Logic 10.5 vs DP 10.1

[mikehalloran]

That is actually the counter-intuitive thing if you really think about it

I’ve been too busy to really think about that. It works. I’m good.

[Michael Canavan]

I'm unfamiliar with the DP note range thing you're talking about. what is that?

DP has no ability to limit the note range of a MIDI track. Say C0 to C3 is channel 1 C#3 to C8 is Channel 2. This way you can control two different instruments using the same MIDI controller on a DAW level. Say Diva on a track limited to C0-C3 and Massive on C#3-C8, simply arming both tracks you have a split keyboard with two sounds. Logic, Live, Bitwig, Reaper, all the other DAWs I have used can do this. It's one of the weirdest longstanding shortcomings in DP, which is otherwise really solid MIDI wise.

I agree. I think this is mainly because DP doesn't really have a separate distinction between a track and a channel. In LogicPro they are two separate things, connected. A track is assigned to a mixer channel. The mixer channel could be a MIDI channel, instrument channel, audio channel, aux channel, etc. The track itself just has regions on it and feeds the region data to whatever object it is assigned to. In that way, an "Instrument Track" in Logic Pro is really a "track" that is connected to an instrument channel, where the plugin is hosted. It looks like a single track, and is.

I think this is you being really used to Logics weird lack of ultra transparent bussing. In Live, Reaper and DP MIDI is routed via it's own bus really, but in Logic it's different. The way Logic now assigns multi instruments is not intuitive or normal. watching volume meters bounce on what look like identical instrument tracks but are actually basically MIDI tracks routed to the Multi is bizzaro.

DP just has tracks (excluding V-racks for the moment). and for whatever the reason they have decide that in order to have a MIDI track feeding to an instrument plugin, you need a second track to host the instrument plugin, which I also find a bit annoying, but that one is not the end of the world.

You can always use a V-Rack I think, which can help to consolidate things a bit into less tracks of each sequence. But Its been a while since I used DP, but I think that may result in some automation hassles when using a V-Rack, can't remember now.

Honestly DP's method is as straightforward as you can get, MIDI tracks are MIDI tracks, whether they address software or hardware. Instrument tracks host track automation and listen to MIDI.

V-Racks do not host track automation, so a AUi or VSTi hosted in a V-Rack cannot do track automation. For the most part this isn't that big of a deal, especially if you keep V-Racks filled with samplers etc.

I personally do not think at all that chunks could not be worked through this...I can't see any reason why a sequence with instruments on the same track as the MIDI (like Cubase for example), couldn't be used as a chunk that way.

As stated earlier, if a software instrument is in a V-Rack it can't do track automation, and the MIDI track would have to somehow automagically separate from the V-Rack to live in the track. I think this technical glitch is why we don't see software instruments in DP with a MIDI track channel attached like every other DAW. The benefit of Chunks complicates the transition if it were to happen.

But anyway with some (or maybe all) of the mentioned DAW's, when the MIDI is fed back into the input of a MIDI track, the timestamp from the region where it originated, is lost..it becomes more like a live MIDI event and gets a new timestamp. I did a bunch of testing using scripter's to print out the timestamp. Lost. So not sample accurate. Still close enough most people would probably not notice, but nonetheless, not sample accurate. .............
Back to LogicPro, its the only DAW that handles MIDI plugins really correctly in all respects related to this. Your instrument channel there has a midifx section where you can have as many aumfx plugins as you want... they all handle all ports and channels in the MIDI plugin and pass it all to the instrument. All timestamps are absolutely preserved. no extra tracks in order to route. You can have a series of MIDI plugins if you want...no problem. Clean, easy and accurate.

The one downside of LogicPro MIDI fx is that there is no good way to feed the output from MIDI fx back to a track to record as MIDI to a new region...which of course is easy with Cubase/Dp where you are forced to route MIDI fx chains through separate tracks in order to even do it...so you can easily record the MIDI fx results to a new region if you want. so they win there, but at the expense of a lot of complexity and problems when you don't need to actually do that.

Think you can see the benefit and disadvantages here. Personally I like having the actual MIDI in a track, which would be sample accurate of course, VS it being sample accurate but not getting the MIDI. I think it works well in Logic because of Logics port shortcoming, it likes hosting the MIDI plug in on the same track because otherwise it would send to all tracks. Like someone else mentioned it's easy to send MIDI from a VI MIID FX plug in to multiple VSTs in DP compared.

Anyway the other problem DP has with MIDI plugin chaining is that way it gives you a list of MIDI ports to choose as the input and output. It lists out each MIDI channel as a separate selectiable thing. There is no way to feed a MIDI track to a MIDI plugin and get ALL MIDI channels fed to the next MIDI track and instrument. They don't have an ALL option for when you select which MIDI device to feed a MIDI track, you have to select one of the 16 MIDI channels as the input device to the next MIDI track in the chain.

That goes back to the MIDI bussing system, in Live and DP MIDI is port and channel specific. Logic does MPE pretty well because of this though, but not as good as Bitwig, which can separate controllers to VSTi's by channel. Of all of them, Bitwig and R do the bussing and routing the best, no comparison.

I'm betting though we see the most development with DP when they start really diving into MIDI 2.0, which will come of course. Here's to hoping that all the DAWs with little weirdnesses use it as a chance to sort them out.

[dewdman42]

I agree. I think this is mainly because DP doesn't really have a separate distinction between a track and a channel. In LogicPro they are two separate things, connected. A track is assigned to a mixer channel. The mixer channel could be a MIDI channel, instrument channel, audio channel, aux channel, etc. The track itself just has regions on it and feeds the region data to whatever object it is assigned to. In that way, an "Instrument Track" in Logic Pro is really a "track" that is connected to an instrument channel, where the plugin is hosted. It looks like a single track, and is.

I think this is you being really used to Logics weird lack of ultra transparent bussing. In Live, R••••• and DP MIDI is routed via it's own bus really, but in Logic it's different. The way Logic now assigns multi instruments is not intuitive or normal. watching volume meters bounce on what look like identical instrument tracks but are actually basically MIDI tracks routed to the Multi is bizzaro.

Well now you're onto a separate topic from what I was talking about before. Multi-timbral instrument handling is not the same topic as single instrument tracks. Multi-timbral instrument handling in LogicPro is definitely sketchy, I make no argument there. its workable once you get used to it, but to this day still has many odd things going on with it, but honestly most people don't use multi-timbral instruments...so its kind of a moot point...but definitely a point worth considering...LogicPro's handling of multi-timbral instruments is not the greatest. it will basically works though once you know what you're doing with the software. In comparison, DP is very much more straightforward to assign MIDI tracks to different MIDI channels of a multi-timbral instrument. No question.

DP just has tracks (excluding V-racks for the moment). and for whatever the reason they have decide that in order to have a MIDI track feeding to an instrument plugin, you need a second track to host the instrument plugin, which I also find a bit annoying, but that one is not the end of the world.

You can always use a V-Rack I think, which can help to consolidate things a bit into less tracks of each sequence. But Its been a while since I used DP, but I think that may result in some automation hassles when using a V-Rack, can't remember now.

Honestly DP's method is as straightforward as you can get, MIDI tracks are MIDI tracks, whether they address software or hardware. Instrument tracks host track automation and listen to MIDI.

I do not think DP's need to use two tracks for one instrument is the ideal way. I'm not alone in that assessment. You can get around the nuttiness by using V-Racks, as I just explained. Thank you.

V-Racks do not host track automation, so a AUi or VSTi hosted in a V-Rack cannot do track automation. For the most part this isn't that big of a deal, especially if you keep V-Racks filled with samplers etc.

Exactly, well that is part of the problem. If you need to do non-MIDI automation, you can't put your instrument in the V-Rack...you have to use multiple tracks and see back to my previous annoyance.

I personally do not think at all that chunks could not be worked through this...I can't see any reason why a sequence with instruments on the same track as the MIDI (like Cubase for example), couldn't be used as a chunk that way.

As stated earlier, if a software instrument is in a V-Rack it can't do track automation, and the MIDI track would have to somehow automagically separate from the V-Rack to live in the track. I think this technical glitch is why we don't see software instruments in DP with a MIDI track channel attached like every other DAW. The benefit of Chunks complicates the transition if it were to happen.

I think you are confusing the conversation now. Forget about V-racks. what you originally said and that I responded to had nothing to do with V-Racks. You said that you thought it would not be possible for MOTU to consolidate instrument tracks into a single MIDI/instrument track because of chunks. I am saying, I don't see any reason why they couldn't do that and be fully usable as chunks.

V-Racks is the only way to eliminate the extra tracks right now, and yes....the way DP is now..if you want one track per instrument (with the plugin in a V-Rack, the chunks become just the MIDI part...which gets weird...and yet another reason why DP could be improved.

Think you can see the benefit and disadvantages here. Personally I like having the actual MIDI in a track, which would be sample accurate of course, VS it being sample accurate but not getting the MIDI.

I don't really understand your point here, so i can't comment..

but...

I think it works well in Logic because of Logics port shortcoming, it likes hosting the MIDI plug in on the same track because otherwise it would send to all tracks. Like someone else mentioned it's easy to send MIDI from a VI MIID FX plug in to multiple VSTs in DP compared.

In LogicPro, midifx plugins do not reside on tracks!! They reside on instrument channels. Tracks are assigned to send their data to one or more instrument channels (or other things). All DAW's will render sample accurate MIDI from the region of the track through the plugin. That is fine. but what I found in the testing I did some months ago with DP, Cubase and S1, was that the INPUT to MIDI tracks, may overwrite any existing timestamp...because the software kind of assumes the MIDI event needs to be timestamped.

So in cubase, DP and others...when you try to use MIDI plugins...you have make a route that goes from track to track, in order to host the MIDI plugin in between. Cubase requires 2 tracks to do that, DP requires 4. In that MIDI signal chain..the MIDI goes through the INPUT of a MIDI track..and guess what...if there is a timestamp from the region it came from...it may be lost during that time. it will be treating it like a live incoming MIDI event that needs a new timestamp.

As I said already before, I had different results from every DAW, that all had some kind of problem, but I don't remember now the exact results I had with DP, but this seemed to a common occurrence when trying to use MIDI plugins with those DAW's (DP, Cubase, S1)

EXCEPT FOR LOGIC PRO which does not have the problem because you don't have to route the MIDI signal back through another MIDI track. its the original MIDI events from the region with their sample accurate timestamp and they flow through the midifx plugin chain (the only daw that really has a midifx plugin section at all), with absolute timing retained. Its the only one.

But as i said, its difficult with LogicPro to record the results of a MIDI plugin back to a track again, but of course easy with DP and Cubase because of the way you are routing through MIDI tracks to do it.

Anyway the other problem DP has with MIDI plugin chaining is that way it gives you a list of MIDI ports to choose as the input and output. It lists out each MIDI channel as a separate selectiable thing. There is no way to feed a MIDI track to a MIDI plugin and get ALL MIDI channels fed to the next MIDI track and instrument. They don't have an ALL option for when you select which MIDI device to feed a MIDI track, you have to select one of the 16 MIDI channels as the input device to the next MIDI track in the chain.

That goes back to the MIDI bussing system, in Live and DP MIDI is port and channel specific.

So is LogicPro?

the only difference is that DP does not allow you to use the output from a MIDI plugin with ALL channels feeding back to a single instrument. The other DAW's do. DP only needs to add an ALL option. MIDI plugin usage is limited because of this. Maybe you didn't understand the point I was making.

Let's say you have a MIDI plugin that needs to channelize some notes before sending on to VePro, for example. Can't do it with DP because of the limitation I just mentioned. The MIDI routing through tracks requires you to separate the channels to separate MIDI signals, rather then having an OMNI option to send them all to one instance of VePro.

[Michael Canavan]

Just to clarify. LogicPro can do what you are asking about also. More then one track can be assigned to the same instrument channel. Just like in DP. The only difference is that its being routed to a "channel" rather then to another track. Myself I do not find it "intuitive" in DP to have one track with regions and another track without any regions, but hosting the plugin. That is actually the counter-intuitive thing if you really think about it. DP does provide V-Racks, which is more similar to the LogicPro approach, because in a V-Rack you basically are adding channels, without tracks...more like LogicPro's default approach.

Hmm, I think you're just used to the way Logic works at this point, because there's nothing intuitive about the fact that a basic MIDI track in Logic cannot address an AUi, deemed "external MIDI" now, this threw me for a loop recently revisiting Logic. Live, DP etc. can do this. It's awkward in Bitwig as well, but not as awkward as Logic.
Seriously, Logics set up is flatly more confusing, it's not worse or anything, it's just not at all intuitive. DP and Live IMO have the easiest to figure out routing, there's no mysteries, MIDI tracks in DP are MIDI tracks, you can use them to address internal and external instruments, audio, aux, are the same. Instrument tracks although not hosting a MIDI track behave otherwise as expected. They show up as destinations in the MIDI system. MIDI FX plug ins show up as hosts and destinations, as expected.

Logic on the other hand has workarounds for some of it's oddities. Because it doesn't differentiate MIDI by port in old timey days you would hard wire in the Environment multi out AUi's to MIDI tracks, but now you use these weird auxiliary MIDI tracks that all have the fader on them for some gawdawful reason. Actual external MIDI tracks in Logic suffer none of this. These aren't intuitive things, you have to know them, it's not at all like setting up a multi in Live for instance.

I can't off the top of my head think of another DAW that approaches tracks vs it's Environment mixer populated with things before you even instantiate a plug in? Every other DAW I know of populates the arrangement etc. pages with tracks that you instantiate on the fly, all "demix" by channel and port.

I'm not at all saying DP doesn't have weirdnesses, it very much does, but not in the bussing system. DP's weirdness is more in the fact that the workflow isn't a given, there's more than one way to use the interface, Chunks, V-Racks, and even two linear sequencers to choose from. The MIDI weirdness isn't even really that weird, VSTi and AUi's look just like external instruments do in DP.

[dewdman42]

well actually my last comment...I guess perhaps if you had a MIDI plugin the that channelizes, then you could theoretically create 16 new MIDI tracks just to route the results from the MIDI plugin back to a single instance of Vepro...so yea you could do it, but in that situation you would literally need 19 tracks to accomplish the task of say an instrument like EW play, with articulations on each MIDI channel and a MIDI plugin that channelizes the notes depending on some information...and all 16 of those channels then need to be funneled back to a single instrument plugin such as EW PLAY or VePro or whatever..

DP is definitely clunky here. If they added an ALL channel or OMNI for the input to a MIDI track...would be easier.

[Michael Canavan]

That goes back to the MIDI bussing system, in Live and DP MIDI is port and channel specific.

So is LogicPro?

No, it's not. In Logic you cannot assign a specific MIDI controller to a specific software instrument by port, only channel. You probably could wire something up in the Environment but by default Logic is non port specific with incoming MIDI. It's my biggest pet peeve with Logic.


This is why in Bitwig I can use an MPE controller and my MPK88 at the same time no problem.
This isn't possible in Logic without serious Environment work.

BTW it's also dead easy in DP even though like you pointed out DP's All channel MIDI doesn't work for MPE, assigning 16 channels to a MPE instrument allows it to work with the Rise 49 here while using the MPK88 on another track.

[Michael Canavan]

well actually my last comment...I guess perhaps if you had a MIDI plugin the that channelizes, then you could theoretically create 16 new MIDI tracks just to route the results from the MIDI plugin back to a single instance of Vepro...so yea you could do it, but in that situation you would literally need 19 tracks to accomplish the task of say an instrument like EW play, with articulations on each MIDI channel and a MIDI plugin that channelizes the notes depending on some information...and all 16 of those channels then need to be funneled back to a single instrument plugin such as EW PLAY or VePro or whatever..

DP is definitely clunky here. If they added an ALL channel or OMNI for the input to a MIDI track...would be easier.

I'm not in disagreement. I would bet it happens. Matt Leblank addressed this in the webinars, that MOTU are distinctly aware that people want MPE and people want articulation mappings. A side effect probably of MPE support would be an OMNI that worked. It's also Live's shortcoming MPE wise as well, that it doesn't have a true Omni in/out mode.

I'm betting it happens with full MIDI 2.0 support, makes sense to address these things all at once.

[dewdman42]

Hmm, I think you're just used to the way Logic works at this point, because there's nothing intuitive about the fact that a basic MIDI track in Logic cannot address an AUi, deemed "external MIDI" now,

there are two ways to do that now. So not sure what you're meaning to say.

Seriously, Logics set up is flatly more confusing, it's not worse or anything, it's just not at all intuitive.

Like all software you have to learn how to use it.

DP and Live IMO have the easiest to figure out routing, there's no mysteries, MIDI tracks in DP are MIDI tracks

LogicPro has that too.

what I think is that DP is more "explicit" perhaps. There are definitely some built in automatic routing features in Logicpro that throw some new users off until they learn how it works, but then once they get used to it they wouldn't want to go back. I used to say the same thing you are saying now about DP's explicit routing, I would complain on the LogicPro forum about it and how DP was better. But now that I understand it, I'm not bothered, and actually it is less mouse clicks to work in a lot of cases.... so eh... whatever. This particular aspect is not worth the comparison between the two DAW's. There are other much larger pros and cons.

Logic on the other hand has workarounds for some of it's oddities. Because it doesn't differentiate MIDI by port in old timey days you would hard wire in the Environment multi out AUi's to MIDI tracks, but now you use these weird auxiliary MIDI tracks that all have the fader on them for some gawdawful reason. Actual external MIDI tracks in Logic suffer none of this. These aren't intuitive things, you have to know them, it's not at all like setting up a multi in Live for instance.

You're saying some confusing things and I would say that perhaps you never really mastered LogicPro based on what you just said, and that's fine, but just keeping it real, you're making it sound a lot worse then it really is. It makes sense when you understand it. My main beef with LogicPro routing is that I can't record the output of a MIDI plugin to a new region. And with DP my main routing beef is that I need 4 tracks to handle a MIDI plugin...and the two problems I already mentioned cause pain and suffering as well.

for me, there is a lot of stuff I do like about DP, mainly chunks; but anyway I would switch back to DP as my primary DAW instantly if they add decent articulation management....and better MIDI plugin routing... no looking back if they do that. Hey, maybe even MOTU will get articulation management right so that we don't even need to mess around with MIDI plugins. LogicPro and cubase did not nail articulation management perfectly either. Its better then nothing. S1 also has nothing. But...they also both missed the mark enough that many users will end up with situations that can't be handled that well and MIDI processing is needed in between...thus the need for the MIDI plugins. If MOTU were to really nail the articulation management feature spot on, perhaps that would not be needed. I'd still much prefer one track per instrument though. Just sayin'.

[dewdman42]

I'm not in disagreement. I would bet it happens. Matt Leblank addressed this in the webinars, that MOTU are distinctly aware that people want MPE and people want articulation mappings. A side effect probably of MPE support would be an OMNI that worked. It's also Live's shortcoming MPE wise as well, that it doesn't have a true Omni in/out mode.

Let's hope.

[dewdman42]

That goes back to the MIDI bussing system, in Live and DP MIDI is port and channel specific.

So is LogicPro?

No, it's not. In Logic you cannot assign a specific MIDI controller to a specific software instrument by port, only channel. You probably could wire something up in the Environment but by default Logic is non port specific with incoming MIDI. It's my biggest pet peeve with Logic.

we were talking about different topics again, talking past each other. I thought we were talking about playback. This is about when you record MIDI from your controllers.

I agree with you here. This is not a limitation of the tracks or plugins or channels though, this is a limitation of the way MIDI controllers are routed through into the sequencer for recording MIDI tracks. Its the recording process itself that is for absolutely sure suck ass, DP wins on that one. All MIDI controllers have to flow through one bottleneck and the tracks are armed for recording, with the demix, bla bla... LogicPro sucks ass on that particular thing, no doubt about it, I'm with you 100%. I personally don't need to separate my input controllers, so it doesn't effect me. But some people do get messed up by that. And yes, you can wire them in the environment directly to the instrument channels...it can be done, but its not intuitive and

DP, has an explicit definition for each MIDI track where the input is coming from, just like Cubase, and S1 and every other DAW and I agree 100%, I want Apple to fix that!

This is why in Bitwig I can use an MPE controller and my MPK88 at the same time no problem.
This isn't possible in Logic without serious Environment work.

I totally get you. If you need the controllers routed to different tracks for recording or explicitly to different instruments at the same time...LogicPro is a PITA, no doubt.

[dewdman42]

in fact I'll go out on a limb here a bit and say that if MOTU were to really nail the articulation management thing, I think they would pick up a whole class of converts from Cubase and LogicPro that are prevalent in the film scoring crowd. Just spend some time on ViControl... Cubase and LogicPro are far and away the two DAW's being used the most(at least there on ViControl). But almost everyone on there is dealing with complicated articulation management issues.

Meanwhile DP has a bunch of other film scoring related features that they would all love... And an ex MOTU guy has the perfect iPad interface to work together with DAW's

https://patchboard.app

if MOTU and he were to get it all sorted out and working seamlessly...I think a lot of that crowd would switch over to DP. I know I would.

[Michael Canavan]

You're saying some confusing things and I would say that perhaps you never really mastered LogicPro based on what you just said, and that's fine, but just keeping it real, you're making it sound a lot worse then it really is.

I used Logic exclusively from 2000 to about 2008, I'm rusty now of course, but I would say more that you're indoctrinated rather than I'm unfamiliar. The routing in Logic is whack, it always has been, it's a fantastic DAW, that's not even a question. I'm very tempted to jump back on board and I'm one of those gluttons for punishment that likes learning new tricks etc. I think so far it's obvious that Apple took a little more time with their version of Clips than MOTU did, it's out the door in better shape, but both have crashed my system.

I'd still much prefer one track per instrument though. Just sayin'.

I'm not disagreeing with you here, but you keep missing my point about why it might be the way it is.
V-Racks exist as a way to have virtual instruments outside of Chunks. V-Racked instruments cannot have track automation, since no track exists. So, a virtual instrument track with MIDI in it would have to shed it's track automation and it's MIDI track in order to be moved to a V-Rack. It's not an untypical thing to do, to move a VST/AU to a V-Rack in order to work on a song in more than one Chunk etc.

I've been saying this is probably why we don't see a single VI with a MIDI channel attached to it, I imagine that to be a big task, splitting a VI from it's MIDI and losing it's track automation so you can send it to a V-Rack. (the obvious to us laypeople anyway solution would be a new VI category that was not V-Rack able.)

One thing MOTU could do that would do it for me articulation wise is if they bothered to do the assignments so you had a complete set of the 20 or so companies that do articulation instruments.
I'm by no means a classical composer, but I like to add in phrases that sound good to my music, and having to map out all of Spitfire Tundra or EWQL Orchestra, or.... it's a PITA. I think it was you who did the Kirk Hunter Concert Strings 2 for Logic Pro? if so thanks.

[dewdman42]

one thing I am definitely not is indoctrinated. Please. That's rather insulting. I manage to piss off everyone in every tribal forum like this one for exactly the reason that I am not indoctrinated to any one way. Just keeping it real.

[dewdman42]

I think so far it's obvious that Apple took a little more time with their version of Clips than MOTU did,

Of the new 10.5 features. the new step Sequencer is probably the most interesting to me. I don't really need that live clips approach, and can't say anything about how good or bad it is.

I'm not disagreeing with you here, but you keep missing my point about why it might be the way it is.
V-Racks exist as a way to have virtual instruments outside of Chunks. V-Racked instruments cannot have track automation, since no track exists. So, a virtual instrument track with MIDI in it would have to shed it's track automation and it's MIDI track in order to be moved to a V-Rack. It's not an untypical thing to do, to move a VST/AU to a V-Rack in order to work on a song in more than one Chunk etc.

As i said, V-racks is a separate discussion. the question is about why we can't have a single instrument track and have to have two tracks for every instrument... You said that would be a problem with chunks. I say no it doesn't have to to be. It could be done without V-racks, MOTU just needs to implement it. I'm not going to speculate as to why they choose not to, that is foolish.

I've been saying this is probably why we don't see a single VI with a MIDI channel attached to it, I imagine that to be a big task, splitting a VI from it's MIDI and losing it's track automation so you can send it to a V-Rack. (the obvious to us laypeople anyway solution would be a new VI category that was not V-Rack able.)

You are conflating topics. Forget V-Racks. Just built a friggin instrument track that hosts both the MIDI region and the plugin hosting in one track. It can be chunk able. Done.

One thing MOTU could do that would do it for me articulation wise is if they bothered to do the assignments so you had a complete set of the 20 or so companies that do articulation instruments.

Well that's what Miller's product is about. I think that would be a moving target. But DP needs an engine to support articulation presets, some enterprising users, such as Babylon Waves would instantly release a set of presets for it to cover all the big libraries.

[Michael Canavan]

As i said, V-racks is a separate discussion. the question is about why we can't have a single instrument track and have to have two tracks for every instrument... You said that would be a problem with chunks. I say no it doesn't have to to be. It could be done without V-racks, MOTU just needs to implement it. I'm not going to speculate as to why they choose not to, that is foolish.

It's not a separate discussion. V-Racks exist, they are problem for MIDI and track automation when porting to a V-Rack. I'm actually kind of confused about how you got stuck on this notion that I claimed Chunks and only Chunks get in the way of MIDI on an instrument track? You can't just "forget" V-Racks, that doesn't make any sense, they conflate the issue, it's obvious, no speculation needed. You can either be stuck on why something isn't the way you want it to be or you can look at how it operates and try to understand why it works the way it does.

Logic built an empire on top of a system that allows only by channel input to software instruments, I would love to see it change, but I get it, it's probably too late in the game. This is very possibly true of DPs MIDI implementation in terms of separate tracks for MIDI and instrument.

It's certainly no reason to get offended.

one thing I am definitely not is indoctrinated. Please. That's rather insulting. I manage to piss off everyone in every tribal forum like this one for exactly the reason that I am not indoctrinated to any one way. Just keeping it real.

lol, you're the one using the "noob" routine.

You're saying some confusing things and I would say that perhaps you never really mastered LogicPro based on what you just said, and that's fine, but just keeping it real, you're making it sound a lot worse then it really is.

In response to my attacks on Logics weird bussing compared to DP, Live etc.
Not trying to offend, but don't you think "keeping it real" mostly comes across like an attempt at ad hominem without the guilt? But yeah I'm not interested in this becoming another internet tough guy argument by men beating intellectual chests in some protracted ape screaming match. Oddly enough without too many ruffled feathers I think we did a pretty good job of pointing out the major advantages and shortcomings of Logic VS DP. That's commendable! Have a good night.