189,666 users have contributed to 42,667 threads and 256,811 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 11 new post(s) and 50 new user(s).
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:
- 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.
- 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.
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.
@BachRules said:
If you prefer Play's brand of elegance, I say go for it.
I stand by my words in that for me, if Vienna Instruments was multitimbral I would be able to select articulations by MIDI channel.
It's not that PLAY, Kontakt, Omnisphere and the like is what's elegant, it's the process of selecting those articulations within a score that is extremely elegant and quick. There's no time-consuming fiddling with nudging program changes or keyswitches around, just an uninterrupted focus on the score, and within a fraction of a second change the articulation via MIDI channel without having my eyes even leave the score.
These continued references to vintage synths are unneccessary. My tongue-in-cheek comparison of Vienna Instruments to old hardware was due to its lack of multitimbral capabilities, just like a vintage synth.
Nonetheless, the limitation in Vienna Instruments has been confirmed. I can only request and hope that multitimbral capabilties be implemented in a future update of Vienna Instruments. That would be extremely beneficial for those who prefer the functionality that multitimbral offers.
@george_11239 said:
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).
By design/an oversight is a contradiction.
You don't like keyswitches is all this says to me. The VI Pro interface offers vastly more than another interface in terms of what can be done in one 'instrument' instance.
The analogy of one Kontakt .nki within a multi/VI within VEP is fairly apt, except that VEP can give you 48 MIDI ports instead of one.
Anyway there is something for Logic now in terms of articulation mapping
Anyway there is something for Logic now in terms of articulation mapping
I appreciate that, but this is exactly what I don't want - to be distracted from the score and nudging program changes or keyswitches.
Thanks for all the suggestions. I certainly hope the brilliant folks at Vienna consider the multitimbral implementation.
@BachRules said:
I just tried this with Play and it crashed my machine.
That is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. The point was to find out how I could access articulations within Vienna Instruments with unique MIDI channels. And it's not possible in the current version.
The attached image is a screenshot showing a few articulations in the score which were quickly and easily assigned with the highlighted MIDI channel selection box shown on the left. If Vienna Instruments was multitimbral I would happily be able to do this.
Once a portion or the entire piece is written, it is then I leave the score and focus on editing the dynamic curves. But while in the score, I just want to write and not be distracted with clumsy program change or keyswitch nudging -- for me, that's not very conducive to creative writing.
The attached image is a screenshot showing a few articulations in the score which were quickly and easily assigned with the highlighted MIDI channel selection box shown on the left... in the score....
there are solutions
I wasn't looking for an alternative solution, I was inquiring how I go about changing articulations within Vienna Instruments by MIDI channels.
@BachRules said:
But Play is really zero-timbral, because it crashed.
This is pointless and again irrelevant to my inquiry. Vienna Instruments is not multitimbral, whereas other samplers are.
I am not requesting Vienna to remove any of the articulation accessing features that others enjoy and have become reliant on, but merely asking for the implementation of what I consider to be basic functionality.
I am not requesting Vienna to remove any of the articulation accessing features that others enjoy and have become reliant on, but merely asking for the implementation of what I consider to be basic functionality.
You are asking them to divert their limited resources into adding a feature for solving a problem which already has other solutions (the alternative solutions requiring no more eye-movement or "clumsy fiddling and nudging" than your own preferred solution). Diverting reources into a redundant solution would mean diverting resources away from different issues, hence my reservations.
If the functionality you want is truly "basic", VSL will hear requests from numerous customers for this functionality. If that doesn't happen, maybe the functionality wasn't so basic after all.
You are asking them to divert their limited resources into adding a feature for solving a problem which already has other solutions
I am requesting a feature that would be beneficial to working within a score editor.
I did not read the 3 pages of this discussion, if you use Logic it is easy to do, you just need a few Transformers in the Environnement
