Orchestral Mockup in Musescore 4

[Carl Irwin]

I posted this in another discussion, but here it is again for those looking to make the most of the Musescore 4 play engine and Muse Sounds for orchestral mockup (especially on Linux).

Here is a walk-through of the project and a lengthy discussion of my philosophy and approach:
https://youtu.be/HYEGwQ-JQrA

This is the original composition by itself:
https://youtu.be/-hSwdfgoqEY

Enjoy!

-Carl

[d.healey]

I hope they re implement MIDI out so I can use my own sounds.

[j_e_f_f_g]

Around the 1 minute mark, it almost turned into the theme from "The Simpsons".

[Carl Irwin]

Around the 1 minute mark, it almost turned into the theme from "The Simpsons".

If you only know that tritone #4 by The Simpsons, then that's what you will hear. But a lydian #4 resolution shows up in an enormous amount of music as it is inherent to several exotic scales and many jazz progressions.

But, I'm quite certain that this didn't almost turn into The Simpsons

[Carl Irwin]

I hope they re implement MIDI out so I can use my own sounds.

You can still export your midi to DAW, but that's not real-time, of course.
If they get around to implementing VST/LV2 in Linux, then we will be able to load compatible instruments directly into M4... still waiting on that.

[d.healey]

It seems they have no intention of adding vst support for Linux unfortunately. It was originally listed as being added in v4.1, then it was moved to the community tasks, and yesterday it was removed from the to do list on github.

But I'd much prefer midi out to plugin hosting

[Carl Irwin]

It seems they have no intention of adding vst support for Linux unfortunately. It was originally listed as being added in v4.1, then it was moved to the community tasks, and yesterday it was removed from the to do list on github.

But I'd much prefer midi out to plugin hosting

They locked the projects for the final push on 4.1. The community contribution list was moved to another area. They will need to confront the VST issue at some point.

Frankly, I have a hard time believing that external VSTs will be able to create the kind of quality that their engine can do with the Muse Sounds. Their sample organization is tailor made for the play engine. I would imagine that legato and velocity crossfades won't be able to compete with the intricacies of the Muse Sounds structure and the play-from-notation drivers that they have created. I think the benefit with VST/LV2 would mostly be for synthesizers or extended sample sets that aren't covered by Muse Sounds.

[d.healey]

They locked the projects for the final push on 4.1. The community contribution list was moved to another area.

Oh well that's a bit better than I thought.

I have no interest in using MuseSounds due to the proprietary license. But since the API is open to anyone hopefully a free option will be available at some point.

I'm more interested however in hosting my instruments externally to Musescore. This has a few advantages:

If I have a large template I can load it up once, and switch projects quickly without having to reload all the samples.
I can load the template on a separate machine (or multiple if necessary).
If Musescore crashes I don't have to wait for the samples to reload

This will be especially useful with the proposed DAW like features. But even without those I could implement keyswitches and be able to craft a reasonable performance with sounds of my choosing.

For now I'll carry on doing what I have for years which is to export the MIDI and import it into a DAW. Or just play the lines into my DAW manually.

[Carl Irwin]

They locked the projects for the final push on 4.1. The community contribution list was moved to another area.

Oh well that's a bit better than I thought.

I have no interest in using MuseSounds due to the proprietary license. But since the API is open to anyone hopefully a free option will be available at some point.

I'm more interested however in hosting my instruments externally to Musescore. This has a few advantages:

If I have a large template I can load it up once, and switch projects quickly without having to reload all the samples.
I can load the template on a separate machine (or multiple if necessary).
If Musescore crashes I don't have to wait for the samples to reload

This will be especially useful with the proposed DAW like features. But even without those I could implement keyswitches and be able to craft a reasonable performance with sounds of my choosing.

For now I'll carry on doing what I have for years which is to export the MIDI and import it into a DAW. Or just play the lines into my DAW manually.

I haven't really talked to anyone about the proprietary nature of Muse Sounds. From what I see in the license, there is no risk to the end user... and I am not against proprietary products (especially something as invested and novel as this). To each their own... but as far as limitations in copyright law for providers and users, I fail to see the controversy. Essentially, if one plays a Korg synth that they own, the same copyright restrictions (and limitations on restrictions) apply as for this library. One does not own the samples on the Korg, etc. Muse Group cannot claim ownership of your music in any part, and you cannot modify or redistribute their library as a library.
Thoughts?

[d.healey]

I differentiate between the software and the audio samples. I won't run software that I don't have control over. I want to be able to audit, edit, and redistribute the software I run. The samples and any other "assets" I'm less concerned about, although I prefer if they are sharable.

there is no risk to the end user...

How do you know if you can't see the source code? We know MuseGroup loves telemetry, perhaps they've snuck some in to MuseSounds or MuseHub, or something worse (I doubt they have, but we have no way of knowing).

What about when MuseGroup goes out of business, or abandons the software? What about when there is a bug that they refuse to fix? Or when there is a feature that you want but they won't add? Proprietary software gives you zero control over what the software does or how it does it.

If the Korg synth runs software that can be changed, then you should be able to change it. If only Korg can change it then you again have no control over what it does or how it does it. You are at the mercy of Korg for new features and bug fixes.

[Carl Irwin]

I differentiate between the software and the audio samples. I won't run software that I don't have control over. I want to be able to audit, edit, and redistribute the software I run. The samples and any other "assets" I'm less concerned about, although I prefer if they are sharable.

there is no risk to the end user...

How do you know if you can't see the source code?

My assessment of risk is exclusively on the issue of legality. As for telemetry data, if it connects to the internet it is a risk... One will make their own decision on how to engage with the grid (forums, social media, ISP, email service providers, proprietary software, etc.) I am less concerned about control as I am not a developer. In spite of M4 being open source, I have no control over its features. It lacks Jack transport now, and I am powerless to create it. Without a community interest, that aspect of the program will suffer the same fate as obsolescence.

Good discussion on the perspectives! This is where I come down:

https://youtu.be/Jhp8qJLoSL4

Enjoy!

[Carl Irwin]

Here is one of the original videos on virtual instrument copyright legality with sources cited, if interested:
https://youtu.be/3OdO2iBbJcg

[d.healey]

My assessment of risk is exclusively on the issue of legality

I don't quite understand what you mean here. Are you talking about your personally liability for infringing copyright?

In spite of M4 being open source, I have no control over its features. It lacks Jack transport now, and I am powerless to create it.

You have the ability to look at the source code. You might be surprised by how much of it you can understand even if you are not a developer. You might not be in a position to change it but you can still see it, and who knows, you might spot an obvious mistake or a malicious feature. I don't think I've ever looked at the source code for Musescore, but I know there is a whole group of other people who are keeping me safe by auditing it, and if I ever want to look I can.

You also have the ability to hire someone to add/change a feature for you.

As a user you are part of the development community if you choose to engage with the community. You are able to lobby the community to make changes, or point out bugs to them that they can fix. Sometimes this is possible also with proprietary software, but not often. Go and ask Microsoft to fix a bug in Windows, or Native Instruments to fix a bug in Kontakt (I tried for years)...

[Carl Irwin]

I don't quite understand what you mean here. Are you talking about your personally liability for infringing copyright?

In spite of M4 being open source, I have no control over its features. It lacks Jack transport now, and I am powerless to create it.

You have the ability to look at the source code...

...Go and ask Microsoft to fix a bug in Windows, or Native Instruments to fix a bug in Kontakt (I tried for years)...

I am referring to both the legality of copyright in music AND the preservation of GPL in the software.

Sure, I understand the principle of access, I am just giving the cold realistic assessment of availability. I'm not going to be looking into the source code. My spare time is exclusively for writing music.

[d.healey]

I'm not going to be looking into the source code. My spare time is exclusively for writing music.

Why do you use Musescore and not something like Sibelius or Dorico with Note Performer?