I guess in a way "midi paper" already exists in the form of Sibelius and photoscore.  I use Sibelius to compose, or scan music in - it will even cope with handwritten scores to an extent, which I then export to my DAW and hone to perfection (sic).  OK so it is an imperfect system - but it does work pretty well. 

The performance marks written in Sibelius are rendered as midi messages, the parameters of which you can edit, and I guess that the flexiblilty and power of this feature will evolve.  With the advent of touch screen displays I suppose Sibelius could eventually accept input via a pen on a "paper" screen.  That would be cool.

 Yes, you can do that in Finale as well but again, you are forced to conform to how the equipment makes you work - at a computer terminal, scanning, etc. etc. 

But the physical aspect of this is more what I meant - the concept of using book-like forms that are actually digital is being done already as well as the development of flexible, paper-like LCD (or similar) screens. 

Another device I have wanted is a handheld USB recorder that transcribes a whistled or hummed tune into notation and then uploads into a computer.  This would replace the scrawled notes for melodies or motifs that I am often putting on napkins or scraps of paper and losing.  Of course then I would lose the recorder with a year's worth of humming and really be disgusted.

As I said in my post, I agree with you that Sibelius etc are imperfect, but with the advent of touchscreen LCDs and digital paper - which i am sure will arrive fully in the next five years (windoze 7 is rumoured to have some touchscreen capabilities) - all our DAWs and software will have a more tactile interface. I am sure the technologies will converge and develop.

As regards your second point about a hummed or wistled tune - once again it exists in nascant form in Melodyne - the latest version will have the ability to turn more than one line into midi....

Now..... what about a thought wave reader, to turn what we are thinking into midi....

No wait!  We don't want it to be tooooo easy - everyone will be doing it then

Those are more like peripherals to computer systems. 

I meant a completely different base of operations that is exactly like traditional musical creation as much as possible.  Not taking a computer and making it a bit similar, like a touch sensitive screen, or putting a program that can transcribe sounds,  but instead completely remodeling the basic GUI so that it is radically different as in the case of music paper that was completely internally digital and had no cables, etc.  This is seen in something like the Amazon "Kindle", which is not a glowing backlit computer screen (which irritates long-term book readers) but is actually illuminated by the ambient light in the room, exactly like book paper.

 Sorry this got so far away from the topic.

I was wondering if Jay could discuss the percussion parts on this, and what difficulties there might have been, how many tracks were used, which instruments.  I had the impression that the tam-tam part would be difficult with muted fortissimo, etc.  Also, if all the instruments asked for in the score were available.

Everything we have talked about here will happen but in do course.

I have recently seen a robot made by Toyota connected wirelessly to a human. When the man had a thought about moving his foot the robot moved his foot. This was repeated but with various tasks like walking, jumping...the man was in a chair but the robot was doing what the man was thinking. It was amazing.

I know that everything I wrote about above will become available, its just a matter of time.  For me they can't happen soon enough and the discussion about samples is only half the battle. Making the process of music dictation easier is what needs to happen. Right now the samples are better sounding than this process allows.

I see your point about how it will become easy and everyone will be doing it then, but music composition is unlike the other arts like dance, or painting, sculptor in the way that we (the audience) only care about the final product and not process whereas how a painting was painted or statue sculpted is part of those artistic disciplines. Its not really the composing we are making easier but the process of getting it from our brains to the world. We still need the musical training and understand orchestration, counterpoint, melody....

What I care about is how good my music is and how fast I can compose the next piece and I want to take away all the steps that are not required in the process, the natural organic process: think, compose, perform/record. And that process is simply dictation, once the musical idea hatches. Many of the steps we have to take right now to get the idea into the computer are completely useless to the creative process and in fact blocks creativity itself.

I look forward to the future where I can put on a helmut (instead of using a keyboard and mouse) and conceive music as I hear it in my head and it gets scored right into some software for me to hear it back immediately.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE writing music on paper at the piano. If I had all the money in the world that is how I would compose. I would MUCH rather compose that way as opposed to wearing a helmut or using a mouse or keyboard, I would also much rather hand the finished piece of music to real musicians and rehearse them and conduct the piece myself and ditch the computer completely. But, since I am not wealthy I have to resort to this unnatural process with computers just to hear my ideas as they would sound with a real orchestra.

I am sorry to have hi-jacked this thread so maybe we can move these last few messages to a new thread and continue there if need be.

DM33

Jay, this is an astonishing piece of work with meticulous attention to detail. Well done. Thank you for sharing the MIDI file and VE set-ups with us, they are very useful resources.

"The second challenge for me was acquiring technology powerful enough to get the job done. The size and complexity of the Rite quickly brought my old computer (Windows 32-bit XP with 4 GB of RAM) to its digital knees. I would have to brave the new world of 64 bits. I got a book on building my own computer and bought all the separate components. Then, fearing that I would somehow fry my expensive circuits with a single ungrounded touch, I carefully assembled my 16 GB, quad-core silicon juggernaut. Surprisingly, the building process was much easier than I feared. And within a few days I was able to run more than 100 VSL MIDI tracks on a single computer with only the occasional hiccup."

if you're not too busy sequencing the entire works of Wagner, could you kindly spare the time to elaborate and tell us what the components, OS (etc.) of your new computer are? (Sorry if this is posted elsewhere and I missed it.)

Here are the main specs for the system that I used to for the Rite of Spring.  Looks like I'm going to have to build an even faster one to run MIR.   I'll post those specs too in about a month. 

--Jay

OS: Vista Home Premium 64 bit
Processor:  Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 @2.40GHz
Memory: 16 GB
Graphics: NVidia GeForce 8800 GT
Sound: Echo Digital Audio Mia Midi
Network Adapter: Marvell Yukon 88E8001/8003/8010 PCI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Ethernet 802.3)
Main Drive: Seagate Cheetah 15K 300GB

2 500GB eSATA hard drives

 Thanks Jay!

Hi again Jay, I downloaded the two big MIDI files and the VE set-ups for your fabulous arrangement and am having great fun studying it. One question - in Part 1, I found what appears

 to be a glitch in the time signature and tempi tracks. Having started at bar 11, they both seem to be missing data for 48 bars from bar 12. This may well be a side-effect of Logic 7's inept attempt to import the file, but if someone has the time could they kindly check the original MIDI file (available here:

http://vsl.co.at/downloader.asp?file=/Sounds/MP3/VI_DEMOS/Rite_of_Spring/Rite-Part1_ProjectFiles.zip )

... and let me know if it seems OK? Many thanks. Such a great piece of work, it's wonderful to be able to hear all the individual parts! [Y]

 Just rechecked midi file.   Looks fine in Sonar 8.

--Jay

 Thanks Jay, must be a Logic thing.

I'm currently listening and am blown away again by the music. I do not listen to the fact that it's a simulated orchestra, I'm solely listening to the music.

That's how it should be, isn't it?

Yeah, I'm listening to the interpretation, and not tripping. This is a pretty awesome achievement, really it is.

Regarding note data - was this inputted in Sibelius first, then exported to Sonar?

I have both programs and I wish to start using Sibelius and VSL properly for composing, but first, to input an orchestral score in SIbelius (no way I'll use the piano roll) by copying the print score (best way to learn Sibelius), using the standard Sibelius instruments for playback, then exporting the 'notes' as individual MIDI tracks to Sonar 8, set up 4 instances of Vienna Ensembles as VSTs in Sonar each with the main sections of the orchestra (WW, brass, etc.), then do all the mixing and articulation changes manually with MIDI messages.

I have the VSL SE and + but no extended instruments. Also I have 4Gb RAM but since I'm running on XP VSL only sees 2Gb (How do I get the 3Gb switch to work in VSL ?). I intend to move to WIn 7 64-bit and 8Gb RAM when Soniccore release their 64-bit SCOPE drivers!

I wish to do Ralph Vaughan Williams Symphony No.4 1st Mov, a powerful piece that's quite unlike the sort of music VW is usually known for, and a good project to do as the notation isn't very complicated and the orchestra is of only moderate size so might suit my low availablily of RAM.

I agree with that Johann, it is an all around feat.  But the thing that is most noticeable on these responses is how people keep saying they stopped listening to the samples and just listened to the music.  In other words it is the goal of VSL to become invisible. 

This brings up the question of what makes this possible.  On another thread people were complaining bitterly about how some ranges of articulations were not complete.  They focused on a few tiny missing notes and generalized about the entire orchestral library.   But the fact this massively complex modern piece is not only possible, but very expressively played, demonstrates that the height of orchestral performance is possible with VSL.  I always notice today how people take for granted technology.  They think it is ordinary and even simple, because they are used to it.   But in the case of computer technology it is vastly complex, and the only reason it functions at all (when it does) is because thousands of people have worked on it, creating and maintaining an infrastructure of almost frightening complexity.  In the case of this kind of technology,  applied to music, the greatest challenge was not the technical means, but the musical system by which the breaking down of the huge instrument known as the symphony orchestra had to be created.  It is in this area that VSL shines - the way that a system was evolved for determining what notes of the almost infinite number of possible ones are most needed.   The knowledge and musicality of a great performer/programmer such as Jay Bacal are essential, but none of that would be heard if the system for the representation of orchestral sound was not so thoroughly and ingeniously worked out as it is with VSL.  To this musical system was added the programming of the Vienna Ensemble/Instruments, which accomplished what only recently seemed impossible - making a musically intuitive system for sample selection and performance.

I agree with William totally. VSL is capable NOW of producing realistic orchestral performances (but I think you have to pick pieces that suit it best) - emulating an orchestra with a computer is a terrifically complex task - VSL succeeds with this, so this enables a new breed of talented musicians to emerge - 'Orchestra performer/programmer'  to give it a crude title-- Jay Bacal is one of the pioneers - but he wouild not have bothered to have done it unless he knew the tools were available/capable to do it.

I think Jay with the Rite of Spring has set a benchmark - but there are equally realistic mock-ups by other 'performer/programmers' on the demo page - just not with the length and complexity of Jay's work.