Looking for a better Music Composing Program than RPG Maker 2

Alright, first, I'll do my best to try to explain what RPG Maker 2 is and what all its faults are when it comes to making music since I'm quite sure no one here knows anything about that:

RPG Maker 2 is a programing tool for the Playstation 2 designed to allow people to make their own videogames of the "RPG", or "role-playing game", genre, however, because of how powerful and difficult of a programming tool it is (it actually is extremely close to the rapidly-growing computer-programming language "Java") it can be used to make tons and tons of things including games of numerous other genres and you guessed it: music. If it weren't for RPG Maker 2 I probably wouldn't be here now.

Anyways, why I'm here now is that RPG Maker 2 has a ton of really lame limitations in the music department, because it was never intended to be used that way, and is actually a God awful tool for music composition. So, I've come to you now asking for a better music composition program that is capable of doing these things:

1) Can play as many sounds as I want to, or at least can freely play a lead melody, two to four supporting rythms/melodies, a supporting bass, and one or two supporting percussions THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE SONG

2) Has at least the following instruments available: Piano, Acoustic Guitar, Bass, High and Low Flute, Snare Drum, Bass Drum (is that what it's called? that heavy deep drum sound), Cymbal, Some more gentle percussion sounds, and Harp

3) All those instruments are free to be played in at least a good 48 different pitches/notes or so (RPG Maker 2 only had 24 and it drove me nuts!!)

Also, I don't care AT ALL how long it'll take me to learn it, I just want THE BEST, MOST POWERFUL, NOT LIMITING program possible. Thank you!!!!!

Lastly, a few questions about the program(s) you're recommending:

How many different instruments does it have total?

How many pitches/notes are you capable of using for each instrument?

What are those "more gentle percussion sounds" that are available in the program? (in RPG Maker 2 it was this soft plucking sound that was called "Banjo" in RPG Maker 2 but I would say it sounded just like when I played a string on my acoustic guitar while numbing the string completely - that's what I used in that as a "gentle percussion sound", I want/need something like that!!)

Buy Finale 2006. You got no instrument limit, all kinds of symbols you can use, pratically no limitations, beautiful scores, over 120 instruments, some 20 sound effects (just typical MIDI instruments) and the most used by professionals. There's nothing you can't do with Finale. It's got all instruments you requested in your post and you can learn how to use it with video tutorials. I highly recommend it and I'm sure most people will.

And if you want to buy it legally, it's not cheap.

Are you a "trained" musician? That is, can you read and write music? Do you understand key signatures, time signatures, ranges of instruments, the meaning of most music related nomenclature (including things like various articulations and dynamics)? If not, then Finale is probably NOT for you.

Finale is primarily a music notation software package. Its primary area of expertise lies in its ability to write sheet music for players of acoustic instruments, and even more specifically, orchestral instruments. Yes, it does more than that, but those areas are not its strong points. Its midi implementation is rudimentary compared to many other composition software packages out there.

On the other hand, if you are more interested in contemporary genres of music like pop, rock, rap, electronica, metal, jazz, folk, trance, etc., and are more of a self-taught (which is somewhat of a euphanism for untrained), "just make it sound good", kind of a composer, a program like Reason is much more likely to be what you're looking for. Yes, it has orchestral instruments, but it also has onboard sequencer style editing, synthesizers, samplers, effects modules, and extensive looping capabilities, all with subtle ways to manipulate them in real time. And inputting and manipulating notes and phrases is much more visually intuative for the untrained (this time I'll suggest the euphanisim is "natural") musician.

I like the euphemism "hippie", but those work as well.

I'm sorry!:(

I should've mentioned that. Yes, I'm untrained/natural/whatever, but I wouldn't be here if I didn't think it was worth it!:(

I've been a composer on RPG Maker 2 for 3 years now and really have come a long way, but in order to advance any further I need a better (less limiting) program to compose with. It's actually in a way a good thing: RPG Maker 2's lack of ability to play lots of sounds forced me to evaluate each sound I added and whether it improved the song or not, and the other limitations did similar things. For fun I've actually done songs with just plain beeps like the old Nintendo days to see how well I could do with those limitations and I did quite well!:D

Anyways, thank you for what's been said so far, but I noticed how populated this forum is, so I expect more posts!;)

I myself prefer more classical instrument sounds, can only play guitar, and only own an acoustic guitar, but with my music I stand by what an old idle of mine said: basically, (something close to this) I don't want to limit the music I create by restricting what I create to my own particular musical tastes or to the musical tastes of a particular group of people. In short, the bigger variety of possibilities, the better.

Oh, one more thing then. Since they seem to have tons of sounds/instruments to use, I'll ask this. Are there any of these sounds avaliable: dog barking, dog howling, dog growling, cat meowing gently, cat meowing like it's been hit with something, cow mooing, and chicken clucking? This isn't a joke!!!

megascrubsfan,

Despite what other's may tell you, you don't need to be trained to use any notation program. Most of notation programs in the market are relatively easy to use. However, seeing as this is solely for the purpose of videogames, I'd say you hit sequencers to start off.

Another misconception you have is the instruments. Most of these music writing programs aren't limited tools, instruments are expandable.

As for the specific FX sounds... I would suggest you try to record them yourself with proper equipments.

Also... 20 years is a long time. You might want to reconsider lowering that by assembling a team.

Thank you JuicyPork!!!:D

I have a few questions though:

What's a sequencer? A friend of mine had this music program thing and it totally blew because all you did was take pre-existing sounds and place them in measures, but there were hardly any sounds and you had little to no control over them (no pitch change, no tempo/duration change, etc.) and little to no control over when to place them (only one sound alotted per instrument line per measure that played at the very start of the measure). Even with all my complaints about RPG Maker 2 I still was building songs completely from scratch.

And what do you mean by "instruments are expandable"?

And cool! I can do that to add sounds.:D

Thank you JuicyPork!!!:D

I have a few questions though:

What's a sequencer?

A sequencer is a program that plays the instruments back in real time. Most sequencers have "Piano Roll' editing. If your program has PR editing, then you already know how to use one. One of the advantages of a sequencer is that you can go back and individually nudge notes until you get them exactly where you want. Another advantage is that because a sequencer keeps track of playing information only, you can change instruments with the click of a button. For instance, let's say you just spent a lot of time getting a flute solo just right. But then you decide that you really want it to be a soprano sax. No problem, just change the instrument on that track.

As for pig sounds, etc. A sequencer with sampler (such as Reason) can take your sampled pig, car, or chicken sound and turn it into an instrument. You can then place it exactly where you want it in the mix. Where you get the sampled "chicken being run over by a car" sound is your problem: But once you find it or create it, you covert it to a .wav file and then it's simple to just drop it in your work any where you want - with effects if you like. Programs like Finale and Sibelius can't do this.

megascrubsfan,

Despite what other's may tell you, you don't need to be trained to use any notation program. Most of notation programs in the market are relatively easy to use.

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Pork on this one. The better professional programs like Finale and Sibelius have some rather steep learning curves, and are geared to-wards musicians that understand standard notational practices. This doesn't mean you can't learn to use a program like Finale with no formal music training. In fact, you could potentially learn quite a bit from it, but the more contemporary (for lack of a better word) music programs will provide much, much more flexibility with sound effects, and easier syncing with digital recorders when the time comes to produce the final tracks. It is also much easier to tweak and even master the sound in these programs. A program like Reason is designed around one thing - the final recording. You never have to deal with notation with a program like Reason. Programs like Sibelius and Finale, on the other hand, are primarily geared to-wards providing a score and parts for live musicians to play later. In order to input sounds, you put them on the page as if you were writing music. This makes a lot of sense if you have a formal understanding of theory, but (in my opinion) it makes little sense if you are not willing to.. essentially learn to read. Good sounding playback is getting better and better with these programs because of advances in technology and competition, but the fact remains, here, they are way behind the professional recording studio products.

What's a sequencer?

Have you ever played Dance Dance Revolutions? Or this asian game called O2Jam? Well if you ever played any of this, understanding it won't be too hard. It's the same thing. Except, you are creating the instructions. The space between the two instructions are proportional to the time it takes to "stomp" your foot on that pedal. Now imagine that DDR with A LOT more than just 4 notes... you get a basic sequencer. But most sequencers today have functions to change the dynamics with great flexibility.

The thing you saw from your friend is either a sequencer or audio editing program. Most sequencers are also "mixers". They allow vocal tracks, prerecorded tracks to be mixed with your music. If your friend was using a sequencer, it's likely that he's not using the sequencer to the fullest and only using it to make loops. Sequencers has all the controls you mentioned along with many others.

As far as expandable instruments, you'll have to purchase them.

For instance, let's say you just spent a lot of time getting a flute solo just right. But then you decide that you really want it to be a soprano sax. No problem, just change the instrument on that track.

Not entirely correct. You are missing the prime of sequencers. That may be what you do with Finale (with some pitch changes and what not). In sequencers, you have to think about whether each resulting note will still sound the same knowing the fact that flutes and sax don't sound the same. Eg. Release, velocity..

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Pork on this one. The better professional programs like Finale and Sibelius have some rather steep learning curves, and are geared to-wards musicians that understand standard notational practices. This doesn't mean you can't learn to use a program like Finale with no formal music training. In fact, you could potentially learn quite a bit from it, but the more contemporary (for lack of a better word) music programs will provide much, much more flexibility with sound effects, and easier syncing with digital recorders when the time comes to produce the final tracks. It is also much easier to tweak and even master the sound in these programs. A program like Reason is designed around one thing - the final recording. You never have to deal with notation with a program like Reason. Programs like Sibelius and Finale, on the other hand, are primarily geared to-wards providing a score and parts for live musicians to play later. In order to input sounds, you put them on the page as if you were writing music. This makes a lot of sense if you have a formal understanding of theory, but (in my opinion) it makes little sense if you are not willing to.. essentially learn to read. Good sounding playback is getting better and better with these programs because of advances in technology and competition, but the fact remains, here, they are way behind the professional recording studio products.

Before I start, "towards", that's how you spell it. What you call "contemporary" programs may be more flexible in sound effects, but that's not to stop them from being used as non contemporary musics. Notation and Sequencers are no different, with an effort, one can make a program that translate one into another. "This makes a lot of sense if you have a formal understanding of theory, but (in my opinion) it makes little sense if you are not willing to.. " You also need a formal understanding for work with sequencers. Many people tend to think that sequencers are "Hot Beatz" makers or "Techno" tools, but the fact is that it's capable of doing anything. You can make techno and hot beat music in notation softwares too, haha. A majority of sequencers have integrated notation systems into their software, making their function not solely for the purpose of final recording. And as far as the professional recording products, it's becoming a commercial product where an average customer can have access to.

You are correct that notation softwares aims for notation... which can be done by pencils... or a feather and some ink on paper. We ARE using the computers, so let's make the full use of them. And let's face it. This guy is making a game. Not a stage play or movie. Which one seems like a plausible option? Real musicians playing or computer?

The thing you saw from your friend is either a sequencer or audio editing program. Most sequencers are also "mixers". They allow vocal tracks, prerecorded tracks to be mixed with your music.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you are right. It's possible that I have been using sequencers since before you were born. Sequencers, by definition, do not allow vocal, or any audio tracks. This is what a DAW (digital audio workstation) is for. A DAW (such as your Cubase) that has a sequencer on-board is an entirely different matter. A program like Reason does not record audio, and it makes use of audio files only in the sense that it triggers them as samples.

Not entirely correct. You are missing the prime of sequencers. That may be what you do with Finale (with some pitch changes and what not). In sequencers, you have to think about whether each resulting note will still sound the same knowing the fact that flutes and sax don't sound the same. Eg. Release, velocity..

I understand what you are saying here. Changing the sound may require additional tweeking because of the ASDF nature of the instrument (among other things), but this is a subtle distinction that the original poster will either discover with time, or possibly never notice. For the purposes of his inquiry, my observation is correct enough.

Before I start, "to wards", that's how you spell it.

I can't be sure if you are genuinely concerned about my spelling, or if just trying to subtly assert an air of superiority here. Suffice it to say, this is not an English writing forum. Rather, it is an informal venue for the exchange of information, where often times I compose my responses right in the browser, and depending on the amount of time I have, may even choose to spell check. Even if your writing is flawless, let me suggest that this type of comment, regardless of intent, can easily come across as condescending. Otherwise, thank you for your concern.

Also, FWIW, best when you do correct someone's spelling, that you suggest the proper correction.

What you call "contemporary" programs may be more flexible in sound effects, but that's not to stop them from being used as non contemporary musics. Notation and Sequencers are no different, with an effort, one can make a program that translate one into another. "This makes a lot of sense if you have a formal understanding of theory, but (in my opinion) it makes little sense if you are not willing to.. " You also need a formal understanding for work with sequencers. Many people tend to think that sequencers are "Hot Beatz" makers or "Techno" tools, but the fact is that it's capable of doing anything. You can make techno and hot beat music in notation softwares too, haha. A majority of sequencers have integrated notation systems into their software, making their function not solely for the purpose of final recording. And as far as the professional recording products, it's becoming a commercial product where an average customer can have access to...

..This guy is making a game. Not a stage play or movie. Which one seems like a plausible option? Real musicians playing or computer?

I'm not sure I understand the point of your entire post. It almost sounds like you are agreeing with me. Are you suggesting that mega get a program like Finale or something different?

Sorry, I didn't intend to make fun of your spelling. It's just that to-wards was a peculiar spelling that stands out boldly when I read your material. And my correction is indeed spelt correctly for that matter, your quote to mine has been skewed.

Sequencers by definition, do not allow audio tracks. I suggested that most modern sequencer programs today are built into mixers, allowing audio tracks. Reason is one that doesn't.

I'm not sure I understand the point of your entire post. It almost sounds like you are agreeing with me. Are you suggesting that mega get a program like Finale or something different?

Well, the fact that you implied that Reason was made to Sound, where Finale was made to be played by real people. I think it's safe to say that Reason or his choice of "Sequencer" is his option because real musicians aren't really all that handy.

In my opinion, if you can get one of the "light" versions of the music notation packages, or PrintMusic, NoteWorthy, or one of those, AS LONG AS YOU CAN RECORD TO MIDI, you should. You probably don't need a full notation package. The important thing is that you should be able to record to MIDI.

Those programs, especially "light" ones, will have limitations. Of course. But there are free programs that will help with that. You can download "soundfonts" online (hammersound.net has some, for example) and apply them with a program called Synthfont after you save to a MIDI. This will just change the instrument on your MIDI sounds to an instrument you downloaded. This has the downside of being rather antiquated -- you don't find soundfonts being made anymore, and hammersound.net hasn't been updated in at least two years, I think -- but it works. Synthfont will save your song as a .wav.

Your program may also be limited in number of staves/tracks, let's say, or especially in the number of staves that can be played together. So you can save different groups of tracks in different MIDI files, record them to .wav with Synthfont (you'll have to download each soundfont separately, though, remember), and put them together with some .wav editing program, like Audacity, which is also free. Then a program called Zlurp! can convert that .wav to an .mp3 if that's what you want, or iTunes can do it.

If you just want MIDI, though, you'd be fine without this whole thing, as long as your notation program gives you enough polyphony. (: A program called Anvil Studio can help you edit the MIDI as well. Note that all of these programs I mentioned, except for the initial notation program, are free -- as in, you don't have to pay for them. I'd recommend that before investing money in something you might lose interest in later. As for the notation program, I use Sibelius 3, but that costs money.

I hope you've read this far. (: I'm a musician -- well, I'm a science researcher now, but I've been playing several instruments for many years, singing, and composing; I've taken music theory classes in high school and at Harvard; I read harmony books for fun (if someone could recommend a good one on modern TONAL harmony, I'd be happy). I know how to read and write music. I had a treble staff with notes around my crib as a baby. The point of this isn't to brag but to tell you that this kind of thing is appropriate for what I do (which is also online at http://people.fas.harvard.edu/~braunst). HOWEVER, you can most likely find tutorials for learning to read music online, and if not, at a library or music store. Plenty of musicians learned late how to read music, and many guitar players still can't (they only read guitar tab, which tells them where to touch their instrument as opposed to what notes to play; with music notation, they have to figure out where to touch the instrument themselves), so there are plenty of resources for learning music notation. I selfishly believe that this is a good thing to do -- learn music notation -- and if you're trying to learn C++ anyway, something I could never persuade myself to finish doing, then adding another very useful skill to your repertoire would probably be agreeable to you.

Good luck!

HHCC

Mauro

Sorry, I didn't intend to make fun of your spelling. It's just that to-wards was a peculiar spelling that stands out boldly when I read your material. And my correction is indeed spelt correctly for that matter, your quote to mine has been skewed.

hmmm.. originally your correction was "to wards", probably per the fallible YC on-line spell-checker. Check my original quote, which was a "cut and paste" Did you edit it? Let me answer for you.. Uh... "Yes" And by the way, the word "spelt" in the above quote stands out boldly in an ironic sort of way. Make sure you go back and edit that. I'm done with this conversation, as I'm sure you can easily continue to deny your actions by editing your posts, and it would take quite a bit of humility for you to "own up" given the circumstances. Regardless, very little positive can come from continuing in this manner.

I already know which notes are which frets on which strings on the guitar, can come up with a melody and write it down in my pseudo music-writing way, and am also aware of (I don't know what they're called) and have used in a few songs the three-notes in two-beats thing. Here's what my pseudo-writing way looks like:

R = rest

# = play a note

ABCD (notes of played notes)

####RRRR

I just made this one up now in one second (I know it ****s ****) - I have much better and more melodic/rythmatic ones! Many of mine would go into eighth notes and some even used the three-notes in two-beats thing, and most were much harder to transcribe onto paper than the simple 4 straight notes 4 straight rests example with boring/bad notes above.

Basically, I had to do this to transcribe it into RPG Maker 2. So, with me already capable of doing this, how long do you think it would take for me to learn how to read/write music?

Thank you for all the help so far everyone!!!

Leightwing, you have a problem... seriously.

Honestly, I never wanted to mock you in anyway with your spelling nor to try to gain the superiority over you. I just felt that I needed to inform you, I don't go around correcting everyone's mistakes. For all I know, people can make mistakes by typing at 100 wpm. I correct other people's spelling only to acknowledge them, but I guess not everyone welcomes it and accepts their own mistakes. In that case, if I have upset you by correcting you, then I'm sorry... again. Don't put every word on the internet to a random context, (I could've felt insulted when you addressed me as Mr. Pork insteand of JuicyPork).

But if you really like to play word games... I've never changed my original post, and I don't use spell checkers unless I'm writing a research paper or legal document. And as for "spelt", http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spelt

You may have quoted my post, but just because there's a discrepancy doesn't mean I modified mine. You are just as suspicious modifying the content of the quote you posted. I'm not going to point fingers at anyone for I know that with your attitude, no truth can be settled. I understand that at times, I can't accept the truth. But a matter like this, why would I want to hide the fact that I can't spell or a mistake occured in my post? No one is perfect. If I did change my post, I would without doubt own up for I know the board has a way to check whether it has been modified or not. You may believe this one simple concept "I never modified mine, therefore he must've been the one that changed it." Just as I'm believing "I never modified mine, there he must've been the one that changed it." Did you ever wonder that a space character may have accidentally occured when you quoted mine? All I'm saying is that an accident like that is very likely to occur. Me changing my original post would obviously disobey my belief, and as I have stated previously, I would admit it. You believe that the spell checker changes "towards" to "to wards", yet you are the one that uses the spell checker. I never realized the spell checker function until you mentioned it. Can we come to a conclusion that you didn't "intend" on changing correction, but it was in fact the spell checker that modified it on it's own accord?

Don't talk to me about owning up to a falsified truth. For many times, I've been forced to admit to activities that I've never committed in which I have to suffer dire consequences whether or not I admit to it. The emotional damage is far greater than any insult you can ever imagine. And for that reason, I'm only willing to accept to fight for truth, not for myself anymore.

To megascrubsfan, I'm terribly sorry that an unintended battle of the spelling bee has been declared. It's not hard for you to learn how to read/write music. Obviously, I can't say for certain about "writing" part, but as far as reading goes... it should be of no problem to you.

No problem dudes (both of you)! I've had more than my share fair of internet feuds.

Alright, for now it's looking as though I'll first get Reason and then (perhaps) Finale or Sibelius, however I have but one more question (sorry, I know I've been relentless about this):

Now, before I ask this I want to warn people: I know that this was an opinionative statement and that there are bound to be differing opinions, but please keep your replies kind, considerate, and solely related to the subject matter at hand. These are just opinions.

leightwing said previously in this topic, in his first post:

"Finale is primarily a music notation software package. Its primary area of expertise lies in its ability to write sheet music for players of acoustic instruments, and even more specifically, orchestral instruments. Yes, it does more than that, but those areas are not its strong points. Its midi implementation is rudimentary compared to many other composition software packages out there."

So basically, I just want to get more opinions on this (it's not that I don't believe you leightwing!! It's just that someone said elsewhere on this forum that Finale costs around $200 or so). Do you agree with this statement, and why?

Good news though! Others than this question I think I'm done asking questions! I'll wait about two weeks before making any purchases and make certain to come back to this topic, so if anyone has anything more to say please do so! (that's why I'll wait two weeks before making any purchases)

And again, thank you to -everyone- who's posted so far to help me with this. You guys rock!

Mega, I mentioned "orchestral instruments", which was Finale's strong point originally. They have since built out the program to work very well for pop/jazz/rock, etc style "charts" as well, but certainly the focus is on providing a score and parts for live instrumentalists. This said, the automatic playback feature is quite good. By this, I mean that after you have notated your peice, Finale can playback and render (make a recording of) what you have written and it sounds pretty good. Certainly good enough to give you rough simulation of what it sounds like. Finale will render a midi file as well, but you can't (within Finale, at least) go in and directly modify the midi information like you can in a program like Reason.

Also, I doubt you can find it for $200. Double that is closer to the mark. Maybe with a student discount a little less.

I have both Reason and Finale, and unfortunately, I have to choose between one or the other - they don't "talk" to each other.

Okay, I'll go with Reason and see if I'm happy with that. Chances are I will be since RPG Maker 2 was never even meant to be used to compose music in the first place.:wacko:

Thanks guys!!:whistling: