trying out Cognitone Synfire Pro trial
Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2015 9:20 am
Finally got around to installing Synfire Pro trial. It needs iLok manager, and the actual software (if bought) needs the physical iLok. Bleh. Anyway, here's what I'm seeing so far:
1. The app overall doesn't feel like a DAW. I view it as computer aided composing, but overall layout isn't quite friendly to a normal DAW operating composer. The UI if highly custom to Synfire's own distinctive workflow so a lot of it doesn't make immediate sense. The workflow isn't exactly play in some stuff -> use AI magic and make it awesome -> mix down, it revolves more around throwing around MIDI snippets (which I think you can record in app, but haven't figured out how) -> create a chord progress -> map the MIDI snippets and tweak the "flow" a bit -> and as far as mixing and other DAW-ish things, it seems best done in DAW through Synfire's export workflow.
2. Ultimately, it seems to want to behave like a keyboard arranger. Lots of theory and all, but at the end of the day, it seems to take in MIDI phrases, and makes them work within a specific chord progression. It does it with good music theory fluency and accuracy, but ultimately what you get isn't too far off from remapping an arrangement from one chord progression to another. I personally wouldn't call that composing, since you'd rarely just straight up map one arrangement into the another. The lines change and the phrasing changes pretty dramatically depending on the progression. (at least the way I like to work) It's labeled as a "prototyping tool", so perhaps it's good for trying things out.. but for actual production, I think this approach is too limiting.
But, it may be useful in specific instances, like if creating an arrangement for 1 progression takes up a chunk of time. (like with strings) It's still tough though, because those arrangements are the ones that are even more sensitive to progression, so remapping simply doesn't work. I can also imagine it being useful for repetitive phrases like super fast string loops... but if they're looping, I don't think you need a $1000 piece of software to do what an arpeggiator can do.
3. Synfire trial comes with a bunch of demo sequences.. They don't really sound good. Not because they're going through an internal GM wavetable synth, but composition wise they're very, very peculiar sounding. So my first impression was not very good. I guess it would be okay if someone with absolutely no knowledge of composition could produce these results, but I'm not sure if that's an accomplishment to strive for.
4. There seems to be some level of "interpretive" playing, but I'm not sure how to make the controls affect what I'm hearing. The UI is just.. so confusing. I guess I should say, it's just "non standard", because maybe the way it's laid out makes perfect sense if I knew exactly what I as doing. (but that's not very intuitive) If I can get this to work and it plays the notation with natural interpretation, whatever that means, then that's pretty awesome.
So at the end, I'm kind of confused who this is for. A $1000 arpeggiator that's pretty smart sounds like a pretty serious piece of gear. But the results are not really on par with what you'd need for production grade material. The main difficulty I find with its particular workflow is getting material in and out of it. If I can put in MIDI and quickly make 4 part arrangements out of it via just drawing contour lines, then that's some value.. but as it stands it doesn't seem quite that smooth, or at least I haven't figured it out yet.
But fundamentally, the art of arrangement isn't that easy. It's partially governed by logic and theory, but a large part of it is just stylistic decision making. The theory and logic I think is the easy part. Maybe hard for some, for whom Synfire can be helpful for. I guess in a way it can free up resources to concentrate on the stylistic choices... Realistically, though, I don't think a lot of composers are struggling with keeping in line with music theory... a piece doesn't really fall apart there. If it does, the that's a more elementary problem. You can view it as Synfire enabling people without the theory knowledge or experience to compose.. but then those people probably also don't have the knowledge and experience to make good stylistic choices. Not necessarily true, but most likely true.
1. The app overall doesn't feel like a DAW. I view it as computer aided composing, but overall layout isn't quite friendly to a normal DAW operating composer. The UI if highly custom to Synfire's own distinctive workflow so a lot of it doesn't make immediate sense. The workflow isn't exactly play in some stuff -> use AI magic and make it awesome -> mix down, it revolves more around throwing around MIDI snippets (which I think you can record in app, but haven't figured out how) -> create a chord progress -> map the MIDI snippets and tweak the "flow" a bit -> and as far as mixing and other DAW-ish things, it seems best done in DAW through Synfire's export workflow.
2. Ultimately, it seems to want to behave like a keyboard arranger. Lots of theory and all, but at the end of the day, it seems to take in MIDI phrases, and makes them work within a specific chord progression. It does it with good music theory fluency and accuracy, but ultimately what you get isn't too far off from remapping an arrangement from one chord progression to another. I personally wouldn't call that composing, since you'd rarely just straight up map one arrangement into the another. The lines change and the phrasing changes pretty dramatically depending on the progression. (at least the way I like to work) It's labeled as a "prototyping tool", so perhaps it's good for trying things out.. but for actual production, I think this approach is too limiting.
But, it may be useful in specific instances, like if creating an arrangement for 1 progression takes up a chunk of time. (like with strings) It's still tough though, because those arrangements are the ones that are even more sensitive to progression, so remapping simply doesn't work. I can also imagine it being useful for repetitive phrases like super fast string loops... but if they're looping, I don't think you need a $1000 piece of software to do what an arpeggiator can do.
3. Synfire trial comes with a bunch of demo sequences.. They don't really sound good. Not because they're going through an internal GM wavetable synth, but composition wise they're very, very peculiar sounding. So my first impression was not very good. I guess it would be okay if someone with absolutely no knowledge of composition could produce these results, but I'm not sure if that's an accomplishment to strive for.
4. There seems to be some level of "interpretive" playing, but I'm not sure how to make the controls affect what I'm hearing. The UI is just.. so confusing. I guess I should say, it's just "non standard", because maybe the way it's laid out makes perfect sense if I knew exactly what I as doing. (but that's not very intuitive) If I can get this to work and it plays the notation with natural interpretation, whatever that means, then that's pretty awesome.
So at the end, I'm kind of confused who this is for. A $1000 arpeggiator that's pretty smart sounds like a pretty serious piece of gear. But the results are not really on par with what you'd need for production grade material. The main difficulty I find with its particular workflow is getting material in and out of it. If I can put in MIDI and quickly make 4 part arrangements out of it via just drawing contour lines, then that's some value.. but as it stands it doesn't seem quite that smooth, or at least I haven't figured it out yet.
But fundamentally, the art of arrangement isn't that easy. It's partially governed by logic and theory, but a large part of it is just stylistic decision making. The theory and logic I think is the easy part. Maybe hard for some, for whom Synfire can be helpful for. I guess in a way it can free up resources to concentrate on the stylistic choices... Realistically, though, I don't think a lot of composers are struggling with keeping in line with music theory... a piece doesn't really fall apart there. If it does, the that's a more elementary problem. You can view it as Synfire enabling people without the theory knowledge or experience to compose.. but then those people probably also don't have the knowledge and experience to make good stylistic choices. Not necessarily true, but most likely true.