If this is indeed by design I am very suprised by what I think is a glaring oversight of an elegant way to compose in the score (selecting articulations with MIDI channels).

The Vienna Instrument player appears to be bountiful in ways of selecting articulations, especially suited for real time performances, but composing with the proverbial quill and paper it doesn't seem to offer an elegant method of selecting articulations (without cluttering the score with keyswitches).

As an AU/VST plugin that may be used 'within' a sequencer, it seems odd in this day and age that it is not multitimbral, especially when offering such a robust Matrix, along with a myriad of other ways for selecting articulations.

Will selecting articulations by MIDI channel ever be implemented in Vienna Instruments?

 Well, instead you'd be cluttering the score with MIDI channel change messeges...

That is a ridiculous statement (not sure that you're serious). No MIDI Channel change messages appear in the score. On the contrary, a note or group of notes is selected and their MIDI channel is simply changed to the channel that the desired articulation is on, and the score remains clean and very legible.

Will selecting articulations by MIDI channel ever be implemented in Vienna Instruments?

@Another User said:

... You'd have to use Vienna Ensemble to host an instance of the player on each channel with the desire articulation loaded in each....

I absolutely do see it as an extremely elegant method and also the most preferable way of selecting articulations in the score.

I am really surprised by the lack of this basic functionality in 2014. Not having multi-timbral capibilties reminds me of vintage synths.

@george_11239 said:

I absolutely do see it as an extremely elegant method and also the most preferable way of selecting articulations in the score.

I am really surprised by the lack of this basic functionality in 2014. Not having multi-timbral capibilties reminds me of vintage synths.

The functionality isn't really lacking; it's just that you're overlooking Bill's solution. If it were a vintage synth, you'd have to buy a separate VI for each articulation, and that's not the case. I'd be really surprised if VSL jumped on this, considering they'd only be duplicating functionality already available, as Bill described, and VI reminding people of vintage synths doesn't appear to be a widespread problem.

@Bill said:

... You'd have to use Vienna Ensemble to host an instance of the player on each channel with the desire articulation loaded in each....

Your understanding is shortsided of multitimbral advantages and it is by no means a moot point to any degree. A virtual instrument without multitimbral capabilties within Vienna Ensemble requires the articulations to be spread across the channel strips in order to access them by MIDI channel, and the Event plugin doesn't help in this regard either (whereas on a multitimbral VI the Event plug is of tremendous value).

A multi-timbral instrument (e.g. PLAY, Kontakt, Omnisphere, etc.) is capable of not just loading 16 articulations within a single instance, but is capable of assigning each of those articulations a unique MIDI channel. This I see as of paramount importance in quickly assigning a selected note(s) in the score a desired articulation.

@BachRules said:

The functionality isn't really lacking; it's just that you're overlooking Bill's solution. If it were a vintage synth, you'd have to buy a separate VI for each articulation, and that's not the case. I'd be really surprised if VSL jumped on this, considering they'd only be duplicating functionality already available, as Bill described, and VI reminding people of vintage synths doesn't appear to be a widespread problem.

Yes it most certainly is a lack of basic functionality.

I am well aware of the benefits of Vienna Ensemble, but as I stated, without multitimbral capabilties the solution is to spread the articulations across the channels in VE Pro, opposed to loading 16 articulations within a single VI instance and accessing them with uniquely assigned MIDI channels from the score.

@Another User said:

A multi-timbral instrument (e.g. PLAY, Kontakt, Omnisphere, etc.) is capable of not just loading 16 articulations within a single instance, but is capable of assigning each of those articulations a unique MIDI channel. This I see as of paramount importance in quickly assigning a selected note(s) in the score a desired articulation.

@Another User said:

An architecture limiting the number of articulations to the number of MIDI channeles -- 16 -- would seem vintage-synthy to me. Limiting timbres to 16 made sense in 1983 when MIDI was designed, but not anymore.

On the contary, a virtual instrument without these capabilties is what is similar to non-multitimbral vintage synths. And it makes perfect sense to have these capabilties in this modern day and age... especially when needing to access articulations by MIDI channel within a score.

If the Vienna Instrument player had multitimbral capabilties the benefit of using it within VE Pro would be even more beneficial, as each instance could hold a multitude of articulations and circumvent the 16/32 MIDI channel limit by adding more instances (as I do now with multitimbral VI's.).

Nonetheless, I understand that the Vienna Instrument Player does not have this capability and thus remain very dissapointed.

Hello everybody, 

Vienna Ensemble / Vienna Ensemble PRO is a multi-timbral plug-in. 

And although it´s not the intended use, you can definitely load multiple Vienna Instruments instances and use one articulation on each channel. 

Another alternative is to use program changes to switch between matrices within a Vienna Instruments instance (instead of using keyswitches to switch, this way you can us up to 127 matrices in 1 instance of Vienna Instruments). 

Best, 

Paul

Whilst I would have no use for a separate MIDI channel for each articulation, I can see that it might be useful for other people,. However, I just wanted to clarify a couple of points:

1. If you use VST Expression this solve the problem, and is by far the most elegant of all solutions. The caveat is that there is a limit to the complexity that can be achieved using this method, although using separate MIDI channels has a much lower limit.
2. You don't have to see Keyswitches in the Score. Just set them outside of the range of the instrument in the Score Editor properties and they wont show.

@Another User said:

Another alternative is to use program changes to switch between matrices within a Vienna Instruments instance (instead of using keyswitches to switch, this way you can us up to 127 matrices in 1 instance of Vienna Instruments).

This is interesting and I appreciate the suggestion, thanks.  

@DG said:

1. If you use VST Expression this solve the problem, and is by far the most elegant of all solutions. The caveat is that there is a limit to the complexity that can be achieved using this method, although using separate MIDI channels has a much lower limit.
2. You don't have to see Keyswitches in the Score. Just set them outside of the range of the instrument in the Score Editor properties and they wont show.

I'm using Logic Pro X and VE Pro 5 and have been working in the score of Logic since the early 1990's.  While I appreciate your suggestion of using expression maps, for me, the most elegant and quickest workflow is to write a note(s) in the score and then within the same window simply change the MIDI channel that is assigned to the desired articulation. No messy keyswitches, no extraneous info on the score, and no opening any other window to select an articulation.

-

-

As I previously mentioned, I realize the range of the viewable score can be decreased in order to hide the keyswitches. However, the idea of nudging keyswitches around and hiding and showing when necessary is not a desirable approach. I prefer to see only the notes I am composing and triggering articulations via the assigned MIDI channel within the score. Thanks for the suggestions though. 

-

-

I would dive into Vienna Instruments if it were multitimbral as are PLAY, Kontakt, Omnisphere, etc. That's too bad because the sounds are superb.

 Think of VE Pro as Kontakt, and instances of VI as the instruements loaded into Kontakt. The functionality is the same.

Ah, well if you have to use Logic, then obviously VST Expression maps won't work. BTW if you ever do think about using Cubase, or any other VST3 compatible sequencer, do look into Expression Maps, as they do just what you want and are much more convenient and efficient than using MIDI channels.

DG

@DG said:

Ah, well if you have to use Logic, then obviously VST Expression maps won't work. BTW if you ever do think about using Cubase, or any other VST3 compatible sequencer, do look into Expression Maps, as they do just what you want and are much more convenient and efficient than using MIDI channels.

I much prefer Logic over Cubase in more ways than one.

Using MIDI channels within the score is undoubtedly the quickest, most convenient, and extremely efficient.

If Vienna Instruments was multitimbral this wouldn't be an issue.

@george_11239 said:

I much prefer Logic over Cubase in more ways than one.

Using MIDI channels within the score is undoubtedly the quickest, most convenient, and extremely efficient.

If Vienna Instruments was multitimbral this wouldn't be an issue.

VI is post-multimbral, providing 127 timbres via program changes. That's 111 timbres more than the vintage "multitimbral" synths provide.

@BachRules said:

VI is post-multimbral, providing 127 timbres via program changes. That's 111 timbres more than the vintage "multitimbral" synths provide.

Trying to convince me that I should be using another method or using another DAW is a fruitless effort.

Vienna Ensemble not only harnesses, but relies on the 16/32 MIDI channel specification, just not within the Vienna Instrument player itself. Which to me is perplexing and quite unfortunate.

Furthermore, I am not finding a way to send program changes on a note by note basis within the score.

My question has been answered:

Vienna Instruments lacks the functionality that I prefer.

@george_11239 said:

Trying to convince me that I should be using another method or using another DAW is a fruitless effort.

I wouldn't try to do that, as I don't mind whatever you decide to do. I was responding to your big, red claim about multitimbrality, your likening VI to a "vintage synth", and your opinions about elegance. If you prefer Play's brand of elegance, I say go for it.