@herb said:
Please keep in mind, that the mapping structure on patch level (which you dont see) is pretty advanced, there are patches which use up to 200 different samples triggered by the same key.
It depends on velocity, speed, intervalls, repetition counts and more which wav file is triggered.
best
Herb
Sorry... very true. I don't know that in detail, obviously, but I understand that it must be the case.
However, that would still be the case in the "Learn Music" option I'm talking about - it wouldn't change. What I'm suggesting is that, if playing one pitch on a given articulation requires 200 samples for all the realtime stuff to work, then those 200 samples should *all* remain in RAM. The idea is to retain 100% felxibility *but only for the notes in your piece*. The RAM savings won't be anywhere near what you've managed with the general purpose Learn scheme, but considering that many pitches will likely not be needed, they will still be considerable in many cases. Obviously, if your piece uses every chromatic pitch, for the entire range of the instrument, then such a function would offer 0% improvement! [;)] However, in such cases you'd probably just do all your tweaking with a non-optimized VI, then optimize when you were done, since you would know beforehand that you were going to use just about ever sample available!
But the more I think about it, it seems as though this idea of mine is really a matter of creating a sort of "partial keymap". The function would keep a record of all the pitches used in the score, then dump all the samples for any pitches that weren't used. And actually, it might even make sense to only perform this optimization step for the more "costly" performance instruments, since the more "effect" oriented articulations, like trills, trems, pizzes, and so on, are used pretty deliberately during composition; it's not likely that one would be nit-picking about whether to use a perf-legato, a perf-detache, or a pizz sample! So perhaps it could just optimize performance patches? Any sense in that?
Please keep in mind, I'm not trying to drive you mad, just rattling off some possibilities! [;)]
J.