15.2 Player music

[Swagman]

I would caution increasing this too much. Since Turbine would probably set a higher priority on keeping lag down, increasing this has a direct impact on fps.

Maybe a compromise? 72? 80? just a few more notes so it's better, but a nominal decrease in fps.

So besides the 3 instruments that need to be more quiet, cowbell louder a notch. What's the reason for not pushing out U15.2 again? Tonal qualities? Notes in lute/flute/horn that sound different than LIVE? Turbine has already compromised and rolled back harp. It's never going to be perfect. but I find the new qualities and fidelity of the sound sample an improvement, not a step back. Sounds like they've listened to the 15.2 beta feedback and are attempting to address it through a blizzard no less. What's the award for gaming again? Someone's up for a nomination. heh

Are we forgetting too that this included resolving all the different octave problems with horm, clarinet? Doesn't U15.2 fix it so all instruments have the same octave note range?

The big question is will volumes be within 10% of LIVE, no updating re-mixing volumes necessary for current .abc files.

For me, the bagpipe and dropped notes fixes are on the table. I vote yes if all three addressed and that's a lot of timely work done.

I agree, fix the dropped notes problem and I'll take the new music system. We'll probably have to learn to adjust for certain things just like we learned with the old system, but I'm willing.

[Summer_Beor]

I 100% agree with Fincin. If it has to stay in beta till update 16 or even beyond, I'm for it. If you guys run out of gas (so to speak) at least we'll have a known system still in place we can work with. I'm hopeful it can be worked on however long it takes. But we lost a great transcriber in my kin after the broken update 15 was released. Pretty please with sugar on top... let the transcribers and folks with great knowledge of the music system test it and fine tune it before you release it.
I'm grateful for all the work you guys are doing.

Second this, third, 111tyfirst this, please. This is worth waiting for. Also, I believe the max sounds to 128 value is a necessary consideration. I think it would help immensely. Thanks for all the continued work on this and to the testers who have provided samples.

[SpiritusLOTRO]

I would caution increasing this too much. Since Turbine would probably set a higher priority on keeping lag down, increasing this has a direct impact on fps.

I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt anyone outside of concert goers listening to a super saturated song will ever reach 64 simultaneous sounds. And cases where there is frame rate drop, it is usually the "floaty notes" that cause graphical lag well before any lag due to audio.

And, of course, that could be fixed by turning off the "floaty notes." But that is an issue for another day/build/patch.

[SchorschiSchrumpf]

We definitly need more testing, how much time would we have to check the newest changes before everything is rolled out?
Loosing notes on the instruments that fully work right now is not going to help us in any way and it'll be exactly the same as the last time.
I do not see how the system that is now on Bullroarer, even if it's slightly improved, can compete in music quality with the old system.

If anyone wants to demonstrate - please post a song for more than 4 musicians played on bull and live that actually sounds better with those modifications there.

So give us at least till U16, don't do it now!

The other thing: It's nice if ppl say they are willing to fix their own tunes, but saying that you force others to fix up to thousands of tunes - and the tunes of ppl who stopped playing will stay broken.

All these changes could be done keeping the volume balance between the instruments at what we have now, while still changing samples and pitches and thus not break the large archive of tens of thousands of abc files we had on fatlute.

[Siegfriedpf]

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
Fix the dropped notes, or at least identify the issue and we can work around it until U16.

[Swagman]

The other thing: It's nice if ppl say they are willing to fix their own tunes, but saying that you force others to fix up to thousands of tunes - and the tunes of ppl who stopped playing will stay broken.

All these changes could be done keeping the volume balance between the instruments at what we have now, while still changing samples and pitches and thus not break the large archive of tens of thousands of abc files we had on fatlute.

Back on page two of this thread (I think) the Devs already informed us that we would have to make changes in our ABC files because when they changed the samples and pitch it changed the volumes of instruments. They said the only way to keep the old volume balance is to keep the old system. Or am I reading what they said wrong? Anyway I know nothing about how this stuff works and I know you do so maybe you can point out a way.

(Oh man, I just drive 'em. I don't know what makes 'em work- Oddball)

[Swagman]

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

I agree wholeheartedly.

[Lolorndinfey]

Back on page two of this thread (I think) the Devs already informed us that we would have to make changes in our ABC files because when they changed the samples and pitch it changed the volumes of instruments....

I have to admit. That was a shocker to read. I was on another topic and jumped over here just after Vyvyanne announced the volume tweak build three days after U15.2 playback came online. As I can confirm the volumes on BR testing, they're certainly capable ot making volume tweaks to match LIVE, but that post certainly contradicted the latest post. Did we win her over, did the dev's cave in to community pressure? It just makes no sense to me why they would release a patch that says, hey guys, better sounds, different volumes, then release a volume tweaked update, and conclude with we think we fixed the dropped notes and bagpipe cut off, examples would help us and btw, there's some volume tweaks in this next version end of the week.

I mean the whole debacle of U15.1 was a reversion to pre-U15 levels because of the volume changes in U15? Remember?

*scratches head*

[Siegfriedpf]

We need volumes to be good. And they are NOT good on live. It's nearly impossible to get theorbo loud enough and nearly as bad keeping clarinets quiet enough. I would much rather need to do a consistent tweak across my existing music than have to continue to battle volumes that are hard to get to mesh.
Once we know the final volume changes that will go in, then it isn't that hard to update existing files to match the new volumes. Just need to have a nice listing of what needs +p+ instead of +pp+ or +f+ instead of +ffff+. Then, replace all in the right instrument parts.

[Silmelin]

As for the volumes, with all the tuning and changes in this version of the system, we can not just set the volume to live settings but leave the rest of the changes as the sound will be different. Many of the instruments were re-recorded. We have to balance the volume based on what we have now or revert back completely. My understanding was that the musician community wanted these updates enough to make adjusting ABC files worth it. If that is not the case then we need to know that so that we can leave the system as it is on Live.

If this is the quote you are talking about I read it as an answer to those who wanted the volumes set the same as on live, and I read it as meaning that they can't just set them as they are on live since it won't be as on Live anyway due to the sounds being different, they have to work from what they have on Bullroarer and raise or lower the volume depending on feedback there.

No idea if I understand it correctly but that's what it sounds like to me

Like if you set your stereo at a certain volume and then play a CD, and then you put in another CD but keep the volume set the same, it might still sound louder or more quiet because the CDs are different, so that your actual volume wheel is set the same for both of them doesn't make it sound the same

[SchorschiSchrumpf]

I agree, fix the dropped notes problem and I'll take the new music system. We'll probably have to learn to adjust for certain things just like we learned with the old system, but I'm willing.

I'm fishing in the dark here .. but could it be that the new samples are actually stereo samples and thus using up 2 effective slots per tone instead of 1?

At least that would explain why songs seem to cut out earlier on Bullroarer while the system seems to work ok otherwise.

[Swagman]

I'm fishing in the dark here .. but could it be that the new samples are actually stereo samples and thus using up 2 effective slots per tone instead of 1?

At least that would explain why songs seem to cut out earlier on Bullroarer while the system seems to work ok otherwise.

*shrugs* I don't know Bruzo, I just transcribe midi's to ABC's, I have no clue what makes the system work hehe. The music system in Lotro is a godsend to a frustrated musical idiot like me, and the new system will make it even more amazing once the bugs are worked out.

[SchorschiSchrumpf]

*shrugs* I don't know Bruzo, I just transcribe midi's to ABC's, I have no clue what makes the system work hehe. The music system in Lotro is a godsend to a frustrated musical idiot like me, and the new system will make it even more amazing once the bugs are worked out.

Hehe I wasn't expecting an answer from any of the players .. the idea was to give the developers a theory about a possible origin of that overloading bug, which would be a real dealbreaker for all the bands in lotro if it was rolled out on live. If we could just play 32 effective tones at a time it'll break a huge portion of our ABC-files - unfixably - because it'd not just be adjusting volumes, it'd be kicking out tones.

[Elwenwing]

I agree that things as they are on the Bulroarer testserver are not ready to go live yet!

I hope all bugs and volume balancing can be addressed before things go live!

Also the thing I dislike most about the new music system is the sound of the lute!

I really has too much reverb for my liking and it still has many notes that just sound odd!

Also I think for many music genres the new lute does not sound as nice as the old one does!

I would feel much better about the update if the sound of the old lute can be kept for update 15.2!

And then the new lute can be added later together with the new harp in update 16 as separate instruments.

That way everyone has the choice to play the lute and harp of their liking!

[Lolorndinfey]

Also the thing I dislike most about the new music system is the sound of the lute!

I really has too much reverb for my liking and it still has many notes that just sound odd!

Wow, really? Listen to this playback of a real world Lute recital.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2zbAO5_jCE

Notice something? It sounds like the new lute. Why? The waveform and tone is really similar on the frequency band equalizer. The two faults are perhaps the new lute is much higher in fidelity, and inconsistent in the sample in tone, some more 'banjo'ey, others more like the old lute tone. The new sample range is also alto heavy and louder in the upper frequencies.

Sorry, I had to chime in, since this is more of an opinion I realize, but I'm sitting on physical data, and felt I had to speak up. But like I said in a previous post.
It's a bit of art form here, and the 'ear' and personal taste does come into play somewhat.

I think part of the problem here is that we're so used to the guitar like tone of the pre-U15 lute, that when a new sample that more closely represents what a lute should sound like is (re?) introduced, it sounds wrong to some of us.

[Swagman]

I think part of the problem here is that we're so used to the guitar like tone of the pre-U15 lute, that when a new sample that more closely represents what a lute should sound like is (re?) introduced, it sounds wrong to some of us.

I was thinking this exact same thing.

[Emere]

Wow, really? Listen to this playback of a real world Lute recital.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2zbAO5_jCE

Notice something? It sounds like the new lute. Why? The waveform and tone is really similar on the frequency band equalizer. The two faults are perhaps the new lute is much higher in fidelity, and inconsistent in the sample in tone, some more 'banjo'ey, others more like the old lute tone. The new sample range is also alto heavy and louder in the upper frequencies.

Sorry, I had to chime in, since this is more of an opinion I realize, but I'm sitting on physical data, and felt I had to speak up. But like I said in a previous post.
It's a bit of art form here, and the 'ear' and personal taste does come into play somewhat.

I think part of the problem here is that we're so used to the guitar like tone of the pre-U15 lute, that when a new sample that more closely represents what a lute should sound like is (re?) introduced, it sounds wrong to some of us.

I think an nice solution here would be give us the new and improved lute, which we will call a lute, then also give us one that has nothing but those banjo sounding notes, and we can call it the Balute, and then, as a final measure, let us keep the pre-U15 guitar sounding lute but we can call it a Gulute. Then, if the devs really want to be nice to us, they could include cosmetic bunny pets, but I suppose I am asking for to much there.

[Swagman]

I think an nice solution here would be give us the new and improved lute, which we will call a lute, then also give us one that has nothing but those banjo sounding notes, and we can call it the Balute, and then, as a final measure, let us keep the pre-U15 guitar sounding lute but we can call it a Gulute. Then, if the devs really want to be nice to us, they could include cosmetic bunny pets, but I suppose I am asking for to much there.

Hobbits *sighs*

[SpiritusLOTRO]

I think an nice solution here would be give us the new and improved lute, which we will call a lute, then also give us one that has nothing but those banjo sounding notes, and we can call it the Balute, and then, as a final measure, let us keep the pre-U15 guitar sounding lute but we can call it a Gulute. Then, if the devs really want to be nice to us, they could include cosmetic bunny pets, but I suppose I am asking for to much there.

In all seriousness, the new "lute" sounds are fine. They are, indeed, more lute like than before. With the exception of the following notes: C#2, C#3, F3, & D4 (Check here for a more detailed breakdown: https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...06#post7306606). These are off timbre and are what folks are referring to as more of a "banjo" sound. Match those notes to the timbre of the others and you'll not get any more complaints on this front.

And if, in the future, you'd like to introduce another instrument that is more banjo-like, then by all means. The music community will not be upset.

But I recognize that's a future deal, and I understand that completely.

Let's get a good baseline of dynamics and timbre before we look to expand instruments.

[Emere]

In all seriousness, the new "lute" sounds are fine. They are, indeed, more lute like than before. With the exception of the following notes: C#2, C#3, F3, & D4 (Check here for a more detailed breakdown: https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...06#post7306606). These are off timbre and are what folks are referring to as more of a "banjo" sound. Match those notes to the timbre of the others and you'll not get any more complaints on this front.

[/U][/B]

I cannot say that there wont be anymore complaints on that front until I hear how my heavy metal songs sound with the new lute, I will test some of them tomorrow to figure that one out.

Also....Bunnys....that is all. /bow

[Emere]

I was asked to post a request from a very good friend of mine in the Shire and I of course, being a hobbit, couldn't say no.
Here is the request as mailed to me:

Hello, I was thinking,
the new sounds might be best suited, in completely new instruments, or perhaps assigning them into another command.
If the new sounds/music code was duplicated, and renamed a bit, and assigned to , say /music2 folks could retain old instruments on /music and the new set on /music2 synchronize would work with both, in case someone preferred old over new, but if this was done this could also afford other things, like new animations ( or preferably old ones, we had on music's launch ) Current animations, could be on /music2 and the old ones we loved from 2007 could make their way back in /music.
So in a sense, we'd double the richness of sound by creating another music command, and give Turbine another method of introducing new things without breaking old things.
So a recap of this suggestion is:
Original music on /music New on /music2 /sync would work allowing you to use from both, and create more depth.
Also allowing animations to change or new instruments added.

(it was signed with a sticky bilbery pie hand print)

[Thurallor]

Emere, your last message doesn't give any information about whether you would like bunny pets.

[Emere]

Emere, your last message doesn't give any information about whether you would like bunny pets.

*giggles* BUNNY PETS!!!!

[Lolorndinfey]

I'ts an interesting proposition. The big question is, will Turbine be willing to add a /music2 command to support this?

Without all the supporting .plugins, will it be received with positive feedback from the music community this late hour into the last edit as promised by Vyvyanne and team?

If only this was suggested earlier, then it might stand up better to scrutiny and testing. If only... sigh. We're on the midnight hour the night before the last update for U15.2 beta is released. My fear is that it is too late to be even considered at the present time, and relegated to U16 as a viable option.

Good suggestion though. Who is your friend?

[Emere]

I'ts an interesting proposition. The big question is, will Turbine be willing to add a /music2 command to support this?

Without all the supporting .plugins, will it be received with positive feedback from the music community this late hour into the last edit as promised by Vyvyanne and team?

If only this was suggested earlier, then it might stand up better to scrutiny and testing. If only... sigh. We're on the midnight hour the night before the last update for U15.2 beta is released. My fear is that it is too late to be even considered at the present time, and relegated to U16 as a viable option.

Good suggestion though. Who is your friend?

I would agree its a nice thought but odds are its not feasible, I would see it easier to do with new instrument icons so you know which lute you was holding like a lute icon with a 1 or a 2 on it as opposed to /commands, but at this point in time I would be happy just to roll out the new system if it was working and tuned right. The other could be added at a later date if they wished to do it and it would save many old files from being in need of tweaking or redoing. As for who is my friend? Mmmm, bunnys fer sure, uh, hobbits, most tall folk and dwarfses, elfses what ain't all down talky at me ....bunnys....did I say bunnys yet, cuz they are my friends .....uh, peoples what ain't mean at me....most bands....pie, yup, can't fergit pie.....Oh! And pet bunnys, yup, bunnys wha' is pets!