My idea was that using midi within a VI to select the matrices (and then keyswitches within the matrices) might be a more user friendly way of selecting/accessing samples.

Sorry, I think I'm "standing on the line" as we Austrians say - I still don't get it. We are using Midi for that ... Do you mean that you would like to have a Midi channel assigned to every Matrix line in a Preset so that you can switch by assigning different channels to your notes?

That certainly would be a cool possibility, maybe it can be done sometime. For the time being, the new VI version can switch Matrices using Program Changes 101-112, which is nice, too, because there'll be less notes in the score.

Cheers,
David

Adrian, it's a good idea.
Also worth remembering as a wider view, that Midi is past it's use by date in its current form, and i would hazard quite limiting for developers such as the VSL team.
Maybe a 'Midi mk3' would give the opportunity to further expand the capabilities of instruments like the VI in regards to keyswitching, for an example, having 128 midi channels, instead of 16, and 1028 instrument/articulations instead of 127. Instead of going into the Matrix and then selecting a series of patches for keyswitching, one could simply dial in the channel for an articulation.
(If i were to have a say in the construction of a new midi format, i'd go much bigger than this with 500 midi channels, and 5000 instruments/articulations, but i don't know if this would even be possible, and i'm certainly no expert.)

I don't know if any work is being done in this direction, but it seems ever more apparent to me that midi, as it is constructed now, is fast becoming the 'slow' point in a audio/midi compositional work process.

Just two and a half roubles worth,

Regards,

Alex.

The problem with this is that Midi connections are really slow compared with firewire or even USB 1, and since it's a serial connection, information sent on one port never will really be simultaneous. I believe that it's not worthwhile (at least not for the developers) extending that "old" format. Something like Yamaha's mLan probably would be more interesting. Takes a lot of time though, and it's always hard to overcome outdated standards.

Regards,
David

@david ender said:

The problem with this is that Midi connections are really slow compared with firewire or even USB 1, and since it's a serial connection, information sent on one port never will really be simultaneous. I believe that it's not worthwhile (at least not for the developers) extending that "old" format. Something like Yamaha's mLan probably would be more interesting. Takes a lot of time though, and it's always hard to overcome outdated standards.

Regards,
David

David, i agree with this. I was more commenting on the construction of midi itself, rather than the method of delivery. Ethernet midi would be a huge advantage over what we have now, particularly if 'Midi mk3' was multiport.


Regards,

Alex.

Hi Adrian,

this thread might be interesting for you:

<<Frizzell-Wiedmann Logic Environment>>

http://community.vsl.co.at/viewtopic.php?t=9466&iframe=true

Best,

M a y a

Thanks Maya

It was this (the Frizzell-Wiedmann Logic Environment) that got me started on this but I'm a DP user and was wondering if anyone had got anything similar together in DP.

Adrian

for me channel would be helpful - I have one VI package now but really can't fully utilize it because every patch has to have its own instance. This is because I use finale to write/program. I could use program changes but it's needlessly complex (waste of time) to do so.

Hi Matt,

How about VStack or some similar software where you can load VSTi instances? Doesn't that work with Finale too, or am I mistaken? (If yes, then I'm sorry, I don't use it myself ...)

Regards,
David

True but I believe each instance eats up a lot more cpu vs one instance with multiple patches.