#Dr.T's Level 2 & DTP
6 messages in this thread
(continuation)
The editing is powerful, but tedious. The sequence does not scroll on
playback, so you can hear, but not see, your edits in context. Worst of all,
the program forces you to use numerical data and not musical concepts. Since
there is no graphic editing, it would have been better for the the user to deal
with note values, etc., instead of the raw Midi data representing those values.
The screens are also generally very cluttered. Navigating through the program
is cumbersome.
The PVG is extremely flexible and this results in many variations that
are not musically pleasing. The Master Editor gives Level II tremendous
flexibilty, but is also tedious to use.
I am currently using Music-X by Microillusions as my Midi sequencer and
M by Intelligent Music as my algorithmic composer. They are both a pleasure to
use, and offer many features not available in Level II, although they are
lacking in others. Since it is the first version of both programs, I expect new
features and improvements in short time. They are both relatively bug free.
I hope this has been of some help to you. Good luck.
Dom Fontana
I agree with some of Don's complaints and not with others. I just finished
reviewing Level II for Amazing Computing (look for it in a couple of months). I
find it to be a pretty powerful piece of software. I don't use Track mode much
at all; Open mode is more flexible and powerful. I've seen the demo of Music-X
and was quite impressed. The bottom line (according to moi!): Level II can do
things no other Amiga sequencer can (Boolean editing, PVG, precise edits in
music). But it is harder to use than other more AMiga oriented sequencers. So
if you need the special features, you have no choice. By the way, Dr T is
coming out with a TIGER program that adds graphic editing to KCS, and revision
1.7 of KCS (and Level II) that will add Amiga menus
and a few other improvements. The revised KCS will be out in a month or two.
Thanks for the inside info, Phil! I agree with your comments on Level II, which
I use on occasion as I learn it. It certainly does have capabilities beyond
anything else available, despite the interface. It's great about the upcoming
menus – even the Mac version is lacking those. I've heard that TIGER is
something quite incredible. I think that with those combined that it will stay
beyond the other Amiga sequencers available for some time(let's hope we're not
talking airware here!).
J.C.
Phil,
I've had the chance to work a little bit with TIGER. Believe me, it's gonna
be real nice to have something like that on the Amiga. Almost bought an ST for
just that program (smile).
Regards,
Allen
Dom,
> They are both (Music-X and M) a pleasure to use, and offer MANY (emphasis
mine) features not available in Level II.
Was wondering what you found in Music-X that was not in Level II. I am aware of
keyboard mapping, the librarian and the Bar Editor.
> They (MX and M) are relatively bug free.
MX SHOULD be bug free! As you know, it's been in development for quite a while.
However, I cannot say that it is as stable as Level II yet (or for that matter
as stable as V1.6 of KCS when it was first released). Also I should note that I
own and use both MX and V1.6a of KCS. I do have the demo version of M, but not
the released, commercial version so I cannot speak to that issue.
Regards,
Allen
Allen,
I own KCS-Level II, M, and Music-X. As mentioned, I don't like the KCS
interface. With time at a premium, I am trying to select the best music
software for my needs. I spent a number of months with KCS and it got the job
done. However, rather than spread my time between too many different programs,
I would rather use just a few programs and master them. When Music-X was
finally released, I decided to devote all my time to learning it. In theory, I
thought I might use both programs (Music-X & KCS) at different times for their
different strengths. I then decided to stick with MX for now. I discovered that
most complex programs, and especially KCS, remain very difficult to use if you
don't use them constantly. KCS isn't really Amiga-specific and MX is. In that
vein, I'll probably exclusively use MX for sequencing, for now, and wait to see
what they do with the new KCS release (with menus and graphic editing). I'll
reevaluate it at that time. I'll also use M for algorithmic composing instead
of the PVG in KCS. In this way I can really master these two programs.
As for MX improvements over KCS, besides keyboard mapping, the bar
editor, and librarian, MX also has an excellent filters page that also offers
real time Midi control; a much better Samples page with an amplitude envelope;
and also allows for patch editing from the librarian page. In addition, it has
an open-ended architecture for protocols and additional modules, and generally
has a much superior interface. Both the graphic and event editing are a
pleasure to use and the sequencer page has fast forward, rewind buttons, and
more cue points. The edit windows scroll on playback and events appear in real
time in the edit windows as you record them. The program is Amiga-specific and
just more user-friendly and fun to use.
My MX complaints: more comprehensive editing, especially for global
edits; a real metronome function within the program; real time quantizing; a
better step recording method; printing, a notepad & calculator; and more
protocols.
With all that said, I just ordered MasterTracks Pro 3.5. I'm never
satisfied.
Dom Fontana