I can't seem to figure out how to use the CC option to switch matrix cells. I have searched the tutorials & manuals; I must have overlooked something. How do I determine what value of the CC controller switches to what row or column? There are these bars in the indicator which are movable & dots and numbers indicating controller values. But things respond erratically. I don't understand how you assign controller values to switch to a particular row. I can't trouble shoot sending the controller values if I don't know what the display in VI pro means. Does there exist a detailed description of how this system works?
-
How to use CC controler to switch matrix cells in VI pro2
-
The X bar moves through the matrices left to right, and the Y bar moves up and down.
Right click the box to the right of the bar, allows you to select what controls it, in your case it will CC something, if you pick CC1 here and then move your mod wheel on your keyboard you will see the dot in the bar move. You should also see the matrix change. You can assign any controller or other MIDI event to control this, but generally CC's are the best (some users use keyswitches).
The value of CC to pick a particular cell can be adjusted by grabbing the dividing line and moving it
-
I can't even imagine how someone could come away with 'generally CCs are the best' for keyswitching.
I guess some of the matrices VSL built could have CCs for the horizontal dimension, but I don't recall any so far, they are assigned to keyswitches which has always been the way to switch articulations in vis. The Vienna Instruments interface has a vertical dimension which afaik is novel and it seems convenient to use a CC there. For instance I use CC64, a switch (toggle) if there are two rows, and CC1 if more than two.
-
matrices that contain speed differences, eg., 'performance trills' are assigned to switch past a certain speed. also see velocity switching.
-
Thanks andyjh,
I understand what you are saying. I finally figured out what was throwing me. The CC display indicates a RANGE of cc values which will switch to a particular cell. I assumed I would get one value per row/column - whichever I was switching. So, when I see the two numbers flanking a dot (corresponding to a matrix position), it means any cc value inside that range will switch to that matrix position. It seems simple now but somehow it isn't something that naturally occurred to me. I was expecting ONE cc value per row or column.
RE the advantage of using cc instead of key switching: You don't have to hide score notes which have nothing to do with the actual music pitches of the composition.
-
the remark I referred to was 'generally best to'. Doing notation first or primarily and a requirement owing to that is obviously not general but specific.
in my experience, generally the VSL matrices have the horizontal dimension assigned to keyswitches. there's less to worry about in piano roll sequencing that way, compared to a continuous controller & 'a range of values', which has to be set in the VI interface as well as the CC lane. The piano roll is where realistic performances are achieved.
-
There are several reason why I think using key switches are a bad idea.
1. It is very hard to have a standard set of key switches for all sounds, key switches are usually put at the bottom of the keyboard, but if you use a contra bass or similar, the playable range of the instrument will collide with the keyswitches, and if you use the top of the keyboard, the piccolo or similar will collide with them there.
2. If you use any form of quantise with your performance, the articulation change keyswitches will move as well, that is definately what you don't want.
3. Using randomise values for note position, will cause the articulation position to change, and they can move the wrong side of the note.
4. The score editor goes horribly wrong with keyswitches all over the place.
Using VST expression maps in Cubase using CC's is a very logical trouble free way of doing things.
-
Yes ok civilization 3, I understand what you said. However, I have found the most convenient arrangement to be using CC for selecting a row, and stepping horizontally with the sequential control. In such a case, single setting rows are simple and so are phrases which step along horizontally. You can still use the piano roll, but the score remains pristine; you do not have to hide all those key switch notes.
-
This is very interesting since I always used keyswitching and had some troubles with it. So using CCs might be a solution. Is is possible to use a CC to switch between the matrices?
Could I use CC1 for switching matrices, CC2 for switching X-axis and CC3 for switching Y-axis within one matrix?
Cheers,
Sabine
-
So using CCs might be a solution. Is is possible to use a CC to switch between the matrices?
Could I use CC1 for switching matrices, CC2 for switching X-axis and CC3 for switching Y-axis within one matrix?
I don't know of a way to switch matrices using a CC. AFAIK I know, it's KS or Program Change, but I could be wrong. Certainly you can use whatever CC you like for changing patches within a matrix, both vertically and horizontally.
DG
-
Hi DG,
thanks for joining in!
Until now I always needed 2 expression maps for the low and high instruments for the reason andyjh is describing. I switched the matrices with program changes. Now I upgraded to MIR Pro 24. So I use VEP5 to load up VIP2. I can't use my program changes anymore, because I need to use the VST3 bridge to VEP5 to control multiple midi channels.
I tried to switch to only keyswitching yesterday but I have two problems:
1) There are not enough keys on the keyboard. I know you think I'm mad but my presets include about 30 matrices. Not all matrices are enabled but I have the same matrix structure for all my VSL instruments.
2) When I use keyswitching for matrices, X-axis and Y-axis I get quite often hung notes on the keyboard and I can't manage to change the matrices and the cells on the same time. I don't use the 2nd keyswitch in the Cubase expression maps, so I have to trigger in an extrem scenario up to 3 keyswitches at the same time. Could this be too much for the VIP2 player?
Thanks for any help!
Cheers,
Sabine
-
- I assume that all your matrices are pretty simple then? I can't imagine a scenario were I would need so many matrices. I would never remember what they all were! I use a 2 bank KS system; 1st octave for articulation description (legato, staccato, repetition etc.) and the second octave for narrowing down the length of note from shortest to longest.
- I've never had any hung notes, so it may be the way that you're triggering things. I also put all of mine in the bottom two MIDI octaves (VSL -1 and 0, or Cubase 02 and 01) so that they are the same for all instruments.
I've never used Expression maps, so I can't help you there. However, the other issues that have been previously mentioned are all solvable by judicious use of macros. If you could order them specifically, I can tell you how I deal with them.
DG
-
I use keyswitching the majority of the time as well. I'll use a CC contoller to switch between closely related articulations like stac. and portato or sus. and slow legato. This works well for changing things up a little if you have a line of stac notes, for example. Push the CC up every once in a while to get a portato.
-
Thank you all for your feedback!!!
@DG: Yes, probably I have to simplify my approach here. But I like to have all articulations at hand. So you only have matrices for the standard articulations and load up the rest if needed? I have never worked with macros but I will see what I find about it and check it out.
@Bill: Event Inputs sound interesting. I'm new to VEP5, so I have just read a little bit about it. Do I need a separate midi track to just send midi date via Event inputs?
Cheers,
Sabine
-
I don't think I'm really skimping on articulations. For example my string Presets have well over 40 articulations to keyswitch to, and I have many more that are using cell xFade or velocity for patch changing. It would help if you could post some sort of screenshot of what your setup is, because it sounds as if it could be streamlined, without losing access to the articulations.
DG
