I am myself a jazz/whatever else musician, and I dig your point there about those scales and that being useful. I haven't really thought about it like that for a while, as it is pretty much instinct. It would be nice, even just to experiment with. You could open up a lot of doors for ideas with all those scales. I'm amazed at some of these suggestions, scales that you don't often here people playing straight out, rather, you hear them used in slight variations.
On 8/9/11, Nicole Massey <[email protected]> wrote: > Dorian is a minor scale with a raised sixth. And it's actually fairly > useful, especially in jazz. > > Mixolydian (lowered seventh scale degree in a major scale) is common in rock > and pop stuff, so it's a good one to do too. Phrygian (lowered second in a > minor) sounds exotic and can add some unusual color to a line, as can > Locrian. (like the Phrygian, but with a lowered fifth added to the lowered > second) And Lydian (raised fourth in major) is good for a bit of surprise, > as that tri-tone is unexpected in what is usually a normal major scale. (It > also works well in a major blues progression) > > That reminds me, a transform to a blues scale might be nice as well. (not > for me, I play that scale almost instinctively, but some others might find > it useful) > > There's a wealth of scales to use. Fun stuff. (though I admit, as someone > with a degree in Jazz my idea of fun is a bit off the norm) > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > James Malone > Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 8:04 AM > To: QWS list > Subject: Re: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi > applications? > > Indeed we do. I was also thinking of say, Dorien? Of course one would > hardly ever use it, but it would be there for a bit of a laugh. Will > even make it myself when I get round to learning how to do so. Dunno > why, but something about that scale fasinates me. Lol :) > > On 8/9/11, Raymond Grote <[email protected]> wrote: >> Funny you mention that, about a half hour ago I thought of doing that > myself >> lol! Musicians think alike I guess. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Onj" <[email protected]> >> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 7:10 AM >> Subject: Re: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi >> applications? >> >> >>> Hi. My suggestion for submission is send in a txt and say at the top of >>> the document, disable wordwrap. >>> Then paste each transform you want into the userxfrm.ini file and hope it >>> works. >>> That should work, as the list does support attachments, just not very big >>> ones for obvious reasons. >>> Cheers. >>> >>> From: Raymond Grote <[email protected]> >>> on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 10:08 AM >>> >>>> The problem with melodic is, when going up the melody line has a normal >>>> sixth and seventh found in a major scale, and when going down it is >>>> lowered >>>> to a natural minor scale. I could try making one to see how well it >>>> works. >>>> Another thing I was thinking of, how about a transform for inverting >>>> melodies, so if you wanted harmony, you could just run the inversion >>>> transform you needed and have an instant harmony track? I'd have a route >>>> to >>>> first and second inversions for major and minor. Anyone have suggestions >>>> for >>>> transforms? I really am into them now that we brought it up. >>>> If I send in transforms, how should I send them? Should I attach a file >>>> containing the data, and call it transforms.ini or something like that, >>>> that >>>> way I'm not overwriting anyone's user transform data? Or should I just >>>> paste >>>> it in a message and hope the line breaks don't interfere? >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Leonard de Ruijter" <[email protected]> >>>> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 4:04 AM >>>> Subject: Re[2]: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi >>>> applications? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Good idea there with the major to minor. I've also thought about >>>>> creating those, since there are more then one major to minor So if >>>>> you'd like to share them with us, that would be great. >>>>> transforms possible, harmonic, melodic and such things. >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Leonard de Ruijter >>>>> Playing in the dark >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Monday, August 8, 2011, 9:53:32 PM, you wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I fully agree with you there. Once I loaded in a 15 minute file, and >>>>>> was >>>>>> looking for different things with the find function. It found > something >>>>>> at >>>>>> the very end of the file instantly. I've never! had to wait for >>>>>> anything >>>>>> to >>>>>> be processed or found in qWS. Even notepad with text files sometimes >>>>>> makes >>>>>> you wait, but maybe that's because text files can be bigger than midi >>>>>> if >>>>>> they're long enough. But the same can be said for midi too. I get the >>>>>> impression there's no real size limit with QWS, because i've tried to >>>>>> push >>>>>> it several times, I've loaded 200 k midis and it didn't complain. The >>>>>> only >>>>>> time it did, was when I tried to load in a final fantasy midi and it >>>>>> said >>>>>> the midi wasn't a valid midi file or something, so I went into Synth >>>>>> Font >>>>>> and resaved it, and then it opened fine. The sound was unaltered too, >>>>>> in >>>>>> that there were no changed controllers that i could tell, nothing >>>>>> really >>>>>> missing. >>>>>> By the way, I've made a new major to minor transform, it sounds more >>>>>> natural, instead of changing the major sevenths to minor sevenths, it >>>>>> keeps >>>>>> them where they are. So it's more of a harmonic minor scale now but > the >>>>>> minor -sevenths in the original untransformed data are still > preserved. >>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Onj" <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 3:51 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi > applications? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> good morning. I cannot begin to tell you just how much of a > proponent >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> am for QWS. I'm probably the second longest user of QWS in the > world. >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> produced my entire album with it. Recently I went to Birmingham in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> UK, not Alabama, and tought it to some students in Priestley Smith >>>>>>> school >>>>>>> for the blind. >>>>>>> From the feedback I got at the end, it helped them quite a lot, and > we >>>>>>> produced some videocasts for the school intranet. If or when I get >>>>>>> permission, I will share those on-list with you all, so you can >>>>>>> hopefully >>>>>>> benefit from that also. >>>>>>> I was only there for one school-day but the students were receptive >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> did really seem to enjoy the demonstrations I put fourth. One of > them >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> of course, the famous note-transform. I played the very well-known >>>>>>> nursery rhyme old Mcdonald in F major, and used the major to minor to >>>>>>> turn >>>>>>> it into something rather different from the original. Picking >>>>>>> something >>>>>>> that people know quite well for demonstration purposes really hellped >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> get the point accross I feel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Although other DAWs have such features, how many of them are as easy >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> use or to find as simply visiting the tools menu? How many programs >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> forgoing menus entirely in favour of nasty ribbons or toolbars and >>>>>>> saying >>>>>>> bye bye to keyboard shortcuts? too many imho. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the fact that I can run a basic set of synths on a Netbook and take >>>>>>> QWS >>>>>>> with me literally anywhere with access to a qwerty keyboard and write >>>>>>> down >>>>>>> ideas is a huge bonus to me. What I think is that a rather large >>>>>>> section >>>>>>> of modern computer users have very little pacients and if the product >>>>>>> has >>>>>>> no fancy graphics they dismiss it out of hand after 3 minutes of > using >>>>>>> it. >>>>>>> Truely it is their loss, not ours. We know what we have. We utilise >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> to the best of our abilities and for myself, I'm very glad QWS came >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> being. >>>>>>> For a free product, very few things come close in the midi world, of >>>>>>> matching it. Note I said midi, not midi and audio, for we all know >>>>>>> QWS >>>>>>> does not support audio. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lastly, the size of the program and lack of CPU. Both are > practically >>>>>>> non-existant, even with 32-channel midi files. Responsiveness. Fast >>>>>>> forward and rewinde in other daws and see what happens. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's really that for now, but just my thoughts on this Monday >>>>>>> morning. >>>>>>> Thank you for reading. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Nicole Massey <[email protected]> >>>>>>> on Sunday, August 07, 2011 10:52 PM >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I haven't installed it yet, because I'm still waiting on some >>>>>>>> assistance >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> get one of my USB keyboards out of the storage space my studio is in >>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> moment, but I have read the manual end to end. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One thing that struck me was its similarity to older DOS based >>>>>>>> sequencers, >>>>>>>> in that the approach tends to give you a lot of tools to work with >>>>>>>> without a >>>>>>>> lot of focus on bells and whistles. There's a very large list of >>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> will do to MIDI, but it leaves a lot of other stuff to other >>>>>>>> programs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the computer programmer world, such a program is called a >>>>>>>> "gerbil." >>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> mental picture is a small gerbil busily running in its wheel, doing >>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>> it's supposed to. Such programs are nice to find, because they > handle >>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>> rather well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One of the points I like about QWS is that everything is done using > a >>>>>>>> standard MIDI file. This takes a step or two out of porting the >>>>>>>> sequence >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> a notation program if you need it, or to a DAW should that be your >>>>>>>> intent. >>>>>>>> I plan to use QWS for my MIDI work while my studio is deconstructed >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> construction of the building, as I still have work I want to get > done >>>>>>>> right >>>>>>>> now, and dragging a seven foot tall rack full of modules and support >>>>>>>> gear >>>>>>>> into the house (with three steps to get inside, too) doesn't seem to >>>>>>>> make >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> lot of sense to me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >>>>>>>> Of >>>>>>>> Raymond Grote >>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 4:18 PM >>>>>>>> To: QWS list >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi >>>>>>>> applications? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's a good point. What I was trying to figure out is why QWS is > so >>>>>>>> scary >>>>>>>> to a sighted person. It's nothing graphical, it just lays itself out >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> front of you and you have to do what you need with it. And it > doesn't >>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>> as many functions but that's because it's only for midi, not even >>>>>>>> sheet >>>>>>>> music which I could care less about it. I'm sure there are other >>>>>>>> programs >>>>>>>> for it when I need it that I could use in conjunction with QWS. As >>>>>>>> I've >>>>>>>> said >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the only reason I can even think of is that it doesn't have any > quick >>>>>>>> presets that you can just click or modify like some DAWs do. >>>>>>>> In any case, even though QWS's usage is simple, mastering it is not. >>>>>>>> I've >>>>>>>> had many people try QWS and play with it and figure out how easy it >>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> transpose or change to a different instrument, for example. But they >>>>>>>> know >>>>>>>> nothing about midi or theory. So it's even simple enough for them, >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> that's a good thing. If they're satisfied with it, then let them be. >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>> really don't see how much simpler the interface could get. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Leonard de Ruijter" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> To: "QWS list" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 4:43 PM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: QWS List is QWS harder to use than most midi >>>>>>>> applications? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey Raymond, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have to say that qws seemed quite complicated to me when i > started >>>>>>>> working with it. Another thing, which is a big credit to Andre, as >>>>>>>> soon as i started listening to some of his tutorials, i found qws >>>>>>>> getting more and more interesting for me, and understood more of >>>>>>>> it. For example, i've played with note transform for several days >>>>>>>> after i listened andre's tutorial concerning this. I use qws for >>>>>>>> every >>>>>>>> sequencing work i have to do now, and it works great. Lots of >>>>>>>> functions qws has i miss in daws, for example the quick note > editing >>>>>>>> and midi assignments. So may be it's an idea to point >>>>>>>> the daw-lovers to Andre's tutorials. One remark i also have to make >>>>>>>> is that some of my sighted friends found qws quite scary as well, >>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>> that's more about how they found it look like, and as it is mainly >>>>>>>> used by blind musicians, i don't care. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> Here's an interesting question. When I learned QWS, I didn't >>>>>>>>> have anyone to help me out with it, just the setting up the > keyboard >>>>>>>>> part. And I had to learn most of the tools and functions myself. >>>>>>>>> While I am a decent musician, I don't consider myself better than >>>>>>>>> everyone. But QWS just came natural to me, a little more than I > had >>>>>>>>> expected. There are sighted people I know that know way more than > I >>>>>>>>> do, who use other programs which are not at all accessible. They >>>>>>>>> have a whole workstation in front of them, and they can do way > more >>>>>>>>> than impport midi data and play it back, they can tweak pretty > much >>>>>>>>> every synth and effect peramitor there is. Whether they actually >>>>>>>>> know the ins and outs of it I don't know, but it sure seems like >>>>>>>>> they do. >>>>>>>>> Now the question. I know people who are impressed with the work >>>>>>>>> I do, contrary to my opinion, lol. but, they wanted to know how I >>>>>>>>> did it, but they're sort of geared into something like I said above >>>>>>>>> and I'm not sure exactly how to approach QWs. I initially said, >>>>>>>>> "The manual's really good, you should understand it." I was under >>>>>>>>> the impression that QWS's features were pretty familiar to any > midi >>>>>>>>> sequencer that knows what they're doing, and it would be >>>>>>>>> ridiculously simple. But then an hour later they'd uninstall > because >>>>>>>>> it was either too complicated for them or too slow. I then > realized >>>>>>>>> that QWS and a DAW are pretty different, QWS is like Notepad, > where >>>>>>>>> it doesn't offer amazing functions with one clikc. You have to use >>>>>>>>> the thirty or so tools that it provides you, in the way you want >>>>>>>>> them, not go by some factory of presets already made for you and >>>>>>>>> tweak it from there. >>>>>>>>> So am I even partially right? Is QWS really complicated from >>>>>>>>> that standpoint, or could it be lack of patience? We've all seen >>>>>>>>> what Andre can do with it, I myself found it hard to believe that > he >>>>>>>>> used QWS at first since I'm nowhere near that level. >>>>>>>>> Maybe some of you here have had similar experiences and can give >>>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>>> insight. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see >>>>>>>> http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see >>>>>>>> http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see >>>>>>>> http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see > http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>> >>>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>>> >>>>> for archived list posts, see >>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com >>>> >>>> for archived list posts, see >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com >>> >>> for archived list posts, see >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >> >> To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com >> >> for archived list posts, see > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >> > To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com > > for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com > > for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
