerning jOrgan and, although I understand the preference for
Hauptwerk as the platform for recorded pipe organs, I think the few drawbacks which may discourage
use of jOrgan, by comparison, could be, effectively, addressed and corrected or improved to make its
appeal, as free, open source, virtual organ software more appealing to users who are not inclined to
or in a position to afford the expense of Hauptwerk. I believe the drawbacks and objections are,
almost exclusively, related to Fluidsynth Sound and issues with Reverb which give a less than realistic
production of organ sound. I have begun using Generic Sound in jOrgan which allows the use of EAX
Reverb with both Creative Labs and Realtek Onboard Audio.
The EAX Codec has been around for a long time. My experience has been that there is a boominess in
bass notes when Fluidsynth Reverb is used and, of course, there is the issue of the Amplitude Modulation
of looped wave files which becomes unacceptably obvious in playing and playback, which I have described
in detail in other, previous postings. If the developers of Fluidsynth can not rectify these problems,
would it be possible to contact the developer of the CoolSoft Virtual Midi Synth to see whether that
application might be adapted for use in jOrgan. I do not like VST Hosts and instruments or apps to
effectuate effects and, I feel, the appeal of jOrgan is decreased when its use is impeded by increasing
the correlative applications which must be running in order to achieve the objective for which it was
designed. It needs to be as "self-contained" as possible without a lot of external connections to other
programs to make it functional. I am going to use jOrgan with Generic Sound and the CoolSoft Virtual Midi
Synth and EAX Reverb for a while to see if any issues develop and whether the sound output is consistently
good and I will report my findings on the forum.
Just out of curiosity, what sound engine does Hauptwerk use? I know that Garritan Pipe Organs use the
Aria sound engine. I have never tried Garritan. Has anyone on the jOrgan forum done so?
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-09-30 11:22
Hi John and all
The Windows installer of jOrgan places "all" files in a jOrgan folder in "Program Files" or
"Program Files (x86)".
Yes, other program installations also place "some" files here but not "all".
Other programs create a folder in "Documents" and place files there that are intended to be
written to, or created and edited by users.
jOrgan needs to do this.
At the same time, jOrgan needs to group the example dispositions in folders with all their related
files (even if they are duplicated) so that users get a working example of how jOrgan disposition
packages need to be "packaged" in order to avoid learning complex "construct" addressing in the
first attempt to use it.
Windows monitors and prevents "write" activity to any file in the "Program Files" folders as one
method to avoid malicious activity on a PC.
If you try to use an Example Disposition of jOrgan from its default install position it will prevent
the user from making any changes to the file.
To use a jOrgan .disposition file you inevitably need to make some changes to the file, even the
simplest task of adding a MIDI keyboard requires that the file be written to.
Some users change security settings in the jOrgan folder to allow files to be written to, however
this is not something I would recommend and certainly not something most users would know how to do
for themselves.
New users face these problems before they get even the slightest squeak out of jOrgan, not to mention
matching bitness to Java.
I believe we lose many would-be users at these initial hurdles, that could be avoided by just changing
the installer package.
(having said that, I have no idea how to create or change a Windows installer package)
Some of our most esteemed previous jOrgan creators have tried to create their own "packages" to avoid
these problems.
Regards
Rick MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan Generic Sound and CoolSoft Virtual Midi Synth
From JohnB on 2021-09-29 12:15
I have been trying out some of the dispositions which others have produced using CoolSoft Virtual
Midi Synth instead of Fluidsynth.
https://coolsoft.altervista.org/en/virtualmidisynth#soundfonts
After creating a Generic Sound element, and referencing all the ranks that are listed under the
Fluidsynth Sound element, I deleted the Fluidsynth sound element. The Virtual Midi Synth will work
with both Creative Labs soundcards and onboard audio (Realtek), once installed. The installation
went flawlessly and the program is very intuitive and simple to use. I have only used it in
conjunction with jOrgan and a MIDI file sequencer program outputting to Loopbe virtual Midi Cable
which is the input on jOrgan. The Virtual Midi Synth will show up as an alternative sound output
in jOrgan. You can load as many soundfonts (in proper, numerical order) as you have in a disposition.
It supports controller Reverb and Chorus from both the Creative Labs soundcard and Realtek onboard audio.
This might be an alternative to Fluidsynth for use with jOrgan. I will try playing the organ using
this Virtual Midi Synth and post my experience. I do know that the Recorder in jOrgan does NOT work
for playback of the disposition proprietary midi files and I have, yet, to figure out why. Make sure
you download the proper bit version for your system, if you try to use it.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Sven on 2021-09-29 16:18
Hi John,
interesting, I've never heard of that one.
Note that CoolSoft's VirtualMidiSynth is just a wrapper around the un4seen's BASS audio library.
The latter has a C Api, so we could build a similar integration into jOrgan as we have with
Fluidsynth currently.
I'm curious what results you will achieve and how this compares to Fluidsynth.
Best regards
Sven
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-29 17:03
Hi all,
I am very curious about your opinion/experience with Linuxsampler. How does is compare with fluidsynth?
I suppose a good reason for fluidsynth is the available dispositions.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-29 23:53
Sven, after playing around with the configurator settings of the CoolSoft Virtual Midi Synth, I find
that, whether attempting to play a jOrgan disposition with a MIDI controller keyboard or using it to
playback .mid files using another sequencer application, the latency, which is, theoretically,
regulatable (0-100) is unacceptable with nearly a half-second of hesitation after the initial press of
a key.
It would be intolerable with that response time. Also, when used in conjunction with jOrgan stops,
it does not seem that the correlation of preset numbers in the soundfont is accurate. Whether this
may be due to the difference between a base of 0 and a base of 1 with respect to the 000-000 bank and
preset numbering system in soundfonts, I don't know. There seems to be only one example of a tutorial
on youtube that deals with CoolSoft Midi Synth and General Midi soundfonts, exclusively, while it may
have potential uses for .mid file playback, I don't think we will do better than Fluidsynth and, after
comparison, I think I will stop finding fault with it. It does an excellent job for me with NO latency
whatsoever and I have played organ with it for many, many hours. I do experience boominess with the
bass notes in the Pedal division of my own dispositions, and this is a problem whether using headphones
or loudspeakers with amps where treble and bass are controllable.
I may try playing around with the configurator in the Virtual Midi Synth, but as it is, now, without
improvements in latency of play, and preset identification in the soundfont, it would not be suitable
as a substitute for Fluidsynth.
Generic Sound works pretty well with the Creative Labs Soundfont Bank Manager and produces a very high
quality sound because the EAX console feature for Reverb allows better control than Fluidsynth Reverb
does and there is no annoying amplitude modulation of the sound of the looped wave file which is,
definitely, caused by the LEVEL control of Reverb in Fluidsynth. I have read up on what LEVEL, actually,
does and the concept of increasing the overall effect of the correlated parameters of ROOM, WIDTH, and,
to a lesser extent, DAMPING, as a purpose of "amplitude," really, seems to be the problem, although I can't
imagine how else it could be effectuated, considering the implications of impulse response, the frequency
of phase of waves bouncing around in enclosed spaces of varying sizes. Digital signal processing is pretty
remarkable, considering that it must be based on means of simulating what is captured on recordings or
experienced, sensorily, by the human ear, subjectively.
If my opinion changes relative to experience with the VMS, I will let you know.
Thanks for your input.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-30 11:35
I have no experience with Linux at all.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-30 12:39
It is easier than Windows nowadays . . .
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-30 16:40
John,
Linuxsampler has nothing to do with Linux.
There is a good working windows installer.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-30 16:48
Pete,
Linuxsampler has nothing to do with Linux. It has a good windows installer. I work only in windows with it.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-09-30 17:27
Aha! What's in a name?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-09-30 22:17
Pete and Jan, a few important questions. I have downloaded the Linuxsampler.exe for Windows,
and the Asio4all (which I have used before). My question is, since Linuxsampler calls "soundbanks"
"orchestras?", are soundfonts (sf2) files supported or do I have to convert my soundfonts to some
other soundbank format?
Since the subject of Linux was brought up, and my objection was that it was not as easy to use as
Windows, I should explain that I was put off by the amount of manual entries of DOS-like data that
was necessary on installation (and about which, the average Windows user would have NO idea whatsoever,
the frequent use of "sudo" and other "commands"). Also, the file storage system in Linux is complex
and not as well-identified as Windows. I never knew where to install programs or where to find parts.
I did have the very limited experience of trying to use GRUB and GPART and tried the Linuxpuppy for
jOrgan with no success. That is the extent of my unhappy experience with Linux.
Now, back to the problem of soundbank conversion to Linuxsampler format. I have SF2 soundfonts, eleven
total, for one disposition in jOrgan which has about 540 stops. It is a kind of "wishlist" organ
that includes about every stop to be found in pipe organs. It is divided into 7 divisions from Pedal,
Swell, Great, Choir, Solo, and Echo. How do I go about converting these to "Orchestras" or "Midi
Instruments" for Linuxsampler? I don't seem to find any information on the tutorial page for Linuxsampler
concerning the actual "creation" of soundbanks or "orchestras" as they refer to them.
On opening the "Load Instrument," I get a blank window with no choices, obviously, so I am mystified at
this point. (Again, a deterrent to the popularity of Linux-based OSes, etc., please, forgive the
personal opinion!)
Thanks for your tolerance and patience with my ignorance.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-09-30 23:09
John,
Due to health issues my memory is not good. So, regarding Linuxsampler I cannot remember how
and why I did it.
I recorded from my digital organ, edited the samples and have made from my recording from my
organ sf2 files. I used these samples and created .gig files. That is a soundbank.
The best way to get familiar is to use fantasia.
You create a midi device and a audio device. Forget orchestra'sdatabases. You create a instrument
from gig,sf2 and connect to audio/midi.
After that you exort a lscp file. This is a text file. You can edit this in your notepad.
Linuxsampler does not use sudo etc. It is normally compiled in Windows.
I can make a video creating a lscp files with sf2.
And each stop has its own file in .gig When you use the same stop on more then one manual you
can use one file. You can create f.e. a mixtureIV with four samples for each note.
The only issue I can see is that Linuxsampler as far as I know has no reverb. I use REAPER
and Reverberate.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-10-01 02:53
During the course of this thread, I guess I forgot the beginnings of it. What, besides unsatisfactory
reverb, are the perceived downfalls of Fluidsynth, and why are people jumping through such hoops
(including alternate OS) to avoid using it?
As has been discussed at length here, there are fixes for the the reverb, not the least of which is use
of Creative Lab products as well as other add-ons for those not wishing to use CL. What else is not
good about Fluidsynth?
I for one have been using Fluidsynth since the day it became available in jOrgan, and welcomed its
ease of operation and improvement in sound quality. If you make your own soundfonts using Viena and
various looping programs (WHY isn't Zero-X looper available any more, it's the best), you can create
soundfonts with release samples, just not, to my knowledge, multiple ones. This is not an easy or a
fast process. I have only done it on my chorus and solo reeds: Clarinet (most effective of all of
them), Kinura, Tuba Mirabilis, Trumpet and Posthorn. The other ranks, at least on a theater organ,
do not seem to have nearly as noticeable releases. (to my ears).
I can see where releases on more of the traditional organ ranks in a classically-voiced instrument
would become more important for authenticity.
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-02 18:43
Hi all,
I have this program. You can convert sf2 files to gig files, this are the soundbank for
Linuxsampler. You may call Linuxsampler also Windowssampler.
https://www.extranslator.com/
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-10-05 17:42
Linuxsampler can use sf2 and sfz as well as gig files. My experience is that sfz files have the
best sounding engine of the lot. Polyphone will export an sf2 file as sfz. Sfz does not have patches
the way sf2 does.
Sfz is an "open" standard. The samples are held as wav files and the parameters (called "opcodes")
are in plain text files. That means thay can be edited in any text editor at a pinch. Polyphone will
open an sfz file as a new sf2 file for editing. Here is the header and first sample of John Tays
Wurlitzer Diapason as an example. (Each sample gets a <region>.)
// Sfz exported from a sf2 file with Polyphone
// Name : Tay Diapason 48
// Author : John Tay
// Copyright :
// Date : 2021/09/29
// Comment :
<group>
loop_mode=loop_continuous
ampeg_attack=0.001
amplfo_freq=8.176
fillfo_freq=8.176
pitchlfo_freq=8.176
fil_type=lpf_2p
cutoff=19913
<region>
sample=..\samples\Diaphone C2.wav
lokey=12 hikey=24
pitch_keycenter=24
effect1=100
amplfo_delay=0.00999787
fillfo_delay=0.00999787
amplfo_freq=5.00104
fillfo_freq=5.00104
pitchlfo_delay=0.00999787
pitchlfo_freq=5.00104
pitcheg_delay=0.001
fileg_delay=0.001
pitcheg_attack=0.001
fileg_attack=0.001
pitcheg_hold=0.001
fileg_hold=0.001
pitcheg_decay=0.001
fileg_decay=0.001
pitcheg_release=0.001
fileg_release=0.001
ampeg_delay=0.001
ampeg_attack=0.001
ampeg_hold=0.001
ampeg_decay=0.001
ampeg_release=0.100018
volume=-4.764
offset=0
end=34585
loop_start=30153
loop_end=34553
Cheers
GrahamW
Jan F wrote:
"Hi all,
I have this program. You can convert sf2 files to gig files, this are the soundbank for Linuxsampler.
You may call Linuxsampler also Windowssampler."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-05 20:58
Extranslator also translates to SFZ.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-05 21:01
Graham,
Do you prefer SFZ above gig?
I have the option to convert my gig disposition to SFZ.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-06 02:34
In jOrgan with LinuxSampler, in the LinuxSampler Sound element, after selecting the output device,
(Synth A or Synth B with a Creative soundcard), in the "LSCP" dropdown box, are the SFZ (exported
SF2 folder saved in C:\Users\Me\SFZ Folders) folder/instruments selected for this? Also, do the sf2
banks have to be loaded into RAM with the Soundfont Bank Manager as with Generic Sound or Creative Sound?
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 04:15
The best way to explain how it can be done I think the best way is to provide a video. I do not know
what Graham Wykes thinks about this idea?
Probably a small disposition. Please give ideas?
MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Great Organ" virtual pipe organ software
From JohnB on 2021-09-30 00:40
I just came upon this website as I was looking for a jOrgan disposition of the Barton 3-10 that
Jan mentioned in his last post. Is this just an English version of the alternative to Hauptwerk,
called "GrandOrgue" open source software, or something far more extensive? It, certainly, allows
for a great deal of input and control of features.
https://digitalvpo.com/Home/About?ReturnUrl=%2F
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-09-30 06:27
Hi JohnB,
It has been around for some time - certainly some months, and probably over a year. I don't think it has any
connections with Hauptwerk or GrandOrgue. As far as I recall, somewhere on its website it says that it does not
use release samples.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-09-30 10:50
Great Organ was originally named Digital organ. It has been written by Richard McCavery in the UK.
They made contact with me in April 2016 wanting to use the "Christie" in their software. At the
time I tried the software and found it very buggy and lacking a lot of important functionality.
I believe it has evolved a lot from then and has been on again off again over the years with key
people suffering a lot of very personal and very damaging attacks by some very powerful lobbies
promoting only the big "H".
Regards
Rick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-09-30 10:54
https://www.modartt.com/organteq is another virtual organ some of you may not have seen.
MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A Lynn Walls' Video on jOrgan from 2009
From JohnB on 2021-10-01 16:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYyGzGvEf3s
The link above is an introductory video made by Lynn Walls in 2009.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-01 21:18
Interesting look back. I remember in subsequent posts Lynn was working on a "real" console installation.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From johnB on 2021-10-01 22:06
Pete, I did a search in youtube for "jOrgan Virtual Pipe Organ Users" and that came up. Also,
a user named, Josh Walworth, has posted several videos of him playing hymns. Other than those,
I don't find much, which is sad, because I listen to a lot of organ music and I think jOrgan
dispositions do a pretty fine job of emulating pipe organ sound. I think what we need to remember
is that, as with the Hammond and Allen organs which were designed to meet the needs of persons and
congregations which could not or did not want to afford a pipe organ, jOrgan has been, and is, free,
open source software that has, thanks to Sven's abilities, met the wishlist requests of those of us
who did not or could not or would not afford the Hauptwerk software.
Purists have expectations that we, lesser mortals, may appreciate, but not fully enough.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Lynn W on 2021-10-02 01:23
I just found another video from the same day:
https://youtu.be/DqmBJvsQ9No?list=UUXg3QGxvePFxiGotaeWoPkA
...and here's one from 2018 after I converted from jOrgan/GSO3 to Hauptwerk:
https://youtu.be/HIMFJCf2vYU?list=UUXg3QGxvePFxiGotaeWoPkA
Note that the sound quality, especially the pedal notes, is much better.
...and here's the last video that I made (from 2020):
https://youtu.be/9hckBgFjUlw?list=UUXg3QGxvePFxiGotaeWoPkA
Note that the console monitor has been moved over to the console and is now reachable
while playing.
CLW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-02 01:50
Have you ever played the same sound font in jOrgan and in Hauptwerk? Kind of an A-B comparison?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Lynn W on 2021-10-02 02:01
No. Hauptwerk doesn't support soundfonts -- only sample sets developed specifically for Hauptwerk.
However, I suspect that someone could take the same samples used to build a soundfont, and use them
to build a Hauptwerk equivalent...But I don't know of anyone who did that.
Please be aware that the video camera used to make the earlier jOrgan/GSO3 videos had a fairly lame
built-in microphone (for music recording). So, the later 2018-2020 videos used better microphones.
Note that I never used fluidsynth (except experimentally) for sound rendering. I only used GSO3 and
later Linuxsampler to render the audio for jOrgan.
CLW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-02 02:08
I understand that Graham Goode has done both jOrgan and Hauptwerk versions of the same samples,
maybe he has some recordings if he is following this thread.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-02 02:52
Hi all,
Some years ago I recorded a video playing jorgan.
I recorded a video including sound, but replaced that with the same recording in the computer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2JV440JGzI
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-10-02 04:14
John
Did you not see an earlier reply I made about jOrgan videos on YT?
Here is my channel https://www.youtube.com/user/jOrganuser/videos
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-02 07:52
So the blue screen videos are jOrgan and the other stuff is other stuff?
Chris P wrote:
"John
Did you not see an earlier reply I made about jOrgan videos on YT?
Here is my channel https://www.youtube.com/user/jOrganuser/videos
Chris P"
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From King Hedonist on 2021-10-02 23:55
I took the Freisach set created by Piotr Grabowski for Haupywerk/Grandorgue
and made a soundfont using every third sample. I myself don't notice a big difference.
Dan
Lynn Walls wrote:
No. Hauptwerk doesn't support soundfonts -- only sample sets developed specifically for Hauptwerk.
However, I suspect that someone could take the same samples used to build a soundfont,
and use them to build a Hauptwerk equivalent...But I don't know of anyone who did that.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From ChrisP on 2021-10-03 04:16
They are all jOrgan, apart from the bike.
Pete T wrote:
So the blue screen videos are jOrgan and the other stuff is other stuff?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K 2021-10-03 08:13
"I suspect that someone could take the same samples used to
build a soundfont, and use them to build a Hauptwerk equivalent...But
I don't know of anyone who did that."
Yes you CAN do that, but Hauptwerk sample sets are much harder to create than
soundfonts. The instructions for creating a Hauptwerk 'Codem' and other details
are not widely published. It is also possible to do the reverse, but Hauptwerk sample
providers claim this is copyright infringement, even for the freeware.
All in all, if you are happy with the sound of jOrgan, and you have an actual organ console with a
movable combination action and/or other special features on your console, jOrgan may be a better bet.
jOrgan's capture combination action is easier and less expensive to set up than Hauptwerk, and
completely customizeable.
My favorite things about jOrgan/soundfonts are that you can create your own totally customized
list of ranks, and swap out ranks, even individual pipes if you want. It's like George Wright with
his Pasadena studio organ, swapping out ranks or portions of ranks to achieve the very sound
desired! It's the closest thing to a hobbyist's pipe organ you can get in the VirTual world. The
other thing is that you are not married to (stuck with) the stoplist that someone thought would
be best for your instrument. I own some Hauptwerk sample sets created by well known
theater organists. Anyone who has heard my youtubes knows I sure don't play like those people,
so why should I have them dictate how my personal instrument is configured?
Here's are examples of this. My 3/25 theater organ has two Tibias, two Voxes and six Strings. Stop tabs
for all of these would fill my single rail bolster twice over! Using the concept of Amplexes, I can add
Solo Tibia to any and all Tibia stops drawn, Solo String(s) to String registers, Solo Diapasons to the
Diapason stops, the list goes on, and the stoptab count goes down. If I want individual Pizzicato stops
rather than a "Solo to Great" Pizzicato coupler (wastes an entire manual just for Pizzicato effect) I can
(and have) put these in. BTW, Pizzicato ranks can be created from conventional soundfont ranks in Viena
by altering the volume envelope.
Les K
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-03 12:26
What, that guy playing the terraced French console is jOrgan?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-10-03 20:27
There's no terraced French organ on my channel
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-03 21:02
YouTube slipped it in, I guess.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-03 22:06
Say, you are a very accomplished organist!
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-03 22:30
What happened on that one, Alexandre Guilmant - Andante Sostenuto from Sonata No.8, at 2:54 - it all
goes to static? Clearly a technical glitch in the system. Do you know what caused that?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-10-03 23:40
I've just played the original file I uploaded, there's no static on it!
Can you send me the link to terraced French organ, please.
Is YT being hacked?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-04 03:43
The static is right at the end. It is still there. Just as you are grabbing for the mouse.
I can't find the terraced French organ right now. It played right after one of yours, I just can't
remember which one.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-04 06:28
Pete T wrote:
“I can't find the terraced French organ right now. It played right after one of yours, I just can't
remember which one.”
I wouldn't bother looking for it. Those videos are a list which YouTube has put up because you are
interested in pipe organs, and which YouTube goes on to play. They have nothing to do with Chris's videos.
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-04 10:06
Chris, I was away for the weekend and just saw your post and checked out the link on youtube.
You have a lot there. Will comment later.
Thanks.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-05 01:03
Lynn, given the attractiveness of your console and the high quality of your playing,
why did you turn off comments? Given the difference in interests in organ by fans of
theatre and classical, I think it would be beneficial to hear people's opinions of the
videos, regardless of how superficial they might be or which aspects those comments address.
I am, also, wondering if the differences between theatre organ and classical, as preferences
by people, are the reason why Chris Pearson's videos have had so few views. I noted that in
2008, one of your jOrgan videos had almost 1K views, but that one made three years ago had
only 26 views. The sound quality of the threatre organ was the same for both videos.
What is observable about views is this. Over the past 6 years, views have dropped more than
50%, overall, from more than a thousand in many instances of videos, to far less than 500
within the last 6 years. Does this represent, simply, the declining interest in organ,
as an instrument, or organ music, generally, as a trend? My point is that the lack of the
popularity of jOrgan may have nothing (or very little) to do with its actual quality,
features and ease of use or price.
John Beach
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-05 08:34
JohnB wrote:
"I had to lower the bass setting to –6dB to eliminate an overwhelming boominess"
I suspect that any boominess is likely to be the result of using connvolution reverb and failing
to re-regulate the levels, note by note. I noticed this back in my Puppy Linux days, where GrahamG
provided convolution reverb. My recollection is that I felt there was disproportionate emphasis on
the bass frequencies, and so I preferred not to use it, but to use the Fluidsynth reverb, which I
always had at a lower setting for LEVEL than I imagine most jOrgan users would be satisfied with.
Convolution reverb mimics the acoustic properties of actual buildings. In a cathedral building
with its long distances and vast space, it is inevitable that acoustically it will act as a great
low pass filter, suppressing the treble sounds drastically - or putting it the other way,
drastically over-emphasizing the bass sounds. A pipe organ will be designed and regulated accordingly.
HW and GO use actual recordings, and so there is no need for any kind of re-regulation. However,
that doesn't guarantee excellent results in every aspect. The microphone(s) can be placed in one
location only, and will fall prey to the existence of standing waves in such buildings. The result
will be that across the range, notes with mainly fundamental content will greatly vary in loudness
from note to note, some being too loud, and some appearing to disappear altogether. If you are in
the building listening, the same thing applies.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-10-05 11:25
You may be interested to know that the more recent (and more expensive professional) HW sample sets
have 4 and even 6 channels of sound recorded simultaneously (at 24bit 96kHz) with multiple attacks,
loops and releases.
A user is able to use the various positions if they have multiple channels of audio, or they can use
various adjustments to create a personal perspective in a stereo pair, headphones or however many
audio channels they have.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Lynn W on 2021-10-05 12:32
John, I rarely go back to youtube to read the comments, so I just turned them off so as to
not disappoint people when I don't respond back.
Also, I am not much interested in the comments of people I don't know, so I am content
to read just the comments of the people here on jOrgan-user.
In the early 2000s YouTube had only a very small fraction of the video material that it has today.
Back then it was a novelty and many of us uploaded a lot of theatre organ stuff.
Today, there is indeed more theatre organ stuff, for sure...but there is also thousands of times
more material on YouTube than there was back then. So the percentage of theatre organ videos
to the total is minuscule. Also, no matter what you search for on YouTube, they always try
to divert your attention to something else.
CLW
JohnB wrote:
“Lynn, given the attractiveness of your console and the high quality of your playing,
why did you turn off comments?”
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-05 14:30
I have been interested in VPO for longer than I knew about jOrgan and, even now, I listen regularly
to scheduled live streams and recorded videos of two of the very professional users of Hauptwerk.
On the basis of my age and my limited ability to play a lot of organ literature or repertoire,
I can't justify the cost of Hauptwerk . But I do appreciate the outstanding quality of
the sample sets that I have heard on youtubers such as "Beauty in Sound" (Richard McVeigh)
and Fraser Gartshore. Anyone who likes a combination of theatre, jazz and classical organ
will appreciate the outstanding offerings of the latter and those interested in the hymns of
the church and more sacred classical organ music, the former.
A further note about the "lower bass setting to –6dB to eliminate an overwhelming boominess,"
the adjustment of setting was made to the soundcard "Properties> Tone" control in "Sounds" by
right clicking the Volume (Speaker Icon) in the lower right on the Launchbar. This took care
of the problem....which, I thought, might be related to the EAX reverb setting, at first, but I,
usually, uncheck the reverb to avoid the "inside the barrel" perception it causes.
Our expectations with respect to perception are formed by experience with real-world instruments
in the building environments where they are located. In producing sample sets, especially, for
the professional VPOs such as Hauptwerk, I get the impression that they are recorded to give as
accurate a presentation of the environmental acoustic as "the most important stop in the organ,"
as they can, and, yet, allow the user organist to adjust that environmental acoustic, to some extent,
at will. So, the same sample set does not have to sound, acoustically, representative of the
environment in which it was recorded. I have seen videos of the machine that plays each note of
each stop for the recordings of sample sets for entire, cathedral organs and read the detailed
description of the process. It is, technically, quite interesting, and, while automated,
as a procedure, it is time-intensive, done at night when no one, other than sound technicians,
are in the space and when external, noise sources are minimal. It is, truly, impressive.
John B
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-10-17 22:07
Hi, John B
Yes, I agree the sound quality of my YT videos is poor. I believe that YT doesn't allow .WAV files
so I have converted the audio to mp3. I don't know if this is the best quality audio available for YT.
If anyone knows which is a better format I would be interested.
In the meantime I have deleted the Reubke video and I have now uploaded the original Audacity wav
recording made from my jOrgan MIDI recording. See (hear) what you thing to that,
https://www.mediafire.com/file/uha2d80biie2de7/Reubke_-_Sonata_on_94th_Psalm.wav/file.
There are other original wav files on MediaFire which I have uploaded over the years,
https://app.mediafire.com/xo7yg7dhcg204
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-18 09:35
Well! That is awesome. Definite bass line, that's for sure. Brightwork is nice as well.
Regards,
Pete T MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fluid synth distortion From NickP on 2021-09-29 17:57
Hi everyone, apologies if a solution exists but I've had a long search and not turned anything up..
I used jOrgan 4.01 beta on Windows 10 with a laptop, but when I've installed the portaudio and
fluidsynth backend, I get distortion when setting a sound font to use WASAPI via portaudio.
I've tried all sorts of variations of buffer size and number, large and small without luck too...
Is it my CPU or memory? I'm trying to use the Barton 3/10 disposition with Atom x7-8700 CPU
and 4GB. Tried an external USB sound card with no luck either.. perhaps the system is not powerful enough?
Many thanks!
Nick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamG on 2021-10-02 17:24 Hi Nick, There are a couple more things to try to see if it helps: 1. Reduce the Gain value in the Fluidsynth element (This is typically where most distortion comes from once you've ruled out buffer number and size) 2. Turn off the Reverb (if this works then your CPU is under too much strain) Have you tried any other dispositions? Do they also have distortion? Kind regards, GrahamG
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Nick P on 2021-10-09 05:32
Thanks very much for the tips, Graham. I will try it out at the next opportunity
and report back. If I have no luck, I think I may just have to get something
a little better to run it on...
Nick MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan Linuxsampler
From JohnB on 2021-10-06 04:06
Since LinuxSampler uses the ASIO4ALL, which can only take one soundfont, does SFZ allow multiple SFZ
folders of instruments to be used? By analogy, with Fluidsynth, I load 11 soundfonts for use with my
favorite disposition. I am assuming that this is NOT possible with Linuxsampler. Is that correct?
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 04:17
I work with REAPER REAROUTE.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 04:43
Test_LS_SFZ.disposition (~6 KB)
Web link:
https://webmail.exetel.com.au/?_task=mail&_caps=pdf%3D1%2Cflash%3D0%2Ctiff%3D0%2Cwebp%3D1&_uid=
75596&_mbox=INBOX&_framed=1&_action=preview#
Hi,
This is a small example dispo.
I use loopmidi from Tobias Erichson.
The sound engine is defined in a .lscp file. That defines several sfz files for each stop
and the sound engine. This can be Jackrouter, REAPER Rearoute or a sound card.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-06 08:45
There is a small amount of information on using LinuxSampler with jOrgan on the LinuxSampler sound page,
found on the jOrgan InfoBase. I am not aware of anything else, such as a tutorial.
Here is the link: https://jorgan.info/base/l/LinuxSampler_sound.html
A much larger source of information is found in the Mailing List archive. I put "LinuxSampler" into
the Search Window, and there were many results. You will find a convenient link to the archive
in the text at the top of the Mailing List Link (2nd paragraph, I think).
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 16:35
Hi all,
Scrolling on this page you find example LSCP scripts:
https://www.linuxsampler.org/documentation.html
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 16:40
Hi all,
Here a part of my lscp script.:
--------------
RESET
SET STREAMS 3600
SET VOICES 3600
SET VOLUME 0.3
# Audio ASIO Device 0
CREATE AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE ASIO ACTIVE='true' CARD='ReaRoute ASIO (x64)'
CHANNELS='5' FRAGMENTSIZE='1024' SAMPLERATE='48000'
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 0 NAME='Channel 1'
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 1 NAME='Channel 2'
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 2 NAME='Channel 3'
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 3 NAME='Channel 4'
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 4 NAME='Channel 5'
# MIDI MME Device 0
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 0 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 0 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port'
# MIDI MME Device 1
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 1 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 1 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 1'
# MIDI MME Device 2
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 2 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 2 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 2'
# MIDI MME Device 3
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 3 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 3 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 3'
# MIDI MME Device 4
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 4 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 4 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 4'
# MIDI MME Device 5
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 5 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 5 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 5'
# MIDI MME Device 6
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 6 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 6 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 6'
# MIDI MME Device 7
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 7 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 7 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 7'
# MIDI MME Device 8
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 8 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 8 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 8'
# MIDI MME Device 9
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 9 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 9 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 9'
# MIDI MME Device 10
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 10 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 10 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 10'
# MIDI MME Device 11
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME ACTIVE='true' PORTS='1'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 11 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 11 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 11'
# MIDI instrument map 0 - Chromatic
ADD MIDI_INSTRUMENT_MAP 'Chromatic'
# MIDI instrument map 1 - Drum Kits
ADD MIDI_INSTRUMENT_MAP 'Drum Kits'
# Channel 0
ADD CHANNEL
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE 0 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE 0 5
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_PORT 0 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_CHANNEL 0 13
LOAD ENGINE GIG 0
LOAD INSTRUMENT NON_MODAL 'C:/Domus gig/Nov2016mono/Gedekt8.gig' 1 0
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 0 0 1
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 0 1 1
SET CHANNEL VOLUME 0 0.3
# Channel 16
ADD CHANNEL
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE 16 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE 16 6
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_PORT 16 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_CHANNEL 16 13
LOAD ENGINE GIG 16
LOAD INSTRUMENT NON_MODAL 'C:/Domus gig/Nov2016mono/Prestant8b.gig' 0 16
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 16 0 1
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 16 1 1
SET CHANNEL VOLUME 16 0.3
# Channel 153
ADD CHANNEL
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE 153 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE 153 9
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_PORT 153 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_CHANNEL 153 8
LOAD ENGINE GIG 153
LOAD INSTRUMENT NON_MODAL 'C:/Domus gig/Nov2016mono/PdlBombarde16a.gig' 0
153
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 153 0 3
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL 153 1 3
SET CHANNEL VOLUME 153 0.3
# Global volume level
SET VOLUME 0.3
----------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 16:47
Hi all,
Test_LS_SFZ.disposition (~6 KB)
wEB LINK:
https://webmail.exetel.com.au/?_task=mail&_caps=pdf%3D1%2Cflash%3D0%2Ctiff%3D0%2Cwebp%3D1&_uid=
75607&_mbox=INBOX&_framed=1&_action=preview#
For every 16 stops you create a generic sound:
Each generic sound connects 16 ranks with the virtual loopmidi port as
defined in the lscp script. See the section sound in Test_LS_SFZ.disposition.
In the rank you define the midi channel [equal ..] as defined in your lscp
script.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 17:45
Hi all,
Now an example using more then one sfz.
---------------------
RESET
SET VOLUME 0.3
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 0 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 0 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port'
CREATE MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE MME
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 1 0 NAME='Port 0'
SET MIDI_INPUT_PORT_PARAMETER 1 0 PORT='loopMIDI Port 1'
CREATE AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE ASIO ACTIVE=true CHANNELS=1 SAMPLERATE=44100
CARD='Creative ASIO' FRAGMENTSIZE=2400
SET AUDIO_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_PARAMETER 0 0 NAME='Channel 0'
ADD CHANNEL
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE 0 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_PORT 0 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_CHANNEL 0 0
LOAD ENGINE SFZ 0
SET CHANNEL VOLUME 0 1.0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INSTRUMENT_MAP 0 NONE
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE 0 0
LOAD INSTRUMENT NON_MODAL 'D:/Domus\x20gig/sfz/Bourdon8_hfd.sfz' 0 0
ADD CHANNEL
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_DEVICE 1 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_PORT 1 0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INPUT_CHANNEL 1 1
LOAD ENGINE SFZ 1
SET CHANNEL VOLUME 1 1.0
SET CHANNEL MIDI_INSTRUMENT_MAP 1 NONE
SET CHANNEL AUDIO_OUTPUT_DEVICE 1 0
LOAD INSTRUMENT NON_MODAL 'D:/Domus\x20gig/sfz/Clarinet8_nvn.sfz' 0 1
---------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 17:48
Hi all,
SFZ documentation:
https://www.linuxsampler.org/sfz/
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-06 20:45
Jan, thanks for all your input and work on this. Unless the sound output from Linuxsampler is
so perceptibly better than that of Fluidsynth or Creative Sound (using Generic Sound with soundfonts
loaded by Soundfont Bank Manager in RAM), given the fact that Linuxsampler must use ASIO (ASIO4ALL)
and all soundfonts must be combined into one Mega-soundfont, it would not be worth it for me to go
through the work of combining all the soundfonts into one. Generic Sound, as I described, allows
the use of all Soundfonts, without conversion or alteration, along with EAX, which, in Creative
Soundcards, is superior to Fluidsynth Reverb. So, depending on the wave file-sample quality, which,
in my case, is excellent, there would be no sound quality advantage in audio output to gain by using
Linuxsampler.
For others who may want to use it, perhaps, a repository could be created of downloadable,
Linuxsampler-configured, jOrgan dispositions, created by users of the jOrgan dispositions that are
linked for download in the jOrgan Wiki or jOrgan.info websites. The work of creating the SFZ files
from SF2 files is easily done in Polyphone by simply opening the soundfont and Exporting it as an
SFZ file. These are saved in the root directory, C:\Users\Me\Stop Name.sf2 and a "Samples" folder
of all the wave files used in the bank. My impression is that, for the LSCP file which Linuxsampler
uses, there is a great deal of work to create it. For me, with 11 soundfonts, 5 of which have,
all, 128 presets of the soundfont, and which total nearly a gigabyte in size, the task of conversion
would be enormous. Generic Sound is identical to Creative Sound (without the CTLoader, which is no
longer a functioning part of jOrgan, anyway). Once soundfonts are loaded into RAM by Soundfont
Bank Manager, the sound output is, exactly, the quality of the wave files that were recorded for
the various ranks/stops. I only found one youtube video that did a comparison study of the difference
between Linuxsampler audio and Fluidsynth, but my understanding is that the opinion of the person who
made the comparison is that Linuxsampler is better than Fluidsynth.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-06 22:37
John,
That is clear.
Generic sound routes only midi messages between linuxsampler and jorgan.
For those who are interested I will make a video. Using Fantasia will create
a script file a .lscp file.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamW on 2021-10-07 13:00
John, just a few points to note.
I don’t believe there will be much, if any, quality difference between FS2 and LS using translated
sound fonts. SFZ has a lot of potential if you build from scratch and optimise for that format.
There are also alternatives for sfz players out there.
Don’t be put off by the scripting. I’ve never written a script because the front-ends (Qsampler or
Fantasia) give you a GUI for the setup and create the script for you.
LS does not have reverb so that has to be an external reverb of some type. (BTW, Linux makes all
this relatively easy esp Ubuntu Studio). As I’ve said before, I use Zita-Rev1 which was designed
specifically for use within a virtual organ and then separated into its own application but
is Linux/MacOS.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-07 15:54
Hi all,
For those who are interested a video explaining a disposition Linuxsampler
with sound engine SFZ. A script file is also created.
https://youtu.be/oo1QBSg-E_E
Kind regards
Jan F MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comparing GIG and SFZ with Linuxsampler
From Jan F on 2021-10-08 23:11
Hi all,
I compared SFZ and GIG in Linuxsampler. As known I work with Windows. I converted GiG files
to SFZ and did not edit the sfz files. I used the same project settings in my DAW REAPER.
I used the same disposition in jOrgan. With the same stops. The result can be download from
Google drive. It is a short wave file during a few seconds playing accord both gig and sfz.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uC-I9aqAR9HTriqoteSzP1PBNoT6ta5k/view?usp=sharing
I prefer the gig result because the high frequencies are better. I use a "scharf".
The registration is
16-2
Mixt+Scharf
Pdl 32-4
All based on Montre,Flutes.
I did not use reeds on the manual.
In other cases the sfz reeds are to loud. Of course that can be corrected.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete on 2021-10-08 23:51
Nice. Thanks.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-10-09 05:08
Hi, Jan
Thanks for the video.
I agree with you, the GIG is better.
It has a broader and deeper sound I associate with Cathedral organs I've heard live.
Is the set up similar for GIG files?
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jan F on 2021-10-08 on 2021-10-09 06:37
Hi Chris,
Every stop needs instead of LOAD ENGINE SFZ [nr of stop] :
ENGINE GIG [nr of stop]
That Is all.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-09 06:47
Chris,
Fantasia does the job for you. Every instrument you add is default gig. Just choose your
gig file and save the script.
See video https://youtu.be/oo1QBSg-E_E
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-10 08:44
Jan F wrote:
"I prefer the gig result because the high frequencies are better......In other cases
the sfz reeds are to loud."
Jan, I have listened to this, and I think something else may be going on rather than
simply GIG being preferable to SFZ in sound quality. I think there is some difference
in the way GIG and SFZ are treating the Attenuation parameter figures. Such parameters
in a soundfont can refer to individudal notes and to individual stops, as we all know.
Thus the Mixture stop ends up being rendered as too soft by SFZ, and the reed stops too loud.
I recall the VST plug-in "sfz" (not to be confused with the current "SFZ"), which some
jOrgan users were employing, possibly before Fluidsynth became widely used. Its Attenuation
parameters applied different rates of attenuation compared to other sound engines such as
Fluidsynth, the Creative soundcards, and VSTsynthFont (or whatever it was called). All those
three applied identical attenuation according to the figure designated by the soundfont creator.
Perhaps something like that is going on.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-10 17:43
Hi John,
Thanks for your reply. Reading your message I suppose each stop needs its
own Attenuation?
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-10 23:25
On the subject of attenuation parameters....With recorded pipe samples which are wave files
used in the creation of soundfonts, and without alteration to amplitude, this, seemingly,
should not be a problem.
Originally, in the creation of soundfonts using synthesized wave files, I set the attenuation
parameter in the Instrument pool of the soundfont, having set all the wave files at the same
amplitude (Change Volume in Polyphone Menu>Samples) in the Sample Pool. The settings in the
Instrument Pool were 6 dB per octave, maintaining consistency relative to the footages of stops.
That is, if 32' equals 0, 16=12, 8=18, 4=24,2=30, 1=36, etc., with thirds and halves for tierces
and quints. I found that this did not work well at all, causing near silence when, for example,
in a Dulciana 8' in the Preset Pool, a setting of 20 or 30 for the attenuation of the compass of
the stop was used to achieve the ppp volume of that stop.
My solution was to use a system of settings for the wave files in each octave at the Sample Pool
level, having determined that a difference of 10 (70 to 60) achieved the 6 dB attenuation from
one octave to the next. So, my wave files for each octave from 32' stop to mixture fractions
decrease from a loudness of 70, by 10 for the wave files of higher octaves. This achieves a
uniformity of sound without shrill harshness in the upper registers. For softer stops such
as the Dulciana, I halve the starting amplitude in the bass octave and continue the halving
throughout the wave files of the upper octaves.
I, once, used a chart that listed the ppppp, to fffff values for all stops in the organ and put
the numerical value in the velocity settings of Polyphone .12 for ppppp to .95 for fffff, along
with the Attenuation Parameter setting 127=0 to 31=.88. I did not find these to be satisfactory,
either, and that is when I began to use the Change Volume feature in the Sample Menu of Polyphone.
This has achieved the best results. I have stopped expecting perfection from digital, although
I have thought that the theory of "harnessing," while, obviously, correct, is defied by the nature
of electricity and electronics in nature. We can not always get it to do what we want it to do,
regardless of the harnessing we apply to it. I do find this annoying and I think it explains
why real-world instruments are the epitome of man's creative genius. As long as the electric
blower produces the wind, the organ sounds as it should after being tuned by a master voicer.
Using synthesized wave files, it is easier to use standardization in parameters in editing
soundfonts, than it would be with wave files from recorded pipes. I do try to make reference
to the soundfonts of other disposition creators on this forum to inform my choices and increase
my knowledge and understanding of the science of editing. However, there is no standardization
which can be achieved with recorded-pipe, wave files where "normalization" can not be used for
a complete rank and "Change Volume" adjustments made per octave.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-11 06:43
John,
That is very interesting.
You write: "That is, if 32' equals 0, 16=12, 8=18" Should "32"not be 6?
You made quite a journey and the resume seems to me: "Perfection does not
exist and go back to the basic the wave sample."
I suppose you do fine tuning using attenuation and sustain.
In my case the manufacturer of my "Domus Vivace digital organ" did a very
good job. And fine tuning attenuation and sustain will do. The combination
of these two involves "chiff".
The con of linuxsampler gig files is missing a complete editor. Using
gigedit Windows you cannot hear the result in the editor.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-11 14:58
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"I suppose each stop needs its own Attenuation?"
Jan,
I am not familiar with GIG or SFZ soundfont files. Sf2 files are the only ones I know about,
and I use Viena as an editor, with its excellent GUI (Polyphpne is very similar). But as far
as I know, the actual Sf2 files are text files, and I assume that is the case also with SFZ
and GIG. With Sf2, the stops are referred to as "Presets". They are made up of one or more
"Instruments", and they are the repositories of the appropriate sound Samples. Attenuation
parameters can be applied to the notes, which are arranged in "splits" or "zones", each such
making use of one sample, and they can also be applied to the Presets. In this case they set
the sound level for the Presets (stops).
I think JohnB made it clear in his recent long post that he normalizes the level of each sample
(probably to the maximum level allowed), and I might say that that is my practice also, even
when I am using recorded samples. However, many makers of soundfonts (or sample-sets) do not
adjust the level of recorded samples, and they use the samples much as the microphone found
their sounds. Any processing will attempt to remove unwanted noise and insert looping points
without changing the level of each recording (or the pitch of the sounds, possibly). In this
case attenuation parameters will not be applied, either at the Instrument level or the Preset
level, and all in the name of authenticity. As far as the soundfont is concerned, the attenuation
parameter will usually be "0", I would expect.
My theory after listening to your sound clip is that converting from SFZ to GIG has incorrectly
changed the attenuation parameters, so that the figures for the Mixture(s) ended up higher
(more attenuation) than they should have been, and those for the reeds lower (less attenuation).
But I have no way of investigating that. Perhaps you can use a text editor to explore it.
The only other suggestion I can make is that you (or someone else) create a very simple soundfont
in Sf2, which can be converted to SFZ and then to GIG. Let it consist of only one Instrument
(say a fairly dull flute), and let it have two Presets - one called Great Flute 8 and the other
Swell Soft Flute 8, and each using the same Instrument. (Of course you will need to use a set of
Flute samples). Make the Preset Attenuation Parameter for the Soft Flute to be 15 higher than
that for the Flute. This should make it 6 dB softer. Using a jOrgan disposition you have designed
for the purpose, play C48 (Tenor C - an octave lower than Middle C) on the Great, and then on the
Swell. Can Linuxsampler play SFZ files as well as GIG files? If so, then you can compare the
difference in level between the Great and Swell notes, as achieved by SFZ and GIG. If you get
the same level, then it disproves my theory. If LinuxSampler does not play SFZ files, then all
is not lost. You simply use Audacity to measure whether Playing using the GIG file reproduces
the 6 dB difference accurately. This is all a bit complicated and time-consuming, and I wonder
if the text editor idea may be all that's needed.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-11 16:05
John R. and Jan, John R. stated: "I think JohnB made it clear in his recent long post that
he normalizes the level of each sample (probably to the maximum level allowed), and I
might say that that is my practice also, even when I am using recorded samples. However, many
makers of soundfonts (or sample-sets) do not adjust the level of recorded samples, and they
use the samples much as the microphone found their sounds."
After synthesizing my organ ranks for stops using a jOrgan disposition which I created for the
purpose, using a soundfont of sine waves, or the Sample Set Creator application (which synthesizes,
writes the wave file to specific length in seconds and autoloops the wave file), I record them
using, simultaneously, the jOrgan Additive Synthesizer disposition, a Midi Sequencer Program
which plays a midi file containing 6-second length of each the desired pitches, recorded, spaced,
contiguously, ascending the compass of octaves from 32' to 1/16th Foot (16 Hz, Midi Note 12 to
8,196 Hz, Midi Note 120) by Audacity, in which I, also, "normalize" the wave files and edit them
for length.
I, then, import them into Polyphone where, in the Sample Pool, I set the root key,
"Change Volume" wave file(s) for each octave for the 6 dB attenuation and auto-loop the samples.
Then I create the Instrument Name for the Rank/Stop being made and copy and past the specific wave
files used in each footage of the rank as many times as it will be used for notes, zones or splits
in the octave. Usually, I have one wave file for each note since the parameters for each individual
note can be set, rather than having one sample cover several notes where the parameters are the same
for all notes of a "zone" or "split" having only one wave file. If each octave has twelve wave
files, the settings for each note are specific to the twelve notes of that octave. Polyphone's
editing features allow for bulk editing and copy and paste of the complete parameter settings for
given footages. So, the process is relatively rapid.
Final attenuation settings are made at the Preset Level in the soundfont, the actual Program Change,
where the final loudness of the rank/stop is set by a percentage of loudness value, for example,
30% attenuation. I had attempted to set the attenuation by using a "Velocity" parameter, but this
was not effective and what I have described above is the manner in which I do it, now and it works well.
Although the practice of "Normalize(ing) the wave files is not necessary in Audacity, I do so because
it is easier to see the points at which I want to edit the wave file. Polyphone's Sample Pool is
where the standardized attenuation settings for each octave or a rank/stop are made.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-11 16:53
Hi all,
Thanks for your replys. Later today I will read them better, because it are
interesting things.
I would like to do some testing.
One remark: Fluidsynth deserves more attention. I suppose the 2gb limit was
a reason to switch to gig.
From my digital Domus organ I have recordings before editing in spear,
before normalizing.
I made sf2 files from the sfz files. Due to limitations I splitted this to 6
sf2 files.
My mixtures contain separate samples for each footage.
My SFZ file for Scherp(Scharf):
<group>
volume=-23.2
ampeg_attack=0.001
ampeg_decay=0.001
ampeg_sustain=8.8
ampeg_release=0.001
pitcheg_attack=0.001
pitcheg_decay=0.001
pitcheg_release=60
fileg_attack=0.001
fileg_decay=0.001
fileg_release=60
pitchlfo_freq=4.999
fillfo_freq=4.999
amplfo_freq=4.999
My gig file has not txt file the same stop:
Volume -23.2
Sustain 8,8 %
I cannot remember how I did things but the base of this is converting sf2 to
gig.
In my dispositions Prestant 32,16,8 has chiff, a nice chiff. Because I love
the romantic sound I mostly play based montre/flute based. And for that
reason mixtures montre based. I can check this with SPEAR. At this point the
manaufacturer of my digital organ did also a good job.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-11 17:13
Hi,
Linuxsampler can play sf2, sfz, gig files. Gig files are no text files. But
stops wich use the same samples can be stored in one gig file.
The problem of my disposition is that I suppose I cannot share it.
I can send a printscreen of one stop recording from Audacity and spear. I
cleaned each stop in spear and normalized each stop to -6db and splitted the
sampled in audacity.
I set volume,attenuation and sustain.
The script file also contains volume for each stop. This is set to 1.
The main volume of the script file is f.e. 0.3
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-11 17:38
Hi all,
My digital organ has an option to correct each the volume for each stop.
Before recording I placed all volume for each stop to zero. My recording was
on 48000/16. This because the limit for SPEAR is 16 bit. At the end I
normalized in Audacity to -6 db. I also did it in Polyphone. All samples in
one time. In the first sf2 I used I think I placed attenuation according to
the volume for each stop in the digital organ. My goal was the loudest to -3
db.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-11 22:02
John,
My sfz f.e scherp.sfz file is editable with text editor. Both Polyphone and
Extreme Sample converter save in that format. This setting is converting gig
to sfz using Extreme Sample Converter.
After creating a sfz file Fantasia creates a lscp file pointing to that sfz
file for each stop.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-13 16:30
Hi all, John&John,
Thanks to your feedback I think that the difference can be caused by the way
sf2,sfg and gig are handled. My mixtures f.e. II-VIII have 8 instruments.
Simple converting volume causes a difference.
Yesterday I changed the SFZ files. It now contains only the reference to
each sample and volume. No more, no less.
I judged the volume for each stop again.
The reason I did not do this with the samples is that they can change every
day.
My impression is that mixtures in sfz are a matter of attenuation.
I now consider how to go on with gig. Convert back from this result or
modify the gig files to defaults and volume.
How about comparing the way f.e. linuxsampler handles soundfonts? That
cannot be perfect and that should not be perfect. Every judgement of
volume/attenation is handmade and depends on the moment. When the difference
between the way linuxsampler handles gig, sfz and sf2 soundfonts is a matter
of taste, there is no good no bad.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-13 16:45
John,
I will split things apart.
I think there is no perfect comparasation and there should not be. The
difference the way Linuxampler handles instrument in gig and sfz files
causes the difference in my comparisation. After correcting that I suppose
it is a matter of taste.
Now I did the next thing
-modify linuxsampler/sfz
I Planned to do:
-modify linuxsampler/gig
-modify linuxsampler/sf2
-modify jOrgan generic sound Creative X-fi xtreme music.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan w/Fluidsynth vs. Hauptwerk
From Les K on 2021-10-09 08:46
Several years ago I re-recorded HW freeware samples using the HW audio recorder and created
a soundfont of the samples just for comparison, as I had installed Hauptwerk 4.0 as well as
jOrgan. This was a tremendous amount of work with processing, looping, etc., but I had to
see how it sounded. I did an A/B comparison with the same ranks in each system and found
the sound quality equal for both. The Fluidsynth version sounded a bit different, but I
liked it more.
Bear in mind this is for theater organ samples, so that's a bit different than the classical
sample sets most of the jOrgan people use.
Les K
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Creative Soundfont-Bankmanager Cache-memory limited to 1968 mb
From Jan F on 2021-10-12 03:25
Hi all,
Today I started using jOrgan with my Creative soundcard x-fi music to use the soundfontbank
with that card.
My system: Windows 10 64 bit 16 gb ram, AMD athlon 3300
How to increase the cache-memory?
It stays on 1968 mb.
The help file states for xp and windows 2000:
Regedit
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\
PagedPoolSize FFFFFFFF
After reboot this does not change anything.
Any ideas?
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From John B on 2021-10-12 11:56
Apparently, That's the maximum permissible in Windows 10, makes no difference how much RAM
you have installed. I have the same limitation and I have only 8 Gb RAM.
John B MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
convert sf2 to Linuxsampler sfz/gig
From Jan F on 2021-10-13 16:51
Hi all,
I should like to convert a existing jorgan sf2 disposition to Linuxsampler sfz and gig. My idea
is to choose one classic and one popular one.
Please tell me which disposition you prefer?
The only thing I do is convert disposition/soundfond and judge attenuation.
Each can judge attenuation, make his own modification and compare.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Convolver for Legacy Organ
From Pete T on 2021-10-14 12:30
Hi List,
This is a question I have not seen explored. We expect to receive a Legacy Toaster in the next
few weeks which will have the more or less standard outputs to a tone cabinet. Can we use a
convolver reverb somewhere in this set-up? The room is large, but very dead.
No, we can't convert it to jOrgan right now. No money for that.
--
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-14 16:29
Does the "Legacy Toaster" have MIDI or will you take the analog signal and input it to a computer
Line-In, use a convolver reverb with a VST Host and output it to the Tone cabinet? When you say,
"No, we, can't convert it to jOrgan right now," I assume you are intimating that it has no MIDI
capability.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham G on 2021-10-14 17:53
Hi Pete,
Yes.
Audio L/R out of organ > computer Line In > Linux running jConvolver >
Computer audio out > speakers
You have the choice of hardware (from RaspberryPi to any Intel/AMD
based PC) and Linux distributions (based on your hardware choice).
So first step is finding out how many audio channels the organ has....
(as some toasters have 8 channels) and then see what PC you're going
to use, etc.
GG
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-14 17:49
The lady who once owned the Polk Theater Robert Morton has passed away and left this Legacy Organ
to CFTOS in her will. In truth, I have not seen the organ yet but I have not known this lady to be
a MIDI sort of organist so probably not. If it does have midi, well, that is a whole new dimension,
of course.
If I had to guess from the one picture I have seen of it I would say it is an old Wurlitzer, c. 1960
or so. I expect to see it soon so the first thing I will look for will be the model number. But for
speculation I have to say probably no MIDI.
So, the block diagram is analog from organ to a computer line-in, convolver running on the computer
with a VST Host and output to a Tone cabinet? Sounds doable . . . Might be good.
Another possibility would be a guitar reverb pedal. Some of them are quite interesting. I have never
seen one patched into an organ but perhaps it has been done. Probably want to make sure to not overdo it.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-14 19:32
Recalling a message from you years ago, I would like something that could run "headless" and live
out-of-sight inside or behind the tone cabinet.
Kind of minimalist. Figure out the best setting for the room without seeming phony and then let
that be it.
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-16 11:12
Graham G wrote:
"So first step is finding out how many audio channels the organ has.... (as some toasters have
8 channels) and then see what PC you're going to use, etc."
Graham,
Since Linux is being proposed, it would be good if you or other Linux users could report on which
currently-available sound "cards" (USB or otherwise) have been found to work well with Linux computers.
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Creative sound font bank and Linuxsampler gig
From Jan F on 2021-10-18 01:13
Hi all,
I have a Creative xi-fi xtreme music soundcard.
This card is shipped with a sound font bank manager.
I recorded two short examples with this Creative sound font bank manager and Linuxsampler Gig.
This is no compare
It is difficult to compare.
Every recording and sound font differs.
Perfection does not exist.
On the other hand is nice to "show" them.
The recording can be downloaded from Google Drive:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1517JQSAQDcnn7A745yifYV5UxHb8fah4/view?usp=sharing
The title of this file explains itself.
The Reverb is not good, because it cuts off at the release.
I recorded both dry and added reverb/compressor in REAPER.
There is one problem:
As far as I know you need an EAX console in Creative which is not available with my Soundcard.
That is a nasty limitation for which I have no solution.
I tried to install a EAX console but I get an error message.
Kind regards,
Jan F MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fluidsynth 2 jOrgan 4
From Jan F on 2021-10-23 23:54
Hi all,
I did not follow the posts regarding Fluidsynth2 and jOrgan 4.
I managed to get Fluidsynth2 working on jOrgan 4 leave audio device and driver blank.
I used reverb and chorus from Fluidsynth and did not edit the result in any DAW.
Here a link to download a very short result:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10mK3b_ULkIrC4PcqpG94NMOnDETRrgIB/view?usp=sharing
In early comparisations I learnded that it is all about attenuation/volume.
Kind regards,
Jan F
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-24 06:57
Jan F wrote:
"I managed to get Fluidsynth2 working on jOrgan 4"
Jan,
I think it would be helpful if, when we refer to Fluidsynth reverb, we mention what parameter
settings are being used. Fluidsynth reverb has long had a bad reputation among jOrgan users,
and I have never felt that it was totally deserved. In fact I have settled on settings with
Fluidsynth 1 reverb which I find give quite a satisfactory sound. Admittedly it is all a matter
of taste - personal preference for one sound over another.
Our main criticism of the Fluidsynth 2 reverb is that there is a definite cyclic "modulation"
which is very obvious at high settings of LEVEL (anything more than 0.05, in my opinion!).
However, I wonder how distracting it is when we are listening mainly to the music and not
concentrating on what the reverb is doing.
Do you know what settings you were using for that short recording?
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-24 11:45
Jan,
It's important that you have raised the subject of reverberation for discussion, as we all know
what a difference good reverberation makes to organ sound.
I have come to the conclusion that in a normal domestic-sized room, we shall never truly rival
the sound produced in a large acoustic space. At the very least, we should feed the reverb signals
through separate amplifiers and speakers, located away from the main organ speakers. At 82,
I lack the energy to set that up properly in my home. But even if I were to do that, I suspect
that there would still be something missing.
My local church, where I built a jOrgan installation with the BROADWAY disposition, is very dry
acoustically, and I have set the Fluidsynth reverb at very modest levels (sorry, I haven’t written
down what they are). Yet even there, when listening to the sound in the body of the church,
I think I can hear something of the “magic” quality which is absent in my music room at home,
where I have the Fluidsynth reverb settings at L 0.07, D 0.3, R 0.9, W 1 (and which I certainly
should have quoted in my previous post!). The settings at home are far more reverberative than
the church settings. Yet even in that dry church, there is a hint of that special quality.
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-10-24 14:46
This discussion about reverb is quite interesting. Here is what I have decided to use in
my dispositions. SoundBlaster x-Fi with EAX. There are many adjustments in the advanced
settings. The card I am using is a pci-e with 4 stereo outputs. The reverb is mixed into
all the outputs. To make it sound good for my ears... I like the reverb to respond to the
bass as I feel bass frequencys last longer in big spaces. I cut off treble quite soon to
eliminate what I hear as a "brassy" sound that is unflattering. Very little pitch shifting.
When I have had other organists in to play... they seem to like the reverb quite a bit.
It can be shut off with one click also.
Thanks for everyone's discussion.
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Fl on 2021-10-24 19:00
JohnR wrote:
"Do you know what settings you were using for that short recording?"
John,
Indeed. For this recording I used Fluidsynth Chorus: D 0.7/L 0.5/NR 0/Sp 0.1
Reverb: D 0.31/L 0.28/R 0.95/W 0.23
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Fl on 2021-10-24 19:14
JohnR wrote:
"I have come to the conclusion that in a normal domestic-sized room, we
shall never truly rival the sound produced in a large acoustic space."
Hi John,
I agree that we can get a very beautiful sound, but not replicate real space.
But our result can me very good and it is good to search for the best as possible.
And I enjoy fiddling this things.
For a good result I need Chorus. Chorus: D 0.7/L 0.5/NR 0/Sp 0.1
Reverb: D 0.31/L 0.28/R 0.95/W 0.23
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-24 20:57
JohnR wrote:
"Our main criticism of the Fluidsynth 2 reverb is that there is a definite cyclic
"modulation" ... However, I wonder how distracting it is when we are listening mainly
to the music and not concentrating on what the reverb is doing."
Jan F,
I listened to your short sound file a few times, and I think it illustrates what I was
getting at. Although on this occasion I was listening to the reverberation as well as
the music, I did not feel that the Fluidsynth 2 modulation was all that obvious, especially
as there was so much complexity in the sound anyway.
Any real pipe organ with chords being played on a number of stops together is bound to have
undulations which cannot go unnoticed. It is part of what makes organ sound interesting.
If the FS 2 undulations were occurring in your example file, they were being swamped by
what else we were hearing. On the other hand, if we were listening to sounds which were
all completely in tune, those "unwanted FS 2" undulations might indeed be distracting.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-24 21:58
Pertinent to what Marc Allen has stated, below, for those who are dissatisfied with the
Fluidsynth 2.0 reverb problems, an excellent and inexpensive workaround with the Creative
Labs soundcards WHICH support soundfonts (are soundfont capable with the Soundfont Bank
Manager software) is the best alternative. Creative Labs still produces one soundcard
in the Audigy line, the RX, which is soundfont capable and which has a preamplifier at
output, just as the Sound Blaster AWE-64 sound did. I, recently, purchased a new one
(they sell for $69. USD) and installed it in the PC which I use exclusively with my
midified Allen Organ. I use the original Allen amplifiers to output stereo from the
Realtek Onboard Audio of the PC to one set of speakers and the Audigy RX with a separate
100 watt amplifier with separate subwoofer input and output and volume control to an amplified
15-inch subwoofer. My soundfonts are organized according to organ tone families, Flutes,
Diapasons, Mixtures, Reeds and Strings with a GM-based percussion section which includes
Acoustic Piano, harp, harpsichord, bells, chimes, tubular bell, choir ahs. The Flutes and
Reeds output through the Audigy RX and the Diapasons and Strings output through the Realtek.
I, also, have a soundfont for ambient blower noise with optional on/off in jOrgan.
Previously, I had used an X-fi Titanium which produced decent output, but the articulation
of the Audigy RX is superior. I think this may have to do with the preamp at output. The
advantage of either soundcard is the fact that the EAX console feature can be used in place
of the Fluidsynth Reverb, even if one uses Fluidsynth instead of Generic Sound and soundfonts
loaded by SFBM (Soundfont Bank Manager). I doubt there is a better long-term solution to
the reverb problem.
I think that amplitude modulation with the LEVEL of Fluidsynth Reverb is indicative of a major
impasse with respect to Digital Signal Processing. That is, it can not be done any other way.
This is equivalent to saying that reality is reality with respect to acoustic environments and
impulse-response, wave files have to be manipulated with "amplitude" in order for the effect
to be noticeable. As the amplitude is increased, distortion of the sound relative to loop
points, (the length, in time, of the looped wave file), pitch/frequency and amplitude level,
occurs. This is compounded by multiple stops of different footages and, in slower music or
sustained tones, is, objectionably, noticeable. Whereas, when playing faster pieces, it may
not be.
I use 6-second long, auto-looped, wave files for every pitch in every instrument. So, it does
not seem to matter how long or short the wave file is, the reverb LEVEL distorts. This is not
the case with the EAX console settings for reverb with the Creative Labs soundcards.
John Beach
From Marc A:
"This discussion about reverb is quite interesting. Here is what I have decided to use in
my dispositions. SoundBlaster x-Fi with EAX. There are many adjustments in the advanced
settings. The card I am using is a pci-e with 4 stereo outputs. The reverb is mixed into
all the outputs. To make it sound good for my ears... I like the reverb to respond to the
bass as I feel bass frequencys last longer in big spaces. I cut off treble quite soon to
eliminate what I hear as a "brassy" sound that is unflattering. Very little pitch shifting.
When I have had other organists in to play... they seem to like the reverb quite a bit. It
can be shut off with one click also.
Thanks for everyone's discussion.
Marc-Paul"
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-10-25 08:29
I agree, reverb has a lot more work to do to carry the pedal low frequency sounds. They do
hold longer in a real space, and I find playing without that most unsatisfactory.
In the Christie disposition I went to the trouble of creating another Fluidsynth Element just
for ranks played on the pedals (which for a highly unified theatre organ is all of the ranks).
This allows the user a set of Fluidsynth reverb settings for the Pedal voices and a separate
set of reverb settings for keyboard activated sounds.
It was always my aim to be able to distribute a package that other people could easily set-up
and enjoy the organ I had worked so hard to emulate, without the need for extra hardware and/or
extra software will links and connections.
My attempts failed. It seems to me, that users who have persevered with jOrgan each end up
with it as one part of a complex puzzle with their own unique combination of extra software
and hardware to create their "own" organ. Their specific investment in hardware and/or research
locks them down their own path.
In the end, the strength of jOrgan is that it enables so many optional configurations, and it will
never be a cookie cutter, one size fits all solution.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-25 19:45
Hi all,
The goal of the recording is to hear the quality of fluidsynth. That quality is very good.
Important is reverb/chorus.
I doubt if reverb and chorus of fluidsynth can beat Liquidsonics Reverberate with IR.
Fluidsynth has a nice reverb and chorus.
I must confess I am not blessed with patience to hear and judge sound. I better should do that.
When it sounds good I think it is good.
Reverberate can handle two streams to process reverb. Each stream can has his own equalizer.
Reverberate is shipped with presets for churches, cathedrals. Indeed they f.e. process the
low frequencies.
So using these presets and pick your favorite IR is possible. I use saint silvain.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-10-26 01:55
Marc A wrote:
"This discussion about reverb is quite interesting. Here is what I have
decided to use in my dispositions. SoundBlaster x-Fi with EAX. ... "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a country song that goes: "I was country before country was cool." My version of this
would have to be:
"I was Creative Labs/EAX before Creative Labs/EAX was cool." I have been using various CL
soundcards for well over a decade and found the EAX reverb settings just right for the type
of instrument I am trying to create.
As many who have read my previous posts know, my jOrgan project is 100% theater organ 3/27
(if you count the ranks in my 'junk box') with a restored and midified theater pipe organ
console. My present soundcard is a Soundblaster Audigy 5/RX. I use three channels, two
from the Soundblaster and an additional 15" subwoofer channel for my 5-16 foot ranks. (No 32's).
I have recently added an additional soundfont of modern percussion to go with the Arduino-based
programmable percussion sequencer I developed for the instrument. More on that another time.
My studio is approximately 15' x 18' and with the chambers built into the 'long' wall for max
stereo separation. Some time ago I decided to be more realistic about the relationship between
my physical space and the organ sound that would fill it. I envisioned what it would be like
if a windblown instrument was installed in chambers speaking into the studio, which, incidentally
was designed for the organ installation when the house was built. Besides violating all building
codes by hanging over the lot line, the two attached chambers feeding into this room would give
more of a "studio sound" to the instrument, not unlike the Vaughn WurliTzer that George Wright
recorded on (about the same size instrument but with five manuals) but not quite as acoustically
flat as Leon Berry's "Beast in the Basement." (2/7)
My thoughts on this were "Who am I kidding, this instrument is not in the 'Frisco Fox', why try
to make anyone think it is?" All I have to do is look around the room to tell I'm not in a 5,000
seat theater! A studio organ sound similar to broadcast instruments is realistic for this room
and actually contributes to the illusion since is is 'nearly' plausible that such a sound could
be created by a windblown instrument speaking into this room, violating a string of building codes
not withstanding. The one thing I do not duplicate is the roughness of sound many theater organs
would have if placed in a similar environment. Of course such is not the case when expert
technicians tailor the voicing to smaller quarters, but fortunately I did not have to call in
Terry Klevin or Clark Wilson to do the job here! If you have ever been in an organ chamber
in a theater while the organ is playing, you know that what you hear in the chamber is a whole
lot different from that you hear in the theater, after the sound has been allowed to 'breathe'
before reaching you.
By the way, I do have personal experience with residence theater pipe organs, having owned one in
my younger years. It had to share space with the Rock group I was playing with...cramped quarters.
Would I go back to pipes? no way.
I use the EAX "Jazz Club" setting with a moderate amount of reverb in the mix. The idea is to
create "chamber reverb" and not a whole lot more. Since just about all the samples in my
soundfonts are sampled outside the chambers, this reverb treatment merely reinforces what is
already there. Modern music production does not put much if any reverb on bass, and I have
followed this practice.
The overall result is realistic for my studio space, and I can actually perceive some "chamber
depth" whereby some ranks seem deeper in the chamber than others. My Posthorn spits fire from
the rear of the Solo chamber with Tibias and Voxes more to the front. In the Main chamber, the
gentle two-rank Salicional (actually a scaled down Barton VDO) is up front, where I hear all the
nuances of its attack and its tremulant, just as I have heard in similarly sized residence pipe
organs (Morton) while sitting near the main chamber.
I do, however, appreciate the need and desire for those recreating classically voiced organs to
have a greater level of reverb. Classically voiced instruments just are not the same without it.
Theatrically voiced pipe organs in a studio environment have set a precedent for what I am doing
here, and a 'close' sound is more accepted in a theater organ.
By the way, I had a Yellow Labrador way before THEY were cool, too. (Shay, RIP).
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-26 16:45
Hi all,
Bach and Franck are the greatest organ composers.
I did not learn play baroque organ, I struggled with articulation.
Once I was Shopping, I hear outstanding organ music! I went to the shop. They played a CD of
Jean Guillou playing organ works from Franck on a "van den Heuvel" organ St. Eustache in Paris.
It concerns the recording on Dorian. That is what I love. Clear musical lines!
I must confess Bach/Franck do not fit in the Dutch Protestant tradition. I prefer as I call it
the Dutch romantic style. (Jan Zwart, Feike Asma, W.H. Zwart etc.) Most of these music is at
the best with good reverb and chorus/flanger.
That Dutch Romantic does not require a specific style organ, it requires a good reverb/chorus/flanger.
See f.e. Klaas Jan Mulder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnVz0oHZ4E8
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-26 16:50
Hi all,
And not to forget the Bovenkerk in Kampen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvueFb4U6xo&list=OLAK5uy_l1QbOotDTaRTx_kdPsh4dHWwh5vIQus1k
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-27 18:59
One man who can speak to this is Graham Goode. If you study his words.
I want to eventually create an instrument that works as a traditional organ. Using SAMs,
keyboards, pedals, expression controls - all as God Himself intended, :-), without all
these computer thingies cluttering up the console. In Graham Goode's immortal words, "headless".
Over the years I have been gathering parts . . .
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-27 22:38
Pete T wrote:
"I want to eventually create an instrument that works as a traditional
organ. Using SAMs, keyboards, pedals, expression controls - all as God
Himself intended, :-)"
Pete, funny and timely that you should mention that. Not to be off-topic or trouble-making,
however, I posted a comment to an article concerning a very famous social media website
(which shall remain unnamed) that has been in the news for its apparent censoring of
comments or perspectives with which it was, either, not in agreement or which did not reflect
its determination of acceptable truth."
I stated that the entire internet is a mistake and that social media is a profound waste of
time filled with, largely, non-essential "swap-shop" comments that profit no one. I, also,
condemned the digital age as having changed basic, human activities, interpersonal
interaction and relationships and face-to-face, business transactions in many instances.
The universal wearing of masks reflects the slide down the slippery slope to the condition
of present-day society. Shutdowns have limited personal interaction for business and
fostered greater use of online purchasing. All leading to greater government surveillance
and control of our lives. I, strongly, reject this.
Now, to the matter of organs. After all these years being involved in jOrgan which has brought
me many hours of educational endeavors related to it, practice and enjoyment, I am more
convinced than ever that there is nothing like the real thing. One of my favorite Motown songs
was Marvin Gaye's "Ain't Nothing Like The Real Thing, Baby, Ain't Nothing Like The Real Thing."
That is, certainly, true of the pipe organ. But my appreciation for the virtual pipe organ
programs continues to grow through the productions of youtubers. I, as an amateur, would be
hard-pressed to distinguish the difference between the same piece of music played on the pipe
organ and that piece played on a recorded sampleset of the same organ. I have really good sound
systems and they can handle the most bombastic organ music with the deepest bass notes and the
punchiest reeds without a problem. They, all, use organ-manufacturer-manufactured subwoofers.
...." all as God Himself intended,"....Given what is known and has been published concerning the
field of music and music theory, the amazingly ordered structure, mathematically, I have often
wondered how the principles of music were transmitted to man. The Old Testament makes no mention
of God, literally, revealing them to a man who, He purposed, to be a musician. Yet, it seems so
complex that explanation had to have been necessary, just as instruction is done, today. If I
had been left alone in a field with a flock of sheep, I doubt that I would have had a brainstorm
and decided that a shepherd's flute would be a good way to amuse the ewes and rams and lambs and
have broken a branch from a willow tree and proceeded to fashion a flute of an octave of 12 notes
with no engineering courses from Post-Eden University. So, I suspect that the history of music
is lacking in similar details for many thousands of years, but that more recent establishments in
the field of music, such as "equal temperament" tuning, having promoted greater universality with
respect to it. Certainly, it has progressed from simple, flute tonality to orchestral divisions
of layered and blended sound.
These latter must have been by experimentation with respect to materials and structures which
produced particular, tone qualities. That the organ, a wind-blown instrument, has developed to
contain, potentially, every instrument in the orchestra, including percussions, identified as
"orchestral," on the one hand, or "organ tone quality," on the other, is interesting. That the
state of tools must have been primitive, the construction materials and design techniques--trial
and error--, whether modelled on a consideration of the principles of the human windpipe and human
voice, or not, were what, eventually, was discovered to work, or whether God saw what man was
attempting to do and guided man to effective design is not recorded history.
A problematic thought is that much technology emanates from the tragedy of war, after the fact.
How much of the workings of the universe were affected by the Fall of man in the Garden of Eden?
I think the effect is limited to earth, that the universe functions as "God Himself intended,"
since man does not, nor has ever had, any control over it. In the limitation to earth, man has
endured the consequence of being subject to what earth (as "creation") contained for sustenance
and resources. It is, seemingly, counter-intuitive that technological development should be
inspired by or result from the machinations and tragedy of war.
I don't understand this since the survival instinct is so strong that, it would seem, it would
be the only thing to come out of war. The reconciliation of what "God intended" and what man,
through trial and error experimentation," developed is, factually, what works. So, we deal
with the question of "how can it be better?" and is that the difference between "what God
intended" and what man has developed? I am reminded of the verse that says, "He hath shown thee,
o man, what is good and what doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly, to love mercy and to
walk humbly before thy God." That the organ found an exalted place in leading church worship was
fitting and I, still, find it difficult to adjust to its displacement by praise bands, however
powerfully loud. They are not the same and do not inspire the same sense of reverence, meditation
or awe as the organ. I apologize to those who are offended by this. I have learned that this is
a generation gap "thing," and a cultural "thing" as well.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-28 01:05
Bingo!
JohnB wrote:
"the organ found an exalted place in leading church worship was fitting and I, still, find it
difficult to adjust to its displacement by praise bands, however powerfully loud. They are not
the same and do not inspire the same sense of reverence, meditation or awe as the organ."
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Christian W on 2021-10-28 19:52
Being a professional theologian I cant help but making one remark:
JohnB wrote:
"The Old Testament makes no mention of God, literally, revealing them to a man who, He purposed,
to be a musician."
Music is highly esteemed in the context of the OT. The English Standard version shows 19 hits
(www.bibleserver.com) and all except 3 (being all from Daniel) are positive.
So even though there is nowhere mentioned that HE is a musician himself, it is clear that the Bible
favors the thought that he likes music.
I absolutely love the thought of Tolkien (unfolded in the Silmarillion) that God created the universe
by the ultimate harmonic chord ... but that is, of course, not biblical 😊
Greetings MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
New Features for jOrgan
From JohnR on 2021-10-26 08:46
RickW wrote:
“It was always my aim to be able to distribute a package that other people could easily set-up … “
Rick,
We can identify with your disappointment and your failure to achieve this. I listen to what I
consider to be the outstandingly beautiful sounds from the NORDEN SCHNITGER VPO (courtesy of
jOrgan), especially when using the Recorder, and I think – what a pity that almost nobody else
is hearing this!
I suppose the snag was in those words, “that other people could easily set up”, and you found
that they lacked the computer expertise to reproduce your own success.
Is it true that jOrgan could not rise to the occasion? I remember BCA’s “jOrgan in a USB stick”
(my description), and I wonder if it would not have been within the capabilities of your friends
to insert it into the USB port of their computers and enjoy what jOrgan had to offer? True, the
boot-up procedure might have needed to have the settings adjusted, and perhaps in those days many
computers did not provide for USB boots. But things should have improved these days, and the
procedure is not all that difficult to describe in ordinary words, and have them follow it.
I think that within the jOrgan community there are a number of people capable of producing what
BCA did for us, and I hope at least one of them might do so, if the request went out.
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-10-26 11:11
JohnR wrote:
"I remember BCA's "jOrgan in a USB stick" (my description), and I wonder if it would not
have been within the capabilities of your friends to insert it into the USB port of their
computers and enjoy what jOrgan had to offer?"
Hi John
As always, thank you for your thoughts, and yes, the USB stick package BCA produced did bypass
the main installation issues that can be experienced with jOrgan. My only concern is that it
becomes locked into the java version at the time the package is created.
Other thoughts to air again:
1/ The "Customizer" settings could be saved to a dedicated file so users don't need to reconfigure
their console settings every time they try a new or updated disposition.
2/ The "Memory" function be upgraded to a 2 stage system allowing Map/Range/Scope whatever people
would prefer to call it.
More detail
1/ if a jOrgan user is using a particular organ package and the package creator issues an update
to the package, the user needs to start from scratch as if it was a completely new disposition,
and enter all of their console Customizer settings again. This might seem ok for a couple of
keyboards, pedal and swell, however if a user has 50 pistons this can become a much larger task.
The whole idea of virtual is to use the power of a computer and remembering things is one of the
best functions of a computer.
It could also help in a user being more likely to try more dispositions, if they didn't have to go
through the entire setup process for each one.
There would need to be one more step in linking the stored configuration to a new disposition,
but if dispositions were created to follow a formula, this step could be minimised.
A user with access to more than one console could have extra named "Customizer" files depending on
the console being used, and not need a completely different disposition file.
2/ it is possible in Construct Mode to set the References for each Piston to effectively make them
a General or Divisional Piston, however I wonder how many users know this can be done or how to do it.
It is certainly not a simple task.
If the Memory system had two stages Set Piston 1 (Called Map or Range or Scope) to visually set on
the active console screen whether or not each drawstop or tab are included on this Piston (General
or selective Divisional), then Set Piston 2 (the traditional Set piston) to store the position of
the drawstop or tab (if it is included in Set Piston 1)
Not the first time these have been mentioned, maybe this time they are explained in a way that is
better understood as to the usefulness, and/or how it could be achieved.
Regards
Rick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-10-27 12:03
RickW wrote:
"The "Customizer" settings could be saved to a dedicated file"
"it is possible in Construct Mode to set the References for each Piston to effectively make them
a General or Divisional Piston"
Rick,
Yesterday I spent quite some time looking into the first matter referred to above. I came to the
conclusion that what you are looking for is probably possible.
The method I envisaged certainly requires the disposition creators to adopt a protocol of naming
stops in a particular way (but without having to consider what names appear on the screen stops).
I think it would involve setting up a TEMPLATE disposition (created using File > New) and adding
nothing to what is there (Console, Memory, Recorder), but keyboards, stops, combination pistons
and swell pedals (perhaps also Crescendo Pedal), all duly named. It may be necessary to group the
stops in divisions (Great, Swell, etc.), but perhaps not, because I think that the naming protocol
would take care of that. It would also be necessary to include a large number of stops etc., to
cater for those who want to use large dispositions. These would be irrelevant to small dispositions,
and would not do any harm.
This TEMPLATE disposition would be "charged" with the desired information by using the Customizer
to record the MIDI messages sent from the console by "anything that moves". Care would be needed
in the ORDER in which keyboards, stops etc. are chosen for recording, all related to how the naming
protocol is arranged.
jOrgan dispositions are XML files, which means they are in text. To view their content and edit it,
all you need do is rename them, replacing the extension ".disposition" by ".txt".
The user would need a PROGRAMMABLE text editor to FIND and REPLACE relevant sections of text in the
disposition of the VPO wanting to be used, drawing on sections of the text found in the TEMPLATE file.
I am assuming that this is a very common need in the IT world, but I have no personal experience of
doing this sort of thing. It is of course possible to do it manually, but most people would find that
it would take longer than simply recording the MIDI messages sent by the console in the normal way -
which is what you want to avoid.
We need to hear from Mailing List members to shed some light on this. What I envisage is someone
telling us that what I am proposing can be done relatively easily and quickly, even by someone not
used to doing it, if furnished with clear and adequate instructions to be used with whatever (free)
text editor they recommend.
As regards the second matter, I suppose it is not users in general who need to know how to do this,
but only disposition creators. However, any time saved there, is time gained! Is the process
documented anywhere? I don't think I have ever heard of it. One could presumably use COPY and PASTE
methods when assigning references to the pistons - are you referring to some more elegant process?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-27 17:14
Several years ago, when Jonathan Aquilina proposed to take over the programming aspect of jOrgan
from Sven, we discussed the possibility of changing the structure of jOrgan to that of "modular"
construction. Envisioned was the idea of a customizable module of the , individual, system-based,
hardware-specific, organ division=MIDI channel assignments, audio inputs/ drivers and output,
sound devices, elements, those things (elements) that are the same for an individual's physical,
organ console and audio output sound devices which remain the same, regardless of the disposition
that is being used. This involved the concept of "standardization," which, we found, was not,
specifically, established by the MIDI Association (such as the General MIDI Soundfont or GM.DLS
bank instrument and preset standard) for permanently fixed, MIDI channel assignments for organ
divisions and which was never agreed to by manufacturers for purposes of facilitating
interchangeable playback of .mid files of organ music. For example, a Pedal division channel
assignment might be 3 or 4, depending on whether the organ was a 2- or 3-manual. Swell=1,
Great=2, Pedal=4 would be the fixed "standard" and if an organ had more divisions, Choir=3,
Solo=5, Echo=6, etc.
The rejection of a compulsory agreement or "standard," on the grounds that it violated freedom
of choice prevents the concept from being, purposefully, implemented. Just as the idea of a
standardized, naming and numbering of specific, organ stops as presets (Program Changes) in
soundbanks or soundfonts was never established or implemented to facilitate playback of .mid
files in the way the General Midi Standard effectuated the same for .mid files.
Apparently, corporate cooperation between organ manufacturers never established an Organ
Manufacturer MIDI Standard for division-MIDI-channel numbering or the naming and numbering
of organ stops for the soundbanks/ranks or stops which MUST be considered as preset (program
change numbers) in order for the standard to work, even with System Exclusive. Seemingly, MIDI
should, always be System (MIDI System) INCLUSIVE. As was noted, at the time, the individual
quality of presets (wave files compromising the sounds) was what distinguished one organ or
company from another, and the standardization of basics (midi channel to organ division and
Soundbank Preset Naming and Numbering) was not an abuse or violation of freedom to be,
professionally, distinctive. It, actually, enhanced the attractiveness and makes the concept
of a choice more relevant to specific quality differences.
I believe someone in our jOrgan group reached out to a spokesman for one of the organ
manufacturing companies and asked why such a standard had never been established. After all,
what does MIDI-capability on an organ, actually, DO if interchangeable stop/preset naming and
numbering are not standardized? Why have MIDI in an organ?
It should be said that we never created a tutorial for editing the skin.xml file within jOrgan
or created a user-accessible tutorial for creating and editing skins. Some members were very
proficient at doing so. However, that is something that would have been very useful for
home-made dispositions. I, for one, still use the classic skin that comes in the original skins
folder of jOrgan. I have never had any success in trying to substitute edited image files of a
console skin which I made from self-taken photos of wood and real console, organ stops for the
image files packaged with the jOrgan skins. I am sure this had to do with the xml file edit,
not the dimensions of the image file or its renaming and substitution with the original.
Those who use Hauptwerk or Grand Orgue might be able to input some information (without violating
copyright or licensing rules) concerning the concept of standardization within the "shell" of
the program where individual customizables, once set for an individual organ, remain the same for
all the various organ sample sets and specifications that are imported for playing.
Sorry about the length of this. For something that is, seemingly, so fundamentally, simple, its
description is pithy!
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-06 08:45
JohnR wrote:
“The user would need a PROGRAMMABLE text editor to FIND and REPLACE relevant
sections of text in the disposition of the VPO wanting to be used …
We need to hear from Mailing List members to shed some light on this. What I
envisage is someone telling us that what I am proposing can be done relatively
easily and quickly, even by someone not used to doing it, if furnished with
clear and adequate instructions to be used with whatever (free) text editor
they recommend.”
JohnB’s post speaks of a problem in the need for the stops etc. to be
named in accordance with a certain protocol. John’s concern is irrelevant to
what I am proposing, which I am calling a Customization Scheme. jOrgan can
assign TWO separate names to those elements which would be involved. The
Scheme's protocol applies to those names which are seen only in Construct
Mode or when using the Customizer, and not to the names seen in normal use
of the VPO. The latter names can be assigned by the VPO creator (or by the user)
when using the Description View. They could conform to whatever separate naming
protocol may be in use, without affecting the Customization Scheme in any way.
Someone I know who works in IT confirmed my suspicion that Notepad++ would be
a good text editor to use (it is a free program for Windows). It can open more
than one text file at the one time and perform editing automatically if provided
with a suitable script. This is exactly what the Scheme requires.
Below is a lengthy description of how the Scheme would work, including the
naming protocol.
Comments or questions would be welcome.
JohnR
A CUSTOMIZATION SCHEME FOR jORGAN
This scheme allows a user to write the MIDI messages sent by their console into
a “new” disposition file, without going through the usual Customization process.
It requires that disposition creators observe certain protocols in how they name
keyboards, stops, pistons and swell pedals. But there is nothing that is
particularly troublesome, for the creator or the user.
1. Change the keyboard names to reflect physical position, starting at the floor.
Keyboards to be 1PD!, 2KB!, 3KB! etc
(numbered from the floor)
Change the coupler names so that they read (not the quotes)
1CP1!. 1CP2!, 1CP3! Etc. “Ped, 1st Coupler, 2nd Coupler etc.”
2CP1!. 2CP2!, 2CP3! Etc. “1st Manual, 1st Coupler, 2nd Coupler etc.”
3CP1!. 3CP2!, 3CP3! Etc. “2nd Manual, 1st Coupler, 2nd Coupler etc.”
(numbered from the left or from the bottom)
2. Change the stop names so that they read (not the quotes)
1S1!, 1S2! etc. “Stop 1, Stop 2 on Ped”
2S1!, 2S2!, etc. “Stop 1, Stop 2 on 1st Manual”
3S1!, 3S2! etc. “Stop 1, Stop 2 on 2nd Manual”
(numbered from the left or from the bottom)
3. Change the Divisional Pistons (Combinations) so that…
1DP1!, 1DP2!, etc. “P1, P2 on Ped”
(numbered from the left)
2DP1!, 2DP2!, etc. “P1, P2 on 1st Manual”
(numbered from the left)
4. Change the General Pistons …
GP1!, GP2!, etc. “General Pistons 1, 2”
(numbered from the left)
5. SET Piston(s) to be SP1!, (SP2!) “SET 1, SET 2 (if such exists)”
(numbered from the left)
6. Swell Pedals to be 1SWPD2!, 2SWPD3!, etc. (numbered from the left)
(The second number would indicate the Manual under control.)
7. Cresc. Pedals to be 1CRPD!, 2CRPD!, etc. (numbered from the left)
We don’t want those “!” names and numbers to be appearing on the computer
screen, but the Description View takes care of that. Those names will
certainly appear on Page 3 of the Customizer, and so the creator will need
to provide a file (probably .odt or .doc etc.) which lists the visible names
against the “!” names. An experienced creator will know how to put the
disposition together so that Page 3 lists all the appropriate elements in a
tidy fashion. (They are listed there in the order in which elements are added
to the disposition.) The keyboard names will appear (1 PD!, 2KB! or 3KB! etc.),
on Page 1 of the Customizer, and the user will need to be given appropriate
instructions.
The Scheme makes use of the fact that a VPO.disposition file can be re-named
simply as a VPO.txt file.
To set up a Template File, one goes through the normal Customization
procedure whereby the TEMPLATE.disposition is fed with the various MIDI messages
from the console, and then saved. The user will need to observe the numbering
protocol, as indicated above. The procedure preserves the console’s MIDI messages
in a set format within the text of the TEMPLATE.disposition file. This file does
not have to be created each time a new user wants to set the scheme up for their
console. It would already exist, for anyone who wants to use the Customization
Scheme, due to the helpful efforts of some other party, presumably. It would,
of course, need to be fed with the messages from the console, and then saved
(preferably with some console identification).
When the Customization details need to be transferred to a new disposition (which
should not yet have been put through a Customization process), a “reversal” of
this process uses that FILE, renamed as TEMPLATE.txt file (it will not actually be
"TEMPLATE", as by now it should contain some form of console identification), so
that for each appropriate element, those details are copied and pasted to the
relevant locations in the “new” disposition file (temporarily re-named to VPO.txt),
which is then saved, and re-named as VPO.disposition. ("VPO" here represents the
actual name of the jOrgan VPO, but possibly re-named slightly to show that it has
been Customized for a paricular console).
This process, apart from the renaming, can be done automatically and quickly using
the Windows text editor program NotePad++ and a specially-written script file.
As already indicated, keyboards are to be numbered from the bottom, starting with
the Pedals. In horizontal displays (stops, couplers or pistons) numbering is to be
from the left; in vertical displays (stops, couplers), from the bottom. Whatever
names they are given by the creator, to be seen in the display console (e.g.
“Bourdon 16”), makes no difference to the names (e.g. “1S1!”) being used by the
Scheme. Any new disposition to be used, will of course have had to have the stop,
piston, etc. names changed to match the above format. The actual stop names seen on
the computer screen “console” will be those set by the creator by using the
Description View for each relevant element.
For dispositions that already exist, there is obviously a lot of work to be
done to render them usable by the Scheme. The use of FIND/REPLACE and COPY/PASTE
techniques will minimise that work. It may be quicker to apply the changes to the
disposition as a .txt file than by using jOrgan for this. (“!” does not yet appear
in the VPO.txt file.)
We need to have someone with the experience, who can write the basic details of the
script file. Someone else could use that work to produce the full script, which would
be quite long, to refer to large numbers of elements. This would involve much use of
COPY and PASTE. However, only one full script file is needed for the Scheme, if the
naming protocol is observed by all creators/users. It will then work with any
disposition that is observing the naming protocol.
You will probably come to the conclusion that even if this Customization Scheme
becomes a reality, most people will prefer to use the Customizer in the normal
fashion, unless we are talking about new dispositions where the creator used the
protocol names from the start, and also catered for the “visible” stop and piston
etc. names by using the Description View in all relevant cases. An exception might
be for a console which uses a touch screen for the stops but does have physical
pistons. In this case only the pistons would require renaming as per the naming
protocol, with the Description View being used to prevent those names from appearing
on the console display. (This would be the case even if the creator or user wants
no numbers or letters to appear on the piston icons. The Description View allows you
to assign no name, and this over-rides the name required by the Scheme.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-06 18:12
While I am not sure if I am the "JohnB" whose "post speaks of a problem in the
need for the stops etc. to be named in accordance with a certain protocol,"
I know that I have made comment on the subject of a permanent change with respect
to the "Customizer" in jOrgan, as a user-proprietary module with the input and
output devices specified relative to the individual, physical-organ console of
pedal and keyboards which are unique to each user's circumstances. The practical
purpose of a "fixed Customizer Module" is that the basic elements of it do not
change, regardless of the disposition being played. Since we, all, have a
"default" disposition which is set to open upon starting jOrgan (Configuration),
we know how this Configuration function works.
My thought was that any disposition, upon opening (click on the disposition which,
then, starts jOrgan), The input (keyboards or virtual midi cables) and output
devices (Fluidsynth Gain, buffer and settings) are retained by the Customizer
"Scheme" or module. The organ is ready to play.
The fact is that referencing within jOrgan takes care of such issues as couplers
and other keyboard-correlative functions. So the concept of a "text editor to
find and replace relevant sections of text in the disposition of the VPO wanting
to be used...." seems to be unique or, perhaps, extraordinary relative to
individual circumstance or purpose.
While there may be circumstances when the use and ability to edit the XML text is
desirable, this function is not essential to the Customizer, as such.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-12-07 14:04
I use a scripting language called postscript to create dispositions.
On occasion I have used a text editor to do search and replace.
Organ definitions are basically a database in computer lingo. With postscript it
is easy to parse (or generate) the xml. Sometimes however there are simple things
that need changing. Mostly where path to things like the soundfonts or skins that
need to be found. These paths can be absolute which contain user and computer names.
They can also be relative to either the app folder (in the case of Mac OS X) or the
folder where the disposition is. Sometimes it is simplest to open the xml and
change the path. It is also possible to do some soundfont substitutions as well as
these are also file names.
Dealing with the MPL which gets customized, is a bit more tricky. Especially when
multiple keyboards are shared on the same channel and not always aligned to a Midi C.
The automatic setup does not like negative offsets of many octaves, and will attempt
to 'Correct' this 'Error.' The interpreter seems to be happy with these
transpositions. The only way to set such things up is to edit the XML with a
text editor.
Things get more complicated with the rest of the definitions. By necessity the
relations of the stops, ranks, manuals, and couplers is many to many. Some of
these can also have a slight recursion. Especially when activators are used to
implement tremulants, celestes and re-iteration. Where one tab can control groups
of tabs. Search and replace is not going to work well in this case.
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-12-08 10:33
Hi John
You have certainly given this a lot of thought and work. I agree with your
naming/numbering systems as I think this level of linking physical with virtual
needs to steer clear of any particular strain of organ conventions.
Having had a quick scan through your detailed proposal I am not sure it would
achieve the goal I was looking for.
What I would like to see is that effectively all parameters and values viewed
and set in the "Customizer" (anything relating to external links in or out of
a jOrgan Disposition) be saved in an independent file (like skin, combination...)
and named to relate to a physical console.
On opening a disposition, a user would choose their "Console" from one or more
"Customizer" files. All data and configuration relating to external links would
be independent of the Disposition file.
A Disposition builder could alter, modify or evolve their core Disposition and
a user could download a new version, then not need to go through all the steps
in the Customizer to be able to use the disposition.
By the same token, a jOrgan user would set up their "Console" "Customization"
file once, then they could open any "Disposition" and play it with as much console
MIDI physical connection it might offer, without needing to go through all the
settings in the Customizer every time.
There would obviously need to be a double link, but I believe the effort to do this
once for each Disposition being used and circulated in the jOrgan community would
be worth it.
Regards
Rick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-08 21:05
Hi Julie,
Thank you for your remarks, and I take note of the cautions you have expressed.
The Scheme has jOrgan itself using the console MIDI messages to edit the TEMPLATE
file appropriately, and this inserts the correct MPL content there. That TEMPLATE
file, after being saved with an identifying reference to the console, is henceforth
used, unchanged, to Customize whatever jOrgan disposition is intended to be used
with that console. The MPL content is simply passed on to it when it is processed
(edited) by NotePad ++ controlled by the script. This leads to all those vagaries
you mention being taken care of by jOrgan itself, if the disposition creator has
got it all correct.
I knew from your previous posts that you are able to create scripts almost without
thinking about it, and so I was confident that I might be able to call upon your help
to set up the initial script, based on what I consider to be needed (the details
being expressed in my layman's terms). Then I or someone else would be able to expand
on that as required, without having to know how to do that initial scripting. If you
are not able to find the time, I would be surprised if we have no-one else in the
jOrgan community who can do it instead.
Hi Rick,
Thank you too for your remarks. I think if you give the Scheme a bit more thought,
you will see that it does achieve what you were seeking - even if it does not do it
in quite the way you were expecting. The Scheme is not quite as "elegant" as the
method you were expecting. Its big advantage is that it does not require the
jOrgan program to be altered in any way to accommodate it. I would be very surprised
if Sven would consider putting in the work that would be needed to implement your
idea, especially seeing that a remedy that works is feasible without him doing
that work.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dutch romantic organ reverb/chorus
From Jan F on 2021-10-27 20:07
Hi all,
For those who are interested in Dutch romantic organ music on jOrgan I recorded Fantasy Psalm 25
of Willem Hendrik Zwart. Son of Jan Zwart. It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p3TVeyLGg8G_HkqvvjDrAXfTXi4XQQ-8/view?usp=sharing
Please note the chorus effect in the first part on the 8,4,3 registration.
Most recordings you find on Youtube are Prestant/Flute based. I played this Montre/Flute based.
Even the mixtures are Montre based. The reeds in pedal are Bombarde. Reeds manual is
Trompet Harmonique.
I played the choral FF because I want to hear that. Feike Asma played this choral P.
I use reverberate. From Bricasti small church 4,2 seconds reverb. Fusion 1 hz early fusion on.
One chanel I raised at 7,1 khz 3 db The other chanel I cutoff below 710 hz.
Chorus post off and both channels chorus width 40 and rate 0,4 hz.
In REAPER I have for each manual and carillion a separate track. Each track has Reverberate
and a compressor. After that each manual has his own track with vibrato. In this peace I did
not use vibrato.
I seems to me interesting to hear your opinion about the rever/chorus.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-27 23:43
Jan, I think this kind of exchange is helpful. I find the chorus fluctuation, which is very
evident in the treble melody notes, to be annoying and difficult to listen to, after a short time.
It is distracting.
At 4:25 (minutes and seconds) into the piece where the registration changes, the balance between
the loudness of the pedals (should be stronger) and the difference in reverb between that of the
manuals is unrealistic, to the point that it sounds like the pedal division is located in a
different building entirely.
This is a difficult subject. I have experimented with Fluidsynth Reverb in jOrgan using 4 different
sets of reverb elements (room, width, damping and level) and assigning the divisions of the organ
to each. What is critical is that they must, all, sound like they are located in the same building.
I have, also, tried assigning the organ tone families (flutes, diapasons/mixtures, reeds and
strings) to separate Reverb elements in jOrgan. I can do this because all of my soundfonts were
created by organ tone family. That is, all the flutes are in Flutes.sf2, soundfonts, Diapasons are
in Diapasons.sf2, Mixtures are in Mixtures.sf2, Reeds in Reeds.sf2 and Strings in Strings.sf2.
With the exception of Strings, which tend to be a slightly smaller family of stops than all the
others, there is one full soundfont of 128 presets and another soundfont of the same tone group to
complete each family of stops.
These I use in a home-made disposition of 6 manuals and pedal. The combination pistons are, also,
unique, having tone-group pistons, (Flutes , Diapasons, Mixtures, Reeds, Strings, and Celestes)
instead of divisional pistons, but general pistons for the whole organ. For example, the number 1
piston in the "Flute Combinations" turns on the Pedal, Bourdon Doux 16, Lieblich Bourdon 8' , Swell
Lieblich Bourdon 8', Lieblich Flute 4' and Great Lieblich Gedeckt 8', Choir Flute 8' Flute 4',
Solo and Echo flute choices. (General Pistons are, typically, settable for the entire organ.
(pppp to FFFF). I used this technique experimentally, at first, and have found it so intuitive
and, functionally, useful that I have kept it and not reverted to divisional pistons.
One thing that might be beneficial would be if a .mid file of a jOrganist-played piece were made
available for download with the specific registration and changes used in the piece and users could
make a .wav recording of the .mid file with their disposition/soundfonts and reverb/chorus settings
and make it available to listen to for purposes of comparison. This does get into issues of
hardware differences and obvious subjectivity and preferences of the listener. It might be
informative, however.
John B.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-28 00:07
John,
Thanks for your reply. I think the values of chorus can be lower. I Will look at the bass.
Sorry, i should say listen. An idea could be place reverb at the end in the master track
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-28 00:27
I may be wrong regarding my observations about chorus. However, I believe that the individual
stops, when combined, may, or may not, cause a slight chorusing effect. Whether this is due to
wave file sample quality, loop points, the effect of the LEVEL with Reverb in Fluidsynth. My
preference is that of as perfect a tuning to eliminate chorusing as possible. Celeste tuning
is, purposefully, a chorus effect which, when done correctly, is, truly, beautiful. I think
what makes classical organ so powerful is the steady state of sustained tone without undue
undulation which, I perceive, to be a weakness.
Indeed, the tuning adjustments in cents from tuned frequency, perfect 0, specified for nazards
or quints (+2), tierces (-14) or flatted 7ths (-31) (there is also an adjustment for 9ths,
I believe, which I have forgotten), prove the recognition and need for this steady state of
sustained tone, particularly, in footage combinations. It may sound counter-intuitive, but
the Principal chorus 8', 4', 2' should not waver or undulate. It should be a steady blend of
those footages.
So, I think it is, generally, considered that chorusing is a somewhat, undesirable effect that
detracts from the overall quality of sound and makes the listener think the organ is not properly
tuned. Insomuch as there are harmonic upper partials that may cause a minor undulation, proper
cents tuning should eliminate it and produce a solid blend of footages. I don't think this is
an expectation in the theatre organ, as distinct in its voicing from the classical organ.
John B.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-28 00:33
The reverb/chorus is nice. However, your choice of stopping point is sort of unresolved :-)
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-28 03:36
In English flanging. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanging
Pete T wrote:
"your choice of stopping point is sort of unresolved :-)"
Hi John and Pete, Hi all,
When you record samples from an organ I suppose they have been tuned. I
recorded from a digital organ and I suppose they tuned.
My goal is to emulate the effect of the space, a church for classical
organs. The manfacturer of Reverberate ships it whit reverb/chorus. Better
should be reverb/flanger. By using Montre instead of Prestant I want to
avoid the difference in tuning.
Then I will go and listen. The problem is I send the audio to my digital
organ and listen on the speakers of that device. This has no noticeable
stereo effect.
I also have two headphones. One is very sheep. The other is an 30 year old
Sennheiser. The sound of these headphones is not nice.
The speakers of my digital organ I should listen and try to understand the
words of John: The pedals sound if they come from another room.
Pete stated that my stopping point is a sort of unresolved. Do you mean the
"reverb"? For this matter I added a few print screens of Reverberate an
MCompressor:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ivgIf2iAHpHE3Xk_sfE_W_jv32Sr57A3/view?usp=s
haring There you can see the graph of de IR file.
I will also look at the compressor. I can look at the "clever volume
manager" from my Creative sound card.
So I go on with your feed-back and possible you see some new views.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-28 03:37
Jan F wrote:
"Do you mean the "reverb"?"
No. I mean the composer would have finished the piece on a resolution chord. Unless it is
something from the praise band . . .
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-28 16:36
Hi all,
Regarding praise bands and the evangelical movement which at the end is a " progressive "
movement in churches there is much to say. I always think: Did they reinvent the gospel?
Which release we have now? The Holy Bible did not change!
Let us think in opportunities: VPO can be an affordable way for small churches to have a
great orchestra. You need one man, the organist, that is every service available.
After the fire of the Notre Dame of Paris I thought please make let there be a recording
of that organ.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-29 17:44
John,
One of my principles is that the human observation is real. So your observation should be
investigated.
First of all I changed the script of Linuxsampler in stereo.
I also checked my headphones. One has no stereo. The other is very damaged but good. The
upholstery of the auricle has gone. It misses damping.
A personal weakness of me is putting not much bass.
The composer composed the "cantus firmus" double in octave. The distance between bass and
next voice is large. I used mixture+scharf. That is something over the top.
Another point is that choosing the attenuation there is music which uses double pedal.
Especially in Dutch romantic music this is often used. This may not cause to loud bass.
To illustrate another way of composing, another way of choosing stops and putting chord
between the repeated cantus firmus in octave an example of the father of Willem Hendrik Zwart,
Jan Zwart. This time without mixtures+schaf and more reeds. This is the choral from Toccata
Psalm 146. Please note that a choral in these setting is not rhythmic. This is not the way
we sing this psalm. As Pete stated regarding the previous recoring also father Zwart uses
an unsolved chord.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mLWqPb15zq7h9nxwdQV1s5yOxOVXxC5w/view?usp=sharing
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-29 22:24
Jan, that recording was excellent. I have listened to a fair number of Dutch organists,
Klass Jan Mulder and Gert Van Hoef are two of my favorite and there is another excellent
organist and pianist duo who change places playing either organ or piano together.
Excellent all!
I think the Dutch organs have a truly wonderful, unique sound due, perhaps, to the tuning
which, to me, at least, sounds like what we call, in English, "stretch tuning."
It is just a fraction of cents broader than equal temperament tuning. So, the Dutch organs
have a very "warm" sound with just a perfect, minimal amount of oscillation in the overall,
blended effect which is "romantic" or, even, symphonic. I don't know is there is a term
"romantic tuning" or "symphonic tuning," but it would be appropriate and, specifically,
identifying of that particular warmth of ever so slightly undulating sound. I believe that
symphony orchestras achieve this effect due to the string sections.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-10-29 22:29
Jan, I agree with your comments on praise bands and the evangelical movement, but I will say
no more as this can be a very argumentative and divisive topic. What has been lost in worship
in most non-liturgical churches is the opportunity for quiet meditation before a service.
These are, certainly matters of culture and personal preference and taste, but I have often
thought what God would prescribe for us to do if the inspiration of the culture of the world
music scene had not invaded the minds of musicians who dabbled in, both, popular and church music.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-30 00:27
Jan F wrote:
"also father Zwart uses an unsolved chord."
Oh, it is written that way? Just like that, he wrote it unresolved. Did he ever say why?
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-30 03:56
Hi Pete, Hi all,
Yes it is written that way.
Dutch romantic composers does not always follow the rules.
There are much notations of improvisations of Klaas Jan Mulder. He did not
follow the rules.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-30 04:19
John,
Interesting question:
Why does organs played by Dutch romantic organ players sound like they do?
I am not sure. There are a few points I think:
1. Acoustic effect space;
2. Combination of Prestant, Flutes and Nazard which have a different "beating"
That is why I try to get this effect using "chorus". Study of presets of churches learn that
"chorus" is important.
There should be impulse response files which records what space does with sound during sustain,
So before "release".
I have no knowledge about tuning.
Another point is that much organs played by Dutch organ players are no romantic instruments.
They are not build for this music.
F.e. St. Laurens Kerk Rotterdam. That is a Marcussen organ. Marcussen build neo-baroque organs.
I will search on youtube for examples.
I am impressed by the registration of Cesar Franck. Montre/Flute based. Only Gamba added and
not Vox Celeste added. You see not much 4+2+3+mixtures except with Grand Orgue. And not to
forget: Reeds are important. This inspires me for Dutch Late Romantic. And to be clear Dutch
Late Romantic music is not always high state of the art, but beautiful and very useful in
protestant tradition.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-30 04:31
Hi all,
Here an example the Sint Laurenskerk in Rotterdam. This is indeed a Neo Baroque Marcussen organ.
I think space and combination of prestant, flutes causes the sound as it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ_FCgtrjqM
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-10-30 04:45
Here Oude Kerk Amsterdam. Organ 18th century. Especially take notice of 9:00:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsfYIlnlcB8
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete T on 2021-10-30 15:59 MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
Yes. I would class this as inspirational . . .
Regards.
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Enjoy our Music
From JohnB on 2021-10-27 23:51
I have used the kunstderfuge.com website in the past as a source of midi files of organ music.
I just received this in email this morning and, as I do not have a spotify account, it is not
useful to me, but I did check out the offerings at the links below and these might be beneficial
to check out by those who do use spotify.com, in consideration of the things that Jan Flikwert
has been presenting.
I hope this does not violate jOrgan User policy. If it does, I apologize.
John B.
"Dear friend,
We created these special Spotify playlists for you:
Latest Releases: https://spoti.fi/3voq6Bc
Satie's Music: https://spoti.fi/2Z0NUPX
Very Short Pieces: https://spoti.fi/3aROOAs
The Scarlatti Project: https://spoti.fi/3DTYzL0
_
Calming Classical: https://spoti.fi/3AXa4PE
Travel Classical: https://spoti.fi/30NdcBw
Classical for Sleeping: https://spoti.fi/3m1sI4P
Classical Concentration: https://spoti.fi/3jqo3Yt
Dreamy Classical: https://spoti.fi/3B3uqqP
Sad Classical: https://spoti.fi/3m9noN3
Feel free to follow them by clicking on the green heart. They are 100% free!
Take care.
kunstderfuge"
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Connect multiple instances of fluidsyth with jackrouter of Rearoute
From Jan F on 2021-11-02 21:11
Hi all,
How to connect multiple instances of fluidsynth in jOrgan with JackRouter of Rearoute?
I use windows 10 64 bit. I installed Jackrouter (jack2-win64-v1.9.19). jOrgan 4 and
PortaudioAll64.
This works. I can connect one instance of fluidsynth in jOrgan with JackRouter. More
than one instance of Fluidsynth causes a “fluidsynth failure” in jOrgan.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-02 21:42
Jan, does that setup use ASIO4ALL? ASIO only allows ONE soundfont. I have never used it
because it would require combining 9 soundfonts into one, and I don't want to have to mess
around with the bank number changes which can become a nuisance based on the base 0 or base 1.
Normally, the Soundfont Bank Manager reserves bank number 0 or 000 for the General Midi
Soundfont (2MBGM.sf2, by default). If or since the Soundfont Bank Manager is used to load
soundfonts from bank numbers 1 or 001 to as many as necessary, e.g., 9 or 009, if I combine
them into one and use fluidsynth at bank number 0, they must have a bank number added
in order to distinguish presets having the same number (but in different soundfonts) from
one another. Thus, the importance of the bank number. If, in jOrgan, bank number 1 is the
bank used for ASIO4ALL, all the assigned bank numbers IN the combined soundfonts will be
treated as the next higher number and it will not be correct in the MPL messaging regarding
the "set (bank number) x". This is a lot of work and I am not inclined to do it for over
500 stops or ranks.
I am not sure that this describes your problem, but it seemed that, perhaps, that might be
the issue.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-02 22:12
Hi John,
No that setup does not use any ASIO. For jOrgan Portaudio, Jack uses Portaudio and REAPER uses
WASAPI. REAPER can recognize multiple channels. In case of Linuxsampler you define multiple
channels of rearoute in the script. And that works.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham G on 2021-11-04 00:48
Hi Jan,
Rather use the fluidsynth1.1.11_64-bit.dsound.jack.1.0.zip package as
then there is no doubt as to which drivers are in use. The ALL package
will not be as good for this.
GrahamG
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-04 07:04
Hi Graham,
A question I have sometimes wondered about. One reason we have needed the backends is
the latency issue. Does using dsound with the backend give better latency than dsound
without the backend?
Jan will need to revert to jOrgan 3.21.1 if he uses the backend you have recommended.
At the moment he says he is using jOrgan 4. I notice there is a backend suitable for
jOrgan 3.21.1 which offers WASAPI (without the ALL). Would this be better for him,
as he wants to use Reaper?
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham G on 2021-11-04 14:48
Hi John,
All that a backend does is provide access for Fluidsynth to use a
different set of Windows audio drivers. DSound is Dsound whether it is
native DSound or PortAudio DSound, so there will be no difference in
that latency given the same properties.
Sven make the latest version of jOrgan 4 compatible with both
Fluidsynth v1 and v2, so I would assume that Jan just needs to install
the backend and configure it.
Kind regards,
GrahamG
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-05 19:53
Hi Graham,
I did my best to get things work, but I did not succeed.
Using "fluidsynth1.1.11_64-bit.dsound.jack.1.0.zip" does not list a
device/driver in jOrgan 3/4.
Using PortAudioAll64 does give the option dsound, portaudio and wave. Using
portaudio give for device choice of
"ASIO::Creative Asio","ASIO::Jackrouter","ASIO::Rearoute". There are some
options which result in only one javaw input in Qjackctl. Using more then
one instance of fluidsynth in jOrgan will result in a fluidsynth error.
Another option could be vbcable. This is not free. For me at this moment no
option, because I am trying things out.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-05 20:45
Hi all,
I got the next messages in Jackd:
-----------------
"Cannot connect to named pipe after wait = \\.\pipe\server_jack_default_0
err = 2
Cannot connect to server request channel
jack server is not running or cannot be started
JackShmReadWritePtr::~JackShmReadWritePtr - Init not done for -1, skipping
unlock
JackShmReadWritePtr::~JackShmReadWritePtr - Init not done for -1, skipping
unlock
Open error: is JACK server running?
jack_deactivate called with a NULL client
jack_deactivate called with a NULL client
jack_client_close called with a NULL client
JackPortAudioDriver::Render paOutputUnderflow
JackPortAudioDriver::Render paOutputUnderflow
JackEngine::ClientCloseAux wait error ref = 3
Driver is not running
Driver is not running
Driver is not running
CheckRes error
JackRequest::ClientOpen write error name = javaw
Driver is not running
CheckRes error
JackRequest::ClientOpen write error name = javaw
Driver is not running
Driver is not running"
-------------------
Kind regards,
Jan Fl
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham G on 2021-11-08 17:48
Hi Jan,
You have not gotten JACK native to work, so you are not using JACK.
ASIO::JackRouter is an ASIO->JACK bridge and so from Fluidsynth's side
is just ASIO.
Have you started JACK for WIndows (Qjackctl) and configured it to run
before starting jOrgan with the jack backend?
Jan F wrote:
"I did my best to get things work, but I did not succeed."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Fl on 2021-11-10 17:05
Graham,
I installed jack, jack2. Run it first. Use dsound.jack. Let
interface,input,output to default. Restart jOrgan, reboot computer.
Re-installed vc-redist 2015-2019. In jOrgan I definitely can only use
default fluidsynth and portaudioallx86 v2. In all other cases I even can not
choose a driver in jOrgan.
Now I use VBCable. That works whith multiple instances of fluidsynth and one
input in REAPER. Using the tremulant from Silbermann disposition works well.
I also used fluidsynth and jack and jorgan in Ubuntu studio with wineasio.
In some settings the attenuation of one stop caused distortion. That
solution is easy.
Could Rearoute from REAPER conflict whit jackd,jack2? I will try that.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fluidynth failure on mac osx big sur.
From Julie P on 2021-11-07 06:26
It has been a while since I attempted to run jOrgan on my mac which is now running Big sur.
I noticed that there has been a bit of discussion regarding the website with the latest
update. I thought I would give it a try again.
I attempted to follow the mac install instructions which are quite outdated. The dmg does
not contain an installer and a proper apple bundle. It only contains some support folders
and a java wrapper (which could be confusing to most mac users.)
I get fluidsynth failure when I attempt to load my dispositions. I do not get sound.
I can run the editor using the cryptic icons. There are no proper mac menus other than
the java wrapper.
I suspect some this is due to gatekeeper, which does not allow non apple certified programs.
When launching jorgan there are a number of warnings about running non apple certified code.
Some of these can be overridden in the system preferences
The issue could also be that the fludisynth in the sourceforge distro is 32 bit. The newer
mac os from mojave only run 64bit. So if the fluidsynth lib is 32 bit, that could also
present a problem.
I use Java for development through the Eclipse IDE, I also do quite a bit with the command
line.
One of my projects also uses fluidsynth, so I have fluidsynth loaded via macports. There
are also many variations of java that have been downloaded over the years. It might be
possible to run the newer jOrgan from the command line (the way linux is usually used.)
I suspect that there are few if any users here that are so inclined. Most of the users here
seem to be windows centric. Which is fine. But does become a bit of a self fulfilling
prophecy when users say mac is too expensive and not open to users to program. (even though
mac has a complete BSD Unix command line system under the hood.)
I used to really enjoy jOrgan. It worked great and still does on the High sierra. I have
a lot of scripts for creating dispositions and translating performance recordings from other
relays such as Hauptwerk and Uniflex. (Also Emutek.) These can also communicate with each
other using the built in MIDI over ethernet that the mac supplies. There is also a version
of this MIDI driver that works on WIndows. Documented in the online papers "Hauptwerk as a
box of ranks."
I sort of drifted away from jOrgan, as I found the same Arduino based hardware also worked
with Hauptwerk and the same Robert Morton definitions (sample sets) run on Hauptwerk. The
users prefer the latter. So there is not much reason to use the jOrgan as it becomes
redundant. There is still a lot of criticism of that 'Last 10 yards' issue with all of
these synthetic systems. Close, but not quite there.
Uniflex (which is what I work with the most, as I do work on the hardware side, testing
repairing boards etc) can also use Fluidsynth. This was intended as a demonstration mode,
so there are few issues. Only sample sets (soundfonts) that map identical to the MidiTzer
sets work. There is no expression or reverb control exposed as part of the built in uniflex
implementation of fluidsynth. Typically in Uniflex installations Fluidsynth is used to
create raw digital voices inside the swell box or chambers. Again, for most users Hauptwerk
provides better digital voices.
... still have a soft spot for jOrgan though and would like to see an increase of the user
base sometime.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-07 12:34
Julie said, "The issue could also be that the fluidsynth in the sourceforge distro
is 32 bit. The newer mac os from mojave only run 64bit. So if the fluidsynth lib is
32 bit, that could also present a problem."
Julie, since your OS is 64-bit, you need to install the 64-bit Java Runtime and use the
64-bit version of jOrgan with the fluidsynth portaudio backends. You can't mix the bits.
If you do a DEBUG in jOrgan, (Taskbar: View>Debug) it will tell you where the error is
with a "failed" line in the Debug Log. It is, usually, a simple matter to make the
corrections or, let the forum know what the Debug log says and someone should be able to
recommend a solution to the problem.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-07 14:03
More experimentation and I sort of have it working.
Each time you start jOrgan the "Gatekeeper" blocks the dynamic libs in order. There are
about 6 of them. The program had to be restarted that many times then one had to click
on 'security & Privacy' after canceling each of the warning windows. One could of course
go into the terminal then disable this security and reboot, which sort of moots the point
of having security in the first place.
This gets the main program running, but inside the java wrapper. There are no menus and
clicking on a disposition does not launch the app. This also means there is no proper
menu bar (what is called taskbar in windows.) so 'Taskbar: View>Debug' is not possible
without a proper mac application 'bundle.' The 3.20 (32 bit version) did have a proper
mac application bundle.
Once up, jOrgan does run, and it does play the pre-recorded songs. It does not however
support dark mode. File selection for choosing other dispositions and playable songs. does
not use standard mac windows. Instead it opens java created dialogs for choosing the files.
I have not attempted to launch the jar file directly from the command line, which might
allow for more options such as starting in debug mode or the organ setup wizard.
I have also been experimenting with MIDI patchbay which allows one to use the built in
'Audio MIdi Setup' to connect instances of fluidsynth run from the command line, to the
core audio endpoints, which can be seen network wide. A bit of work. Especially on a
subnet that only has a switch and no router. Everytime the system boots it creates a new
random IP address. While these can be set static, that only works for permanent setups.
Old macs have long lifecycles, so It is quite practical to acquire cheap or gifted machines,
which are great for running an instance of fluidsynth, or even an old copy of Hauptwerk4 to
create a box of ranks over ethernet.
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-07 22:25
Julie, knowing nothing about Mac systems, I consulted the Oracle website
( https://docs.oracle.com/javase/10/install/installation-jdk-and-jre-macos.htm
#JSJIG-GUID-E8A251B6-D9A9-4276-ABC8-CC0DAD62EA33)
to determine what the difference between the Java wrapper in Mac OsX and Java Runtime
Environment in Windows. According to Oracle, it appears that the Java wrapper is used
with VST audio applications in Mac OsX and requires a lot of set up procedures to run
audio applications such as jOrgan.
Is there a virtual machine, such as Wine in Linux, that can be used to run Windows
applications in Mac OsX? Given the simplicity of running jOrgan dispositions with
Fluidsynth in Windows, once Java (JRE) is installed, the input and audio output device
selections are, ALL, made within jOrgan relative to the instances of Fluidsynth with a
soundfont in Construct Mode. Along with the specifications in the Customizer
(Taskbar: File>Customizer), you would not have any other program (besides the Java
Runtime) running in addition to jOrgan, if you are, either, playing the disposition
from an organ console or using the recorder/memory feature of jOrgan to playback
pre-recorded, jOrgan- proprietary .mid files, that is, those .mid files that were produced
by the jOrgan disposition.
I must admit a bias against VST, (gained by personal experience with VST and Reverb
applications), and, I think, there is a certain unnecessary redundancy possible when
using a VST, to say nothing of the greater demands on the CPU when running multiple
applications. I, often, use jOrgan in conjunction with a midi sequencer program
to input the playback of .mid files which were NOT produced with a jOrgan disposition,
using a virtual midi cable (Loopbe1) to output the playback from the midi sequencer
program to input to jOrgan. This works very well without stressing out the CPU.
My point is that you seem to be having to do a lot of correlative "interfacing" of
Mac-related and required stuff which is, succinctly, accomplished within jOrgan itself
in Windows and, perhaps, Linux, although the latter seems to be, somewhat more complicated.
The idea that some features of jOrgan "(Taskbar View>Debug) would not be possible without
a proper Mac application bundle" makes no sense, at all, to a Windows user, if or since
the jOrgan program runs independently of any other program except the JRE (which would
only be perceptible when viewed in "Task Manager" if needing to shut down jOrgan because
of a system "hang." (and the known fact that jOrgan runs in JRE).
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-08 05:53
John;
I think this is going off in a different tangent. There was a version of jOrgan written
for 3.20 that worked fine. Still does on Mac OS up to High Sierra. The wrapper to the java
has nothing to do with Oracle. It has everything to do with the way Apple bundles mac osX
applications into a 'Package' is through something called a pList or 'property list' Which
is basically an xml file inside a folder with certain attributes. Sven seems to have had
no trouble working this out. I suspect the scripts are still there to create the wrapper
mac OS X pLists and folder bundle.
I downloaded the jOrgan source a few years back when I was playing with a raspberry pi zero.
It was too complicated to figure out. Ironically I do use Eclipse (which is written in java)
to program embedded systems. I forget if the jOrgan codebase used eclipse or NetBeans.
My normal scripting workflow is unusual as I use the printer language 'Postscript' as a
general purpose scripting language via the ghostscript interpreter.
Up till Steve Job's war with Oracle Apple did include java6 which is what jOrgan 3.20 uses.
This build works fine as far back as OSX 10.4 and possibly earlier. Why I said that macs
have long lifecycles. A powerPC mac can run jOrgan and with acceptable latency. Of course
that 'war' has kept java off of iOS for phones and tablets, which is pure politics. I could
be wrong and there might be a java engine for iOS now, I do not always keep up on that sort
of thing. There are OSC applications which run on iOS and can connect back to relay systems
like Uniflex. I use 'Protokol' and 'TouchOSC' to monitor midi and audio streams.
If one does have a mac, then a right click on the app will bring up a pop up menu that says
'Show Package Contents' When this is done it can be seen that there is a folder called
contents which contains a number of sub folders and files. One of these is the executable.
I have a number of apps which are written in java. In these the wrapper is simply the jar file.
Another side digression, I have been working on an app that works on windows. So it can
work on rasberry pi and mac. This uses an older graphics library called wxWidgets.
wxWidgets does not get updated a lot because it is mature and works well. Unlike some
of the other systems wX uses the native drawing system. Audacity is written in wX.
Of course this would not work for jOrgan as the 'j' stands for java. Still the OS dependencies
could be wrapped using wx. I do note that the use of the fixed menu bar compared to the
'Tool bar' fixed to the current window, does crop up in the wx discussions from time to time.
Not sure what 'VST audio applications' relate to. Mac uses something called 'core audio'
Fluidsynth uses this natively (see the ref to audacity above.) A lot of what other OSes
use is already built in for networking audio. A lot of professional studios use this.
MIDI and advanced audio has been part of Mac since day one.
Most of this is irrelevant. To a determined person like myself, jOrgan can run on OSX.
On the newer versions there may be some issue with the menu bar. But the pre configured
dispositions load and the so called 'Proprietary' midi files play.
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-11-08 06:29
Julie...
...I have been running Mac OS X and PC's side by side for years. The Mac Mini's starting
with intel i5's are still superb at Hauptwerk 4 & 6 with solid state drives and 16gb of ram.
They are 11 years old. I am not having good success with getting jOrgan to work well.
I use High Sierra mostly but have implementations of other incarnations of OS X also.
Your notes are of great interest to me.
jOrgan works well for me on most PC's.
Has anyone taken notice the the current incarnations of Qsynth use fluidsynth 2. Very easy
to experiment with Reverb.
Thanks to all...
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-08 08:44
Hi Julie,
Good to hear from you again.
You wrote:
"I attempted to follow the mac install instructions which are quite outdated.
The dmg does not contain an installer and a proper apple bundle."
Could you please tell us which mac install instructions you are referring to,
and also which dmg? Also, what changes would you recommend to bring those
instructions up to date?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-24 05:53
So I discovered that the version of jOrgan that partly worked on the latest mac big sur
works if run from a terminal command line (like on raspberry pi)
Clicking on the application jOrgan.jar, in the application folder, does not fully work as
many of the menus are missing.
On the other hand if one goes to the terminal window, then does a change directory to the
jOrgan folder in the application folder like this
cd /Applications/jOrgan-3.21.1
then if one types the command
java -jar jorgan.jar
Then the program launches with the file menu. The preferences then show up under the mac
parent "boostrap" menu.
Of course java has to be installed.
I checked the java version that I had installed and this is what it showed. I am not sure
if I installed this through the Oracle installer or the MacPorts installer.
$ java -version
java version "1.8.0_311"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_311-b11)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.311-b11, mixed mode)
$
I think the code to build the proper macintosh bundled app that associates file names with
the app is still in the git source. But the above makes a decent workaround. More
importantly the disposition can be edited.
-julie MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Processing workflow for soundfonts
From Julie P on 2021-11-08 08:30
I have not posted much here as this seems more of a 'Users' group. I have yet to find
a technical group, especially one that covers creating the sound samples. Sound samples
specifically for jOrgan and SF2 rather than the closed Hauptwerk system. Who these days
is creating new soundfonts?
This may be a bit technical, still it might be of interest as there are parts I do not
understand. Specifically what exactly is Reverb? How is it synthesized? And what is
wrong with the current digital implementations of it?
Over the last decade or so I created a set of scripts, which can parse organ definitions
such as created by jOrgan which is in a format called xml. This way I can create a
disposition from a list of stops, keyboards and ranks automatically using postscript.
In effect this would be like printing the 'display screen' jOrgan shows to a PDF file.
Or converting a photograph of an organ console to a jOrgan disposition.
It is well known that sounds can be printed as a wave forms and music represented as note
on off events over time (Piano rolls/MIDI) Internally the file formats for representing
images and sounds are similar. Even to the point where images can contain sound (as in
the case of video files) and sounds as images (as in presentations or slide shows.)
A modern photograph taken with a mobile phone contains several kilobytes of what is called
'metadata' . This contains everything from the size of the photograph to the GPS coordinates
and angle the camera is held. It can also contain arbitrary data such as the names of the
people in the photograph (and where their faces are in the photo If part of a video burst
such can contain audio snippets. This container format is known as IFF when binary and xml
when ASCII or text.
I forget what IFF stands for, the most well known variations are TIFF and AIFF. At the
heart of these formats are a concept called a chunk. MIDI and WAV files also contain chunks
of IFF data as do JPEG images(if you look at a jpeg with a text editor the chunk is called
JFIF.) This is why one can add 'metadata' to link all this together.
SF2 files are also chunk based.
I took my laptop and recorded a WAV file of a rank of pipes playing with a bit of silence
between each note. I then converted this WAV file to an image (like a TIFF) image and
separated each section into separate WAV file. (this can also be done using an application
like Audacity.)
I had an old BASIC program from the 1970s which converted to mac in the 1980s and postscript
in the 1990s which does a fourier transform to find the fundamental frequencies of an audio
wave. (Internally this is how apple and others 'Render' Midi to output audio)
At this point I can open the collection of WAV file rank recordings with an app like polyphone
(which also shows the frequencies.) Or I can process the WAV files into a prototype SF2 file
using ghostscriot. The advantage of the latter Is I can attempt to automatically detect the
loop points of the sound and separate the attack from the decay. Polyphone can also do this,
but it is a lot of clicking and menu selecting. Either way one has to do quite a bit of hand
editing over 100s of samples to get the phases aligned somewhat.
The next part is fairly straightforward, which is to fill in the chunks detailing the
'instrument' and 'preset' chunks in the soundfont. This can be done manually or
automatically. I tend to prefer the latter as I can use the parsed disposition file to fill in
the blanks regarding the 'presets' so that tremulated and reiterated samples have the proper
channel offsets in the so called patch.
This is as far as I have got.
Polyphone exposes dozens of tags inside the sound font. Some of these are obvious such as
note range. Where I get lost is the other stuff.
Modern audio processing seems to be based on something called a finite infinite response
filter or FIR filter. I quickly get lost in the textbooks. I understand the abstract concepts.
Not all infinities are bounded. A circle is a finite infinity. Frequencies can be graphed
using imaginary numbers on a polar circle etc. Where I get lost is when the textbooks start
talking about 'poles' on the filter. Then delve into advanced mathematics that hides what the
numbers really are. I think a lot of the SF2 tags relate to these so called 'poles.'
The other frustration is the use of dB to express volume. I can understand a knob that goes
from one to 11, where 11 is louder than loud. I find it totally obtuse where -dB is louder and
+dB does not really exist. More confusing is that dB is not even a number. It is a ratio
between two numbers. Where one of the numbers does not really exist. The sound of silence.
The best I can figure out is that in a laboratory, a perfect microphone provides a specific
voltage which then is the x axis of the imaginary number. This abstract then becomes the number
of steps (normally 0 to 255) which may or may not represent voltage when seen on an oscilloscope.
This makes changing a sound sample that is too soft impossible to make louder (without changing
the waveform causing distortion) and really annoying when someone says the strings are too soft,
now make them louder. Even worse is when someone says that the languid is too high, or the mouth
too low, or that the toe needs to be coned. In other words, traditional pipe voicing techniques.
Perhaps this is what I am attempting to create a sound font editor that works with these parameters.
Even more mysterious is which of these numbers control that elusive quantity called "reverb."
I think this is the echo caused by the reflections in the room. If I understand correctly dry
samples are created with no room noise (such as the chamber). That wet samples contain the echoes
from the room where the samples were recorded.
My understanding is the best solution to this is to put the speakers in a swell box and use
louvers to control the sound. That way the room is what it is. Obviously the sound in a living
room can never sound like that of a large hall or church. Still a live audio recording hints as
such things when played in a smaller room through phase illusion. The other thing I do not
understand is the temperature of the room is going to change the sound. Even when recording
an organ in the hall with an audience, and playing it back to an empty hall changes what one
hears. (the tuning can also shift between playbacks.)
Are people attempting to simulate this with digital filtering? Is that the problem with reverb?
I am not even sure where one would place a reverb unit? I take it such would probably go on the
analog or ephemeral side rather than the digital side. I know that studios and concerts use
things like equalizers and mixers, so I figure that a reverb unit is just more expensive gear
to brag about.
The other threads have also discussed how fludsynth changes between version 1 and version 2.
I am wondering if this might be a windows thing. Has anyone ever done a comparison? The
fluidsynth on uniflex (Windows) only sounds flat and dull compared to when the same file and
samples are played using jOrgan on a Mac. Some of this may be to the fact that midi
controller 7 and controller 11 is not part of uniflex.
As I noted Apple uses 'core audio' to render the waves. Core audio has the highest task priority
in the OS and when it was called quicktime on the old Mac, it was tied to the vertical retrace on
the monitor.
I could take one of the 'proprietary' jOrgan MIDI files and render each SF2 'note' as the sum of
the individual wave loops parsed from the SF2 files. This could be printed graphically (like the
soundtrack on cine motion picure film) or converted back to another wav file. I think the rest
of what would be a result of the DAC that the computer has when the sampled file is played.
Again modern signal processing does all sorts of things to the sound based on FIR filters and
such. The wav file could also be rendered directly to something called SPDIF which is frame
based temporal digital audio. Which is what I use here at home as I use toslink to optically
link the digital signal to the amp or monitor.
I have intentionally not mentioned stereo effects in the above. That adds a whole different
level of complexity, doubling the data creating in the mind something called an 'Acoustical
Hologram' where the phases of the sounds create an illusion of sound coming from a given point
in the room. Phase relates back to that whole finite infinite thing where the frequencies are
summed using the imaginary number circle. Actually it is quite fascinating how one can turn sound
into images and vice versa. The old 1970s program creates the classic organ pipe wave from the
sum of a large (if not infinite) collection of sign waves. I was able to make soundfonts out of
the examples from the 1970s textbook, that were numbers once stored on punched paper tape, then
printed as a graphic cut for the student to type in. The exerises then were so they could compare
an ophicleide to a french horn, to a diapason, trumpet, and mode locked garden hose. The student
was then given the opening chord to the right of spring and challenged to extract the bassoon and
oboe from it.
I know back when I was testing file formats like TIF and MIDI that people would sell programs that
converted WAV files to MIDI files. This was possible as MIDI files can contain WAV metadata for
soundcards. In theory one could be able to deconstruct the recorded sample of a pipe organ playing
back to the events of which each pipe is turned on or off. In practice this can not be done. At
least outside a laboratory with a mono recording of a bell or a piano. The infinities might be
finite, but they do remain infinities. It seems to me that if reverb is the room echo, then this
is another finite infinity. (A many to one problem with multiple solutions that give the same result.)
Anyway if anyone wants to play with one of my synthetic or postscript generated soundfonts let me know.
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-08 14:32
Julie, you covered so many particulars of related topics that it is difficult to know
where to start to comment. Soundfonts are one of my favorite subjects and I have been
involved in creating organ sound soundfonts for twenty years. Primitive additive
synthesis, at first, with the capabilities of jOrgan to function as a synthesizer with
a sine-wave based soundfont of organ footages, high quality, realistic pipe-emulative
sounds are possible.
Several months ago, I discovered an application called "Sample Set Generator" which is
available for download from the www.organ.monespace.net website.
The basic algorithms are excellent and the program is fairly intuitive to use, although
there are a few setup values that must be entered when using the program. If you would
be interested in using this program, I will tell you what some of the default settings
changes are that should be made when using the program to create complete, wave file,
sample sets. The advantage of this program is that it eliminates ALL editing of the wave
files with the exception of your preferred method of naming the individual files by organ
voice and pitch. It, also, performs autolooping when the wave files are generated, so
that is not necessary to repeat when importing in Polyphone. Once the basic footage
values for the additive synthesis are set, you can, with one click, produce the complete
compass of a rank of organ sounds.
Also, in jOrgan, I created a jOrgan Additive Synthesizer Disposition which has individual
soundfonts with sine wave footages and attacks edited for Open Flute, Stopped Flute,
Diapasons, Single Reed, Double Reed, and Strings. When the footage and amplitude values
for additive synthesis of an organ stop are entered, I use a midi sequencer to play a .mid
file of specified pitches in the compass of the keyboard from midi note #12 to midi note #120.
The output from jOrgan is recorded by Audacity and I edit each wave file to 6-seconds in
length, usually, cropping the tail end. Since release times are settable in Polyphone
(I used to record releases and have separate release instruments in the Instrument Pool of
Polyphone and added these to play at key release of the notes of the instrument), I no longer
bother with release wave files.
With regard to Reverb and your question "Specifically, what is Reverb?", Reverb is the effect
of an acoustic space with objects and walls which baffle, direct and limit the movement of sound.
It is reproduced, digitally, by an impulse response recording (wave file) of a sound generated
in an acoustic space (church, cathedral, etc.), the measurements of which are interpolated,
digitally, and variable by the elements of ROOM (space) WIDTH (size) DAMPING (baffling or
limiting) and LEVEL (the perceptible loudness of the cumulative effect of the first three
elements).
The problem "with the current digital implementations of it" is the use of amplitude modulation
in the LEVEL (volume) of the cumulative effect of the values of ROOM(Space), WIDTH (size) and
DAMPING (limiting or dulling or tamping down). The symptom of the problem of amplitude
modulation in the LEVEL of REVERB is a pitch-frequency-relative, speed variation of the
looped wave files in the soundfont which increases as note pitch increases or as polyphony
is increased during playing. The effect is annoying and is noticeable a bit above the 0.05
value setting of the LEVEL.
REVERB is not synthesized. It is the effect of interpolated measurements of a sound in time
and space. Only the actual wave file of an instrument sound is "synthesized."
I think, ironically, that the fact that the recorded, wave file is the fundamental activator
that is acted upon (by parameter settings to achieve some effect, modulation, attack, release,
chorusing or reverb), is the unavoidable, but basic problem, with regard to midi and digital
sound.
Wave files of recorded pipes capture the total, speaking, length of time with and in the
natural reverberation of the acoustic space in which an instrument is located. So,
technically, no artificial, digital manipulation should be necessary, again, technically
speaking. Such recorded pipe organs are, always, being played "in the acoustic space"
in which they are located, even in a living room.
This is, really, "CD quality" sound, not related to the space in which a user organist
is playing the recorded organ sample set.
I believe the digital age has produced unnecessary capabilities that don't actually do
anything of value. That is, it is the difference between academic and practical. Few
of us understand the edition of an XML file, yet, all of us know that a disposition we
created functions in the GUI of jOrgan and we can edit the GUI.
For all of the built-in capabilities of Polyphone and, for example, Sample Set Generator,
your editing with Ghostscript is, really, outdated. I import ten wave files for every
rank/stop I want to create in the Instrument Pool and highlight all and click the Root
Key which, automatically, identifies the root keys of each wave file. These are what
they are and are left as identified. Then, I click Tools>Sample>AutoLoop, and all those
wave files are autolooped. Then, relative to the footage of the rank/stop I am creating,
I select wave file-12 to wave file-72 for a 32' stop, 24-84 for a 16' stop, etc.
I highlight these wave files and copy and paste 12 instances of all into the Instrument,
deleting 11 instances from the top wave file. This fills the compass of the rank with one
wave file for each pitch with frequency-relative parameter settings. I have instrument
"templates" with the set values for all the parameters of all the footages in the soundfont
and it is a simple matter of copying the entire page of Instrument Parameter Values from Key
Range to End Loop Offset and pasting them to an instrument of the same footage, depending on
whether flu or reed.
I maintain a system of Organ Stop Wave Files that use the same, midi note numbering system
for identification, so I can swap wave files for an entire instrument or an entire soundfont
in a matter of minutes.
I have created soundfonts for all 220 of the Chart of Hammond Organ Registrations, using
both the Sample Set Generator and my own jOrgan Additive Synthesis disposition and have
dispositions using some or all of them.
I agree with your assessment that the expression of dB is confusing. I, often, use Audacity's
"Analyze>Plot Spectrum" to determine the values of a recorded pipe sound's harmonic, upper
partials.
This requires giving a relative amplitude value (0-8), based on the –dB value that is shown
in the Plot Spectrum graph of a recorded sound. Volume sliders in jOrgan have to be whole
numbers 0-8, but counters (without sliders) can involve decimals or fractions, for greater
precision if, in fact, this is even critical. I would like to figure out an exact
equivalency table: X -dB = +X amplitude. The results from estimation have been good.
Swell box simulation is achieved with a slider/counter and MIDI programming language to
effectuate a progressive high frequency damping by amplitude reduction by means of a
continuous filter. It works well.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-08 21:50
Julie wrote:
"It is well known that sounds can be printed as a wave forms and music represented as
note on off events over time (Piano rolls/MIDI) Internally the file formats for
representing images and sounds are similar. Even to the point where images can
contain sound (as in the case of video files) and sounds as images (as in
presentations or slide shows.) A modern photograph taken with a mobile phone
contains several kilobytes of what is called 'metadata' . This contains everything
from the size of the photograph to the GPS coordinates and angle the camera is held.
It can also contain arbitrary data such as the names of the people in the photograph
(and where their faces are in the photo If part of a video burst such can contain
audio snippets. This container format is known as IFF when binary and xml when
ASCII or text."
Logically, music notation is the script that is used to "show and tell" by a "note"
element, the pitch (frequency) and the length in time of a sound. An "instrument"
is the physical generator of sound waves having tone-quality identity. The graphic
representation of this sound is a wave form, visible, electronically, by means of an
oscilloscope. In all digital or computer audio, the wave file is the fundamental
unit having the highest quality file format and the activator which is acted upon by
controller parameters which effectuate a physical modelling of the instrument
producing the sound.
This is what makes the soundfont format so, exceptionally, high quality.
Theoretically, a soundfont could or should be as, precisely, high quality as the
recorded sounds that comprise the sample sets used in the commercial, virtual pipe
organ programs such as Hauptwerk. If it is arguable that they are not, it is only
the difference between the known fact of, in situ (acoustic environment), wave files
of recorded pipes of world famous pipe organs (instruments) and the known fact of
recorded wave files (whether synthesized or actual, recorded pipes of real pipe
organs) the audible quality of which is prescribed by midi controller values, as
parameters, which specify how a tone is produced by a physical, musical instrument
which, in real life, produces that tone quality.
Indeed, the nature and connotations of the word "record," really, capture the
essence of the tone quality with the very notable exception of the effect of
"reverberation" on that tone quality, which is, in fact, a noticeable, audible part
of recordings of instruments in the spaces where they are located. This latter
fact is not a part of the "record" or "recording" of wave files that are synthesized
by means of computer program-generated audio. That is, they (wave files) are not
the actual, real life instrument that produces an identifiable tone quality
associated, uniquely, by that physical instrument.
So, if we admit that no synthesized, computer-generated sound is comparable to the
sounds of real-life instruments, or that exact, computer-generated, physically-modelled,
recorded sounds are NOT the exact same thing as the real life, instrument-produced
sounds, when, equally, recorded, we will never be satisfied with anything less than
high quality, real life instruments in the best acoustical environments where they are
known to be. If we can enjoy CDs of real pipe organ music and consider it to be the
sounds of the real life instrument, then, we just might be able to admit to the possibility
that "CD quality" of the computer-generation of physically modelled instruments is an
exact representation of the tone qualities of real life instruments, we can accept the
quality of soundfonts but will object to the idea of physically modellable "reverberation"
which attempts to pair two wave files; one the tone quality of the instrument and the
other a record, in time, of the effect of the physical elements of a space which shape
a sound as it travels through it (Impulse Response). I don't like this latter term.
The effects of a physical space are what they are and, likely, are not changed on
"impulse." So, we associate a particular grandeur of sound with particular spaces and
their quality is, always, good. Needless to say, this is not so with "space manipulation,"
called "REVERB" which is an alteration of the wave file, electronically, which is a,
practically, harnessed limitation of lesser quality than the free space of a building.
How we, by computer-generation, electronically, "build" a sound is different from real
life instruments, generating, by the movement of air through pipes, sound waves which
are impacted by the baffles and walls or objects of a building.
To my mind, "CD quality" sound for an organ would be the sound heard at the middle center
of a space, in relation to front and back and sides, where the instrument producing the
sound is at the front.
I know, practically, nothing about the recording of Impulse Response wave files, although
I have read that they consist of the recording of a shot fired in a space for as long as
the sound remains audible (to total decay and cessation of sound) in that space. As to
how many microphones, placed where, in order to achieve measurements of sound under the
effect of time and space which are, theoretically, applicable to the super-imposition of
those measurements on wave files by simultaneous reproduction (playback), I don't know.
However, the concept of amplitude modulation as the fundamental element with respect to
LEVEL of REVERB (the cumulative measurements of space, size and damping), not only seems,
but, is problematic. If an acoustic space is envisioned as a "tuned circuit," perhaps,
it is more understandable. Tuned circuits consist of inductance, capacitance and resistance.
A fixed, tuned circuit for one specific frequency has, mathematically, exact values for each
of the parts, inductor coil in millihenries, capacitor in farads or micro, pica or nano,
and resistor in ohms, all calculable. When the resistor or capacitor is constructed to be
variable, or tunable through a spectrum of frequencies, the interaction of inductance,
capacitance and resistance, as reactive, are, ALL, interdependent on the instantial values
of each, producing frequency. Even the mil of the wire in the circuit must be determined
as it has, by impedance, an effect on the product. Impedance matching networks enable
maximum transfer of power, the amplitude of a signal, not attenuated by
impedance factors. Reverberation can not be conceived to be the gradual attenuation of
sound by amplitude modulation in a fixed, tuned circuit. It is the effect of a physical
space and the objects in it which baffle, direct or limit to reflect sound. So, REVERB
might be described as sound and its reflection as perceived by any hearer at any particular
spot in a building. That is, more than likely , not reproducible electronically. While
it can be recorded, can an acoustic response wave file be "married" to a sound-wave file
when the disparities of time and amplitude relative to each define REVERB as the disparities
of time and amplitude relative to each? Is space defined as the disparities of time and
amplitude? No. Space is defined as the measurable area delimited by borders, walls,
baffles, ceilings or other objects which confine sound and reflect it.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-09 18:10
I'd like to throw a few things into this mix which might help others who read this
thread....
First, REVERB
There are basically two types of reverb, Algorithmic and Convolution.
Algorithmic reverb is the most common in software and in hardware. It uses a series
of delay lines and filters to SIMULATE a reverberant space. Parameters like "Width",
"Level", "Room size" etc just change the parameters for these algorithms. Fluidsynth
uses this type of reverb. (My hunch is the "phasing" we can hear is either a bug or a
poor implementation of one of the filters but I could be completely wrong about that.)
Convolution reverb starts with an impulse response. An impulse in this case is a very
short, high energy burst of sound. Think about shooting a starting pistol at the front
of a space and recording the sound (reverb) that it produces somewhere appropriate in
the body of the space. This is the "Impulse Response". Convolution takes your signal
(the dry organ) and convolves* it with the impulse response to produce an output signal
that sounds like your input (organ) is in the acoustic space of the impulse.
*Simplistically, think of convolution as taking the spectrum of the signal multiplied by
the spectrum of the impulse, converted back to a new signal.
Convolution is processor intensive and to do properly has a latency equal to the time
length of the impulse - useless for live performance. There are fancy ways of speeding
up the process so you get the latency down to playable.
Fons Adriaensen has a good one at https://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/
(jconvolver) but it is Linux only. He also has my favourite algorithmic reverb - Zita-Rev1.
Mathias Kronlachner (http://www.matthiaskronlachner.com/?p=1515) has Mac OSX ports of both
of these available and a link to JackOSX for Audio Routing.
On the related discussions re soundfonts, in my system, front and rear Channels are handled
by good quality HI-Fi speakers. Given "CD quality" samples, I believe they should be
"played" through speakers designed for that. PA speakers may be louder but they are
nowhere near accurate enough IMO.
Having set up the speakers and amps in the room, I went and used Polyphone to tweak all
the attenuations in the soundfont to match the speakers IN the room. This is the analogous
process to doing the final voicing on an organ after installation in the venue. In my case,
the speakers and the room interact to affect the sound and I voice the soundfont to suit.
If I move the setup to a different room, I'll need to do it all again!
So a disposition that someone shares will need to be tuned to the room and speakers for best
results. This is no reflection on the producer of the disposition as they will probably have
done this for their environment. They will also have done all that hard work processing and
looping. I could not have built my organ without the superb work of Graham Goode, Bruce Miles
and John Tay among others.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-09 23:16
GrahamW wrote:
"I'd like to throw a few things into this mix which might help others who read this
thread...."
Graham, thanks for your explanation of the fundamental differences between the two
kinds of reverb. If we think of the individual wave file of a soundfont instrument
as an inertial force with a specific shape, first in the confines of a pipe and, then,
emitted from it, into the acoustic environment of a building, which is the outside
force acting upon the sound (wave file), then, perhaps, we can better understand the
concept of the effect of distortion (to a degree unacceptable in the current version
of Fluidynth) that is occurring. The electronic virtual is NOT the equivalent of the
physical reality.
The problem with the electronic is the distortion of the sound, something that does
NOT occur to change the identifiable quality of the sound in the real, physical
environment of the acoustic space of a building. I have, previously, stated that a
workaround is possible for users having a Creative Labs soundcard that has the EAX
(Environmental Audio Extension) studio in which the parameters for Reverb can be
adjusted to personal preference, but which have very usable presets of established,
acoustic environments. I, for example, do not use the Fluidsynth Reverb in jOrgan
because, as we have discussed several times, there is a severe problem of frequency
or pitch-relative, looped playback of the wave file as the LEVEL of REVERB is increased.
The cycle of looping is heard, as if a tape recorder were playing the same loop
repeatedly. Add many stops and the effect is pretty bad. Oddly, the length of
the wave file in seconds does NOT matter. The effect of increasing the LEVEL is
objectionable. This problem has existed since the release of version 2.0.0 of
Fluidsynth. I just noticed that version 2.2.3 release is available, but these are
"maintenance" releases, so I don't think the problem has been addressed, but we do
not know because the current version of Fluidsynth Portaudio backends is what I am
using and there may be no benefit to releasing a new Portaudio backend because the
problem would not be corrected. Does anyone know if the Fluidsynth developers are
aware of the problem with the Reverb or whether any monitor forums such as ours for
issues related to their program?
Perhaps, Graham G. can weigh in on this.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-10 01:20
The disparities of the treatment or effectuation of reverb in the various soundfont
-based programs which have it are, perhaps, best illustrated and visible in Audacity
as the editor of wave files which I use, exclusively, to do so. Theoretically, if a
recorded wave file is that of a real pipe in the environment of a church or cathedral
space, there should be no need for the use of, for example, Fluidsynth reverb. That
is, the reverberation is captured in the recording of the sound wave file of the
individual pitch for the length of time to total decay or cessation of sound.
In Audacity, if a wave file of an organ stop of particular pitch is opened for
editing, Select> All, Effect>Reverb, Reverb=Your choice of Factory Presets or DIY
(set the parameter values, if you know what you are doing). If, for example,
Cathedral is chosen from the Factory Presets and this is applied to the sound wave
file (or files, if bulk-editing.....which is a great feature!), what is immediately
noticeable is the huge reduction in amplitude (overall loudness) of the wave file.
What is, also, noticeable is the very nice alteration of the attack of the wave file
and the, nearly, two seconds of formative development to the "steady state" which lasts
until the end of a six second-long wave file. What is unrealistic is the reduction in
amplitude. So, it is necessary to effectuate a Select>All, Effect>Normalization,
which will restore the amplitude (loudness) to the wave file while retaining the
alterations made in the attack and formative development which are effectuated in
the Cathedral Reverb parameters applied to the sound wave file.
I have no experience in recording pipe organ stops in church or cathedral settings,
so I know nothing of the placement of microphones for, presumably, CD-quality recording
of the individual pitches of individual stops within the ranks of families of pipe
organ sounds. It would seem, however, that there is a significant difference between
the perception of sound if the listener is in the Choir of the Cathedral or standing
inside the rear foyer/narthex entrance to the cathedral. Seemingly, to achieve a
"happy medium" or definitive, industry-standard with respect to the placement of
microphones is not really possible and, my wild guess would be that, the best
placement of microphones for CD-quality sound would be an array in the front of the
altar platform. This would avoid the clap-trap of pallet noise which might be audible
from microphone pick-up in the Choir or any rasping of wind from pipes which, however
realistic, is not a musical effect which adds beauty to the sound being produced,
however essential to its generation. The concept of CD-quality sound should be the
consideration of what we expect to hear, in terms of musical quality on a CD,
particularly, one of organ music. I think good, solid, identifiable tone is the
expectation. We (the listeners) are looking for (and hearing) the "resultant," and,
perhaps, we don't need to know or perceive that it is comprised of the, obviously,
identifiable 16' and 10-2/3' ranks, sounding simultaneously, known and audible to
the organist.
It is not a lot of work to bulk-edit all the wave files which are in the instruments
of soundfonts and this might provide an acceptable solution producing realistic results
of sound with reverb which will eliminate the need for the use of Fluidsynth Reverb.
There is a lot to consider in this regard and, perhaps, one of the most important
considerations is the difference between the sound of a single stop and the sound of
multiple stops. Since the individual pitches with reverb are what are the recorded wave
files, is the cumulative blend a realistic sound or does it multiply, to an unrealistic
degree, the effect of recorded reverb that has been recorded with each individual pitch
of each stop?
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-11-10 01:22
Julie P wrote:
"Who these days is creating new soundfonts?"
HI, Julie
I am :-)
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-11-10 04:12
Graham W wrote:
".......Given "CD quality"samples, I believe they should be "played" through
speakers designed for that. PA speakers may be louder but they are nowhere
near accurate enough IMO.........."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have used an Electrovoice 7300 PA system (200 watts rms/side) for my 3/23 theater
organ almost since the inception of jOrgan. The system had seen rough and tumble
use playing with various Rock 'n'Roll bands and eventually all drivers were replaced
before permanently installing it in music room which was built for (or around) the
instrument. A 150 watt 15" subwoofer system was added for the pedal stops. This is
all that is needed in the size studio I have and I have not included 32' stops in the
specification.
I have essentially voiced all of my samples for use in this system using viena and
other techniques, and I couldn't be more pleased with it. Not appreciably different
from a pipe voicer customizing the organ to the room it plays in. I find "CD quality
samples" played through music reproduction systems to be dry and upon occasion a bit
tinny, or lacking in body and character, sounding artificial. They also seem to be
two dimensional, lacking in 'chamber depth.'
I can't take credit for how well this system sounds, I just stumbled on it, but there
is a coloration (or lack of it) to the voices and just as important, a 3D quality or
'chamber depth' I do not find other systems.
My studio room is of moderate size, about 15' x 18', and I am trying to duplicate a
studio or broadcast organ sound of about a 20 rank WurliTzer Publix I organ with the
addition of the all-important Posthorn. I'm not trying to kid myself that I am playing
in a 5,000 seat movie palace! My reverb is similar to what is presently being discussed
in the forum: Creative Labs EAX. It is being used to create little more than chamber
depth reverb, and it does the job perfectly. I can actually sense rank placement (depth)
in my 'chambers!'
What I'm getting at is there are some PA systems out there with redeeming qualities,
although many may be, as Graham says, not accurate. I may have just stumbled on a good
one, but still had to do some revoicing to compensate. I have been told that my instrument
"looks, plays and sounds like the real thing." To paraphrase an old saying:
"Beauty is in the EAR of the beholder."
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-11 20:12
Graham W wrote:
“.......Given "CD quality"samples, I believe they should be "played" through speakers designed
for that. PA speakers may be louder but they are nowhere near accurate enough IMO..........”
Les K wrote:
"What I'm getting at is there are some PA systems out there with redeeming qualities,
although many may be, as Graham says, not accurate. I may have just stumbled on a good
one, but still had to do some revoicing to compensate."
Hi Les
You quite correct of course. Re-reading that statement (which I made), it comes across as too
dogmatic. There are some really good PA systems out there but you need to be choosy.
I have a Fender system that has a much flatter sound than most PA's and would work well.
I've also worked with some superb QSC stuff but it is way beyond my pocket.
Congratulations on having your system working so well. And as you say "still had to do some
revoicing to compensate". I think that is the most important thing to take away.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Christian W on 2021-11-11 21:29
Just to throw in my 5c unasked ...
I think the choice of the PA depends largely on the room you intend to use it in. I think
it is crucial to find a vendor who offers the opportunity to test the equipment in situ ...
We tried a few systems in our church (although not w/ jOrgan but with a digital Rodgers 588,
the situation is comparable though) and stuck with a Hughes&Kettner Elias as supporting
audio system – a PA that is designed for stage events, originally.
What we did is to add a 2x32 band graphic EQ in the signal flow; helps a lot for eliminating
standing waves etc.
MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan to use open jdk instead of Oracle Java?
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 16:39
Question for all,
Given that Oracle has changed the java licensing for newer versions has
anyone tested with the openjdk which is the open source core that goes
into the oracle java. I think if anything we should start pushing people
towards using that instead with jorgan.
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-09 17:20
I use OpenJDK but I'm on Ubuntu Studio so perhaps not relevant.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 17:54
Hi Graham,
I think even though you are not on mac what are your experiences with jorgan
and using openjdk as an alternative to oracle java?
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-09 18:27
Hi Jonathan
I've had zero problems. Only thing to worry about is installing the correct version.
(The Linux Package Manager offers you all versions that are available.)
I'm using OpenJDK 11.0.11 from April this year with
jorgan_4.0.Beta1_amd64.deb
Ubuntu Studio 20.04.2 LTS.
Hardware is 2014 Intel Mac Mini 64Bit.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 18:35
Hi Graham,
Thanks for the feedback on this.
A question for all really, jorgan is there the option or 32bit or 64bit or is it
just a single bit version just 32bit or just 64bit that is available for download?
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham G on 2021-11-09 19:07
The ONLY platform where 32-bit or 64-bit matters is Windows.
Linux and OS-X/MacOS are only ever one or the other, and the
Fluidsynth linkages with jOrgan for those platforms makes the bit-ness
is agnostic.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-11 06:42
GrahamW wrote:
"I'm using OpenJDK 11.0.11 from April this year with jorgan_4.0.Beta1_amd64.deb"
GrahamW,
Thank you for your report. I'm just a bit surprised to see that you are using
jOrgan 4.0 beta1. Does that mean that you are using Fluidsynth version 2? I had
the impression when we first discussed this new version that you found that
cyclic modulation in its reverb totally unacceptable. Just a bit puzzled.
JonathanA wrote:
"Given that Oracle has changed the java licensing for newer versions has anyone
tested with the openjdk which is the open source core that goes into the oracle java.
I think if anything we should start pushing people towards using that instead with jorgan."
Jonathan,
Could you please share with us your reasons for thinking we should do that?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-11 06:50
Hi John,
Regarding your question Oracle Java we are going to stagnate and not update to
newer versions as well as things have changed with how they licensed it.
Now with Open JDK is the open source foundation which Oracle use to then turn it
into the closed source version
https://openjdk.java.net/
the other thing is that if there is a feature that would benefit jorgan someone
who is technical enough and can program can hack on the JDK and work towards it
being added to the Open JDK.
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-11 08:27
JonathanA wrote:
"things have changed with how they (Oracle) licensed it."
Hi Jonathan,
Thank you for your reply, which raises a number of issues, some of them quite sensitive,
I feel. It was the details of those licensing changes I was wondering about, which you
still have not yet really helped us with.
The Oracle FAQ page re licensing may be of interest to people:
https://www.oracle.com/au/java/technologies/javase/jdk-faqs.html
However, for people for whom open source is important, your mention of open source is
indeed significant - although whether Oracle can be accused of transgressing those
principles either now or in the future is something I am not really qualified to have
an opinion about.
Your statements about whether jOrgan may stagnate, or whether people with technical
know-how can contribute to its development, identify issues which trouble many of us,
I suspect. To my mind, jOrgan is a remarkable program which (for my purposes, at least),
delivers results superior to anything else. What is more, it comes to us free of charge,
due to the generosity of Sven Meier - to say nothing of his ability to create the
program in the first place! In these circumstances, it means that further developments
or even upgrades to deal with changes in any related programs cannot be taken for granted,
and we may at times have to wait patiently until those upgrades can be made - if at all!
In the meantime, I continue to enjoy the sounds which jOrgan is allowing me to hear.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-11 11:08
JohnR wrote:
"I'm just a bit surprised to see that you are using jOrgan 4.0 beta1. Does that mean
that you are using Fluidsynth version 2?"
Hi John
Yes, FS2 sound is good. Reverb is turned OFF.
Because mine is a theatre organ, I run one instance of FS per rank and one for
each tuned percussion plus a traps rank. Each has a dedicated soundfont. JACK
patchbay takes care of remembering all the connections.
Audio is routed with JACK to Carla, which hosts a plugin version of Zita-rev1
to provide the reverb.
Cheers
GrahamW MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Call for mac users re jOrgan downloads
From JohnR on 2021-11-09 14:35
Julie Phas emailed me about what she considers to be serious deficiencies
in the jOrgan 3.21.1 file for download. If she is correct, it means that the
installation instructions I give in the jorgan Discovery website are totally wrong.
My guess is that if the 3.21.1 dmg file is faulty in the way Julie believes,
then the same could be true of the 3.21 one.
It appears that the latest mac release (osx Big Sur) has so many significant changes
that it is unlikely that jOrgan will work on it, along with an unknown number of
other programs.
I need a report from mac users on which jOrgan download files they have had success
with, and on which fairly recent mac OS's, please.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-11-09 15:55
Hi JohnR...
...I am currently testing 3.21.1 on OS X 10.13.6 High
Sierra and 10.14.6 Mojave. I have jOrgan functioning on both... but OS X's
have their different points just like Windows etc.
The files... no matter how downloaded... must be copied into another folder
in someplace like "Public" and then they work.
I am testing several OS X's and several versions of jOrgan. My interest
with jOrgan right now is Mojave because Qsynth with fluidsynth 2.2.1 works
superbly with jOrgan... and the Reverb can be adjusted very easily to sound
good also.
I actually use a keyboard attached to a Mac Mini then network the Keyboard
Midi to another Mac Mini running jOrgan and a Win10pc running jOrgan at the
same time.
I have been beta testing Win11 for some time... but have not done any Organ
testing with it yet.
Cheers to everyone who loves the Organ.
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-09 16:30
Marc-Paul wrote:
"I am currently testing 3.21.1 on OS X 10.13.6 High
Sierra and 10.14.6 Mojave. I have jOrgan functioning on both..."
Hi Marc-Paul,
That's great news! Thank you for such a prompt reply. It's clear that you will
in time have more information for us.
It's clear that things aren't as bad as Julie feared. What has me puzzled is why
in my instructions I steered people away from jOrgan 3.20. It may have been
because it won't work if Java Version 11 is installed. But that is true also of
3.21 . However, I have the impression that Apple are not in a hurry to install
new versions of Java the moment they are released. Any other guesses, anyone?
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 18:35
Julie I have missed parts of this thread i think and just read into the technical
side of things given my IT background. What issues are you encountering really as
I would like to see if I can replicate them on my mac book air.
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Dominique M on 2021-11-09 20:09
Hello everyone.
I am one of those weird people who work on Mac and speak French. (I'm kidding !)
I am using jOrgan on three Mac computers and have stayed on "old" OS:
- Macbook 2008 with Lion OS 10.7.5, which works very well.
- Macbook and MacMini from 2012 with Mojave 10.14.6 without problem.
For reasons of compatibility with other software, I have not yet adopted the
following versions of OS.
The installation of jOrgan 3.21 had been difficult but now works fine.
I am not comfortable enough with the English language to understand all the
technical data that you are putting out on this user group.
I regret that jOrgan is not performing well enough on the Mac when I use a
large number of software which are equivalent on all systems ('Audacity',
'MuseScore' and many others. Note that 'GrandOrgue' is not very stable).
Unfortunately I don't have the technical skills to help and improve things.
A random call: if a jOrgan user is French speaking, I would like to establish
contact to discuss how this software works, which I really like.
Good day everyone from France.
Dominique
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Kevin J K on 2021-11-09 22:00
I was able to use 3.20 easily on Catalina.
At the moment I'm using Hauptwerk but will try jOrgan on my other i5 Mac on
High Serria too.
Kevin
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 22:10
Kevin J K wrote:
"I was able to use 3.20 easily on Catalina.
At the moment I'm using Hauptwerk but will try jOrgan on my other i5 Mac on
High Serria too."
Hi Kevin,
Is there any reason why you have not upgraded to the latest version of the Mac OS?
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-09 22:25
Since jOrgan, in Windows, requires the Java Runtime Environment to be installed, it is
the bit-matching between the JRE and jOrgan version which must be ONE or the Other, but
the same for both. In other words a 64-bit version of jOrgan will NOT run in a 32-bit
version of JRE. Apparently, some people, having a 64-bit operating system, can and do
install a 32-bit version of JRE and a 32-bit version of jOrgan and have run it
successfully. This has been discussed when this problem of having mismatched the bit
versions of JRE and jOrgan was a mistake by a user.
Puisque jOrgan, avec Windows, exige que Java Runtime Environment soit installé, il faut
que et la version de JRE et la version de jOrgan soient des mêmes versions de bit,
soit 32 ou soit 64. L'on ne peut pas les mêler, la 32 avec la 64. Quelques gens,
ayant un système de Windows de 64-bit, ont réussi à installer une version de JRE et
de jOrgan sans problème de fonctionnement. L'on recommende, cependant, que toutes les
versions s'accordent.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-09 22:40
Just a suggestion about possible translation of the technical aspects of jOrgan.
Given the fact that Dave Tripponey, the author of Polyphone, has a breadth of
knowledge in programming, MIDI, Soundfonts, the use of (apparently) a fluidsynth-based
REVERB addition in Polyphone, as well as a good working knowledge of the English
Language and has, also, recruited speakers of other foreign languages to translate
the documentation for Polyphone in those other languages, perhaps, we might find
among them a user or two of jOrgan who would be willing to translate the documentation
for jOrgan into those languages. To my knowledge, other foreign language-based
versions of jOrgan, except in Sven's native German language, have not been developped,
which may account for lack of interest or widespread use of jOrgan, comparatively.
Dave has, also, contributed, on occasion, to the jOrgan user's list forum.
We, at least, need to make available specific, detailed information concerning the
proper installation of jOrgan in the various operating systems that are in current
use so that new users can be encouraged that jOrgan does, indeed, work well when
properly installed on a system having sufficient resources.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 22:31
JohinB wrote:
"Since jOrgan, in Windows, requires the Java Runtime Environment to be
installed, it is the bit-matching between the JRE and jOrgan version which
must be ONE or the Other, but the same for both. In other words a 64-bit
version of jOrgan will NOT run in a 32-bit version of JRE."
Hi JohnB,
One thing not mentioned here you can actually have 32bit and 64bit java installed
side by side as the JVM's are completely separate from each other.
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jonathan A on 2021-11-09 22:43
Hi John,
I think translations go further than just the documentation what about translating
the various elements and menus in jorgan into other languages?
Regards,
Jonathan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-09 23:42
Jonathan, while it would be nice, for example, to have the entirety of the 4 volumes
of tutorials of Bill Skees translated in other languages, it would be a massive amount
of work and users need to be able to get a version of jOrgan installed and operating
so they can enjoy playing it. The technical aspects of soundfont development, homemade
dispositions or other personal preference or "wishlist" things are, really, extraneous
to the need to be able to have a well-functioning version of jOrgan installed on whatever
operating system a user may have. So, initially, at least, there should be a focused
concentration on the translation of installation information.
Sven may want to make some comments about this since he, already, has the experience of
jOrgan in German for German users and, as the developer, knows what essentials need to be
translated for new users.
Thanks.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Kevin J K on 2021-11-10 07:02
Jonathan wrote:
"Hi Kevin,
Is there any reason why you have not upgraded to the latest version of the Mac OS?"
Hi,
my iMac will not support the very latest Mac OS.
Kevin MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
XML and parsing internal structures
From Julie P on 2021-11-11 13:06
John Beach wrote:
>I believe the digital age has produced unnecessary capabilities that don’t actually
do anything of value. That is, it is the difference between academic and practical.
Few of us understand the edition of an XML file, yet, all of us know that a disposition
we created functions in the GUI of jOrgan and we can edit the GUI.
The last few days I have been working with my jOrgan XML parser/generator. I have not
looked at this code for over two years. For me XML is what I find the most useful in
jOrgan. I think Hauptwerk also uses XML, but I have not taken any time to look at that
as the full ODF is not released. I did look over the weekend at some of Hauptwerk
documentation on custom organ definitions. That is something more down the road,
It may be that I could modify my scripts for that system. I find it curious that there
are suggestions that users are expected to edit the XML by hand in their user groups.
The built in graphics editor for jorgan, I find to be frustrating. When I work with
graphics, I like sub pixel accuracy. As I also work with theater organs I also like
to see the tabs laid out in as a they are in the horseshoe format. To this effect I
have a template, where one can 'fill in the blanks' The program then generates the code
that fills in the stops.
Most modern programming tends to work with what is called the key, value, observer inputs
to a database. This is often called KVO programming. What is nice about postscript is
that it does have its own database which are called dictionaries or dicts for short.
These are fully recursive to the limits of the implementation memory. Such ways of
representing data lend quite practically to XML type representation.
Another area of interest I have is in preserving Organs, and the music that was recorded
on them. My decades old interest came about when I was given a floppy disk that
contained the definition and recordings of an organ that was in a local pizza restaurant
known as the 'Bella Roma' Where performances of those no longer alive were recorded.
This organ no longer exists and was parted out. (I actually have some wire from that
instrument in my own console.) Yet the music it played still exists.
A case in point. I have a collector friend, who has a hall in Northern california.
He put together a nice 16 rank Wurlizer, which is used for concerts. There are also a
number of instruments that decorate the side walls. To complete the 16 rank Wurlitzer
my friend wanted a rank of pipes from a second instrument, that had belonged to a mutual
friend. The extra two manual console was placed in the lobby of the hall. That console
has a lot of history and is now in my basement. It is said that George Wright nicknamed
this organ Myrtle, when it was across the river from where I live. The reason for this
was my friend got another console that was salvaged from a pizza restaurant (Pizza Joynt/San
Francisco Warfield) and had been badly burned. We started to restore this, and got the
burned out console into shape, where another collector was able to complete the restoration.
Without a decorative console, my friend thought the lobby looked bare.
Sadly some of these old instruments are no longer as popular. The prices have fallen a lot,
and homes are sold and downsized. My friend found, after looking, a console from the organ
of one Dr Dapolito. I am told the pipes went to Australia, when the house was sold.
This used a strange relay called a S'andelco. Nothing could be found online other than an
article in 'Console' Magazine. (September 1981) What is interesting is that the Oakland
Paramount also has a S'adelco relay (which is being upgraded to uniflex.)
Since I maintain Uniflex hardware (most of the actual non virtual organs I work with have
unifex relays) I upgraded the 'Myrtle' VTPO to Uniflex, using Hauptwerk as a box of ranks.
This left the Arduino MIDI interface available to allow the Dapalito "Hollywood" console to
become a VTPO in the lobby. The S'andelco relay multiplexes the keyboards. I was able
to convert this to simple MIDI and set up Hauptwerk4 in a limited way to test the interface.
Re enter the 'Bella Roma.' As I already had the jOrgan definition for it, I put that on the
mac connected to the Dapolito or 'Lobby' console. Now I can play the recordings from the
'Bella Roma' on it.
This is all because I have a script that can convert the XML from one disposition to another.
A result of decades of research, I noticed that the website I use the most is called
'savevirtualorgans.' Another organ I work on is a similar Robert Morton. Which is where
I got most of the soundsamples/soundfonts I use. I also figured out how after months of
study; learned to code activators and such so that the MIDI recordings can accurately control
the VTPO (the goal is to make the combination stops and led indicators move.) The Pizza
organs also had spotlights and other effects, which are recorded on the old tracks. In
theory One can display this information on the console screen. (at the moment) I use the
simple LED indicators (but any skin graphic can be used.)
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-11-11 16:07
Julie...
...I admire your programming skills and dedication to the Organ.
I was on the crew that converted the NY Paramount Wurlitzer organ to a computer relay...
in short for Lyn Larson to record one of his albums. I spent many hours learning how
the software worked. And also spent many years working on keeping the organ made in
1926 playing for 3 public concerts a year. We reduced a 3000 wire cable to a ribbon
cable and power. I also spent 10 years playing in public now and then for background
music and a hours concert here and there.
jOrgan and Hauptwerk let me continue to evolve as a musician and technician and I am
really grateful for all of us that contribute to our understanding of how things work.
Kindest Regards
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-11 20:02
Julie P wrote:
"The built in graphics editor for jorgan, I find to be frustrating. When I work with
graphics, I like sub pixel accuracy. As I also work with theater organs I also like
to see the tabs laid out in as a they are in the horseshoe format. To this effect
I have a template, where one can 'fill in the blanks' The program then generates the
code that fills in the stops."
Hi Julie
Completely agree with this. I design the screens for Miditzer and I can assure everyone
accuracy is essential. Almost everything on those screens has to be rotated to individual
angles and (often) perspective added. I don't need SUB-pixels but even a single pixel
misalignment is noticeable.
I would imagine that adding rotation to jOrgan stops could be a nightmare. (Miditzer
does it by having an "on" image and an "off" image and essentially "masking" areas to
show or hide.)
The way I "adapt" jOrgan graphics is to use my Miditzer260SP screen as a background.
(Link to draft image if you are interested )
The jOrgan "stops" overlay the matching stop on the background. They are small,
partially transparent circles for the on state that look like a small spotlight
on the stop. The off state is completely transparent. Means you can't click
"anywhere" on the stop, just a small circle at the tip. Since I have pistons and
eventually stop rails, the screen is for "development" at this stage. As I won't
be able to physically fit all the stops on my stop rail, having the screen will
allow me to set registrations on pistons that use things I don't have on the stop rails.
I tried driving jOrgan as a box of ranks for Miditzer running in WINE but WINE ran
out of steam handling MIDI once I added expression pedals. Other than that,
it worked well.
Cheers
Graham
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-11 23:34
From the very onset of MIDI, humanization encountered the exigencies of precise,
computer calculations which demanded that the "sum of the parts equal the whole,"
no ifs, ands or buts.
An applicable analogy might be, why is the present subjunctive objected to by
the present indicative when the construction requires the present subjunctive?
Because one is a mood and the other is a tense. The "snap to" (the line) feature,
with respect to pixels, does not, really, allow for the creation of curves in
circles which are a contiguous straight line. So, seemingly, sub-pixel accuracy
might require fractions thereof in order to achieve a smooth curve. The algorithm
of point-to-point, without the element of an "arc" or "arch," or "curve," always
a straight line, illustrates the difference between graphic image files (which can
be perfect circles), as activators, and their placement on the matrix of the rows
and columns of pixels.
This aspect of the XML file is what, for me, has made the creation of a home-made
skin for my dispositions difficult to achieve. I have not been able to successfully
edit a photo I have taken of colored wood and substitute it for a "console" element
in the skins folder of jOrgan. To say nothing of creating the entirety of elements
in the skin folder.
No one has ever set down the specifications or dimensions for skin elements and,
then, how to edit the skins.XML so that the whole thing was accepted by jOrgan.
I have, previously, suggested that we need a tutorial on how to craft skins and edit
the skin.xml file. However, no one with the knowledge has done so. Other users have,
to their credit, produced some really nice skins! So, we know that the knowledge is
out there.
If there is a positive aspect to this, it must be the discipline--- which is
educational---required to achieve a proper goal.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Mark B on 2021-11-11 23:50
Graphic Elements can be edited, sized and position changed from jOrgan itself without
the need to touch the xml file at all. You can do this by going into construct mode.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-12 00:09
Dr. Mark, true and we do these things without ever looking at or seeing the xml file,
which is being edited as we use the GUI of the Console to create a disposition. So,
although we do not "touch" the xml file at all, it is saving the changes that we make,
including placements of elements
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-12 00:50
Regarding how detailed the xml file is, the classic skin (xml/xsd) contains 1385 lines.
The disposition that I use, regularly, has six divisions, approximately, 540 stops,
and the total lines in the xml file are 63289. My guess is that the xml file begins
with information concerning the Keyboards, in Customizer, in jOrgan, since they include
the 'input' which is only specified in the Customizer. I would not know how to edit
this file to achieve visible changes on the GUI Console, that is, the inverse operation
of how we, in Construct Mode, create a disposition. Seemingly, there would be no
advantage to doing this. Knowing how to edit what, in order to achieve the acceptance
of graphic image file elements which are the skin xml xsd is more necessary and useful.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham W on 2021-11-12 17:54
Hi All
I'll have a go at taking on the challenge of "skin xml 101"
The structure of the skin.xml is defined in the .xsd file. You don't need to have anything
to do with this one except to read it to find out what values are allowed. For example,
the "fill" is defined:
<xs:element name="fill">
<xs:annotation>
<xs:documentation>
In which direction to fill this layer when it is smaller than the overall size.
</xs:documentation>
</xs:annotation>
<xs:simpleType>
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:enumeration value="NONE" />
<xs:enumeration value="HORIZONTAL" />
<xs:enumeration value="VERTICAL" />
<xs:enumeration value="BOTH" />
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
</xs:element>
So you can see there are four values allowed for "fill". The .xsd defines everything
you will find in a skin.xml file This info might be useful in a summary table if that
doesn't already exist.
Now we can have a look at a couple of examples from the classic skin xml file. I'll add
comments along the way. They will start with *** and will NOT be in the xml, just in
this explanation. First is the way the "console" (background) is defined.
*** the skin starts with
<skin xmlns="http://jorgan.sourceforge.net/skin" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://jorgan.sourceforge.net/skin ../../jorgan-gui/src/main/xml/skin.xsd">
<name>classic</name>
<styles>
*** and ends with
</styles>
***the first style is for the console
<style> *** start of this style
<anchor>CENTER</anchor> *** anchor the console image to the centre of the window
<fill>NONE</fill> *** use the image as is
<width>0</width> *** don't change it's size
<height>0</height>
<padding> *** do we want space around the outside of this style element?
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left> *** (NB stops will have at least 2 layers- one for when the stop is on
<bottom>0</bottom> *** and one for when it is off.)
<right>0</right>
</padding> *** not in this style
<layers> *** here is the single layer for this style
 *** finished the image
</layers> *** finished the layer
<name>console</name> *** what is it's name in the gui
</style> *** that's the end of the style definition for
*** the console background image.
***Here is the second example. A stop draw knob I'll break up the sections by adding
*** space and only comment to highlight the differences from the console example
<style>
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>NONE</fill>
<width>0</width>
<height>0</height>
<padding>
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left>
<bottom>0</bottom>
<right>0</right>
</padding>
<layers>
<button> *** this is going to be an on/off thing
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>BOTH</fill>
<width>0</width>
<height>0</height>
<padding>
<top>8</top>
<left>8</left>
<bottom>8</bottom>
<right>8</right>
</padding>
<binding>active</binding> *** yep - active. Will respond to a click
<layers>
<composite> *** here we start the "composite" of layers for the "Off"
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>NONE</fill>
<width>0</width>
<height>0</height>
<padding>
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left>
<bottom>0</bottom>
<right>0</right>
</padding>
<layers>

<text> *** this section styles the text on the stop face when "Off"
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>NONE</fill>
<width>64</width>
<height>64</height>
<padding>
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left>
<bottom>0</bottom>
<right>0</right>
</padding>
<binding>name</binding> *** the text used is the name you enter for the stop
<alignment>CENTER</alignment> *** in construction mode
<font>
<name>Arial</name>
<style>0</style>
<size>12</size>
</font>
<color>
<red>0</red>
<green>0</green>
<blue>0</blue>
</color>
<antialiased>true</antialiased>
</text>
*** there is a text and image layers now defined for this "composite"
</layers> *** remember </ means the end of a section
</composite> *** this ends the first "composite" of text and image
<composite> *** now we get the "On" section
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>NONE</fill>
<width>0</width>
<height>0</height>
<padding>
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left>
<bottom>0</bottom>
<right>0</right>
</padding>
<layers>

<text>
<anchor>CENTER</anchor>
<fill>NONE</fill>
<width>75</width> *** stop gets bigger when "On"
<height>75</height>
<padding>
<top>0</top>
<left>0</left>
<bottom>0</bottom>
<right>0</right>
</padding>
<binding>name</binding>
<alignment>CENTER</alignment>
<font>
<name>Arial</name>
<style>1</style>
<size>13</size> *** text is one point size bigger
</font>
<color>
<red>80</red> *** text also changes colour slightly
<green>20</green>
<blue>20</blue>
</color>
<antialiased>true</antialiased>
</text>
</layers>
</composite>
</layers>
</button>
</layers>
<name>stop</name>
</style> *** that's the end for that style!
-------------------------------------------------
I don't know whether this will help anyone. I hope it's near enough correct. Please
correct me if I've made any boo boos; I'm far from expert. I can imagine it would be
possible to write a dedicated editor for skins, I can visualise how it might work but
I know next to nothing about Java programming.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-13 08:00
Hi Julie
I am always interested to read your posts. I am also involved with a couple
of local Theatre Organs.
Do any of the instruments you are involved with have a Z-tronics relay and/or
capture/MIDI system?
I have been able to get jOrgan to replicate most of the function of my local
Christie/Z-tronics(MIDI) system, however I am stuck trying to get the Swell
control working.
The Z-tronics MIDI system encodes all Console functions as Controler Change
messages, effectively used as a Digital signal (On/Off) rather than an Analogue
signal graduated 0-127 we are more familiar with.
A Stop On/Off signal in jOrgan MPL looks like this:
Pedal Octave 8, On - Activate MPL: equal 185, equal 81, equal 8
Pedal Octave 8, Off - Deactivate MPL: equal 185, equal 80, equal 8
I have stops functioning in jOrgan from the real console MIDI files.
equal 185 denotes Channel and CC function
equal 81 denotes ON
equal 80 denotes OFF
equal 8 is the specific stop (range 1 to 64 for each MIDI Channel)
What I can't work out how to get working is the Swell control.
The Console has 10x Reed Switches for each of Main and Solo chambers
Each reed switch is activated by a magnet on the respective Swell shoe
Each reed switch triggers the Z-tronics driver board to open a Swell shutter
blade.
Each reed switch is encoded just like a Stop outlined above.
My question to anyone is:
In jOrgan, how do I link 10 steps of MPL to gradually step the Continuous
Filter function?
Thank you.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Ron B on 2021-11-13 08:07
In Uniflex each shutter can be assigned an analog value, and when that step
on the switch is reached, it changes the analog value to the new value.
Can you implement something similar?
Ron B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-13 08:07
My only success in modifying jOrgan skin.zip files has been to simply
substitute .jpg image files in the .zip package.
I have not altered the code of the reference file in any way.
I don't know how to add an extra image, just simply substitute an Active
and Deactivated image in a working file.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-13 08:55
On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 at 07:08, Ron B wrote:
"In Uniflex each shutter can be assigned an analog value, and when that
step on the switch is reached, it changes the analog value to the new value.
Can you implement something similar?"
Thanks Ron
Ok, next step of working through this.
The current functioning "Continuous Filter" Element in my disposition has
the following two lines of MPL for Main Swell:
Change: equal 191, equal 11, lessEqual 126 | div 126 | get value
Engaging: set 176, set 11, set value | mult 0.8 | add 0.2 | mult volume 127
Let's say the Main Swell messages from the Z-tronics system were this:
UP
equal 185, equal 81, equal 1
equal 185, equal 81, equal 2
equal 185, equal 81, equal 3
equal 185, equal 81, equal 4
equal 185, equal 81, equal 5
equal 185, equal 81, equal 6
equal 185, equal 81, equal 7
equal 185, equal 81, equal 8
equal 185, equal 81, equal 9
equal 185, equal 81, equal 10
DOWN
equal 185, equal 80, equal 10
equal 185, equal 80, equal 9
equal 185, equal 80, equal 8
equal 185, equal 80, equal 7
equal 185, equal 80, equal 6
equal 185, equal 80, equal 5
equal 185, equal 80, equal 4
equal 185, equal 80, equal 3
equal 185, equal 80, equal 2
equal 185, equal 80, equal 1
In jOrgan, do I use an "Activator" Element to somehow link the two?
Where do I "put" each "Activator" if that is what I use?
What "References" "From" and "To" would each Element have?
Thank you
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Ron B on 2021-11-13 09:03
With jOrgan, I have always used pre-made dispositions, done very little
with messages. How would you do it if you were sending midi messages from
0-255 or a smaller range? In Uniflex the purpose was to use values that
would mimic midi values from a pot such as steps of 20 or so, rather
than 1 to 10.
Ron B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-13 11:51
RickW wrote:
"In jOrgan, do I use an "Activator" Element to somehow link the two?"
Hi Rick,
Perhaps I am missing something quite basic here, but my guess is that all
you need to do is play with the MPL.
What about changing the top line to this for UP:
Change: equal 185, equal 81, lessEqual 10 | div 10 | get value
and this for DOWN:
Change: equal 185, equal 80, lessEqual 10 | div 10 | get value
Just realise I am no expert in this.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reverb
From JohnB on 2021-11-13 02:49
At the link below are some articles on the different types of reverb (artificial).
Under the 5 types listed, there are two hyperlinks, one, to Spring and the other,
to Plate.
The article on "Spring" reverb discusses Hammond's invention of Spring reverb for
the organ. The main article deals with the particular parameter settings of reverb
elements (not identifiable in Fluidsynth Reverb or, specifically, adjustable, given
the limitation of the four elements, Room, Width, Damping and Level).
In all of the articles, the same graph is presented which depicts Reverb as the
sequence of the onset of a source signal of loudest amplitude progressing in
diminishing graduation to decay tail. What is termed "Reverb body" occurs,
approximately, half-way in the decay period. It seems that this perception is
what substantiates the concept that "amplitude modulation" is the parameter relative
to "LEVEL." Given this fact, the question I have is whether the problem of
frequency or pitch-relative, cyclical looped playback of the wave file is due to
the size of wave files in a soundfont or whether the concept of "looping" is,
in fact, the problem. Looping is used to produce a steady state in digital sound
production and is, of course, NOT a factor in real-life instruments.
So, while the theory relative to the application of reverb is correct, the fact of
fixed-length, looped wave files, for the purpose of achieving a steady state is
distorted by modulation, not amplitude. I consider amplitude to be fixed degrees
(levels) of loudness whereas, modulation has to do with the cyclical change in
frequency, effecting warp and woof.
The problem with Fluidsynth Reverb LEVEL is that modulation frequency is increased
as amplitude is increased. These two should be completely separate, but are not.
I tried removing the MOD and VIB LFO Frequency settings (MOD LFO Freq. was 4.981
and VIB LFO Freq. was 14.285) in one specific stop, a Blockflute 8', and tried
playing a single note of the stop with Fluidsynth Reverb LEVEL adjustments. The
change of the values of MOD and VIB LFO to 0 did not put an end to the annoying
effect. I, then, set Fluidsynth Reverb LEVEL to Zero and used the Cathedral Preset
of the EAX Console from Creative Labs. There is a perfect steady state with no
annoying modulation of the tone such as with Fluidsynth. So, the problem has
been isolated to the LEVEL element in Fluidsynth Reverb and is NOT caused by any
parameter settings of the wave file in the soundfont. I hope this information
informs our perceptions and that something can be done to change the Fluidsynth 2.2.0
LEVEL algorithm, since that is, definitely, the problem.
https://ledgernote.com/columns/mixing-mastering/mixing-with-reverb/
John B MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Editing Skins (was XML and parsing internal structures)
From Graham W on 2021-11-13 15:16
RickW wrote:
“My only success in modifying jOrgan skin.zip files has been to simply substitute
.jpg image files in the .zip package.
I have not altered the code of the reference file in any way.
I don't know how to add an extra image, just simply substitute an Active and
Deactivated image in a working file."
Say, for example, you wanted to add an new, extra stop image...
Open the skin.xml in a text editor
Find the code for an existing stop (Hint: its image filenames will point to
stop knob/tab images)
Copy from <style> to </style> (include the style tags) for the stop
Paste into a new line after </style>. You now have a DUPLICATE of your original stop.
Make sure your new images are in the folder and rename the image filenames in the new
pasted section to your new images
Find the <name>....</name> in the new section and change the name.
Save the xml file
(I don't zip my skin folders)
In my Wurli skin I have red, white yellow, black for ordinary stop tabs and redbr,
whitebr and blackbr for back rail tabs
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-13 16:22
I have no experience with Z-tronics other than I know the name.
Most of my work is with Uniflex, Which started out as devtronix. That is a
proprietary system, and well worth the investment.
I also worked with the Obsolete Emutek system which was upgraded to Uniflex a
decade or so back. Emutek had no record/playback so before the upgrade I
created record/playback for Emutek. I used the surplus Emutek boards to create
a simple Wire to MIDI translator.
Emutek was basically what is called a Programmable Logic controller. Normally
these are used for industrial control. The bus is based on rs485 twisted pair.
Older apple users will know this as Appletalk. It was fairly easy to figure out
the frames of the Emutek as these were clocked at 500000 baud. The frame time
was something like 25.4uS. Each hardware board in the frame started with the
high bit set. The designer seems to base it on MIDI. There are 16 possible
input boards. All daisy chained as a large shift register. The first key prefix
is 90 and the last is 9F. There are 16 bytes that follow, which correspond to
128 bits of data. 0x9F is a special case. This channel sends data to the
chambers in a sort of program logic language. The roms were not protected, so I
reverse engineered the simple logic language. I re-wrote this to run using an
Arduino processor.
There was a simple Windows DoS basic program which created these tables.
I find this runs fine under DOSBox.
What the program, did, was it created a bit mask for each 8 bits. These were
then converted into something like MIDI notes through a rotating bit mask as the
data is not always byte aligned. By design or coincidence, there are 'Arduino'
examples and tutorials that work much the same way, using the same '165 and
'595 hardware chips where shift registers are explained.
To record the organ, I simply captured each frame, which used a token 0xC0
(again I think a MIDI reference.) Playing the song was as simple as playing the
frames. I did not bother to do the conversion in real time. Instead I wrote a
program that took the raw binary streams and converted that either to a Uniflex
track file (using the devtronix format.) To make something that could play I
converted the binary to jOrgan MIDI with the stop names as text.
Expression became a bear to deal with. Something I have only really been able
to work with in the last few months. Old consoles use banks of contact switches.
These in effect are simply on and off switches. The implementation is either as
a knife switch or a roller with an angled wire. Where the problem comes is that
none of this is linear. There may be 24 or 32 contacts on the roller, but only
six shade blades. So only 6 wires may connect to the 24 pins. Devtronix is
clever in that they can read a POT and give it weighted values. I have seen swell
shoes where resistor ladders are connected to the contacts to give a semblance of
a cheap D2A and a single analog voltage out.
My conversion code is full of rotating bit masks, weighted lookup tables as well as
quantization thresholds. I think some of this is close to an AI or expert database,
which I have sort of trained with data from a whole bunch of organ definitions.
None is really satisfactory. For the most part it does work, but it takes trial and
error to find the step points.
The whole arduino sketch is about 400 lines. If there is interest I can go into more
specifics how the raw bits from the shift register are converted to MIDI controller
11 or MIDI controller 7.
-julie
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-13 18:23
I suspect that the fact that my edited photos for image files, placed in the
skins folder, did not work was due to some miniscule, size difference in the
dimensions which did not conform to the description in the xml file. Not
knowing how to edit it to make it accept my image files, I gave up.
The older we get, the more acceptant we are of the "path of least resistance."
What has been provided in terms of classic, classic-modified, modern, modern-
modified, theatre and Hammond skins, are inclusive of everything that is
necessary to good functionality.
What I thought would be useful in terms of a tutorial for editing skins was a
complete document of the requirements of dimensions for the elements and how to
edit the skin.xml. This has never been made.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-15 07:51
I had completely forgot that the jOrgan skins also use an XML structure. I can see
from my code scripts that at one time I had worked this out.
Recently on another project (Decoding NASA mars images from 1971) I needed to read
and write PNG files directly with postscript (So I could read and parse the metadata.)
I see that the icons in the skins are all PNG files.
One of the real failings in a theater aka vTpo. Is the lack of a way to rotate the
tab on the layout. I was not aware that MidiTzer could do this.
It could be done easily with postscript as text can follow an arbitrary 'path.' This
is done through something called a spline curve. There are two flavors once cubic one
quadratic. These in turn use a concept called knots or control points. I suspect
digital audio filters do similar things, in a three rather than two dimensional space.
When the curve is rendered it is divided into line segments. The number of these
segments between the endpoint determines how many straight lines are drawn using
plxels. This is also how fonts are stored. Most graphic libraries contain these
spline primitives for creating fonts. At lower resolutions these fonts are converted
to bitmaps (called hints) Even the simplistic drivers for embedded control displays
like used on 'Arduino' have such primitives. These primitives are also used for
drawing non Romanized western texts.
To place a letter onto a page something called an 'Alpha' channel is used. This is a
bitmask, what is transparent to the background. GIF and PNG support this when
treating the graphic as an ICON.
I see the skins use TrueType fonts. I tested these at Apple decades ago. Amazing
what one can forget after a few decades.
In postscript (and the related Apple Quartz rendering system) there is a graphics
primitive called a transformation matrix. This does all the rotation and scaling
of the graphic (or text.) The coefficients of this matrix are from a set of well
defined linear equations. Really all the user is concerned about are location,
scale and rotation. location is usually in world coordinates. Scale, is done from
0 to 100 or 0 to 1. Rotation in steps of 90. If negative numbers are used, mirrored
or upside down text is produced.
What is seemingly magic about these matrices is they can be combined. This is all
done in the GPU hardware.
There are two ways to determine if a mouse click has taken place on text or an Icon.
(abstractly they are the same.) The more common way is to use a region. This is an
outline of the graphic as expressed with line segments. One simply traces this outline
and checks if the point is inside or outside the box. If there are holes in the outline,
it makes a difference if the steps are done in a clockwise or counter clockwise order.
This method works really well with raster graphics as one can step from pixel to pixel
creating the 'region chain.' This could be a case where the transform matrix is unity,
where world coordinates are the same as device coordinates.
The other method (which is harder to follow, but fast in hardware) is to reduce the
graphic in scale to a single pixel at the device location using the transform matrix.
(Note this pixel is a finite infinity, all the information is still there, it is just
lower than the resolution of the display) The transform is also applied to the mouse
coordinates. If the mouse is in that pixel, then the icon or text is selected.
This works better with device resolution independent graphics. I find this much
harder to debug. Especially when working with screens, windows, lines or blocks of text
and graphics, all which have their own transformation matrix.
I am not sure how jOrgan (and the underlying java) does the rendering and hit testing.
If It can deal with hit testing inside or outside the alpha channel mask then it might
only be a matter of creating the right PNG with a rotated alpha mask.
Dealing with the Truetype text that overlays the stop tab graphic might be a bit more.
Fonts are rendered to the display by using the transform matrix to create a bitmap where
one side is one pixel high and as wide as the glyph is to be rendered in pixels. This
forms a line buffer. (when rendering a page the whole line is buffered.)
This transformation matrix is then applied to the page as a window and the page drawn
into it. Such might seem slow as the font, glyph or page has to be drawn as many times
as there are pixels high. In practice this is all done by hardware acceleration.
I suppose if arbitrary text rotations can not be done, then such could be created where
the stop and the rotated tab are overlaid in the bitmap aka PNG space. Such would also
break the device independent nature of the display interface.
Using PNG graphics for each tab would restrict the editing as the text would be bound to
the background for rotated tabs. Still such might make for an interesting experiment.
I do agree that there really should be better documentation for the skin XML as there does
not seem to be a GUI editor for such. For those of us who do work with XML the format is
easy to figure out. There is a lot of repetition in it. Where the keys have a one to many
relation or vice versa. I see that I automated a lot of this in my code. In practice all
of this is simply what is called a "relational database" jOrgan and it's internal
structure basically acts as a syntax checker.
Typically an XML will have a template that describes this syntax. (I know MIDI XML does
and that is where I first ran across these templates.) The first comment in the XML header
is supposed to be a reference to the website where the format of the syntax is defined
(why this comment usually starts with the word com.) I see that the jOrgan XML does not
do this. I also see that the skin.xml does not have the XML version control tags either.
At one time I was going to write a jOrgan skin XML parser, I may have done so and never
finished it as I needed to fix my PNG parser first. I never finished the MIDI XML parser
either.
It would be trivial to add tags to the skin XML for a rotation and bounding clipping region
(which can be created from the Alpha channel of the PNG) and text rotation. There already
is an anchor point. So all one would have to do is set a transform matrix to this anchor
point and apply the scale and rotation. This could also have the advantage that the
background images can be selected or even rendered on the fly for the best resolution that
the current display screen can handle.
Most of this is Academic. I have more things to do than I have time for. (Like help my
Dad setup Hauptwerk VI we installed yesterday so he can play Christmas music on the
Paramount320.)
-julie MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
new user
From RickW on 2021-11-19 22:29
Hello List
There is a chap, Lee Harworth, posting on jOrgan on Facebook.
I have suggested he email the list, but he says he has not been approved to join?
He seems to be a new user trying to work with a disposition file for which I suspect
he doesn't have at least the Skin file, possibly more missing.
Today he has posted saying that he can't add references to his disposition and that
someone has told him he will need to write code.
Can we at least get him on the list, then see if we can help?
As I recall, there is no coding required in jOrgan to create a disposition?
I am pretty rusty, it has been more than 10 years since I have done any deep initial
disposition work.
Regards
Rick
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-20 06:57
On 2021-11-19 22:29, RickW wrote:
"There is a chap, Lee Harworth, posting on jOrgan on Facebook. I have suggested
he email the list, but he says he has not been approved to join?"
Hi Rick,
He sent an email to the List on 10th January 2021. It comes up in a search of the
Mailing List archive. That may not prove that he is a member - it depends on whether
Sven got notification of his post (as an unregistered member) and decided to let it
through. His name there appears as "Lee Haworth". Perhaps that was a typo. But I can
say this: that archive entry seems to give him the email address"mayfield_deltic@ho..."
You can guess the rest. If you try to engage him about registration, you should ask
him if he is trying to use that email address, or some other one.
I may have had a brief email correspondence with him at the time. Or perhaps I saw his
mention of a problem registering on the Facebook Group, and tried to help him with it.
I read your very patient assistance to him there re his trouble with that disposition,
which I think was one of BCA's.
There certainly is no need for a jOrgan user to do any coding. I think that Lee is
someone who tries to do things without putting in the work needed to find out how
to do it.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Lee H on 2021-11-20 08:01
This is not a case of "I could not be bothered" to learn programming, I have
tried to get on a course to get the skills to be able to do it but the course
providers were extremely selective about who could participate and I was not
able to do the course. As a result I am not able to write a config to make the
parameters and dependencies recognised by the host software before trying to
assemble the interface which was the approach recommended by software
programmers as it eliminates any potential issues with other problems
emerging. Going off the instructions there were other items under the
elements tab that did not appear after I had added the skin and the soundfont
file, I can't use the configuration from another disposition as there were
none for that soundfont so the ideal way would be to manually write the
configuration to make sure all the dependencies are listed. But as I am not
qualified to do that, I have had to rely on JOrgan to list them but this has
not been the case as the box to add references constantly shows up empty every
time I try to add any references.
As for the issue with Hauptwerk that had no MIDI connection and none could be
established, I had asked for advice on how to get it to work but the recommended
midi connection software only contained support for consoles and not for general
raw midi signals. I searched for a connection patch but this apparently cost
extra money. This was not a case that I could not be bothered to add it, I did
not see why I had to pay extra money on something I had already paid for that was
not working after the update.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-20 10:53
On 2021-11-20 08:01, Lee H wrote:
"the box to add references constantly shows up empty every time I try to add any
references."
Lee,
Thank you for posting. I think the fact that it got through immediately indicates
that you ARE registered with the Mailing List, and that if you have had problems
with the SourceForge log-in or with sending posts, you may have been using some
other email address at the time. I am pleased to hear that you are prepared to put
in effort to get things to work, and the wrong conclusion I had drawn has been
corrected. Realise that email or Facebook communication is very poor at enabling
us to identify what is really going on.
Regarding adding references in jOrgan, when you are in Construct Mode and are using
the References view with an element selected, and you then click on the ADD icon,
you will (potentially) be provided with TWO boxes - one for references TO and one
for references FROM. Some elements will require both kinds of references, and some
others will require only one. Sven has designed the process so that if the element
in question requires only one type of reference, the other box will be empty. You
can access either box by the clicking on "BACK" or "NEXT". Please try this and then
let us know whether this has solved one of your problems.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-20 11:21
Hi Lee
Good to see you have made it to the list.
Here there are more active jOrgan users who can contribute to your questions
in different ways. Some may click better than others.
As I understand what you are trying to do, I think your first step should be to
"import" the Soundfont. This will automatically build the "sound" connections
and give you some initial Elements to Reference.
I would suggest you need to be very comfortable with using a working jOrgan
disposition before trying to build your own.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-20 11:22
This is not a Hauptwerk forum.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-20 12:33
I would be fascinated to know what course you attempted to attend?
I can't overstate it enough, that you MUST start with a currently working jOrgan
disposition, and preferably supported by its builder still active in the jOrgan
community.
Until you know how to connect a console via MIDI and use the common features in
jOrgan, you will not have the technical base on which to build a custom jOrgan
disposition.
On top of that, you will need a traditional organ builder's understanding of an
organ "relay".
jOrgan is the only virtual organ software that gives you the tools to build your
own virtual organ without coding, but you still need very solid fundamental
understanding of the workings of a real organ and be a competent user of already
built jOrgan dispositions before embarking on building your own.
https://jorgan.info/page2.html
This link gives a listing of available functional jOrgan disposition packages,
many still supported by their creators.
Until you can master a few of these you have no hope trying to build your own
disposition.
Pick one to start and ask as many questions as you want.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie P on 2021-11-20 15:54
I myself got a bit carried away last week.
As said this is not a Hauptwerk forum. However the same MIDI hardware can run both.
One system can also be used to enhance the other, or create additional stop jams or
split things into multiple touch screens or physical interfaces.
I like to use the Arduino Leonardo to scan the stop and keys. There are many
tutorials on You tube that show how to do this. Especially for drum kits.
Arduinos can also be used to create display indicators and control Stop action
magnet coils.
If programming arduino is too complex xny old MIDI keyboard will work. Stops are
a bit more tricky.
Most modern OSs have what is called inter application MIDI. I am not as familiar
with the Windows world calls this.
Mac have a built in control panel called "Audio MIDI setup." Under utilities.
There is a real nice free download for something called rtp MIDI that works on
Windows and gives the same interface as the mac.
Linux uses a program called Jack. I believe there are versions of Jack for both
Mac and windows.
It is important to understand MIDI 'channels.' There are 16 of these. This is not
enough, so on the hardware side there is something called 'Ports.' On the playable
file side there is something called 'tracks.' "Tracks" are really no concern here.
Ports can have one to 16 channels. Ports can be physical or virtual depending on
the hardware. The 5 pin connector is physical. USB, Ethernet, and Firewire can
have multiple 'Ports' A physical MIDI has 3 bytes of data per message. Virtual
MIDI have 4 bytes of data. Sometimes the port is called cable number. Much of this
terminology is left over from when wires were physically connected to a switch board.
There is also the concept of something called a 'Patch' or 'Bank' This is a
collection of 16 memory slots. Each of these slots contain an instrument or
sound. There is a collection of 128 sounds called General MIDI, this is made
of 16 banks of 16 sounds with specific voices. The first one is always piano.
Bank number 128 is a special case for drums. These are usually on track 9,10,or 11.
To a programmer MIDI numbers start with zero 0 and are often written in hexidecimal
notation. A user sees a decimal number that starts with one 1. jOrgan handles all
this internally matching Banks and channels through a special midi programming
language (MPL) The only time a user needs to understand channels is when they
connect hardware.
Typically each keyboard is on it's own channel. This is usually set by a switch on
the keyboard. Sometimes a special manufactures program is needed to change this.
Stops can be done with hardware. More practical is to use a touch screen. (or click
on the icon with a mouse.) That way one only needs to connect a keyboard.
There is another way to control stops. This is called a Non Registered Parameter
Number or NRPN. Most of these are proprietary, which is why they are not
registered. However it is possible to figure these out. Allen and Hauptwork use
this system. There are hardware add on boards that can encode and decode NRPNs to
create a combination action that actually moves. Finding these can be tricky, but
the charts for most common organs do exist. It is also possible to get these by
activating the switch or recording it, then viewing the resulting MIDI file with an
events editor. NRPNs are made from 3 3 byte midi messages and are 14 bits in size.
There is also something called a System Exclusive. These are arbitrary blocks of
tagged Meta data. In theory the manufacturer is supposed to document them. In
practice they do not. Microsoft handles sysex differently than does other systems.
They can contain any amount of data including images like TIFF or JPEG. They can
also contain WAV audio samples. Most MIDI can be represented in 3 or 4 bytes.
Microsoft chains these 3 byte blocks to store the Sysex. Other systems allocate a
buffer of the size of the raw data. jOrgan does not use system exclusives unless it
needs to control hardware intended for Hauptwerk.
A Sysex can also represent a binary map of what stops are on or off. This sort of
system is rare. I think Rogers consoles do this.
Stops can also be represented by MIDI 'notes' on one of the 16 channels. This way
a simple 'keyboard' decoder can be used. It is possible to get an old scrap midi
keyboard and replace the switches with double acting tabs. These usually use
something called a 'diode matrix.' So one has to be careful to keep the diodes,
and make sure they are in the right direction.
Once the hardware is set, then it is simply a matter of connecting things together.
Above I mentioned "General MIDI" . This is 128 sound samples. Most VPOs map the
ranks as close as they can. Each instance of fluidsynth can define 128 sounds,
but only 16 can play at the same time. Again jOrgan does this internally.
All the user needs to know is the bank number for a given 'Rank.'
This can be found by reading the definition in the construct mode. The MPL will
indicate what this is when the 'Messages' window is open in the construct mode.
The numbers are in User MIDI and start with one. The number that follows 176 is
the bank or instrument, the number that follows 192 is which of the sounds are used.
In jOrgan these can be added, subtracted and multiplied. There are also some
predefined variable 'database keys' like pitch and volume(expression.) Sadly this is
not well documented, but the 'language' can be figured out reading multiple
dispositions and comparing them.
The number 144 is an important one. This is what plays a given note and how loud
it is. In hex this is 0x90. The second part of that number in hex tells what
channel the note is on. So 144 is channel 1 and 145 is channel 2. The nice thing
about jOrgan is that this can be setup through a wizard, where one simply toggles
the switch and it reads and calculates the MPL which can be viewed in the 'messages'
window frame. No programming needed.
This information can also be found in the XML and copied from one organ to another.
It is important though that only the data that is shown in the messages be copied.
The rest of the xml is how it all connects together. This is better done in the
definition editor 'construct' menu. There is a many to many relation between a
'rank', a stop, and a keyboard. Which is why it is best to use the construct menu,
If a 'skin' is used then it is best to open the 'skin' window. This displays the
choices graphically. Creating and editing the skin internals, can take months if
not years to work out all the relationships. Many of these graphics are shared
between the VPO apps as they are simply PNG files. Usually there is an active 'on'
version and an 'off' version. Some also have animated 'frames' like pedal or swell
shade indicators. Much easier for most to simply click and drag them around.
Typically no real programming is needed. In practice the only coding that is done
is to find the database keys and what values they affect. Once the relationship is
understood, it is mostly copy and paste, or search and replace to change or create
a new organ definition.
-julie MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
velocity
From Jan F on 2021-11-20 17:52
Hi all,
According to the "freedictionary" Velocity = Rapidity or speed of motion; swiftness.
MIDI translates that to attenuation, volume, gain or whatever you may call that.
What about a mechanical wind driven pipe organ?
Does half pressing a key and leading less wind to the pipe also not involve pitch,
probably even more than attenuation?
Fully pressing a key result in full attenuation.
So velocity for pipe-organ exists, but also how deep do you press a key.
How to translate that?
Today I am not always at home. So excuse me if response delays.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-11-20 23:20
Jan, if you have ever disassembled a "velocity-sensitive" midi keyboard you will
see a single mechanism of two rubber things that look like inverted, fat funnels,
one taller than the other, so that when the key is depressed, there are two pressure
measurements taken as the key is depressed. So, "velocity," in this case is, really,
a pressure measurement, force, whether it translates to attenuation or volume, is
debatable. To some extent, you might compare the action of a mechanical tracker-
action organ to the "velocity sensitivity," but once a key is fully depressed,
the wind flows, full-force, into the pipe and achieves the full volume or loudness.
John B
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-21 02:32
John,
Thanks for your explanation. Velocity using keyboard as you state works like a Piano.
Your remark: "To some extent, you might compare the action of a mechanical
tracker-action organ to the "velocity sensitivity," but once a key is fully depressed,
the wind flows, full-force, into the pipe and achieves the full volume or loudness."
Needs a remark. When you press a key in very much slow motion and the key is fully
pressed volume will be zero. That is the way a Piano acts. That is the way our
keyboards act. As you state a fully pressed key on a mechanical wind driven pipe
organ gives always full volume.
Because we cannot see how deep a key is pressed there is one way we can use velocity
emulating wind driven mechanical organs:
Velocity can be related to the speed of reaching state fully pressed and defines
duration of the attack?
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From King Hedonist on 2021-11-21 05:40
For a mechanical tracker organ, "velocity" is related to the intensity of the attack.
A high intensity attack will open the pallet more quickly, causing a different initial
speech than with a slower attack, yes?
Regards,
Dan
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-21 07:22
Hi all, how to emulate that?
Kind regards, Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Tom C on 2021-11-21 07:30
That's what the tracker backers would tell you -- but in over 60 years of playing and
building organs, I have found very little incidence of that - to the point where the
idea is almost mythological. (preparing for attacks because of what I just said).
It would seem to some people that a slow attack with the fingers would bring a slow
attack in pipe speech -- but the fact is, that the instant the pallet seal is broken,
the rush of wind into the channel pushes the pallet completely down, thereby negating
any type of note regulation. Organists will swear that it does, but that is all in
their imaginative heads.
The one advantage to tracker action is longevity.
Tom C
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-11-21 07:56
Hi Tom..
...my may years of Pipe Organ servicing... including tracker instruments...
agrees with you.
Your analysis in my opinion is correct.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-11-21 09:21
The "velocity" factor of a MIDI keyboard is timing, not pressure. The slightly different
heights of the two silicone pads gives a separation of the contacts as the key travels
down. There is of course some factor of force involved in the movement and the physical
resistance of the silicone, but the electronic measurement is time delay.
Electronic measurement of force would be factors more expensive per note.
MIDI Aftertouch is different again
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Roy Radford on 2021-11-21 09:36
Hi, Rick,
Many moons ago I used to design oscilloscopes. Some of the shift controls
worked on a 'press harder, go faster' basis. This was done quite cheaply with a series
of rings in the tracks of the PCB, progressively bridged by a conical piece of conductive
rubber, the harder you pressed the more rings it bridged, sending a stronger signal to
the shift circuitry.
Have fun,
Roy. (UK)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Tom C on 2021-11-21 10:10
Marc A wrote:
"my may years of Pipe Organ servicing... including tracker instruments... agrees with you.
Your analysis in my opinion is correct."
Thanks, Marc -- it is amazing how many odd ideas abound in the organ world. I have discussed
this with organists over and over again -- and, being one myself, have tried to see if this
is indeed possible. Yes, if you hold the key between your thumb and finger, and prevent the
key from depressing immediately once the seal is broken, some sort of variation in speech may
be realized. The variations do not, in any sense of the word, remain equal from key to key,
so cannot be predicted. Further, the organ is not played in that manner. Nevertheless,
there are many who swear they can hear or feel the difference. I admire their tenacity, but
long ago learned simply to discount their accuracy.
Enjoy a great Thanksgiving.
Tom
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-21 19:32
Hi all,
So the use of velocity does not make sense emulating a mechanical wind driven pipe organ.
Your midi device records the moment of note off and note on and therefore the intensity.
The attack part of your sample represents speaking of the pipe.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan F on 2021-11-21 19:40
Hi all,
Indeed the only point -except attack, speaking of a pipe- can be delay.
This delay is recorded by your midi device and can even be negative as shown below:
TIMESTAMP IN PORT STATUS DATA1 DATA2 CHAN NOTE EVENT
19265 1 -- 144 36 50 1 C 2 Note On
19900 1 -- 144 38 80 1 D 2 Note On
19978 1 -- 144 36 0 1 C 2 Note Off
20609 1 -- 144 38 0 1 D 2 Note Off
Or positive:
TIMESTAMP IN PORT STATUS DATA1 DATA2 CHAN NOTE EVENT
19265 1 -- 144 36 50 1 C 2 Note On
19900 1 -- 144 38 80 1 D 2 Note On
19978 1 -- 144 36 0 1 C 2 Note Off
20609 1 -- 144 38 0 1 D 2 Note Off
So, perfection does not exist.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-11-21 23:01
I'm going to look at the sample recordings I made of a tracker action organ, when I can
find what I did with them. I recorded both slow and fast key presses, but at two different
places in the church, whether this makes a difference, I don't know.
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc A on 2021-11-22 07:48
Greetings Tom...
...I thought that perhaps one further observation might
be interesting.
Any pipe chest with a "expansion box" on top of the pallet ... to my ears... makes for
cleaner pipe speech than a, say, direct electric action.
I would be interested in your thoughts.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Daniel D on 2021-11-22 05:55
Tom C wrote:
"the instant the pallet seal is broken, the rush of wind into the channel pushes the
pallet completely down, thereby negating any type of note regulation."
Thank you for your response. This makes much more sense than what I've been told.
Regards,
Daniel
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Tom C on 2021-11-22 09:19
Marc A wrote:
"Any pipe chest with a "expansion box" on top of the pallet ... to my ears... makes for
cleaner pipe speech than a, say, direct electric action."
Yes, that's true. I installed AEolian-Skinner organs for several years, and those chests
had expansion joints between the top of the chest and the bottom of the toe board, which
helped quite a lot with speech. I still use them in my organs to this day.
MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomaskirche Leipzig Sauer Organ VPO Disposition
From Chris P on 2021-11-22 06:45
Hi, All
I have create a new disposition of the Sauer organ in Thomaskirche, Leipzig.
The console I have laid out in "English" style as I am not familiar with Sauer consoles.
Perhaps somebody could explain them for me!
At the moment there is only a Jack back end disposition.
It can be downloaded from https://app.mediafire.com/093nidaesurpc.
Chris Pearson
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-22 07:53
Chris P wrote:
"I have create a new disposition of the Sauer organ in Thomaskirche,
Leipzig."
Hi Chris,
Thank you for this new disposition. This must involve a large download. Could you please
tell us the size of the soundfont download? Also, are they Sauer samples which you have
used, or is it a case of reproducing the stop names but using other sources for the samples?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-11-23 00:32
Hi, John
The sf2 file is 566,201 KB. I will compress it if anyone has a copy of sfArk,
or knows where I can download it, (lost my copy). It appears to be no longer
available for download, although there are a number of decompressors.
The soundfont contains a number of ranks from Piotr Grabowski's Skrzatusz Sauer
organ samples with his kind permission , which I have processed. The remainder
are from freeware/shareware samples.
Regards
Chris Pearson
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pascal C on 2021-11-23 07:04
Good afternoon, i'm using this disposition (with jOrgan beta 4.0) and added reverbertian to it.
Drawback is latency.
Interested with this update, many thanks to provide us this.
There is a version of sFarck there : "https://sfark-soundfont-compression.apponic.com/"
musical regards
Pascal
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P on 2021-11-23 22:01
Hi, Pascal
Thank you
I don't have any detectable latency, using jOrgan v3.20, other than I would probably
expect from my experience of years of playing a badly maintained tracker action organ.
The link for sFark is broken. :-(
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Denis on 2021-11-24 02:31
Hi Chris
I can't seem to get the sound font file to download - all the other files downloaded
without issue. Maybe it's a size issue. I tried two different browsers, same result.
Regards,
Dennis
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-24 07:01
Chris P wrote:
"The link for sFark is broken. :-( "
Chris,
I did a Google search on Apponics, and there were poor ratings mostly, regarding trustworthiness.
No ratings that I noticed actually called it a scam site, but it certainly wasn't promising.
Have a look for yourself. It may be a good idea to do a security scan on your computer if you
tried to download the sfArk Setup.
I prefer not to use sfArk these days in compiling the jOrgan archive, as it is becoming unknown.
7-zip does a good job of compressing soundfonts, although not as good as sfArk. It is free, and
is available for Windows and Linux.
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris P via jOrgan-user on 2021-11-27 00:50
Hi, All
I have had it drawn to my attention that the sf2 file for this VPO could be improved!
And rightly so. Thank you, Jan.
The Aeoline rank needed cleaning, so after it's come back from the launderette I've
uploaded it on it's own, for those who are familiar with Viena/Polyphone just replace
the original with this.
More information can be found here for this rank,
https://web.archive.org/web/20190113224621/http://www.organstops.org/a/Aeoline.html
For everyone else, I have uploaded a complete revised sf2 file, both compressed (sfArk)
and uncompressed.
The link is https://app.mediafire.com/h58r3lrjacm5i
This is the link for sfArk and it's decompressors for both Windows and OSX.
https://web.archive.org/web/20071012013925/http://www.melodymachine.com:80/sfark.htm
Regards
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-11-27 14:33
Hi Chris,
I tried the new disposition, but I could not get the skin to work. I suspected there was
something wrong with the zipped skin file, so I uncompressed it to view its contents,
and what that produced was the unzipped folder which you have also provided. I installed
that instead of the .zip file, and it now worked.
The simple solution is to modify the disposition file so that the unzipped folder is
expected instead of the zipped file. Then save the disposition and upload it to replace
the existing one. I suggest that you delete the .zip file from the download page,
because as it stands it just will not work.
If you want to put up a correct zipped skin file, the only way I know of doing that is
to open the skin folder, select all its files (holding down CTRL while you do that),
then right-click on the lot and compress them into a zip file. I believe you will be
given the opportunity to name that file appropriately. This is quite a bit of work,
but it is the only way to bring your disposition into the standard jOrgan way of
presenting a skin as a zipped file. In other words, my simple solution above is not
really to be recommended.
It's good to see that you had success in tracking down a download site for the sfArk
program. Do you know that it is possible to use sfArk to create a self-uncompressing
.exe file instead of the normal .sfArk file? If you do that, all the user has to do is
double-click on that .exe file, and they soon have what they need. We can't assume
they will all manage to track down the sfArk download. (Of course they may
understandably be wary of clicking on an unknown .exe file!)
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Using Switch to monitor midi activity
From Pascal C on 2021-12-07 11:09
Hello,
I'm using jOrgan version 4 beta with a few dispositions with success and sound pleasure.
I would like to find how monitoring of midi message from a midi channel (equal a one of
the keyboard of an organ) could be configured.
For example with JL-LCA-StNicolai-AAbenraa disposition, there are a"switch" named LED-**
per keyboard. When a keyboard send a message, LED on the image is flashing. But the
LED flashing is not the one of the corresponding keyboard. When looking in the
disposition, there are the following :
=> Where to locade the picture for the pedal
" <console-locationReference id="65650">
<x>30</x>
<y>10</y>
</console-locationReference>"
=> image to use, in the case the picture of a LED and the condition to activate/deactivate
the LED
"<switch id="65650">
<name>LED-PED</name>
<description></description>
<references/>
<messages>
<switch-activate>equal 145, greater 0, greater 0</switch-activate>
<switch-deactivate>equal 145, greater 0, equal 0</switch-deactivate>
<switch-deactivate>equal 129, greater 0, </switch-deactivate>
</messages>
<style>warningNameless</style>
<zoom>1.0</zoom>
<active>false</active>
<duration>-1</duration>
</switch>"
How is the midi channel of a keyboard identified ?
Thanks for the support
Regards
Pascal
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-08 06:52
On 2021-12-07 11:09, Pascal C wrote:
"How is the midi channel of a keyboard identified ?"
Hi Pascal,
The MIDI Channel numbers go from 1 to 16, as you know.
But MIDI identifies these as 0-15.
Think 144 + X (Note ON), and 128 + X (Note OFF).
So 144 would be 144 + 0 i.e. Channel 1.
And 145 would be 144 + 1 i.e. Channel 2.
So your Pedal MIDI Channel is Channel 2.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-12-08 10:01
This appears to me to be html script direct from the raw disposition file?
To me, the greatest benefit of jOrgan over all other virtual organ software is
the GUI (Graphical User Interface) not just for playing a jOrgan disposition,
but also for analysing, editing and creating dispositions (Construct Mode).
Having created what I consider to be a fairly complex jOrgan disposition
(effectively 4 manuals + Pedals & 270 Stops albeit highly unified), I have
never needed to look at the raw html.
Are you able to find this "Element" its "Properties" and "References" in
jOrgan "Construct" Mode?
All this you have shown here should be easy to find visually, and any editing
you do would not need worry about missing any of the syntax characters or layout.
A trap for young players is that the jOrgan inbuilt MIDI monitoring of MIDI
messages shows the MIDI code numbers with channel numbering starting at 1, but
the activation codes that need to be entered into the Disposition need to be
numbered with Channel 1 as 0.
Regards
Rick MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan 4.X
From Les K on 2021-12-08 00:55
I have just successfully ported over my large theater organ disposition from
jOrgan 3.20 on an Win7 machine to 3.21.1 on a Win 10 machine. (More on what
I encountered and the fixes later, in case others are doing the same or are
just interested). I have seen that a 4.0 Beta is available and might like to
try it, but don't want to get rid of my 3.21 which is working well. If I
install 4.0 Beta, will that wipe out or replace 3.21.1? I've been doing this
long enough that I should know, but I'm checking to make sure. New computer,
new OS and new jOrgan version is a lot to swallow at once! BTW What ARE the
differences/improvements in 4.0? (Sorry I don't follow ALL the posts)
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-08 12:10
Les, the thing you have to be careful about with 3.21.1 is the benefit of
Fluidsynth reverb in that version. Some think it is the better version,
and upgrading to 4.0 Beta with Fluidsynth 2.0 might not be an improvement.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-08 16:35
Les K wrote:
“I have just successfully ported over my large theater organ disposition
from jOrgan 3.20 on an Win7 “ machine to 3.21.1 on a Win 10 machine.”
Hi Les,
I was going to send in a post saying much the same as JohnB has said about
jOrgan 4.0. However, the fact that you are using Windows 10 may alter the
situation. There is a very long thread on the jOrgan-User Link webpage
(https://jorgan.info/link.html) which discusses “Problems with Fluidsynth
Backends on Windows 10”. (That is the thread title). To save you from
wading through all of that, here is an excerpt from one of my posts there:
“The one clear result I came up with in these recent tests is that for this
particular entry-level computer that I was using, if one wants to use a
backend instead of the native dsound, the only version of jOrgan I could
get to work was 4.0 Beta 1 (released only in 64-bit). JohnB and RickW had
slightly more success, namely with jOrgan 3.21 or 3.21.1 , but that success
would still have to be called “patchy”, and does not seem to line up with
what GrahamG was expecting.
There is Windows 11 just around the corner. I feel that with any Windows
version later than 8.1, the only safe way to run jOrgan and be confident
of having good latency, is to use a computer with a very capable CPU,
and not depend on the backends at all. Or if backends cannot be avoided,
then jOrgan 4.0 beta 1 (or later) should be used, but with no guarantee
for multi-channel audio except the normal 2-channel stereo.”
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-12-10 01:19
Thanx to Dr. Mark Bugeja, John Reimer and John Beach for their informative answers to
my questions about versions 4.X and related matters. As far as back ends go, I only
recently learned that they are intended to reduce latency only and do not boost sound
quality as such. I thought that might have been true when I did an A-B comparison with
Dsound. It was mentioned in posts that the best way to avoid latency issues without
resorting to back ends is to have a strong computer. I have always built and used gamer-
level computers for the organ since I originally used Hauptwerk and was led to believe
it can be very CPU intensive. Latency is no issue on this organ. It easily handles the
Widor Toccata or more likely for me, some really quick blues riffs or Rick Wakenam solos
from the Progressive Rock group Yes. I can't outplay it, maybe Cameron Carpenter could,
but I don't think he's coming over any time soon :-)
3.21.1 is working just fine for me now, so I think I'll stick with it. I do want to
mention some pitfalls I ran into when transferring a disposition from 3.20 to 3.21.1 as
others may run into the same things:
1. The designation for inputs and outputs in elements such as Fluidsynth sound,
connectors, swells, generic sounds, SAMS controllers and the like are different than in
3.20. They now have numbers after them. What was Audiobox USB 96 in 3.20 may now be
Audiobox USB 96 #12. The problem arises in that BOTH old and new nomenclature appears
in the selection dropdown boxes. You may think you have the right selection, but if the
name of your selection does not have a number after it, you will get problem messages such
as device not available.
2. I did have a great deal of latency when I first brought the disposition over to 3.21.1,
but that was taken care of by lowering the Audio Buffer Size in the Fluidsynth Sound
element to 512. It was set way higher in the 3.20 version on Win 7 but somehow that
worked. 512 works fine for version 3.21.1.
3. When setting registrations, I found that not all the stops I selected would come on.
If I played an MF registration (9-10 stops) and added a Glockenspiel, for instance, the
Glock would not come on. The same would happen when I added chorus reeds. I increased
the number of channels in the Fluidsynth sounds from 8 to 64, and that took care of it.
Strangely enough, the number of channels reset itself to 8, but all the stops come on
anyway, go figure.
So everything is now OK with the new installation with a new OS, new computer and new
jOrgan version. I have also changed MIDI/Audio interfaces and since I am no longer using
Creative Labs interfaces, must go with an outboard reverb. That is in shipment now, can
hardly wait to hook it up.
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-10 02:57
Les, you stated, "1. The designation for inputs and outputs in elements such as Fluidsynth
sound, connectors, swells, generic sounds, SAMS controllers and the like are different than
in 3.20. They now have numbers after them. What was Audiobox USB 96 in 3.20 may now be
Audiobox USB 96 #12. The problem arises in that BOTH old and new nomenclature appears in
the selection dropdown boxes. You may think you have the right selection, but if the name
of your selection does not have a number after it, you will get problem messages such as
device not available. "
What you describe is, actually, controlled by the checkbox in View>Configuration>Preferences>
MIDI> "Cache Devices" or "Enumerate Devices." With "Enumerate Devices" checked, you will get
the specific # next to the name of a device. This can be a bit confusing since the devices
may show with and without a number, or with two different numbers.
Also, on upgrading a disposition from one version of jOrgan to another, it may be wise to save
an original copy under the previous version of jOrgan used since, once upgraded, it is not
possible to open the upgraded disposition in the older version of jOrgan. I'm not sure why
anyone would need to revert to using an older version of jOrgan with a specific disposition
that they don't want to upgrade, but it is possible, I guess.
Sorry to hear you have abandoned Creative Labs. I recently purchased an Audigy RX (5.0) and
it has soundfont capability and the complete studio for Reverb. It sounds phenomenal! It cost
about $70 USD. I have, also, mentioned that anyone having an Audigy 2 ZS soundcard can use the
drivers and software suite for the Audigy RX (5.0). The trick with the driver is to unzip the
downloadable driver package from Creative Labs and, MANUALLY, install the Windows 10 WDM driver
from the "Audio" folder. Also, you can install the ctgame driver which works in Windows 10 with
the old DB-15 MIDI connector that is on the Audigy 2 ZS. The sound quality from these two cards
is, really, unsurpassed and the ability to use the Audigy RX drivers extends the life of the
Audigy 2 ZS for the foreseeable future. I have not allowed my PC to do an automatic upgrade to
Windows 11, yet and am not sure that I will since it has worked so well for 6 full years.
By the way, if anybody could test the latency on your setup, Cameron Carpenter, surely, would!!!
Best wishes,
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les K on 2021-12-10 05:33
John,
I am not voluntarily abandoning the Creative Labs audio interface. I also have an Audigy 5RX
with a great sounding reverb application (EAX). The problem arises in that my organ computer
is now a laptop and you can't fit a Creative Labs soundcard in them! They currently have
outboard units available, but I don't believe that that EAX software suite we both like so
much is available any more. :-(
I am using a Presonus Audiobox USB 96 as my two-way MIDI interface (I have a full moveable
combination action in my console-jOrgan controlled, hence the need for two-way MIDI) and an
audio out is right there and available, so why not use it? It sounds great, very clear.
The MIDI interface was changed because I have had one too many driver problems with Midiman.
The Presonus is state of the art and designed to work with Win 10. It is also free from any
latency. A 3 manual organ with manuals, stops, pedals, two swells and a register crescendo
PLUS a programmable percussion sequencer which drives a separate Fluidsynth instance (home
designed and built-Arduino based) is a lot for an older MIDI interface, but the Presonus
handles it without breaking a sweat.
Les Knoll MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
jOrgan pup live usb not showing midi devices.
From Kevin K on 2021-12-10 18:46
Ok I have an older jOrgan pup distro on Linux. It contains about 20 organs preinstalled
on a live CD/USB. I find it very useful. I haven't used it for sometime though as I've
been playing with Hauptwerk.
Today, I booted the USB and the desktop opened and I started jOrgan. However, it only
shows Virtual MIDi. I cannot see my connected Casio or M Audio. They are connected via
midi usb ( printer style) cables. They work fine with Hauptwerk and a midi app on iPad.
Any ideas?
I'm wondering if I need to use Puppy installer to install the distro to my hard drive
then update the drivers.
Thanks
Kevin
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From GrahamG on 2021-12-10 20:50
Hi Kevin,
Does JACK show any of your MIDI devices?
Standard MIDI devices, like the Casio and M-Audio usb MIDI cables
should not need additional drivers. What happens if you plug the
cables out, and then plug them in with Puppy running but before you
load jOrgan?
Kind regards,
GrahamG
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From John Beach on 2021-12-10 22:07
Kevin, in View>Configuration>Preferences>jOrgan>Midi-Merger, make sure you check
the box for each of the MIDI devices that you want to use. jOrgan lists all the
available instruments, but you must mark the checkbox for each that you want to use.
That should take care of the problem.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Kevin J King on 2021-12-10 22:31
Thanks everyone. I'm at work so can't test this until later. I've always just found
the device in customise, but I'll do delve a little deeper later
Kevin
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Kevin J King on 2021-12-15 02:03
Update - still no further forward. jOrgan loads and I'm able to play the notes
on the on-screen keyboard, but no sign of any devices in the midi merger.
My hardware setting in the Linux menu shows 2 midi keyboards connected. It's a
real mystery.
Regards
Kevin MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
suggestions mixtures polyphone?
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-10 22:08
Hi all,
I managed again to create mixtures using Polyphone Oktaaf 4 based. In this case I used
the soundfont of Burea. Of course there are others base stops possible.
A list of specs I attached. (Below)
Are there any suggestions/ideas about these specs?
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________
Cymbel II (prestant)
36-47 1/5 1/6
48-53 1/3 1/5
54-59 2/5 1/3
60-65 2/3 2/5
66-71 4/5 2/3
72-77 1 1/3 4/5
78-83 1 3/5 1 1/3
84-96 2 2/3 1 3/5
Ruispijp II (Prestant)
Gehele klavier 36-96 2 1 1/3
Sesquialter II (Prestant)
Gehele clavier 36-96 2 2/3 1 3/5
Scherp IV (Prestant)
36-47 1 2/3 1/2 1/3
48-59 1 1/3 1 2/3 1/2
60-71 2 1 1/3 1 2/3
72-96 2 2/3 2 1 1/3 1
Mixtuur II-VIII (Prestant)
UPDATE
36-41 36-47 1 1/3 2
42-47 48-59 1 1 1/3 2 2 2/3
48-53 60-71 2/3 1 1 1/3 2 2 2/3 4
54-65 72-77 ½ 2/3 1 1 1/3 2 2 2/3 4 5 1/3
66-77 78-83 2/3 1 1 1/3 2 2 2/3 4 5 1/3 8
78-89 84-89 1 1 1/3 2 2 2/3 4 5 1/3 8 10 2/3
90-96 90-96 1 1/3 2 2 2/3 4 5 1/3 8 10 2/3 16
Carillon III (Gedekt of Prestant)
36-96 4 1 3/5 1
Carillon II (Gedekt of Prestant)
36-96 2 4/5
Cornet V (Open Fluit) 36-96 Added in Update.
Bourdon 8
Open Fluit 4
Nazard 2 2/3
Woudfluit 2
Terts 1 3/5
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-12 18:00
Hi all,
As a attachment I added an update from my mixtures to this mail. (See above)
Inspired by the beautiful 1 1/3, 1 3/5, 1 1/7 Scharf and Cymbel orchestra of the Burea
soundfont I created them based on montre on my own gig files/disposition. The goal is
to keep the attenuation as low as possible. To illustrate I played ( not perfect)
Silent Night from Jan Zwart with a Cymbel III..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17BWA1_VLTHpeAoqqgIPBPhCbqZTo1vrE/view?usp=sharing
Jan Zwart advises a 4 ft. But for this purpose I used the Cymbel.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweerton2021-12-15 00:55
Hi all,
Is this a permitted mixture:
36-41 ______________1 1/3__2__2 2/3__4__5 1/3
42-47 ___________1__1 1/3__2__2 2/3__4
48-53 ______2/3__1__1 1/3__2__2 2/3
54-59 __1/2_2/3__1__1 1/3__2
60-65 ______2/3__1__1 1/3__2__2 2/3
66-71 ___________1__1 1/3__2__2 2/3__4
72-77 ______________1 1/3__2__2 2/3__4__5 1/3
78-83 _____________________2__2 2/3__4__5 1/3__8
84-89 _________________________2 2/3__4__5 1/3__8__10 2/3
90-96 ________________________________4__5 1/3__8__10 2/3__16
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnBon2021-12-15 03:05
Jan, I believe the best source for a complete listing of mixture ranks is to be
found in the two-volume work, "The Art of Organ Building" by George Ashdown Audsley.
He sets forth, similarly to what you show, the footages and note compass for
the ranks comprising mixtures for both the manuals and pedals. In constructing a
homemade, "wishlist" of stops disposition for jOrgan, consisting of soundfonts of
the various tone families (Diapasons, Flutes, Reeds, Mixtures and Strings), for
the Mixtures, I used a Dulciana for the soft mixtures and a fundamental diapason
for the other footages of ranks comprising the mixtures. I constructed ALL the
mixtures that Audsley showed in the section on mixtures in "The Art of Organ Building."
I think the most complex is a Plein Jeu which is constructed with a 7-rank Cymbel and
a 5-rank Fourniture, 12 ranks in all, but the concept of "breaking back" requires
special attention to detail. It was worth the effort. The Mixtures total 55
different ones, including cornets. The Mixtures are constructed in the Preset Pool
from the rank footages in the instrument pool. I have never used Polyphone's
feature of creating mixtures. I have done them all, manually. So, I don't know
how well Polyphone effectuates mixture creation. I think the mixture concept is
too complex for a program, such as Polyphone, to be able to construct a particular
type of mixture with the proper break-backs, automatically.
I am systematic with respect to the creation of soundfonts, using a wave-file
identification system which allows for easy importation and substitution of one
wave file or the complete set of wave files which comprise a group of footages of
a particular organ voice. So, for example, for the mixtures, I could substitute
a different set or quality of diapason or dulciana, wave files affecting the entire
soundfont. It is very efficient.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 04:15
John,
I can create a test mixture with Polyphone and place it on Google Drive. I will use
the octave 4 from Burea. I believe that has no problem with copyright.
And will have a look at the books of George Ashdown Audsley.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 04:37
John,
I imported octave 4 files. I let polyphone apply the corrections it calculates an create
an instrument. On that base I created the mixture. Download here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Gm9tkBYsp57OirzRSIGF0UdAAHUgEunq/view?usp=sharing
Kind regards
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 20:25
Hi all,
I removed the source instrument and samples Octave 4 from this soundfont. The new file
can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sKYHWLyE6PCGq4n9CqcdFf4BZbd59zX_/view?usp=sharing
I did not clean the source with SPEAR and the attenuation can be lower. Mostly I
normalize to -30 db.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 23:25
Hi all,
I placed a short video on Google Drive how to create mixtures with Polyphone.
It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nrxF3BOCQx8ttoEt6S-kCm5-_Y8z4shh/view?usp=sharing
Unfortunate the video recording crashed. Af the moment of crash the preset, instrument
and samples of the mixture are created and can be saved.
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris Pearson on 2021-12-17 03:21
Hi, Jan
I have used this as one source of information when building mixtures in Viena (one n).
https://www.lawrencephelps.com/Documents/Articles/Phelps/compoundstops.shtml
Regards
Chris P
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-17 07:18
Chris,
That is a really rich organ. I think they fill repeating ranks with base ranks. Which unit
do they use for ranks? F.e.
SCHARF IV-VII 337 Pipes
22 - 26 - 29 - 33 = 6 notes
What does 22-26-29-33 mean?
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-17 13:24
The 22nd is the 1 foot rank, the 26th is the tierce above that, 4/5',
the 29th is the 1/2' octave and the 33 is the tierce above that 2/5'.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-17 16:24
Hi all,
Thanks. And in Polyphone you can choose fiftheenth and all other theen.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-17 19:27
Jan, in English, our ordinal numbers (first, (exception, second, NOT twoth as zweite )
third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, etc., derive the form
from German; erste, dritte, vierte, fuenfte, etc. The second may derive from Latin/French,
although the French distinguish second (deuxième, cardinal) from Segond, and a seconde,
in time.
It was all the contributing factors of the Romans, Celts, Angles and Saxons, Danes and
Normans that make English an absolute nightmare to figure out. It is good to be a native
speaker. But, to this day, when I hear or read errors in English grammar, I can not help
noticing them immediately. I suspect that is an altruism of most native speakers who have
been taught the grammar of their languages correctly. Although I have much Dutch heritage,
I had great difficulty with a course in Dutch from Radio Hilversum more than 60 years ago.
I can read a bit, but it is too different from either English or German to intuit it without
study.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-17 22:33
On 2021-12-15 00:55, Jan Flikweert wrote:
"Is this a permitted mixture:"
Jan,
The make-up of Mixtures is a complex subject, and a five-rank Mixture such as you have
suggested would, I think, be very uncommon, partly on the basis of its very regular
patterns. I make this statement quite apart from any "undesirable" features which
certainly would be questioned by many pipe organ builders. The II-VIII rank Mixture
which you have included in your first post illustrates this. It certainly has very
regular patterns, but it applies them in surprising ways - two ranks only in Octave 1,
and eight ranks in the top octave. There must be some reasons for this, and whatever
they are, I suspect that your suggested Mixture does not take account of them.
I do not know of any authoritative source that lays down rules for Mixtures. I searched
in two or three of my books, and did not find any reference to such a source. However,
I read enough to show me that your scheme does have what many builders would regard as
"undesirable features", namely the presence of the 5 1/3, 10 2/3, and 16 foot ranks.
Because the Mixture would normally be used along with at least one 8' stop, the 5 1/3
rank would produce a soft resultant at 16' pitch. (This would not matter if a 16' stop
was also drawn along with the 8'). But in the case of the top octave, the 10 2/3 foot
rank along with the 16', would produce a soft resultant of pitch 32'!
I can assure you that such resultants are audible. It happens on my BROADWAY disposition,
where I simply followed the scheme used by the builder. But when one plays from notes
below the section where such ranks are introduced, through into notes of that section,
it can be noticed.
At times your scheme has three off-unison ranks (such as 2 2/3, 1 1/3, 2/3) along with
only two unison ranks (such as 8, 4, 2, 1, 1/2). I got the impression from one of my
books that such a situation should be avoided.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-17 23:51
Hi ,
Due to size limit sent personal.
I found these things:
Cavaille Coll Notre Dame Paris Fourniture Harmonique II-V
C |
c0 |
c1 |
c2 |
36-41 |
42-59 |
60-71 |
72-96 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
8 |
10 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
8 |
|
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
|
|
2 2/3 |
4 |
|
|
|
2 2/3 |
Cavaille Coll Notre Dame Paris Cymbale Harmonique II-V
C |
c0 |
c1 |
c2 |
36-41 |
42-59 |
60-71 |
72-96 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
1 3/5 |
1 3/5 |
1 3/5 |
|
|
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
|
|
|
1(I suppose) |
Van Heuvel combined this in one stop Saint-Eustache Paris
C |
F# |
C |
f#0 |
f#1 |
f#2 |
f#3 |
36-41 |
42-47 |
48-53 |
54-65 |
66-77 |
78-89 |
90-96 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
8 |
10 2/3 |
16 |
1 1/3 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
8 |
10 2/3 |
|
1 1/3 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
8 |
|
|
1 1/3 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
5 1/3 |
|
|
|
1 1/3 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
1 1/3 |
2 |
2 2/3 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 1/3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 1/3 |
Very interesting
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-18 00:05
With the exception of Cornets at 32' and 16', Audsley gives no examples of mixtures
having a rank at 32' pitch. There are instances of Plein Jeu VII, Grand Bourdon V,
and Sesquialteras in the Pedal organ which have 16' and 10-2/3' ranks in them. In Midi,
having a manual-keyboard compass of #36 to #96, the most audible top note of any usable
quality is Midi note #120 having a pitch frequency of 8,372 Hz. It is impossible to
synthesize or produce a sine wave of a usable frequency higher than this on the computer
and the length of a pipe of this frequency would be less than one inch (3/4"), or 1/16th
of a foot. While most mixtures add brightness, some, such as the Grand Bourdon V in
the pedal, are best used alone, since they rumble with a lot of power such as some of
the more powerful pedal reeds.
As in the title of his two volume treatise, "The Art of Organ Building," I think it is
important to note that there is an "art" to mixture construction that is based on the
consistency of harmonic partials completing the reinforcement of the foundation footages.
A tierce mixture, for example, would have to be used very selectively since it imparts a
very noticeable, strong "cornet" quality to the foundations.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-18 00:08
John,
I agree. It does not make sense to use 32 feet mixture in lower divisions of stops. The next is like van den Heuvel did in Saint-Eustache Paris.
Mixture IV-X (Prestant)
C |
F# |
c#0 |
f#0 |
f#1 |
f#2 |
f#3 |
36-41 |
42-53 |
53-59 |
60-65 |
66-77 |
78-89 |
90-96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
16 |
|
|
|
|
10 2/3 |
10 2/3 |
10 2/3 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
|
|
5 1/3 |
5 1/3 |
5 1/3 |
5 1/3 |
5 1/3 |
|
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 2/3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 1/3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
2/3 |
2/3 |
2/3 |
2/3 |
2/3 |
|
|
|
½ |
½ |
½ |
|
|
|
|
|
1/3 |
|
|
|
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris Pearson on 2021-12-18 06:17
Hi, Jan
Further reference material.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190112131350/http://www.organstops.org/m/Mixture.html
Chris P MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Reverb w/fluidsynth 2.2.1 controlled by Qsynth w/jOrgan
From Marc A on 2021-12-13 06:52
Greetings to all:
I have been experimenting with jOrgan on different MacOS. Here is a video of dry and reverb
on Mac OSMojave, jOrgan 3.21.1. Jeux soundfont hosted in Qsynth running Fluidsynth 2.2.1.
I would be interested in comments about the reverb sound… is it the same as what others are
experiencing or better. I have found settings on the Mac to produce different results than
the PC.
YouTube video demo.
“https://youtu.be/PrL8jvaF9MQ” remove quotes.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-13 12:44
On 2021-12-13 06:52, Marc Allen wrote:
"I have been experimenting with jOrgan on different MacOS. Here is a video of dry and reverb
on Mac OSMojave, jOrgan 3.21.1. Jeux soundfont hosted in Qsynth running Fluidsynth 2.2.1."
Hi Marc-Paul,
Thank you for the demo, and for opening up the subject of Fluidsynth reverb. The FS reverb has
a bad reputation amongst jOrgan users, and I have come to the opinion that it is not altogether
deserved.
You are using FS 2, and its reverb has been particularly criticized because of what can be called
a cyclic modulation of the sound, even if its general sound otherwise is judged to be superior to
that from FS 1 reverb. I find the FS 1 reverb to be quite satisfactory, although I do agree with
what I have just stated about FS 2 reverb - about its unfortunate modulation and its general sound.
I think a lot depends on exactly what settings are being used for the four FS reverb parameters.
For me, your demo would have a lot more value if we knew what four settings you were using. I am
assuming that the values used with Qsynth have to be divided by 100 to relate them to the jOrgan
setting values.
Anyway, you have asked for opinions, so here is mine:
The improvement between no reverb and reverb is dramatic. Nothing more needs to be said. I think
a lot of jOrgan users would like to hear longer reverb times than you have selected. But this is
purely a matter of personal taste. And if what you have there is what you find to be satisfactory,
then use it!
I do think that what we are hearing is a bit too short to allow a considered judgement about the
quality of the reverb sound, and probably the same can be said about the level. FS reverb is
capable of producing much longer reverb and at a much higher level than what you have in the demo.
The detail in the music, especially with fast playing, is lost if we overdo it. There is a large
RC church near where I live, at which I heard the organ recently without a large number of people
present. The reverb is truly impressive. But it made nonsense of fast music!
Here's hoping that your post will start a worthwhile discussion about FS reverb and recommended
settings.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
how much correction in cents when tuning a stop?
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-14 23:26
Hi all,
Is there a list of organ stops containing the needed correction in cents when tuning them?
Kind regards,
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-15 02:22
Jan, I believe Paul Stratman included the tuning corrections in cents for the mutations
stops in one of his tutorials on stop creation. Quints are +2 cents, Tierces are
–14 cents and 10ths are –31 cents.
I don't think there are any others. For general tuning of the entire organ in jOrgan,
Near Equal Tuning is achieved by a Switch Filter to which all the ranks are referenced
and for which the following MPL (midi programming language) messages are entered:
Near Equal Tuning Engaged set 176 set 101 set 0
Near Equal Tuning Engaged set 176 set 100 set 3
Near Equal Tuning Engaged set 176 set 6 set 1
Near Equal Tuning Disengaged set 176 set 101 set 3
Near Equal Tuning Disengaged set 176 set 100 set 3
Near Equal Tuning Disengaged set 176 set 6 set 0
In addition, to regulate the entire tuning of the organ up or down several cents, by ear,
to tune with another instrument (piano, e.g.), a Continuous Filter (slider element) is
created, to which all the ranks are referenced and for which the following MPL message
is entered: Engaging set 224, set 0, set value | mult 25 | add 51.
Tuned, equal temperament pitch is achieved with the slider (classic skin, green lights)
showing (approximately) 5 lights. Variations, plus + or minus –, are achieved from the
5 light position. It is readily noticeable, but I am not sure what the actual cent or
semitone value per change of one light of the slider equals.
Hope this helps.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 02:53
Hi all, John,
Thanks for your reply. I search for what you call: "Quints are +2 cents, Tierces are
–14 cents and 10ths are –31 cents. I don't think there are any others."
I will search/google for the tutorial from Paul Stratman. Any ideas where to find that?
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-15 03:07
Jan, Stratman Virtual Instruments https://stratmaninstruments.wordpress.com/documents/
should give you what you are looking for.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-15 03:34
John,
The documents on Paul Stratman's site are set to private. His Burea disposition also.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-16 07:29
Hi all, John,
I found it.
I use a program Chromotia tuner.
I play a Nazard 3
I set the Chromatia Tuner to input "What your hear"
And there it is. Mostly all +2 cents. I think the correction of Polyphone does not effect this.
Terts -12/-13
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marco Francesco on 2021-12-17 04:09
Do you mean Chromatic tuner?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-17 04:15
Yes, that is what I mean and I used it. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mailing List Rules
From JohnR on 2021-12-17 06:47
Hi all,
Did you know that the Mailing List has a number of "rules"? These were agreed upon
when the Mailing List was set up many years ago. They can be viewed on the jOrgan InfoBase.
https://jorgan.info/base/d/Discussion.html
One of those rules is: Chop off EXCESSIVE tails of previous posts.
Failure to observe this one has a number of bad consequences:
1. It clogs up traffic on the internet unnecessarily.
2. It makes the SourceForge archive of our posts unnecessarily long. Eventually someone
has to pay for that, and it is SourceForge, who hosts our Mailing List without charging us.
3. Depending on the content of what should have been removed, it may lead to a very short
post exceeding the size limit imposed by SourceForge, and then Sven or I have to spend
time deciding whether to let it through.
It is a simple matter to delete the offending material. Before sending the post, after
your signature or closing words, hold down SHIFT, CTRL and then press END. Then delete
what you have selected.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-17 07:20
John,
Excuse me. I will keep that in mind.
You can block posts from me which do not meet the rules.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Roy Radford on 2021-12-17 08:22
Hi, John,
Could I suggest leaving at least the previous message or two intact
to maintain the context. When you come back some time later it can be a bit frustrating
to find a post like, "Yes, I certainly agree." when you haven't the faintest idea what
it was the writer agreed with! *:)) laughing
Have fun,
Roy. (UK)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-17 09:03
Roy Radford wrote:
"Could I suggest leaving at least the previous message
or two intact to maintain the context."
Roy,
Thank you. The rule talks of EXCESSIVE tails. Each user can use their judgement on how
they observe that rule.
My formatting of this reply indicates what I consider to be a good way to keep to that
rule as well as to the one that follows it, and it minimises any effort the reader needs
to make. It does however require a little more effort on the part of the sender. Also,
keeping to the precise wording of the Subject Line is important.
Jan,
Thank you for your reply.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Pete Theisen on 2021-12-17 14:45
My tail is excessively small. So much so that I have to wear suspenders
because a belt won't do the job.
On 12/16/21 5:03 PM, JohnR wrote:
"Roy Radford wrote:
'Could I suggest leaving at least the previous message
or two intact to maintain the context.'
Roy,
Thank you. The rule talks of EXCESSIVE tails."
Regards,
Pete
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chris Pearson on 2021-12-18 00:41
Mea Culpa.
On 16/12/2021 19:47, JohnR wrote:
‘Hi all,
Did you know that the Mailing List has a number of "rules"? ‘
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-18 01:30
Sometimes, I think the fact that people leave the body of a previous post to which
they are responding is due to the essential matter of context. If you look at the
Subject line, "Mailing List Rules", you don't get a sense of specific context.
So, what I am posting, now, might not make any sense to people who have not been
following the thread "Mailing List Rules."
John Beach MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Most realistic sounding samples.
From Kevin J King on 2021-12-18 23:48
What's the best sounding samples or disposition? I've converted from Hauptwerk -
it's just too expensive and hardware hungry.
I'm limited to 32 bit PC too. Some of the older dispositions sound muddy when lots
of stops are mixed, but I'm trying to put a nice practice instrument together.
Many thanks,
Kevin
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-19 01:49
Kevin...
...have a look at this.
https://stratmaninstruments.wordpress.com/stiehr-mockers-jeux-dorgues-2/
Remember that Hauptwerk 4 needs no license in its free mode and has a built in
instrument.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Kevin J King on 2021-12-19 05:22
Thanks - btw. I'm a great fan of jOrgan and have been using it for many years.
Regards HW 4 - I can't find a working download and all sources point to HW6 64 bit.
Regards Kevin MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Does spearing Burea samples improve them?
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-19 19:26
Hi all,
In my opinion the sampleset Burea is a very good nice one.
For me is the question: Is improve possible just cleaning it using SPEAR?
I made a compare of a sample from this Burea Disposition for GrandOrgue. For legal
information please note the file license.txt in the download. The result you can download at:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LNMJyooxRH558m7TKjnj6dePPLyhyiQJ/view?usp=sharing
Depending on the program you use to play these files they need a correction with
-7 cents to meet A=440hz.
The only action I took is removing non-harmonics. I did that two ways. 1. Manually
leaving chiff+release alone. 2. Select harmonics, revert that result and delete the
remaining parts.
The file “NoHarmonics-066-F#” contains the questionable sound. I suppose “wind”
touching “pipes”.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-19 21:34
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"In my opinion the sampleset Burea is a very good nice one.
For me is the question: Is improve possible just cleaning it using SPEAR?"
Hi Jan,
Thank you for sharing your trial samples and seeking our opinions.
I must say that I can't hear anything in the actual Burea sample which I think needs
to be removed. I actually prefer it to the two "cleaned" files you have produced.
We really need to hear that note played sequentially with notes either side of it
to see if it departs from the character of the rank at that point.
Also, I don't know if that Creative Commons license has a clause not allowing the
modification of the samples in any way. Sometimes they do, and if that is the case,
then I think it means that what you are doing is O.K. only if you don't share your
work with others.
You seem to be unhappy with the level of air noise in the sample. But for some people,
including myself, it is the presence of such air noise which makes the sound more
authentic (if it is not too loud!).
I believe strongly in the use of SPEAR to remove unwanted noise from samples, but the
way I do it is mainly to exclude low frequency noise, such as organ blower motor noise
or traffic noise coming from outside the building. I will never include in the SPEAR
content any harmonic which is at a low level, because SPEAR does not cope with low
levels well, and it "loses its way" and tries to guess what is happening. The result
is a sort of slow warble. Another outcome is that it greatly increases the difficulty
of finding good looping markers.
When I first played your "No harmonics" file I could hear nothing at all, and it only
became audible when I greatly increased the computer gain control. I then heard the
familiar "SPEAR effect" which I was referring to in the previous paragraph. I could
also hear what I shall call the "chiff" components. Although they seem to be at a very
low level, I do miss them in your two "cleaned" files. I can't hear them there.
From what I described earlier in my reply, it is obvious that although I do use SPEAR,
my method is quite different to yours. I confine the use of SPEAR to the first six
harmonics (the fundamental is the 1st harmonic). I create a file in which all content
below the 7th harmonic is filtered out, and this file is added to the SPEAR file at a
level which I judge to be appropriate. This method will not reject hiss which is coming
from air leaks in the organ, and if the organ has that problem, I will not record it,
as trying to remove that hiss will probably remove high frequency content which the pipe
is making and which I want to preserve. I do all the processing using Audacity, which
has excellent filters.
I might add that when I was using SPEAR in this way, eventually I thought I noticed that
SPEAR made the very start of the note to become slightly abrupt. So I made it a practice
to "slow down" the start of each SPEAR file very slightly. As far as I could tell, that
did remove the abruptness, without spoiling the true onset sound once it was added to
the other file.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-20 17:30
Hi all,
John Reimer wrote:
"I must say that I can't hear anything in the actual Burea sample"
"Also, I don't know if that Creative Commons license"
"You seem to be unhappy with the level of air noise in the sample."
"I noticed that SPEAR made the very start of the note to become
slightly abrupt."
"for some people, including myself, it is the presence of such air noise
which makes the sound more authentic (if it is not too loud!)."
Important is to state that the Burea jOrgan Disposition is an outstanding
good disposition. Lars, Graham and Paul did a very good job.
I always listen using a headphone. I use an old Sennheiser. The sound I hear
that way must be good. The sound I call noise is for me unwanted. It is not
only wind, it is the sound of leaking wind on the outside of the organ pipe.
I hear metal.
The license allows non-commercial distribution and modification. The license
must proceed and you should announce these modifications.
Unhappy is a great word. My idea is a sample should sound like a organ is
new build, well tuned, the motor noise you do not hear and changing stops
you do not hear. The organ pipes do not leak. That is with our techniques
possible, so why not. A soundfont must be easy, as much as possible settings
in "global". Loops must be really seamless. Distribute also complete samples
so users can tune these themselves.
The abrupt start of a sample using spear can be solved in two ways
1. By increasing attenuation sustain.
2. Some peaces SPEAR removes must stay, other which SPEAR does not remove,
can be removed.
My approach is progressive: Always seek improvement.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-20 23:58
Hi all,
John Reimer wrote:"We really need to hear that note played
sequentially with notes either side of it to see if it departs from the
character of the rank at that point."
My comment to that:
I made a soundfont containing the modified soundfont from the jOrgan Burea disposition.
It concerns the Principal8. To compare I cleared most parameters from the preset and
the instrument. It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MyrQB9xMzmu_lYgSYZKpPyd0aPXQh4KD/view?usp=sharing
The answer to the question "Does cleaning Burea samples improve them?" can and may be
a matter of taste. I also want to state that SPEAR probably changes the attenuation.
I modified the samples in stereo.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-21 00:48
In playing the Burea HVPrincipal 8_CL, there is a marked difference in the volume
(attenuation, perhaps) of the HVPr8076-E wave file sample used at MIDI note numbers
76 and 77. The same sample is used for both notes. Otherwise, the entire rank is
very nice, maintaining a very smooth continuity of the quality of the principal stop
throughout its compass.
I am curious as to whether this soundfont was synthesized or whether the wave files
are recorded from the pipes of the actual organ.
The PEDPrincipal 8, on the other hand, has several noticeable differences in the sound
quality of the stop. The bottom three notes, C, C# and D (PEDPr-8024-C) have a tone
quality lacking the noticeable 12th, which is very noticeable in the next wave sample,
(PED PR-8028-E). At note 47, the character of the attack is more like that of a
Quintaton having the hollow, pallet chiff. This is maintained until PED PR-8052,
where it is lost for notes 52,53, and 54, but is, again, apparent in the PED PR-8056.
I think some people believe that little anomalies like this add to the realistic
character of pipe organs as being imperfect, mechanical devices. If the samples are
recorded pipe sounds, this is, definitely, true. I don't believe that, in playing
music with these, the anomalies are that noticeable since the tempo of music,
generally, moves fast enough that they are not so obvious. That said, in producing
organ sound banks, whether from recorded pipes or synthesis, they are as good as
their source quality.
Being an amateur, my knowledge of these things, limited by experience, has been gained
from reading and, for the most part, the authors of books concerning organ building,
consistently seem to feel that the tonal character of a stop should be maintained
throughout its entire compass. Audsley, in particular, criticizes those who do not
maintain a consistency of pipe construction and tonal character throughout.
He, verbally, chastizes those who would place a rank of stopped flute pipes at the
bottom of an, otherwise, open rank of pipes from tenor C to the top of the treble end.
The economy of stopped pipes (half the length of open pipes for the same pitch, thus,
cheaper to produce), being the reason for the breech of tonal continuity. Of course,
using synthesized ranks throughout, the tonal character of a stop is very consistent
and can be of either good or poor quality.
I have mentioned this before, however, the Sample Set Creator by Jean-Paul Verpeaux,
available for download at www.organ.monespace.net is a very good organ synthesis program.
The basic algorithms are excellent and the variety of footages that can be selected is broad.
He has a good amount of presets that can be selected without having to set the amplitudes
for the harmonic partials. However, if you use the application, remember to set the
Mod. Amp. of the Fundamental, Harmonic 2 and Harmonic 3 (which default to 5,4,3,
respectively) to 0 (Zero). Otherwise, you will have a very annoying modulation, similar
to that caused by the Fluidsynth Reverb 2.0. The quality of the auto-looped samples is
excellent and the length can be set to as much as 8 seconds. The "increment" feature
setting determines the number of samples per octave. A setting of 12, for example, will
render one wave file sample (C) per octave. These are created and stored in a file you
name, and should be re-named and numbered with an identification system that suits you.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-21 01:14
Jan, the fact that your "cleaned-up" samples are used in stereo adds a power of volume
over the original and a perception of the acoustic difference. I would use the
"release maker" feature in Polyphone for the 8' Principal (.08 at note 36). This
eliminates the abrupt (almost "key-click") release that is, really, objectionable.
Having produced soundfonts with recorded release-tail, wave files, I must say that
I can not hear a perceptible difference between the good effect of the release
parameter setting in Polyphone relative to an organ footage and that of release-tail,
wave files. So, the economy of eliminating both the work of creating and editing the
settings for release-tail wave files is good in terms of reducing the overall size of
a soundfont.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-21 01:22
John Beach wrote:
"I would use the "release maker""
Indeed John, Polyphone removes sound after the loop. That causes an abrupt release.
I use REAPER with Reverberate and users mostly use reverb from Fluidsynth I suppose.
Of course this is not a front end soundfont, but only to compare sounds. For that
reason I left parameters alone.
The best compare is increase volume for HVPrincipal8. My opinion is the sound of the
cleaned samples more lively. Another idea is to set tuning(cents) global to -10. This
is equal A=440hz.
Kind regards
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-21 06:45
JohnB wrote:
"I would use the “release maker” feature in Polyphone for the 8’ Principal (.08 at
note 36). This eliminates the abrupt (almost “key-click”) release that is, really,
objectionable."
Certainly. But if Polyphone sets .08 (80 milliseconds) for note 36, I would call that
inadequate. Paul Stratman recommends release times somewhere, and I am sure they start
much longer than that, and become progressively shorter as the pitch ascends. The same
is true of all of my soundfonts. I stop making them shorter when one gets to the
Middle C octave, as I think that from then on the release time of the pallet becomes
more significant in determining the actual sound.
It is the ability of the soundfont protocol to produce this synthetic but very successful
release sound which is the main reason I far prefer the soundfont method to what HW and GO
use. Their dependence on long release times in order to handle pipe release sounds and to
recreate the ambience of the building, leads to huge RAM requirements.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-21 08:16
Sorry, JohnR., I miswrote that, it should have been .80 at note 36.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-21 20:52
Hi all,
I wrote: “I made a compare of a sample from this Burea Disposition for GrandOrgue.
For legal information please note the file license.txt in the download.
The result you can download”
Regarding this subject this file is updated. You can download it here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MyrQB9xMzmu_lYgSYZKpPyd0aPXQh4KD/view?usp=sharing
I added a cleaned subbas 16 and gedekt 8. There are modifications of release,
attenuation and pan. I decreased the attenuation of the cleaned samples of principal 8.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-22 17:07
Hi all,
JohnR wrote: "Paul Stratman recommends release times somewhere"
Polyphone has a very nice function. Using [toolbox] [key-based configuration] it can
generate parameters for most parameters in "instruments". You can also add a value
to these values.
ft 4
36
1.293
36
1.293
40
1.329
40
1.329
44
1.357
44
1.357
48
1.393
48
1.393
52
1.422
52
1.422
56
1.450
56
1.450
60
1.485
60
1.485
64
1.514
64
1.514
68
1.550
68
1.550
72
1.578
72
1.578
76
1.607
76
1.607
80
1.642
80
1.642
84
1.671
84
1.671
88
1.700
88
1.700
91
1.736
91
1.736
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-22 17:58
Release times are quite easy to remember. At note 36 (which is specified in
Polyphone), you enter the 3.2 (32'), 1.6 (16'), .8 (8'), .4 (4'), .3 (2-2/3'),
.2 (2'), .1 (1'). I believe they may have been changed in a more recent document,
but the ones above work quite well. Attacks are, also, simple. At note 36,
.32, .16, .08, .04, .03, .02, .01. These values can be entered in Polyphone,
but must be copied from the Release line to the Attack line (copy and paste),
and the correct values for the Release should be entered. I you do the attack
values, FIRST, then the Release values, you only have to do it once.
The Task Bar, Tools>Instruments>Global, will allow most of the settings for
Parameters from Attenuation to Reverb.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-22 18:43
Hi all,
JohnB Wrote: "These values can be entered in Polyphone, but must be copied from
the Release line to the Attack line (copy and paste), and the correct values for
the Release should be entered. "
Polyphone calculates these values. You can choose the f.e. descending/ascending
linear method. It starts at key with 1,293 and ends on key 91 with 1.793.
Key
ft 4
36
1.293
36
1.293
40
1.329
40
1.329
44
1.357
44
1.357
48
1.393
48
1.393
52
1.422
52
1.422
56
1.450
56
1.450
60
1.485
60
1.485
64
1.514
64
1.514
68
1.550
68
1.550
72
1.578
72
1.578
76
1.607
76
1.607
80
1.642
80
1.642
84
1.671
84
1.671
88
1.700
88
1.700
91
1.736
91
1.736
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-22 19:09
Hi all,
JohnB wrote: "Release times are quite easy to remember. At note 36 (which is specified
in Polyphone), you enter the 3.2 (32'), 1.6 (16'), .8 (8'), .4 (4'), .3 (2-2/3'),
.2 (2'), .1 (1'). "
Now I understand. F.e. a 4 feet you let Polyphone calculate each key descending lineair
from 0.4 to 0.2
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-22 23:23
Jan, I found that aspect of Polyphone to be less than satisfactory. The inter-relationship
between maximum and minimum values for some parameters, requiring stretch calculations over
the compass of the keyboard got to be a real hassle, and I enter them by hand. The reason
was that, as the value setting or, either, maximum or minimum was adjusted to arrive at the
closest value to what one wanted, the other value would change causing the values to be way
off. Several years ago, I did calculate the equivalent value settings for attenuation of
6dB per octave stretched across the compass of the keyboard.
6 dB per Octave Attenuation Global Settings in Polyphone
Pattern = Linear Ascending
Footage Minimum Maximum (settings are according to the Stop Footage
including one octave below (sub-octave) and
one octave above (Octave) the normal
compass of the stop.)
32' -18 +44
16' -11 +48
10- -9 +54
8' -7 +58
6-2/5 -5.25 +59
5-1/3 -3.0 +61
4' 0 +62
3-1/5' +1 +63
2-2/3' +3 +66
2' +6 +70
1-3/5 +7.5 +72
The above values gave the best results for a 6 dB per octave attenuation of a stop/rank.
However, since attenuation, as a parameter, reduced the volume too much, I changed my
system and, now, in the Sample Pool, I use the Tools>Sample>Change Volume>Normalize and
use a 10 percent reduction of the samples, per octave, with the two lowest octaves (32'
and 16' in pedal stops) set at 70 percent, and decreasing 10 percent for the samples in
successively higher octaves, ending with a setting of 5 percent for octaves using samples
of MIDI note #108 (4186 Hz) and #120 (8372 Hz).
I am sure that professional voicers of pipe organs might disagree with my theory, but I
have found that my experience demands some arbitrary improvisation, somewhat like the
minimum and maximum value settings above.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-22 23:51
Jan Flikfweert wrote:
"Now I understand. F.e. a 4 feet you let Polyphone calculate each key descending
lineair from 0.4 to 0.2"
Jan, correct. And the attacks are .32, .16, .10, .08, .05, .04, .03, .02, .01.
I dare say that most of us on the jOrgan forum have had no experience in tuning or
voicing a pipe organ and, so, we rely on information that is available. However,
the fact that we are dealing with the stringencies, imposed by electronics and the
computer, necessitates that we apply a consistency of logic that is tempered by
those stringencies.
Actually, in a 4 foot rank, starting at .4, the highest octave of a 6-octave rank
would be the 1/8 foot octave (midi note 108=4186Hz) which would have an attack
value of .001 and a release value of .01.
After listening to a lot of music using my jOrgan disposition and soundfonts which
conform to all these specifications, I don't think that a notion of "sterile
perfection" resulting from conformity to computer calculations is something that is
noticeable. My thought, concerning some of the added noise artifacts (blower
noise, stop change noise, etc.)that are associated with a pipe organ playing, is
that, although they are realistic, they add nothing to the music and are non-
essential in the creation of soundfonts or soundbanks. I think we need to, always,
perceive of sound from the perspective of the listener in the audience, not the
organist sitting 3 feet in front of a swell box with all the windchests gasping for
air! When I think of "CD Quality" sound, this is the perspective that I have.
I am not sure that I have, ever, heard a recording of an organ which give off a
loud sound of stops being changed by a piston. So, my personal opinion is that,
since the goal is music production, these other things are extraneous to that,
however essential they are to an organ being played.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-23 00:00
Jan, the "Release Maker" in Polyphone will calculate the values for the compass of
the instrument if you enter the value, e.g., .4 or .04, for the release or attack
of a 4 ft. stop at Midi note 36. I, always do the Attack parameter, first, since
it has to be copied from the Release line of the Instrument Editor window to the
Attack line. Then, I do the Release parameter which is, automatically, entered on
the Release line of the Instrument Editor window and stays there.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-24 03:00
Hi all, John,
I suppose when the attack part of the sample is good the [vol env attack parameter]
can be cleared?
I suppose also when you use fluidsynth reverb or send audio to an external DAW with
reverb plugin the [vol env release parameter] can be cleared?
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
John B wrote: “Jan, the ‘Release Maker’ in Polyphone will calculate the values for
the compass of the instrument if you enter the value, e.g., .4 or .04, for the
release or attack of a 4 ft. stop at Midi note 36."
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-24 06:25
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"I suppose when the attack part of the sample is good the [vol env attack parameter
can be cleared?"
Hi Jan,
A lot depends on whether we are using fully synthesized samples, or recorded
samples. One would think that with good attacks (usually recorded samples) no V.E.
attack parameter is needed. However, the Viena soundfont editor has a default value
which is very small (1 mSec in duration?), and there must be some reason for that.
On the other hand, in systems where no recorded release sample is being used (the
usual soundfont situation, as in jOrgan), an appropriate release parameter is
definitely needed, even when a good reverberation system is being used. If this is
not done, the abrupt end to the note will still be audible, as it is not fully
masked by the reverberation. This is the case with your recent soundfont you sent
us, which otherwise works very well.
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-24 07:37
Hi all,
Regarding this subject I uploaded a new file. The link is:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MyrQB9xMzmu_lYgSYZKpPyd0aPXQh4KD/view?usp=sharing
New:
1. New stops Bassoon 16 , octave 4+2, Fourniture/Cymbel based on Notre Dame Paris
using cleaned octave 4 Burea;
2. Key based frequency cutoff;
3. Key based attack and release: Release = 0,1 of footage and Attack = 0,1 from release;
4. Added a small jOrgan disposition. Just point to skin location;
5. Optional you can use fluidsynth chorus + reverb which is present but not connected.
I play this soundfont using REAPER with Reverberate with 4 sec reverb and chorus.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-26 00:32
JohnR wrote: "the Viena soundfont editor has a default value which is very small
(1 mSec in duration?)"
I suppose this has no meaning. I also suppose a release cannot be zero, but can
be disabled, so the minimum value 1 ms. F.e. filter resonance has a maximum of 96.
This does not mean it should be used.
I think in my way of cleaning samples I should do the same with the attack part.
My idea is that changing attack should be done with attenuation/sustain. I always
correct attenuation, mostly 9. Increasing/decreasing this value in combination
with sustain should correct an abrupt attack.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
32 bit jOrgan and fluidsynth
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-20 16:18
Creative Sound Card or Multi-Channel advice needed.
John B. and anyone else who can help.
I would like help in successfully setting up multi-channel access to my Creative Sound cards.
The latest jOrgan I am using on Mac and PC is 3.21.1 32bit. I figure if I can master this
on the PC… maybe I can also figure out how to do this on OS X and later. I have NO success
with fluidsynth internal on the PC but Qsynth works fine. The Mac OS oddly works fine with
internal fluidsynth and Qsynth which is Fludisynth 2 in a single stereo pair on an external
SoundBlaster card.
I must be missing something fundamental.
The Jack audio connection kit shows nothing on PC or MAC. Hauptwerk sees all outputs.
I’ve looked at the tutorials and am getting nowhere.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham Wykes on 2021-12-20 17:35
In your JACK settings, have you set the number of output channels?
(In qjackctl -> settings -> advanced tab ->Channels I/O)
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-20 18:32
Marc-Paul said, "I must be missing something fundamental."
jOrgan, in the Construct Mode of a disposition, should show all the Sound Source elements
you have created, whether Fluidsynth or Generic Sound. If you want to use the Creative
Sound Cards in the same manner as when there was a "Creative Sound" element in the Elements
list of jOrgan, you, now, choose "Generic Sound" and, in the "Properties" tab of Generic
Sound, for "Output," select the Creative Midi Synth (A or B) that you want to use for the
Generic Sound.
If you have more than one soundfont for the disposition, create as many Generic Sound
(or Fluidsynth) elements as you need and, if Generic Sound, choose the Creative Midi
Synth from which you want to output the sound. ( With Fluidsynth, you use dsound or
portaudio). Your Creative Labs Soundcards should be operative with the drivers
necessary and you will need to, manually, load the Soundfonts in the appropriate
bank numbers, using the Soundfont Bank Manager application that comes from Creative Labs,
usually, bank numbers 0 or 1.
Remember, if you use bank 0, that it is the General Midi Soundfont which is, usually,
automatically loaded by the operating system on startup and may occupy multiple bank
numbers, depending on its size. You can remove this and load your jOrgan soundfont in
bank 0 or whatever number you choose. Also, you need to make sure the the bank number
you choose is the same as indicated in the Messages for the ranks of the Soundfont, that
is, the rank message for set "x" for bank must be the same number as the bank in which the
Soundfont is loaded in the Soundfont Bank Manager. You can enter this, manually, or if
you are creating a new disposition, you can "import" the soundfont from the File Menu of
jOrgan and select a bank number (bank number and "Create Stops" are options in the "Import"
soundfont feature of jOrgan) which will be, automatically, entered in the "rank" messages
in the "set 0 (bank) set 1 (preset).
Unless a soundfont has been numbered, manually, other than the "default" numbering, in the
Soundfont editor, it should be bank 0 or 1. The point is that the bank numbers must be
the same. Once loaded, the disposition should be playable just as in Fluidsynth with
dsound or portaudio. With the Generic Sound, you will hear the exact quality of sound
as the quality of the wave files in the Soundfont and you can use the EAX (Reverb, etc)
console that is applicable to your Creative Soundcards.
Hope this helps and solves your "fundamental" problem.
John Beach MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Problem when creating FS reverb
From JohnR on 2021-12-24 12:35
Hi all,
I am having a serious problem when creating FS reverb in dispositions where it has
not yet been installed. After my attempts, the FS reverb does work, but it does not
react correctly to the parameter settings. The WIDTH setting has an over-riding effect.
The reverb becomes very long in duration if the WIDTH is set above, say, 0.5, and
extremely long if it is set to 1. And in these situations, having LEVEL at 0 does not
cut off the reverb.
The problem exists whether I am using RPi 3B+ or Windows 8.1 - it makes no difference.
Is there, for example, a rule as to the order in which the four parameter elements
should be introduced when creating FS Reverb?
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-24 13:28
JohnR., since ALL the "reverb" elements are "Reverb" in the Elements list of jOrgan,
you must make sure that each of the 4 Reverb elements, Room, Width, Damping and Level,
are properly identified in the dropdown windows. There is no rule or order in which
they are created, since that dropdown window is how you specify each of the 4 Reverb
elements. Make sure the Threshold is set to .05 for all the 4 elements. The "value"
changes, of course, with the slider setting for each of the four elements.
JohnB
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-24 14:04
JohnB wrote:
‘since ALL the "reverb" elements are "Reverb" in the Elements
list of jOrgan, you must make sure that each of the 4 Reverb elements,
Room, Width, Damping and Level, are properly identified in the
dropdown windows.’
Hi JohnB,
Thank you. That pointed me in the right direction.
Best wishes,
JohnR MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Season's Greetings
From JohnR on 2021-12-25 08:12
Merry Christmas to one and all!
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Keith Tomkinson on 2021-12-25 08:30
And the same from me.
Best wishes
Keith.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From RickW on 2021-12-25 09:00
Thank you John. And to you and your family!
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-25 18:56
John R wrote: "Merry Christmas to one and all!"
Thank you John. Merry Christmas for you and everyone.
In case you have no music I played for you the choral “Komt allen te samen” known as
Adeste Fideles from Jan Zwart.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xRTb6oAzD_riJy58e4lb3NadZy3aoFer
Jan Flikweert
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-25 21:17
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"In case you have no music I played for you the choral 'Komt allen te
samen' known as Adeste Fideles from Jan Zwart.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xRTb6oAzD_riJy58e4lb3NadZy3aoFer "
Hi Jan,
Thank you for playing that and recording it for us.
I admit I played it this morning at home on my jOrgan installation, firstly on the
Stiehr-Mockers VPO which Marc-Paul brought to our attention recently, then on my
Little Bay VPO, and finally on my Norden Schnitger, along with a few other hymns.
Earlier I heard it being sung with great enthusiasm by the choir and congregation
of St Paul's Cathedral, Melbourne, as part of their Christmas Day services. My wife
and I, and also one of our daughters, who lives 800 Km away but is visiting us for
Christmas, shared in their live-stream service on YouTube.
Best wishes,
John
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From John Dubery on 2021-12-25 21:21
Happy Christmas all
John Dubery
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From John Dubery on 2021-12-25 21:25
... and another go at something I tried to post a few hours ago but didn't
see to work ...
Hi all,
Seems time for me to pop up on the mailing list again - to provide a little
Christmas gift to all.
This year I have a pair of jorgan dispositions for you.
1. Some small and mid-sized instruments for jorgan inspired by the writings of George Dixon
For some years I have been facinated by the design of small organs, i.e. how to get the
maximum of variety and effect from limited resources. Some of the writings and organ designs
of George Dixon (1870-1950) address this topic, and provide useful thoughts and ideas.
In the present jorgan disposition I provide a selection of instruments based on Dixon's
writings.
So - 2 files - one with the disposition (incl. sf2), one with a few MIDI files for it:
DixonInspired r2160.zip
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y7T01lU0wqG24Kd6tER7k4OvD0vDCRIs/view?usp=sharing
DixonInspired-MIDIFiles r2162.zip
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lKmEWukjnYlNxjnqeZLaxtdMgYFDMTMY/view?usp=sharing
2. A virtual rebuild of the organ of Golcar Providence Methodist Church
While tinkering at Chris Pearson's jorgan version of the organ of Golcar PMC, it occurred
to me that a virtual rebuild of the instrument could be done in the style of George Dixon.
Dixon did the design for an economical rebuild (well, relatively economical at least) of
the organ of St. James, West Hartlepool; his purpose was to increase the capabilities
of the instrument without making it significantly bigger or causing excessive expense.
Since the Golcar instrument is similar in many ways to the original state of the West
Hartlepool instrument, it seemed to me that a virtual rebuild of the Golcar organ similar
in style to Dixon's rebuild of West Hartlepool would be an interesting exercise - and
should give an modest sized instrument of significant capability.
Just the one file with the disposition and sf2 this time:
GolcarRebuild r2161.zip
https://drive.google.com/file/d/118ORXDfFMWavbGFpCXARtRcHsGTiiSV4/view?usp=sharing
Happy and blessed Christmas all
John Dubery
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Dominique Montel on 2021-12-25 21:30
Joyeux Noël à tous et à chacun !
Dominique
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Chester Berry on 2021-12-26 05:37
However you celebrate the end of this year and the beginning of the next,
very best wishes to all!
MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Merry Christmas and Win 11
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-26 05:40
First of all Merry Christmas to everyone associated with jOrgan!!
Quick question: Has anyone tried jOrgan with Win 11 yet? I'm getting invites
from Microsoft to more up, but really don't think I need it. Currently on Win 10
with 3.21.1.
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-26 05:42
Hi Les...
...I've had no issues in Windows 11 Pro.
Happy Christmas to ALL
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-26 08:54
Marc,
Which version of jOrgan, and 32 or 64 bit?
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-26 10:22
Because of my testing on Mac's at the moment I am using 3.21.1 32bit.
I would be happy to test something else if would like.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-27 03:45
Marc,
Thanx for the generous offer, but 3.21.1-32 bit you have tested is what I would use
if I upgrade to Win11. Can't find the 64 bit available for download, and the organ
is playing just fine on 32 bit with no latency and good sound quality without the
need of back ends.
Wonder if I really need to change to Win11? My Win10 laptop has become my organ
computer. Works flawlessly. I would rebuild the desktop (i7 8-core 16 gig RAM
2.80gig overclocked Win7-64 Pro OS) to include Win10-64 or Win 11-64 and a 2T SSD.
I'm wondering if this is really necessary or would it be redundant with the laptop
working so well?
Unified theater organs (mine is 23 rank 7 tuned percussions) don't need the massive
memory requirements of large classic organs (Some Hauptwerk sample sets require over
8 gig) and jOrgan soundfonts are typically smaller than Hauptwerk sample sets (my two
custom created soundfonts are less than one gig combined) so maybe I have enough
resources without the rebuild. Bottom line is it sounds great and plays great as is.
Is my rebuild a redundancy?
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Roy Radford on 2021-12-27 04:05
Hi, Les,
Haven't been following the details but I would ask if you need a backup
in case the laptop does what electronic gadgets are famous for! *:)) laughing
Have fun,
Roy. (UK)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-27 06:32
Les...
...I believe the expression is: "if it ain't broke... don't fix it."
I have not tried the amd64 versions... although I do have a couple of Ryzen machines
I built for fun... to see how they handled Win11.
Remember the two primary things about hardware compatibility: Secure boot, and
Trusted Platform Module v2. (run tpm.msc to check) Both may need to be turned on
in the UEFI/bios. You probably know that already.
I consider myself more of a Theatre Organist than Classical. I have a small jOrgan
Theatre Organ disposition and the old Hauptwerk 4 free Paramount which I use together
to get the sounds I like. I have never been able to get jOrgan to output multi-stereo
pair audio but it does not seem to be a problem for Hauptwerk.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-27 06:49
Les Knoll wrote:
"Can't find the 64 bit available for download"
Hi Les,
It is here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/jorgan/files/jorgan-installer/3.21/
My short-hand way to find this is simply to google "jOrgan files". Then click on
jorgan-installer, then on 3.21 . However, I usually recommend the use of 32-bit
unless external hardware requirements point otherwise. And I certainly agree with,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-27 07:23
John,
Right you are, and it surely isn't broke! Played the daylights out of it today
and it was in fine voice. I have made several changes that have helped this along:
1. New MIDI and audio interface: Presonus Audiobox USB 96
2. New reverb: TC Electronic M100
3. Re-felted pedals and manuals, eliminating second touch in the process-traded
features for playability and I have MANY ways around it!
4. The subject of the discussion 3.21.1 32 bit on Win 10. Replaces 3.20 on Win 7.
5. Repaired several disconnected and shorted wires.
If it is working this well, I prolly don't need 64 bit. Thought I needed it
cuz I have a 64 bit OS.
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-27 07:25
Roy,
You mention a backup "Just in case". That's what the laptop was :-)
Les Knoll
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Les Knoll on 2021-12-27 07:30
Marc,
You mention you are more of a theater organist than a classic organist. I can identify.
I'm more of a theater organist than a classic organist, and more of a rock organist than
a theater organist, so how far down the totem pole does that put me?
PS I have done concerts under all three identities, I must be pulling the wool
over SOMEBODY's eyes!
Les Knoll MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
play release part of sample with jOrgan
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-26 18:59
Hi all,
SFZ can handle release parts: [Region], [trigger]=release. This reacts to note-off.
I suppose one region for attack and one region for release.
Linuxsampler can handle SFZ.
And jOrgan can handle Linuxsampler.
I am going to try that.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2021-12-27 12:45
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"SFZ can handle release parts"
Jan,
So can the sf2 soundfont protocol. Most jOrgan users and disposition creators do not
use this ability with flue pipe Instruments (prinipals, flutes, strings). as they
regard the extra complication not worth the small difference in sound that results.
Some creators feel that reed stops should use short release samples (I am not one of
them), as some reed stops do have audible release transients. If you want to see how
it is done, have a look at the reed stops in some of Paul Stratman's soundfonts. You
need to look very carefully to get the full picture. It has been quite fully
discussed on the Mailing List over the years.
The reason I, for one (but there are probably others), do not go to the extra trouble,
is that we are more governed by musical usefulness than by the need for great
authenticity. Quite frankly, I consider those reed pipe release transients to be just
an eccentricity which many pipe organ builders would like to see kept to a bare minimum.
I have discussed them with such a builder, and he spoke of them as something which
"just happens". I am sure they occur because of the way the pallet closes when a key
is released. If too loud, they have to be called a musical distraction. That is my
opinion as a player. For listeners some distance from the organ, they are often not
audible, partly because their presence is masked by the reverberation.
Pipe attack transients are another matter altogether. They are very important. I have
done a Google search on "Starting transients in organ pipes" and many sites have been
given. Another search for "Closing transients" yielded nothing, as far as I recall.
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-27 19:10
Jan Flikweert wrote:
"SFZ can handle release parts"
Hi all,
I mean: You can define a part of a sample which will be played after a
note-off event occurs.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-29 22:48
Hi all,
I did not manage to get jOrgan play SFZ files ontrigger=release using Linuxsampler.
Using Sforzando it works. But it is not recommended to use sForzando with large
dispositions. sForzando’s uses the Aria engine.
Because jOrgan/sForzando works this will not be an error in jOrgan!
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-30 22:08
Hi all,
I managed to let jOrgan play the release part of a given sample after a normal
loop using sf2/fluidsynth in jOrgan. Thanks to the author of polyphone which
provided a how to. A small soundfont+disposition can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ts_Yxlrc66DNlXYNfcySsz0w2D1fSFSA/view?usp=sharing
And this is the link to the tutorial from Polyphone:
https://www.polyphone-soundfonts.com/documentation/en/tutorials/
using-custom-releases-in-an-instrument
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2021-12-30 23:57
Jan, I don't know how those who record the sample sets of real pipes from pipe organs
edit the samples. I have seen the automated-player machine that is used to play the
individual notes of a given manual, for recording purposes, and I know that the
length of the samples and the time intervals between notes, for the purpose of
complete decay of the sound after release of the key would be a factor in Polyphone
with respect to auto-looping and the triggering of the release portion of the sample.
I have never used or analyzed a sample set from Hauptwerk, so I don't know if the
release portion is a separate wave file or if it is simply the end portion of the
wave file, set to play on release of the key (midi note-off).
I infer from the wording of the "using custom releases in an instrument" that a custom
release is NOT the recorded natural decay to silence set to play after the release of
a key playing the looped, steady-state portion of a wave file, rather that it is a
separate wave file, set to play after the release of the key (midi note-off).
Whether, with auto-looping in jOrgan, for samples which are ALL of a specific length in
seconds, the release portion of the wave file must, also, ALL be a specific length--after
the END of Loop—would be a factor and a potential problem area, I am not certain.
Whether the release parameters set by Release Maker in Polyphone, the halving of the
value per octave relative to the footage of the stop, (just as with attacks), can be
applied to Release Sample wave files, I, also, do not know.
What we have found is that, if a sample of a specific length is auto-looped for "steady
state", the release parameters for the footage of the stop work very well to effectuate
a release. Given the tempo or speed of most music, I don't believe that releases are,
often, a detectable aspect of "CD-quality" audio, even for the most critical listener.
I would be interested (and will) to try creating samples the release tails of which I do
not edit (out). Normally, I use samples of 6-seconds length and cut and delete
everything after 6 seconds, that is, the release tail portion. Several years ago,
I had release tail samples in all my soundfonts. They were no better and no more
effective than the use of the release maker parameters in jOrgan which effectuate
some emulation of release.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-31 01:07
Hi all,Hi John,
I have here a HW demo of Utrecht. For the prestant 8 there are two different samples.
I suppose Front/L/R and Back/R/L. For that prestant 8 there are 3 different release
samples which are real release samples.
On the next website you can find a nice visual of delay.attack,hold,decay,sustain and
release: Envelope Generators - SFZ Format
The start of the release part should be the start of the release sample.
The loop I suppose you place/search in the sustain part.
Every time you play a note jorgan plays delay ,attack ,hold and decay. Releasing a note
will play the release sample. So I do not care about the length of a sample. I also do
not care about the length from the release part. Let jOrgan play is "as-it-is".
In polyphone it is easy. You make a right click at the start of the release. A red line
appears which is end loop. Then write down the number end loop of that sample and the end
of the entire sample. Then you do "autoloop" and Polyphone cuts-off the part after the loop,
which is actually the release. In this way your release and loop are seamless. Then you
create a separate release file using the notated values of by editing the sample in f.e.
Audacity which can be done from Polyphone.
I suppose our goal is to emulate a real sounding organ in real space.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2021-12-31 19:53
I wrote: “A small soundfont+disposition can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ts_Yxlrc66DNlXYNfcySsz0w2D1fSFSA/view?usp=sharing “
Today I updated this upload with sample+release from one wave file Burea Principal 8.
I defined a very small loop at the beginning of the wave file and cut it off after the loop.
All has been done with Polyphone+Audacity.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-02 08:55
I wrote: “SFZ can handle release parts: [Region], [trigger]=release. This reacts
to note-off. I suppose one region for attack and one region for release.
Linuxsampler can handle SFZ.
And jOrgan can handle Linuxsampler.”
I have found the way to solve this using sfz/linuxsampler in an easy way. In this
example the release file contains only the release part. The sample containing the
loop may contain briefly stated: attack until and including loop and does not need
the release part.
Here is an example sfz file:
Test.sfz
<group>
trigger=attack
lokey=36
hikey=96
pitch_keycenter=36
volume=-3
<region>
sample=.\samples\Sample_containing_atttack_including_loop-Pr8-036-C.wav
loop_mode=loop_continuous
<group>
trigger=release
lokey=36
hikey=96
pitch_keycenter=36
volume=-9
<region>
sample=.\samples\Release-Pr8-036-C.wav
cutoff=1000
loop_mode=one_shot
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-03 04:28
JohnB wrote:"I have never used or analyzed a sample set from Hauptwerk, so I don't
know if the release portion is a separate wave file or if it is simply the end
portion of the wave file,"
And
JohnR wrote: "Quite frankly, I consider those reed pipe release transients to be
just an eccentricity which many pipe organ builders would like to see kept to a
bare minimum."
Hi all,
I have analyzed a demo of Utrecht. As earlier stated the release is a separate
file for each key. Another thing is they cutoff the first little piece of the
release(reverb).
And to be clear for me is the goal of a "release" to hear "reverb". I agree with
JohnR that I am not interested in "reed pipe release transients".
I created a sfz/lscp file from the prestant 8 of demo Utrecht including separate
release samples of that demo. Playing from jOrgan the result is good. Due to legal
reasons I cannot share this. Probably I can share playing some chords.
Discussing/comparing jOrgan with GrandOrgue and Hauptwerk people could state that
they can use the release parts. I think jOrgan can do this also.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnR on 2022-01-03 12:02
Jan F wrote:
"Discussing/comparing jOrgan with GrandOrgue and Hauptwerk people could state that
they can use the release parts. I think jOrgan can do this also."
Hi Jan,
Thank you for all the time and effort you have devoted to this subject. I agree with
your conclusion that jOrgan is capable of using the release parts, but I think I have
already made it clear that I believe it is a mistake to try to do that.
In fact, I think it is one of the great virtues of jOrgan that because of our common
use of sf2 soundfonts, we can use the excellent synthesized release sounds which sf2
sound engines such as Fluidsynth produce for us, and so we don't have to put up with
the disadvantages of having to use release SAMPLES. Those disadvantages are the
difficulty of matching the start of the release sample to the end of the looped sample,
and the poor musical effect produced when the player wants to use staccato or semi-
staccato touch.
If we want to use release samples with jOrgan, however, we need to feed the MIDI
messages processed by jOrgan to a sound engine capable of handling them correctly.
Fluidsynth will do that for a single sample, but as far as I now, that is all! Why is it
desirable to use a sound engine capable of handling a number of release samples FOR THE
ONE NOTE? I assume it is because of the problem I have just mentioned at the end of the
previous paragraph. I can think of no other reason why sample set creators would go to
the trouble of adding those additional samples, if it was not felt that their absence
would be a serious fault. But consider all the extra work involved! I am talking about
sample sets for HW or GO. We now begin to see one reason for the huge amounts of RAM
required by some of the large HW samples sets.
There is a sound engine that is capable of handling this extra level of complexity.
It can be used with jOrgan if we convert our sf2 soundfonts to SFZ ones. It is called
ARIA. It was discussed on the Mailing List about five years ago, and although Erik de
Schriver tried to get us interested in it, nothing came of it at the time.
I don't know if ARIA can be obtained anywhere for free. It was very hard to do that five
years ago, and it may even be harder now. You can access the Mailing List discussions by
consulting the archive. My jorgan.info/link.html web-page has a link to the archive near
the top. You then use the Search box at the left of the SourceForge page. I did this for
"ARIA". It resulted in a large number of posts being indicated. By considering their
dates you can work out that a number of threads were involved. If you click on the first
post in each date-group and then go to the bottom of the web-page, you are given a link
to the whole thread. This is a far more convenient method of following the discussion.
Here, for example, is a link to the second of those threads:
https://sourceforge.net/p/jorgan/mailman/jorgan-user/thread/
1497966407099-4665244.post%40n4.nabble.com/#msg35903471
Best wishes,
JohnR
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-03 19:11
John R wrote: "I don't know if ARIA can be obtained anywhere for free." "And
so we don't have to put up with the disadvantages of having to use release
SAMPLES"
Hi all, John,
sForzando is based on Aria. sForzando can be obtained for free:
https://www.plogue.com/downloads.html It can convert SF2 to sfz.
The con of it is: It cannot handle large dispositions as I use.
For my personal use I do not need the use of release samples, because the
samples stored in my digital organ does not have them.
I am very amazed(I do not know if this is the right word) about jOrgan
users. They do not like the reality of release samples(just cutoff a release
8 ft 36 note at 1000hz and reduce attenuation) , but they love the nasty
reality of leaking organ pipes which organ builders really do not like and
should be repaired!
The main question is: What does the user wish? And what did happen with
users who wanted this, but did not got it?
It is very strange that Grandorgue and Hauptwerk adds the release sample,
use the release part and like John R wrote: "so we don't have to put up with
the disadvantages of having to use release SAMPLES"
I think a strong point of jOrgan is that you can use older computers and
have a nice result. It also can give different flavours: The original organ
and an extended version. To be ready for future I advice to add the flavor
of better cleaning of samples and real reverb.
Again the main question is: What does the user wish? And what did happen
with users who wanted this, but did not got it?
There were much troubles with Fluidsynth, every time anything changes it
does not work and when a sf exceeds 2gb on windows you need to split it.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-03 22:16
Garritan Pipe Organ Sound Library ( https://www.garritan.com/blog/logic-multiple-tracks/ )
uses the ARIA Player. I know nothing about ARIA Player, but there are links ("Software
Integration") to blurbs on using the Garritan Sound Libraries with VSTs and workstudio
programs such as Ableton Live, etc. Apparently, the Garritan Pipe organs are playable
using the ARIA Player with no additional midi software interface. I was curious about it
because the quality of the recordings of organ music from the Pipe Organ sound library,
which consists of 75 stops from a number of different organs.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-03 23:19
JohnB wrote: "Garritan Pipe Organ Sound Library (
https://www.garritan.com/blog/logic-multiple-tracks/ ) uses the ARIA
Player"
Garritan seems to me the same user interface as the free sForzando. I
suppose Garritan adds only their "own" instruments. The free sForzando has a
very nice reverb. And indeed f.e. the free sForzando has a aria plugin which
can be used in f.e. REAPER or any other DAW. I will going to test sForzando
on my disposition using FFFFF, because it I mean to remember it cannot
handle that.
I suppose the available jOrgan sf2 are as good as any other instruments?
Another point of sForzando/Aria/Garritan is when you have a existing sf2 you
load in garritan in sforzando it will convert it to sfz. This sfz in
garritan is accessible from jOrgan with the same messages in the ranks as
your sf2. Only send it through a midi port.
Sideways a remark about Linuxsampler/GIG files: Linuxsampler has a script
language to use scripts in gig files.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-03 23:23
Jan said: "I am very amazed(I do not know if this is the right word) about jOrgan users.
They do not like the reality of release samples (just cutoff a release 8 ft 36 note at
1000hz and reduce attenuation) , but they love the nasty reality of leaking organ pipes
which organ builders really do not like and should be repaired!"
It is not that jOrgan users "do not like the reality of release samples." However, the
effect of the release sample is, practically, lost in the flow of music being played at
most normal tempos. It might be noticeable if no artificial reverb, at all, were being
used and/or the samples, themselves, contained the reverberation of the ambience in which
the organ was recorded. Given this fact, the parameter settings which effectuate a
release effect by "release maker" in Polyphone are more than adequate to achieve an
acceptable result.
I have stated before that, in my personal opinion, "CD Quality" sound is that of sound,
heard by a listener in the audience or congregation, not that of the player in an
orchestra or at a piano or organ.
Key noise, pallet noise, stop change noise, or windchest aspiration or blower noise,
while a reality at certain locations close to the console, are not tonal sounds of an
instrument and add nothing to the actual music, however much "realism" they might add
to the mechanics of performance. Of all of these, the one that might give some realism
to the sound of the music is the blower noise (background" or wind aspiration, white or
pink noise, and, even this is extraneous to proper sound quality from the audiophile's
perspective.
Jan, your description of release sample ("just cutoff a release 8 ft 36 note at 1000Hz
and reduce attenuation") needs some explanation. Is this what you think jOrgan users
do with release samples, or is this what Polyphone does, or is this what you believe
should be done regarding release samples?
Since an 8 ft. stop at note 36 is a frequency of about 64 Hz, a cutoff frequency (if that
is what you mean) of 1000 Hz will effectuate a detectable difference in tonal quality
( as compared with no frequency cutoff) and attenuation. This is one of the weaknesses
of MIDI, effectuated electronically. That is, the unexpected interdependence of, seemingly,
unrelated parameters, such that, if one is changed, it affects the quality of another,
needing to be changed, in turn, to compensate. It creates a "nuisance factor" of
"correlated tuning."
Some of the parameters in Polyphone have a rather dramatic effect and attenuation is
one of them. I tried using a 6dB attenuation setting, per octave, in the instrument
pool of my soundfonts, since they are synthesized sounds and, using one sample per octave,
were uniform. However, the very noticeable change in volume from the B note of one octave
to the C note of the next higher octave was objectionable. So, I changed my system and,
in the Samples pool, I decrease ("Change Volume"), per octave, by 10%, starting with 70%
for MIDI notes 12 and 24 (C=16 Hz and C=32 Hz) up to the wave files of MIDI note numbers
108 (C=4186 Hz) and #120 (C=8372 Hz), which are set to 5%. The transition from one octave
to another is much gentler and the change in volume is hardly noticeable. This gives
an, overall, blend to the sound. But their individuality is perceptible (with headphones,
particularly).
I have, often, thought that I would love to be able to have a professional, organ voicer
take my soundfonts and tune or "voice" them with the parameters of Polyphone, just as he
would the actual pipes of an organ. I am not sure that that could be done, but I would
love to hear the end result!
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Thomas Beck on 2022-01-03 23:48
Jan, you asked, "The main question is: What does the user wish? And what did happen with
users who wanted this, but did not got it?"
I am one who wants the release samples and what I did was switch from jOrgan to GrandOrgue.
For my use and taste, there is no comparison between the two. I also found much more variety
of sample sets using GO, although I do have to create the ODFs myself.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-04 01:18
Jan asked "I suppose the available jOrgan sf2 are as good as any other instruments?"
To be perfectly honest, I have never used Hauptwerk or Grand Orgue, but have listened
to youtubers, Richard McVeigh of Beauty in Sound and Fraser Gartshore, both, wonderful
organists who use Hauptwerk. Apparently, the more professional organists who, also,
can afford Hauptwerk and the sample sets
that are available for it find it to be the best virtual organ program out there.
The sound is, truly, remarkable being, virtually, indistinguishable from the actual
pipe organs. I have wondered whether organists of this caliber have even tried jOrgan.
Some of Paul Stratman's dispositions might rival the real sample sets of Hauptwerk, but
the bulk of opinions from users who have used jOrgan and transitioned to Hauptwerk
seems to be that they are not going to return to jOrgan.
Really, I wonder if the two can not be compared at all? That is, that the quality of
sf2 files is so inferior to the wave files of recorded pipes with the ambient reverb
that there is no comparison?
I am not willing to pay $500 or $600 for Hauptwerk and, whereas, I may "have my taste
in my mouth," I have found the challenge of producing synthesized, organ sounds so
rewarding, and the creation of soundfonts so entertaining, and the use of jOrgan to
be so much fun, that the question of whether it sounds like a "glorified Hammond" more
than a real pipe organ is, no longer, something that bothers me. I have been a jOrgan
user since shortly after Sven began the project and, first, used it with the Organtool
and ORGANizer software which, at that time, would produce a disposition by checkbox
selection of the presets in an imported soundfont. My guess is that this was 18 or 20
years ago, although Sven may know, exactly, when he made the first release of jOrgan.
Here's wishing you, all, a better and happier New Year and hoping that the world begins
to see some relief from the effects of Covid! I had it in November and survived,
thankfully. Back to normal and played for a church service yesterday!
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB 2022-01-04 01:43
Jan mentioned the word "DAW" in his last posting and I was not certain of the meaning
of the term, thinking "digital-analog" something or other. So, I searched the term
and found the following
definition of "Digital Audio Workstation."
"A digital audio workstation (DAW) is an electronic device or application software used
for recording, editing and producing audio files. DAWs come in a wide variety of
configurations from a single software program on a laptop, to an integrated stand-alone
unit, all the way to a highly complex configuration of numerous components controlled by
a central computer. Regardless of configuration, modern DAWs have a central interface that
allows the user to alter and mix multiple recordings and tracks into a final produced piece."
After reading the definition, I came to the conclusion that jOrgan qualifies as a "Digital
Audio Workstation." Isn't this so?
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-04 01:58
JohnB wrote:", I came to the conclusion that jOrgan qualifies
as a "Digital Audio Workstation.""
John,
It is confusing. I think jOrgan is not an DAW. REAPER, Mulab etc. are DAW's.
In f.e. REAPER you can load all the stops of your disposition separate in a
track using sForzando as plugin and control that from jOrgan. Unfortunual
this messes things around.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-04 02:15
JohnM quoted me: ("just cutoff a release 8 ft 36 note
at 1000Hz and reduce attenuation")
John,
Indeed that needs clarification.
I used the Principal 8' 36 of Burea. Splitting the sample at the point I
consider to be the release point results in disturbance at the start. I
noticed this above 1000 hz. So I add parameter Filter (cut hz) 1000 to the
sf. In Hauptwerk they solved this by starting after the disturbance.
Regarding reverb I want to state: Without "reverb" and the effect of the
space on sound organ music should sound "dead".
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-04 02:21
Jan, does a DAW have to include a physical, music keyboard?
John B.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-04 02:39
Thomas wrote: "I am one who wants the release samples"
Thomas,
Thanks for your reply. As you probably have noticed it is hard to change things
in the jOrgan community. You solved it your way which I respect.
For my personal use jOrgan is the most easy. I created a soundfont from my digital
organ. The samples in that digital organ have no release. So for me the subject
"release" is no issue. I use Reverberate with a little chorus. Creating a disposition
with GrandOrgue is not so easy and it has no ASIO audio backend, unless you compile
it yourself. Most important for me is that it is easy in jOrgan to store for each
piece of music combinations in memory.
An issue for both jOrgan and GrandOrgue is there is not much development at the
moment. That is not necessary because they need no improvement. But hardware,
OS etc. changes. The subject "security" also. That causes libraries who were
safe getting vulnerable.
Why do I post about this subject? I have much spare time, I love to work with this
things and want to contribute to the community. I even dreamed to record a organ
and create a disposition. I think the community needs no contribute and as you
noticed I have a different point of view.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-04 02:47
John B wrote: "Jan, does a DAW have to include a physical, music keyboard?"
John,
I do not know. Using sForzando as plugin for your disposition in a DAW
requires midi.
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-04 05:20
JohnB wrote: "Garritan Pipe Organ Sound Library
(https://www.garritan.com/blog/logic-multiple-tracks/ ) uses the ARIA
Player."
Hi all,
The Garritan Aria player can be downloaded here:
https://makemusic.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360037425313-ARIA-Player-Ver
sion-1-959-Installer
The pro is you can use for each instance of it 16 instruments let us say
stops. Using in REAPER you can add for each instrument track one Garritan
Aria plugin containing 16 instruments. Each instrument can be assigned to
one channel.
For this solution again the question, can it handle more than 16 instruments
at one time?
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-05 00:57
JohnB wrote: "Garritan Pipe Organ Sound Library (
https://www.garritan.com/blog/logic-multiple-tracks/ ) uses the ARIA
Player."
Hi all,
I have tried the Garritan Aria player as plugin in REAPER. I used 12 tracks
each track can contain up to 16 stops. I must confess it can handle large
dispositions and does not mess things up.
The only issue I am facing is how to change the volume for each stop? Using
CC1 or CC7 only effects the first channel of each plugin.
Of course I Googled and there is suggested using mod-wheel, so the CC1. That
did not work.
Any ideas?
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Graham Wykes on 2022-01-05 01:21
Jon F wrote:
"The only issue I am facing is how to change the volume for each stop? Using
CC1 or CC7 only effects the first channel of each plugin."
You need to change the first byte of the midi cc message to specify the channel.
So 176 is CC on channel 1, 177 is CC on channel 2 etc.
"Of course I Googled and there is suggested using mod-wheel, so the CC1. That
did not work.
Any ideas?"
CC7 is volume and CC11 is expression. Try those.
Cheers
GrahamW
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-05 02:16
Jan, unless you can access the wave files of the soundbank you are using and,
perhaps, edit the volume in a wave editor, such as Audacity, there may be no
way to regulate it. So, there is no gain level which can be set by the user
in ARIA? That does seem rather strange given the fact that there is so much
variation in the overall volume. If ARIA does not allow allow channel volume
control, you would, seemingly, have to reduce the volume of the wave files in
the soundbank.
Are you using the Garritan Classic Pipe Organ sample set, also?
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-05 02:19
Graham Wykes wrote:
"CC7 is volume and CC11 is expression. Try those."
Graham, Jan is using the Garritan ARIA player in REAPER, which, apparently,
does not allow the input of midi programming language such as jOrgan does,
and, so, he can not change the volume on the individual channels.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-05 02:32
JohnB wrote: "If ARIA does not allow allow channel volume control, you would,
seemingly, have to reduce the volume of the wave files in the soundbank."
John,
I only have the player without instruments and added the soundfont from my
own digital organ. In an early post I wrote the download link from the
player Garritan uses. The idea behind their instruments is they recorded
f.e. a plenum from organs in different styles.
Indeed you can modify the volume in the SFZ file.
But I suppose we want to use our swell pedal or store a given volume to a
stop in our jorgan memory etc.
Reading on other forums you read the wonderful ideas: Read the manual
without telling where, use the mod wheel or CC1 without mention how and in
which combinations these messages should be used:
Engage rank CC 1,100
Disengage rank CC 1, or just nothing.
Is CC1 needed CC1 and CC7 and in what combination. Just try it. Good
luck........
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-05 04:37
Hi all,
I found this. I am going to try that. It needs to be added to the sfz file
<global>
amplitude_oncc11=100
<control>
label_cc011=11 Expression
set_cc011=127 // Power-on Default Value: Expression
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-05 18:51
JohnB wrote: "does not allow the input of midi programming language such as jOrgan does"
Hi all,
I did manage to control the volume. You can create controllers in your SFZ files. All works
even with large dispositions. There are two things which I will change:
1. I use a basic sf2 to convert to sfz. The attack needs improvement. This is a known
issue which we discussed before in this thread
2. Volume needs improvement. That can be done from sfz.
Kind regards
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-05 23:49
Graham said: "You need to change the first byte of the midi cc message to specify
the channel. So 176 is CC on channel 1, 177 is CC on channel 2 etc.”
This, in fact, works in jOrgan with no problem. I have a disposition in which I,
successfully, input the MPL for the messages to 6 divisions, both for expression
(CC11) and Volume (CC7) for all channels.
So, if a midi file is played from an external, midi sequencer program and input to
the jOrgan disposition, or, if the organ were played from a console having a
corresponding number of expression pedals, it responds to volume and expression
change events on each channel for each division. This can be good or very annoying,
depending on how judiciously an organist uses volume or expression pedals.
Some midi files of organ music, (for example, the Reuter organ midi files available
from Classical Midi Organ Stop at www.graeber.com "Pipe Organ" index) Apparently,
there was some kind of automatic "default" volume setting (CC7) when a .mid file was
produced with the organ because ALL of the .mid files have volume changes of 127
(loudest) in the Event List. If these are read by a jOrgan disposition having the
MPL messages to intercept volume and expression changes, the loudness will be
OVERWHELMING. Be careful to delete these events before using their files.
John Beach
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-06 00:14
JohnB wrote: "Graham said: ‘You need to change the first byte of the midi cc message
to specify the channel. So 176 is CC on channel 1, 177 is CC on channel 2 etc.’ "
John,
That is indeed what happens in jOrgan when you use a Generic sound and add in
properties the channel. This channel value is added to 176 and therefore starts with 0.
Additional you need to create for each stop cc11 controllers in your sfz files.
That are a few lines.
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-06 02:47
I wrote: "I have tried the Garritan Aria player as plugin in REAPER."
Hi all,
At the moment the I have a reasonable disposition for this Garritan Aria player plugin
in REAPER. I played some music with at the end 16+8+4+2+mixt to show the result and not
only FF. It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/119cGyS79nSLSp1x8LRtIIbgFuG4v48oE/view?usp=sharing
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-06 03:09
I wrote: "It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/119cGyS79nSLSp1x8LRtIIbgFuG4v48oE/view?usp=sharing"
Hi all,
To compare Garritan Aria/sfz and Linuxsampler/Gig files I played the same using
Linuxsampler/Gig files. Download:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MYAgyYWHGL3ADotdPhZ3NfWh8TfDs3gr/view?usp=sharing
Kind regards,
Jan Fl.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From JohnB on 2022-01-06 13:43
Jan, I prefer the first one below. Linuxsampler is a bit too brash. In your sounds
you have captured the singing quality of the tuning of Dutch organs. They have a very
unique quality to them.
John Beach
Jan F wrote: "It can be downloaded here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/119cGyS79nSLSp1x8LRtIIbgFuG4v48oE/view?usp=sharing
To compare Garritan Aria/sfz and Linuxsampler/Gig files I played the same using
Linuxsampler/Gig files. Download:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MYAgyYWHGL3ADotdPhZ3NfWh8TfDs3gr/view?usp=sharing "
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Jan Flikweert on 2022-01-06 22:59
JohnB wrote: "In your sounds you have captured the singing quality of the tuning
of Dutch organs. They have a very unique quality to them."
John,
That is very interesting. Things are relative. My way of using stops is inspired
on César Franck. F.e. Montre 8, Bourdon 16+8, Flutes en of course reeds. There may
be tuning, but not from the combined stops. That is why I created Montre based mixtures.
The Dutch romantic way of using stops can differ. There are people who combine
Flutes+Prestant which gives a special tuning. There were even sons of Jan Zwart
(Latterly translated: John Black) which are more Prestant based and did not mix
flutes to them. Without judging about these ways of playing I want to point to it.
Another interesting point is you prefer the aria player. This morning I spent to
update aria sfz with the most actual gig. Regarding the Aria player: I use it as
plugin in REAPER, but it can also work standalone with reverb and ambience with
16 instruments. I suppose it is possible to run multiple instances of Aria player
and these instances assign the input to a different midi port. Connection through
Generic sound with use of the channel propertie.
Linuxsampler can also handle release parts of a sample with their gig files. And
Linuxsampler has a script language which can be assigned to gig/sfz files.
Is there anyone who has experience with Kontakt Player? The full version has also
a script language.
I had a look at Kontakt. I see that it can react on release triggers. Problem is
that the free version which I use gives limited access to "third party" instruments.
This does not work fine for me. The complete version costs € 199.
Kind regards,
Fan Fl. MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mac OS x xi xii
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-30 05:01
I start by saying that jOrgan will work in any Mac OS I have tried it in…
with a few eccentricities. Which I believe have been outlined in the past.
Fluidsynth worked the first time I tried it. And also sending midi data to
Qsynth works, which is my preferred way to create a disposition.
I am not a programmer… but I am persistent… with years (since everything was
installed in DOS) of fixing computers experience.
My question is this: Should the Configuration menu item show up when starting
jOrgan in the Mac OS? (Not the Customizer… just to be clear.) Even if I
start jOrgan from the command line or command line w/sudo I don’t get Configuration.
Is it correct to assume that there are no “back-ends” for the Mac OS? So any
multi-stereo channel outputs would have to be achieved in another way.
Cheers
Marc-Paul
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Sven Meier on 2021-12-30 05:29
Hi Marc,
the view/configuration menu is hidden on OS X, because the system should offer you
the standard menu entry in the OS X application menu.
I changed that recently (https://github.com/svenmeier/jorgan/commit/
4ff0d54ec1f3ccbbe83e25e6fee741365d180dc3#diff-04820bb208bb451fc026531d7
a2ec85eb55374a323a51980d096fa6169b30ddb) because the old AppleJavaExtensions
are no longer supported - maybe this is why the menu entry no longer shows up?
Yes, the "back-ends" are for Windows only.
Have fun
Sven
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Julie Porter on 2021-12-31 06:15
Marc Allen;
I found on my Big Sur installation, I have to start jOrgan using the terminal,
$ cd /Applications/jOrgan-3.21.1
$ java -jar jorgan.jar
For info this is what I have installed
$ java -version
java version "1.8.0_311"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_311-b11)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.311-b11, mixed mode)
and
$ fluidsynth -v
FluidSynth runtime version 2.1.9
Copyright (C) 2000-2021 Peter Hanappe and others.
Distributed under the LGPL license.
SoundFont(R) is a registered trademark of E-mu Systems, Inc.
There is some weirdness regarding the menus, one has to have a disposition open
in order to see the preference menu.
The app menu is called 'bootstrap' which is where the 'preference' and 'quit'
options are. I think the settings are correctly stored in the ~/Library or in
the root Library. These seem to be retained from earlier versions.
'Customize' shows in the file menu once the disposition is loaded.
It looks like the source code still contains the mac application wrapper.
The version on sourceforge does not seem to have this in the dmg.
I do not have time to attempt to create a build environment to figure out why
that is not working or was not done. Without this the finder can not
open dispositions with a double click.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
From Marc Allen on 2021-12-31 08:30
Thanks Julie...
Sven mentioned that Preferences would show up on the
Bootstrap menu... I never looked there! The first time I tried the command line
it ask me to install some additional Java software.
I don't have to use a command line any more to see it... I don't know why.
I have done most of my early testing on OS X High Sierra... although I have an
incarnation of everything from High Sierra to current.
Thanks for thinking of this issue.... AND THANKS for the MIXTURES!!!
Cheers
Marc-Paul MOST RECENT POST IN THE THREAD
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
End of 2021 Jul-Dec Archive