DP9 & Key Switching VSL instruments

[Musicmind]

Hi
I'm almost new to DP9 but have seen some of the videos from Guy Michelmore and he doesn't use KS at all (as far as I can see). So now I wonder if the strategy for setting up VSL instruments in DP9 is to have one separate MIDI track for each articulation?
Is that he way those of you who are using VSL do it?
I find that in my template for Cubase, the setup for my VSL Piccolo contained almost 20 patches, and that gives 20 tracks! Thats a lot! Any idea or information very much appreciated.

[Martini Hill]

Yes, to generally KS or not. Good question. I would like to hear opinions too. J

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

[FMiguelez]

I use and abuse keyswitches all the time.
I can't think of an easier and more intuitive way to change articulations quickly and on-the-fly.

My template is huge. And I've seen some videos of guys who also use huge templates, but they don't seem to use KSs as much, and, to be honest, I've never understood why they do it or how they can manage such apparently unnecessarily big templates (I've seen some use one track per articulation making their templates huuuuuuuuuuge).

I'm not criticising their way of work, though. To each their own, and whatever works. They may have a reason for doing this that I either, don't understand, or are simply not comfortable with.

There are many other ways to change articulations, of course, but I've found that the best way for me to do it is to use KS and a "strict" and predictable scheme, so no matter what the instrument is, I know that staccatos will always be on C1, sustained notes on D, fp on F#, etc. Failure to do this has driven me crazy in the past.

All my keyswitches correspond to high instruments (same KSs in the lower keyboard register), Low instruments (same but the KS at the top of the keyboard) and "Full Keyboard" (where I fire my KS from another keyboard set to ultra low to leave the whole normal keyboard alone for instruments like piano, or percussion maps where I use the full keyboard range).

My main orchestral library is VSL, and it works beautifully with a well though-out keyswitching scheme.

[Martini Hill]

That's actually a really good idea...."fire my KS from another keyboard " my little M-Audio O2 could be designated strictly for this. Still not sure which way to go on this while rebuilding my template. Agreed, although unwieldy with a large temp, it still would be nice to have separate tracks for articulations.

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

[FMiguelez]

That's actually a really good idea...."fire my KS from another keyboard " my little M-Audio O2 could be designated strictly for this. Still not sure which way to go on this while rebuilding my template. Agreed, although unwieldy with a large temp, it still would be nice to have separate tracks for articulations.

Are you sure about that? What would the reason be, if you don´t mind my asking.
If there's any benefit on doing that, I'd like to know about it.

All I see is unnecessary clutter, annoyingly difficulty navigation, A NIGHTMARE to follow lines in a score (try making sense of a normal large score, but add 10 times more tracks with instruments dancing all over the score, multiplied by the number of similar instruments from different libraries - even when editing just a copule of instruments at a time...).
For me, that makes reading or using anything notation-related useless.
No wonder their templates are 1000+ tracks!

It actually reminds me of the OLD Gigastudio days, when there wasn't other choice but doing precisely that, and it was horrible. I wonder if those who use a track per articulation keep doing it simply because that's how they got used to do it from those days?

Now, there are a few times when I need to duplicate a track or two to deal with difficult MIDI edits in certain situations, but that's on a need-to basis, and rarely necessary.

But perhaps I'm too blind to see a benefit of having extra tracks when I can accomplish the same with fewer. Like I said, if I'm missing something obvious, I'd like to know about it.

[Killahurts]

Are you sure about that? What would the reason be, if you don´t mind my asking.If there's any benefit on doing that, I'd like to know about it.

VSL has great keyswitching, but not all libraries do. Like LASS- when I first got it, it had very limited KS capabilities. Now, the 2.5 version has fantastic KS'ing, but I'm still with separate tracks for articulations because I haven't taken the time to learn. I'm doing that this week though, finally. Whereas Cinebrass had fantastic keyswitching from the beginning, so I set that up in a much more consolidated way.

Another good reason is when you want to play different articulations at the same time.. which does happen around here.. still, I've committed myself to having a more efficient rig this year.. tired of scrolling through 300+ MIDI tracks on the big template..

[FMiguelez]

Are you sure about that? What would the reason be, if you don´t mind my asking.If there's any benefit on doing that, I'd like to know about it.

VSL has great keyswitching, but not all libraries do. Like LASS- when I first got it, it had very limited KS capabilities. Now, the 2.5 version has fantastic KS'ing, but I'm still with separate tracks for articulations because I haven't taken the time to learn. I'm doing that this week though, finally. Whereas Cinebrass had fantastic keyswitching from the beginning, so I set that up in a much more consolidated way.

I See. That´s understandable. Perhaps other libraries have other means to handle them.

Another good reason is when you want to play different articulations at the same time.. which does happen around here.. still, I've committed myself to having a more efficient rig this year.. tired of scrolling through 300+ MIDI tracks on the big template..

Why would one want to play different articulations at the same time? Unless you mean like combining a fp patch with a crescendo for added accent, and similar stuff?

If so, that kind of thing can be done with most libraries, I think (including VSL).
You can combine up to 8 different patches/articulations on the same channel, and you can control each independently or in combination to the others, by at least 2 different mechanisms, i.e., with a crossfade between cells, etc. So with the fader in the up position it plays only fp, and then you lower it to crossfade into the crescendo. Or you can opt to not crossfade them and have them independent and control their individual levels instead. This is a GREAT feature!

The thing with overly and unnecessarily large templates is that they can easily become problematic and clumsy to navigate and do things quickly.
I recently simplified and overhauled my templete a big deal. I reorganised and deleted so much redundant stuff! Now it´s lean, clean, overly capable, and ready for action

I REALLY think that any time invested in learning about the libraries, so one can use them as effectively and parsimoniously as possible, is time very well spent.

Who wants to look at a 10-stave piccolo part??

[frankf]

So what does the track look like in Quick Scribe or any other notation app if the KS's are in the same track? I like using separate tracks for KS and to avoid seeing the KS tracks I group them to hide/show all in all but the TO (where there's no track selector). This is better for me than looking at non readable (read severely whacked) notation when, for example C1 key switch is in the flute MIDI track.


Frank Ferrucci

[FMiguelez]

So what does the track look like in Quick Scribe or any other notation app if the KS's are in the same track? I like using separate tracks for KS and to avoid seeing the KS tracks I group them to hide/show all in all but the TO (where there's no track selector). This is better for me than looking at non readable (read severely whacked) notation when, for example C1 key switch is in the flute MIDI track.

I see what you mean, and you have a good point.

However, one can hide the keyswitches from QuickScribe and have them only play (but not show). This way you avoid those horrible and unreadable ledger lines.

But I should try your method some time, just to see what it feels like to have KS and CCs in a different track. I may like it

[Musicmind]

Thank you for your answers.
I will consider to keep the KS and keep the track count down.

[Killahurts]

I recently simplified and overhauled my templete a big deal. I reorganised and deleted so much redundant stuff! Now it´s lean, clean, overly capable, and ready for action

I REALLY think that any time invested in learning about the libraries, so one can use them as effectively and parsimoniously as possible, is time very well spent.

I'm doing the exact same thing! I'm going slow, because I don't want the learning curve to slow down my composing/production. The funniest part is, most of the "new" capabilities I'm implementing with my VIs, are features they've always had, I just never explored them. But you're right, it is time well spent.

[frankf]

However, one can hide the keyswitches from QuickScribe and have them only play (but not show). This way you avoid those horrible and unreadable ledger lines.

Never knew about this. Thanks, I'll have to check out how easy it is to use the hide feature.




Frank Ferrucci

[FMiguelez]

It's quite easy, once you assign a key shortcut for the command. Then you jus select the notes (very easy to distinguish KS from real notes in the GE, according to range), press the command, and bam! They're gone.

You have to keep doing this overtime you add new KS, though. I wish we could create some kind of realtime filter for this.

I suppose one can create and save searches, and assign them a QuicKeys macro to easily select the KS for different ranges in tracks. Now I should investigate that...

[Shooshie]

So what does the track look like in Quick Scribe or any other notation app if the KS's are in the same track? I like using separate tracks for KS and to avoid seeing the KS tracks I group them to hide/show all in all but the TO (where there's no track selector). This is better for me than looking at non readable (read severely whacked) notation when, for example C1 key switch is in the flute MIDI track.


Frank Ferrucci

What Frank said. The easiest thing in the world is to hit COMMAND-CONTROL-S for "add similar track," and instantly you are making keyswitches for the track you copied. The worst thing in the world is to forget your keyswitches when you transpose a part in a track whose keyswitches are in it with the data. Oh man. I say keep music and instructions separate. Continuous controllers are a different story, but I've even been known to make separate tracks for those, too. Again, I don't like music and instructions getting mixed up together.

Shoosh

[Shooshie]

When I say "separate tracks" for continuous controllers, I'm talking about the controllers used for automation. Not for vibrato, breath control, volume, etc. If it's music, it goes in with the notes. If it's automation, it goes in the other track. But that depends on how involved things are. If it's a simple project with simple controls, I don't mind a couple extra CCs in my MIDI tracks.

Shooshie