DP Approaches for handling orch articulations

[laurof]

+1

[richhickey]

One problem is that the vast majority of users that need this kind of capability, are also not capable of writing custom scripts of any complexity. Or unwilling to spend the time doing so if nothing else.

That's why the DAW's do need to provide something that doesn't involve scripting, which both Apple and Steinberg have done, but IMHO, not very well.

I disagree. You don't need to be too concerned about people who can't write their own scripts, and here's why:

You or I or the thousands of other programmers who are musicians can provide scripts, if only there was a scripting platform.

For examples, you only need to look at ArtzID, Babylon Waves, AudioGrocery and the many free things that arose around Scripter. And of course there's Reaticulate, which just leverages R_____'s scriptability via JSFX and Lua.

With DAW scriptability, the community can iterate quickly and a variety of solutions catering to different approaches can develop. With a built-in articulation system, you get what you get, it's never flexible enough, and then you wait years for enhancements/fixes that never come.

If a DAW developer wants to include a 'prebuilt' articulation system, they can do so by defining some starter scripts.

What needs to be built-in is the per-note metadata support - editing and display. Without that, all we have is program change (a decent fit for directions but a poor fit for per-note artics).

DAWs should be scriptable, IMO. Especially a DAW like DP, which has a limited ability to compete in the feature race.

[dewdman42]

well I don't disagree that DAW's should be scriptable.

However, personally I think the 3rd party solutions you mentioned are also still missing critical features.

I'd like to see DP include scripting features.

I'd also like to see DP include a built in articulation management solution that does not depend on scripting (but allows for scripting to enhance it if needed)

[richhickey]

well I don't disagree that DAW's should be scriptable.

However, personally I think the 3rd party solutions you mentioned are also still missing critical features.

I'd like to see DP include scripting features.

I'd also like to see DP include a built in articulation management solution that does not depend on scripting (but allows for scripting to enhance it if needed)

Now we both go back to waiting

DP11 anyone?

[Michael Canavan]

well I don't disagree that DAW's should be scriptable.

However, personally I think the 3rd party solutions you mentioned are also still missing critical features.

I'd like to see DP include scripting features.

I'd also like to see DP include a built in articulation management solution that does not depend on scripting (but allows for scripting to enhance it if needed)

Yeah this, because Rearticulate isn't that great, I definitely am more inclined to learn Logics method, even if reaps is more powerful if you know scripting...

[wvandyck]

The MIDI scripter plug-in is a possibility, but I'm among those without time or skills to write custom patch change scripts.

The patch change video shows potential within DP.
I'd still like to see an option building on DP's use of lanes.

A low tech option currently within DP is to make key switch notes hidden- Playback only, in Quickscribe.

The folks at MOTU are smart, surely that can develop some functional if not innovative articulation management system.

[dewdman42]

So embedding actual keyswitches onto MIDI tracks is not that terrible. But if you put them on the same track as your real notes, the score notation gets messed up. Also, if you need to move or copy notes and phrases around, it becomes a bit of a PITA because you have to make sure to move the keyswitches together.

This is why a meta-data like articulationID is so useful in LogicPro. Once you have an extra attribute added to actual note objects, you can just move them around or copy them around, copy phrases with a series of articulation changes...and it all moves together. That's really the primary advantage of that.

but you need some way to convert an articulationID, into keyswitch and/or channel, during playback. LogicPro provides that to a limited degree, but many people are happy enough with what it provides. Or you can use the built in scripter to look at articulationID and perform any MIDI activity you want on it. It works very well. Another advantage is that once you have your MIDI track recorded, with articulationID's on the notes, you can easily change sample libraries and reconfigure how the articulationID's should be handled by a different library. If you hard code keyswitches into a MIDI track, then that's pretty much it, you're using that library and that's it.

Since DP doesn't have articulationID... you have to either just put the keyswitches on the track, or use some other kind of MIDI events as indicators..

You can use ProgramChange messages as a kind of articulation indicator because its not a visible note object on the score. But you still have to find a way to translate PC messages into keyswitches..which is more complicated if a given articulation needs more then one keyswitch...and if you need to channelize the notes for some libraries...then more complicated still. But it can all be handled by Protoplug 3rd party MIDI scripter (free).

You could also use a dedicated CC# instead of PC, which some people may prefer over PC because you can see the CC curve on a lane..and then that kind of becomes like an articulation chooser curve. So you could, for example, use CC100, and the value indicates an articulationID, so to speak. Then you still need to use something like Protoplug to translate that into keyswitches or channelizing of the actual notes..and believe me..its not a trivial script when you start getting deep into it. But its definitely possible.

But then you have to make sure to move the PC messages or CC messages along with notes if you move or copy any musical phrases from one place to another. It can quickly start to become a PITA actually.

In theory, automation could also be used instead of CC curves...if you have a plugin that can read automation on the fly and generate MIDI events to drive the sample library articulation changes. You can definitely do that in LogicPro with its Scripter plugin, I'm not sure whether Protoplug provides automation possibilities.

[wvandyck]

If developing the 'sound' within DP, keyswitch notes can be hidden in Quickscribe, retaining the clean appearance.

Changing libraries after the fact is a pain with keyswitches or articulation ID.

MOTU provides midnam files for external hardware which are easy to use.
In a similar vein, when MOTU implements some articulation management system, they or third parties could develop library-specific scripts for users to run with.

Converting from one system, PC or articulation ID, to another really exponentially complicates the process.

The user needs a clean yet flexible system to articulate using the sample library of their choice. Fingers of both hands crossed that this is a priority for MOTU.

[dix]

So embedding actual keyswitches onto MIDI tracks is not that terrible. But if you put them on the same track as your real notes, the score notation gets messed up...

I have a solution to, at least, this one aspect key-switch handling in DP.

In Quickscribe you can set a velocity-threshold to what shows up in the score. If you set the key-switch's MIDI velocities to 0, and the velocity-threshold to 1, or above, the keyswitches won't show in the score.

[laurof]

...well I don't disagree that DAW's should be scriptable.

Yeah this, because Rearticulate isn't that great, I definitely am more inclined to learn Logics method, even if reaps is more powerful if you know scripting...

Michael I have to be honest and I think Reaticulate has the necessary to do professional works: solid, stable and hugely personalizable without being an expert. And, if possible, it offers constant upgrades. Because of a request of a customer I did an orchestral work with that and I was really impressed!

BUT

I'm not in love with this software or that (exept DP, I confess ), or this philosophy or the other.
Swithcing articulations on DP must start!
It is a great help to higly reduce the huge number of tracks and, when you have to translate files to a real score you don't have to waste hours: you export xml and pizzicato, portato, col legno, ecc. ecc. is magically written in your scoring software.
And ( sorry, this is just a personal opinion) controllers are more "under control"...

[dewdman42]

Its also unfortunate that we can't have different patch names files to hold the articulations for various different instruments. I need more like dozens of them for many different instruments. Having only one default patchnames file to cover all plugins and all orch libs with all their articulations, won't work for me.

I hope MOTU has paid attention to this thread. Its really unfortunate that its missing this feature. It is almost passable with Richkey's PC approach, were it not for the fact that I have many different orch instruments from different libraries to organize somehow. Main advantage of the this approach is the labeling of the articulations in the PC lane. Very clear.

But I think MOTU could do something really far better then all DAW's if they put their mind to it, but somehow I feel this is being overlooked.

[Michael Canavan]

But I think MOTU could do something really far better then all DAW's if they put their mind to it, but somehow I feel this is being overlooked.

I hope you're wrong. I do hardly any orchestral work, but Logic and Cubase really are easy to use that way, and the fact that you can buy, (even if it's a but expensive) all the mapping for all the libraries pretty much from a third party vender is really pretty cool.
I haven't enough time to map out every library I own, so being able to just have it done is far more valuable than Reap with its scripts...

[dewdman42]

Yea.

[Michael Canavan]

Bumping this old thread because I was messing around with this in the Drum Editor.
It's not a ton of work but you can name notes in the Drum Editor if you create a Device Groups of that MIDI track. This allows you to name the notes the name of the keyswitch for a particular Kontakt, Play, UVI, MOTU, etc. etc.

I made a separate MIDI track for In this Case, Action Strings, plus an articulation track. Selecting all three tacks I can then make a Clipping that calls up Action Strings in Kontakt, a regular MIDI track, and one named Action Strings Keyswitches.

If you're using VEP it's not that much more work, just saving the MIDI track alone will save the Device Group with the named notes. Using the drum editor you can pencil in keyswitches at will.

So Clippings to the rescue, and at this point I really wish there was a forum or website to share Clippings of mapped keyswitches. My plan is to add to them as I use them, and eventually I will not have to add to them.

[edit] (Caveat, at first I thought DP10.11 is not retaining the Kontakt instance in the Clipping here, what is not being retained is the output. even with the same name and importing the same Bundle. So you have to reassign the Output 1-2 of Kontakt to.... you guessed it! Output 1-2)

[bayswater]

Bumping this old thread because I was messing around with this in the Drum Editor.
It's not a ton of work but you can name notes in the Drum Editor if you create a Device Groups of that MIDI track. This allows you to name the notes the name of the keyswitch for a particular Kontakt, Play, UVI, MOTU, etc. etc.

I've tried to do this, but I haven't been able to easily use Device group and it's associated note names created in one project, in another project. it seems I have to create it anew for every project, which makes it pretty much useless. Didn't even work in a template.

Maybe there is something simple I'm missing. Do you have a set of a set steps that work reliably?