TV Intro Song: New Day Ministries

A local TV program host hired me to create a video intro and outro for her TV show, which included creating an original song. I enjoyed the challenge of creating the song and video with a very limited budget and time constraints. I always have fun when I get to be creative.

I posted the mp3 version of the song in my personal SoundClick page here (click on the player below)

I uploaded the video to YouTube, but the process took F - O - R - E - V - E - R! I think YouTube would be better off having people convert their videos into FLV first, then uploading instead of the other way around. Just my $0.02 worth.

For the song: I tracked, recorded and mixed with Cakewalk's Project 5 using Dimension Pro and Amplitube for sounds and FX. I used Sony Soundforge for compressiong and mastering. I used Audacity to do last minute editing and converting to MP3 for upload to the website.

For the video I used Adobe's Premiere Pro and royaly-free video footage from iStockPhoto.

EQ Magazine: Managing Multisamples With SFZ

Key Issues: Managing Multisamples With SFZ

By Craig Anderton | April, 2008

The following may seem techy, and, frankly, that techy aspect inhibited me from checking out the SFZ file format. But once I finally wrapped my head around the concept, I was glad I did.
The SFZ file format—a license-free spec, even for commercial purposes—was created by synth designer Rene Ceballos, and it defines how multisamples should be handled within an SFZ-compatible instrument. The format is compatible with several Cakewalk instruments, including Dimension, Session Drummer 2, Rapture, and DropZone. But it’s also compatible with the free, VST-compatible SFZ Player that works in any VSTi-compatible host (download the Player at www.project5.com/products/instruments/sfzplayer/default.asp), so the format’s usefulness extends far beyond Cakewalk instruments.

For example, suppose you work with Samplitude, you’re collaborating with a friend who uses Cubase, and you have a bunch of “found sound” samples you want to use as rhythmic elements. If you create an SFZ file of these sounds, and you both download the free SFZ Player, you can exchange keyboard parts that trigger these samples in the SFZ Player. What’s more, the SFZ format accommodates Ogg Vorbis (compressed) files, so you can use really big files, but compress them for faster file transfers over the net. When it’s time to mix down, simply change the SFZ file to reference the original WAV files instead of the compressed ones.

SFZ BASICS

You can think of the SFZ format as being similar to SoundFonts, but an SFZ file has two components instead of one: a collection of samples (typically stored in a folder), and a text-based definition file that describes what to do with that collection of samples. You can create an SFZ definition file in any simple word processor such as Notepad.

For example, suppose you sampled a Minimoog at the F key for every octave over a five-octave range (F1, F2, F3, F4, and F5). You can then create an SFZ file that references these waveforms, and describes the root key of each waveform, as well as the keyboard range each waveform should cover.

But those are just the basics. The SFZ format can also specify detuning, transposition, filtering, envelopes, sample start time, looping, and many other characteristics. Waveforms can overlap, and you can define as many waveforms as you want in an SFZ file. It’s therefore possible to specify a complete instrument using SFZ, and if you load that SFZ file into an SFZ-compatible instrument, it will play back exactly as you intended.

A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

Creating an SFZ definition file requires some programming chops, but, fortunately, the commands are pretty simple and musician friendly. To elaborate further on the Minimoog example mentioned above, I recently created a multi-sampled set of Minimoog waveforms suitable for loading into SFZ-compatible synths. I sampled the notes at consistent notes for the various waveforms, and gave them consistent names (SawF1.WAV, SawF2.WAV, TriangleF1.WAV, and so on). I stored all the samples in a folder titled Minimoog Waveforms, then created an SFZ definition file for the sawtooth wave samples that defined the note range covered by each sample. Once I created that file, creating another SFZ file for the triangle wave samples simply involved doing a find on “Saw,” replacing each instance with “Triangle,” and then saving the file under a different name (MinimoogTriangle.sfz). I did the same thing for the Pulse, Square, and other waveforms.

Once these SFZ files were done, I could load one into Rapture. The multisampled collection of waveforms then became a single “element” within Rapture (think of an element as roughly equivalent to a voice). I’ve also created multisamples with guitar notes, drum sounds, effects, and various other sounds.

The main “unit” of an SFZ definition file is the region. Here’s the syntax for creating a simple region:

pitch_keycenter=F1 lowkey=C0 hikey=C2 Sample=Minimoog Waveforms\SawF1.wav

This says that the sample being used has a root key of F1, and should cover the key range of C0 up to and including C2. To reference where the sample comes from, an added “Sample” designation points to the “Minimoog Waveforms” folder and after a backslash, specifies the file name within the folder.

Creating regions for the other samples simply involves substituting some different names, root notes, and key-range values. You can also add comments, as long as the line starts with two slashes. Figure 1 shows a file that defines a complete Minimoog sawtooth wave multisample with five samples.

For more information on the SFZ format, including a complete list of commands (opcodes), surf to www.cakewalk.com/DevXchange/sfz.asp, or check out the book Cakewalk Synthesizers by Simon Cann [Thomson Course Technology]. Granted, not everyone will get into programming SFZ files, but I’ve found it to be a tremendously useful format for creating sophisticated multisample collections that can play back in a variety of instruments.

Laptop Vs. Keyboard Workstation

In the Beginning, there was a DX7.
For years I used keyboard workstations because that was the only choice available to the keyboard geeks in the 80's. In the early 90's I tried using MIDI with a Yamaha PSR keyboard and my computer, all using software bundled with a Voyetra sound card. This was very cool! Then I found Cakewalk (can't remember if that was the software bundled with my sound card). This was also very cool! Later a college roommate and music major introduced me to Band In A Box and that was fun because I could create a groove and jam with it in almost no time.

But that was all for fun and hobby at home. When it came time to gig, I used workstations and arranger keyboards such as the aforementioned Yamaha PSR 500, a Korg O1/W, an Ensoniq ASR-10, and an Alesis QS8.1 and even the old Yamaha DX7 (love it or hate it - I love it!).

I loved playing on these machines, but hated lugging them around along with my keyboard amp. Good thing I was young and just out of college. Now I'm married with 4 kids and pushing 40 and the idea of lugging a mammoth keyboard or two plus amp does not appeal to me. And having worked in the Information Technology field for over a decade, I felt it was time to investigate using a computer instead of a keyboard. I totally skipped over the era of using rackmount sound modules and samplers! (If keyboard workstation interfaces were not user friendly enough, how in the world could a small rackmount interface be OK?)

Back to Cakewalk for me.
I re-entered the PC based music world again using Home Studio and playing with demo versions of Sonar. I was impressed with Sonar, big time!! I was hooked and ready to make music on my computer. That computer monitor is so much easier to work on than my old workstation's limited LED interfaces (I preferred Korg's O1/W the best interface of all those older keyboards).

Armed with a powerful laptop, a Kurzweil master MIDI keyboard, an M-Audio Ozonic and an amp, I can now gig with a lot less weight and a lot more options / power.

However, for live gigging, Sonar and most other DAWs are not up to the challenge. But Reason, Live and Project5 are up to the challenge. I chose Cakewalk's Project5 because I'm kind of loyal to Cakewalk for being there for me all these years, plus when I purchased P5 it came bundled with many synths which made it the best band for the buck.

However, two years into using this and I'm finding that the keyboard workstations are calling my name again.
Why? I work so much on computers throughout the day and even at home in the evenings (checking email, my RSS reader, posting comments to blogs or writing to blogs) that I'm getting sick of using my computer all the time! I think it would be refreshing for me to take a small 61-key workstation (e.g., Roland Fantom G6) and go off to some other room and sit down and compose on it. Of course, then I'd be limited to the samples on the workstation as well as the effects; I'd be limited by the hard drive or storage media of the workstation and the RAM on the workstation too. All of these limitations are bound to be inferior to the same limitations on a laptop or PC workstation. But for some reason I keep checking the Internet for information about the latest keyboard workstations.

I don't know what's up! I love working with Project5! It is the easiest, most intuitive DAW I've used. It reminds me of how I used to work with patterns on the old Korg, only it is so much easier to do it now. I have so much more power at my fingertips now. But the old ways are calling to me anyway. Perhaps I'm just waxing nostalgic and it's a passing phase.

If it is I need it to pass quickly before I fork over several thousand bucks on a new keyboard workstation!

New Track: Follow

I've been mulling around a song idea for several years and am just now getting to complete it. I have laid down what I believe are the essential instrumental tracks now, and have begun the vocal tracks. Interestingly (for me), this song began life inspired by a Delirous song (I don't remember which one), but as it grew and evolved it became something completely different: a musical tribute to some of most influential ideologists (for me):

• John Lennon (with the whole "give peace a chance" and "all we need is love" thing
• Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (with the whole "content of your character" vs. "color of your skin" thing)
• Jesus (with the whole "love your neighbor as yourself", "lose your life to keep it" thing)

Lyrically I hope to show how these men taught some things which are inspirational for me - things I aspire to become / achieve; things that I hope speak to all people everywhere throughout the generations. Musically, it is a tribute to the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper album, AND 90's grunge sound (circa, Bush / Stone Temple Pilots / Pearl Jam / Nirvana).

We'll see if I can pull this off. I have questions as to whether I'm trying to cover too much ground both lyrically and musically. I remember my dad used to say "keep it simple stupid' (and I would laugh hysterically, being a 7 year old boy). I'm afraid I've digressed from that concept on this song. But something inside of me keeps pushing that direction regardless of what my common sense tells me. We'll see if this is a train wreck or a great song.

• Falling Down: mixing and EQ-ing
• Falling Down: vocals
• Falling Down: track info
  

Falling Down - Track Info

I'm still tweaking the vocal tracks because they just don't sound like I want them to yet. I don't know if I'll re-record or redo the FX on them. But for now I'll do a track breakdown so if anyone else wants to use similar sounds, they'll know how I created these...

• vel drum: acoustic.simple > classic EQ > drum aux
• dim drum: room kit 01 > amp sim: solid state clean
• pad: dim pro:affected > amp sim: solid state distortion
• rhodes: dim pro: rhodes 2v 4th > amplitube: asdf > classic EQ
• piano: dim pro: tiny piano > studio verb: piano hall > sonitus EQ
• guitar1: strat > amplitube: edged pride > classic EQ > tempo delay
• guitar2: strat > amplitube: edged pride > classic EQ > tempo delay
• bass: dim pro: dull fingered 1 > amplitube > classic EQ
• vocal verse: me > De-ess > sonitusfx EQ > sonitus reverb: lg plate > FX Dynamics Processor: hard limiter
• vocal bridge: me > De-ess > sonitusfx EQ: telephone > amplitube > FX2 Tape Sim: heavy saturation > FX Dyn Proc.: radio compression
• vocal chorus: layered verse FX and bridge FX

I've got some nice constructive criticism of this song, and I'll attempt to incorporate them and rerelease this song when that is done. Thanks to those on the Cakewalk Project 5 Forum and Scott Garrigus' Forum!

Falling Down Vocal Track

I haven't listened to myself sing in a long time.  That's a big mistake: listening to yourself for the first time in a long time.  I think you're always going to be shocked by what you hear because the sound in your head is different than the sound everyone else hears.  When you first do a playback of your vocal track, you'll probably feel like I did (if you have any honest musical listening skills)... "Whoa that sucks!"  "Is that ME?"  "Why did I think I could even bother to record myself?"

I experienced all these emotions this weekend as I attempted to lay down some vocal tracks for my song, Falling Down.  I went through the full range of emotions ranging from:

• "I need to re-record the vocals" to
• "perhaps I should ask someone else to sing instead," to
• "I should rewrite this whole song in another key perhaps and then I can sing it better," to
• "I should just give up songwriting and especially singing!"

Let's just say that for this song to have survived this weekend is a miracle.  I've had this song in my brain for over a decade and it's so close to being completed... and it almost dies, because I don't like my vocal track.  I think the problem here is that I like all the peoples' voices on all the other songs I listen to (and some of these people really can't sing well at all!)... but I don't like my own voice.  Honestly, is Mick Jagger all that great as a singer?  I think if you pick some of the biggest "stars" in rock history, very few, if any, could have survived through a season of American Idol.

So the real issue isn't if my voice is any good.  My voice is fine - I can sing better than many rock stars, but that's not what made them rock stars... Nope.  What made them stars and what continues to separate the mediocre from the great is in their presentation of the song.  U2's Bono is no vocal Pavarotti, but what he lacks in  vocal training he makes up for in emotional content. This is where the rock stars really deliver the goods.  Kurt Cobain and Nirvana never really displayed musical virtuosity in either singing or playing, but they redefined a musical genre (and I'm very thankful for the influence of the grunge rock of the 90's).  Billy Corgan (of The Smashing Pumpkins) is sometimes flat out annoying to me vocally, but I really enjoy his music!

Now I'm re-inspired to go back and record some vocals.  This time I'm going to focus on the emotional delivery of the lines and not the technical aspects of good vocal delivery.  This isn't choir or a choral / vocal contest!  This is my song, my music created by me, mostly FOR me (and anyone else who enjoys it).  I got this song in me and I gotta get it out.  I think only I could possibly do it right... if I can't nobody else will.

Falling Down: Mixing, EQing, Panning

When I started down the musical path at the tender age of 8 or 9 (can't remember exactly when)... I was only concerned with "live" playing.  I wanted to learn to play the keyboards so I could be a rocking piano man like Billy Joel or Elton John.  Never did I dream it would be important to understand and study the concepts of EQing, mixing tracks, panning, etc.  Later, when I actually started playing with bands, I realized the importance of EQ because the keyboard players' sound tends to get lost in the mix, so I had to figure out ways that my sounds would "cut" through the live mix.  I learned how to EQ my synth patches for a little more "bite", piano would have more punch and highs and sound more thin instead of full.

Now, decades later, I find myself needing to learn more stuff yet again.  I guess ya never stop learning, eh?  I'm trying to get this song, "Falling Down" into a semi-final form and I find that it just doesn't sound the way I want it to (for more reasons than the obvious "I can't play these other instruments well" thing).  Aside from the fact that I just can't program drums, the drums just don't quite get it (but they're almost there).  Then there's the problem of panning sounds in the stereo field.  The Rhodes sound originally came in a bit to the right, while the drums and the synth pad were fairly balanced on both sides.  Then the guitars come in, one panned to one side, the other to the other side.  The guitars do not come in at the same time, so there's a time when the stereo field feels unbalanced.  But is that really a problem?

We're so used to balanced stereo fields these days, but it wasn't always so.  One of the most influential albums ever, Sgt. Peppers, was not really a stereo album at all.  John Lennon was creative in how he used mono sources and placed them in the stereo field.  If one of your stereo speakers blew out on you, it meant you couldn't listen to this album properly (either you'd lose the drums or the guitars).  This album is not a balanced stereo field and its a milestone in musical history!  Perhaps I don't need to concern myself with my song so much and just enjoy the creative journey.

After all, this is a labor of love.  I should be able to enjoy the journey... the problem is that I'm a perfectionist, perhaps along the lines of John Lennon.  When Lennon was asked if he'd go back an re-record or remix any of the Beatles' songs, he replied, "All of them."  I know how you feel John, a musical project is never "finished", you just run out of time.

Falling Down

I have recently uploaded what I'm calling a pre-demo version of my song "Falling Down" to my SoundClick page ( http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=699474&songID=5324434 ).

This song was created over a decade ago by me when I got my first "professional" quality acoustic guitar (a 1977 Martin D-28).  I'm a keyboardist not a guitarist, but I have fun making sounds, noises and chords on the guitar.  I started with a basic chord pattern and liked it.  Then I switched to my Fender mexi-Strat, ran it through some delay and a little bit of distortion (for that U2 / The Edge feel).  The chord pattern was droning in my brain and I started to improvise some lyrics.  I liked them too since they felt like they matched the feel of the song.  Soon I had an entire lyric written.  And nothing happened musically with that song for the next ten years.

Next, life happened.  I got married. Graduated from college.  Started my professional career.  Began raising children.  Etc.  "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." - John Lennon.

Now I use computers to record my song ideas and I've finally started towards the path of completing all my song ideas.  Thank you God for silicon chips!  ... and reverb/delay, tube amp simulation, drum kit samples, free stuff and chocolate (oh yeah and also for my wife and children who have been my distraction from music for a decade!)