MOTUnation.com

Michael Canavan wrote: MIDI Polyphonic Expression. So instead of just polyphonic aftertouch you also get polyphonic pitch, release velocity, velocity, and glide.

We already had polyphonic velocity & release velocity in the original 1.0 spec. I think MPE just adds 3 dimensions of control. And since we already had polyphonic-aftertouch, it really only adds two. AND, it REMOVES multi-timbral operation-- which was always a deal-breaker in my mind.

Prime Mover wrote: As for the future, I think we can be sure MPE is here to stay, considering it’s been adopted into all MIDI standards. And the widespread sales of the Seaboard Block have really put it on the map. MOTU has a history of innovation and early adoption, so I disagree that they have to move more cautiously, this behavior is somewhat recent. They’ve never been the big kid on the block, but they were the first to adopt many standards in the past.

The situation is different because the 2.0 spec has been looming (yes, for FAR too long!) and it promises more elegant solution to integrated polyphonic expression. I've always felt that MPE was a clever but messy workaround with a significant sacrifice. It is understandable that MOTU would want to tackle 2.0 & MPE in the same push.

Ideally, any makers of MPE controllers and any makers of MPE compatible synths will be able to rework their software to the 2.0 versions-- or perhaps 2.0 will include ways of re-working MPE into a single channel operation.

macnylonguitar wrote: DP has not updated effects, plugins...in what seems like forever, Masterworks EQ?, limiter? Third party, Waves F6, TB Barricade limiter, etc, are already better than that...
... Logic's updated effects, plugins, and synths look far ahead now... thx, macnylonguitar

I like DP's plugins-- especially the masterworks stuff. I don't use those guitar things. My only complaint is that the delay doesn't have enough level adjustment resolution.

HCMarkus wrote: Don’t know why you need new MW EQ. It is perfect already. Newer stuff like dynamic eq and desser aren’t exactly worn out either.

Yup.

Babz wrote:So, does this make DP one of the only DAWs that has a Clip Laucher ... ?

I'm curious. Will the clip launcher let you trigger MIDI/audio clips at any time (without cueing it to play on the next beat)? Can you have MIDI clips with different tempos? There are some serious creative possibilities depending on how flexibly they structured it.

stubbsonic wrote:

Michael Canavan wrote: MIDI Polyphonic Expression. So instead of just polyphonic aftertouch you also get polyphonic pitch, release velocity, velocity, and glide.

We already had polyphonic velocity & release velocity in the original 1.0 spec. I think MPE just adds 3 dimensions of control. And since we already had polyphonic-aftertouch, it really only adds two. AND, it REMOVES multi-timbral operation-- which was always a deal-breaker in my mind.

How does it remove multi timbral operation? I think you're missing something here. Think about the way DP behaves compared to other DAWs. Plus a synth or sampler has to be MPE compliant on it's side to work, even Cypher 2 made by FXPansion, a company own by Roli has MPE and non MPE modes.

The situation is different because the 2.0 spec has been looming (yes, for FAR too long!) and it promises more elegant solution to integrated polyphonic expression. I've always felt that MPE was a clever but messy workaround with a significant sacrifice. It is understandable that MOTU would want to tackle 2.0 & MPE in the same push. Ideally, any makers of MPE controllers and any makers of MPE compatible synths will be able to rework their software to the 2.0 versions-- or perhaps 2.0 will include ways of re-working MPE into a single channel operation.

Does it? I've heard exactly zero about a more elegant solution to polyphonic expression. MIDI 2.0 from the little the association has put out about it is concerned with DAW communication mostly, but like the site says information about it is closed to the public because the spec could change. MPE works within the given MIDI spec, for devices that support it, it's not some clunky work around like you seem to think....

Michael Canavan wrote: How does it remove multi timbral operation? I think you're missing something here.

Perhaps. But as I understand it MPE uses 16 MIDI channels to get 16 voices of polyphony. Those are 16 channels that cannot be used for multi-timbral operation. So you tell me what I'm missing.

Michael Canavan wrote: Does it? I've heard exactly zero about a more elegant solution to polyphonic expression. MIDI 2.0 from the little the association has put out about it is concerned with DAW communication mostly, but like the site says information about it is closed to the public because the spec could change. MPE works within the given MIDI spec, for devices that support it, it's not some clunky work around like you seem to think....

I say it is clunky because of the previously mentioned issue of needing all 16 channels to operate 1 one polyphonic instrument. Instead, they could easily have used sets of NRPNs (one NRPN per note per control stream) to create more than enough CC's for each note and done it all on one channel, and all the control streams would be 14-bit. Still clunky, but nothing is sacrificed.

Killahurts wrote:None of these new features were anything I would have expected, but I still really like like what they've done. The VCAs (they're actually DCAs) are most welcome! Those and the resizable GUI alone are worth the upgrade. The Clips thingy might be useful, if I can figure out how it works..

OK you guys don't laugh, but I only have one real disappointment about this release.. no mention of any new themes.

I'm bored with the old ones, and the version 9 2D grey on grey with grey highlights on a grey background is somewhat uninspiring, for some reason.

Right. It's getting like Logic in more than one way. If the post above about them using CSS it right, you can get out your web page editor and brighten it up.

Michael Canavan wrote:

stubbsonic wrote:

Michael Canavan wrote: MIDI Polyphonic Expression. So instead of just polyphonic aftertouch you also get polyphonic pitch, release velocity, velocity, and glide.

We already had polyphonic velocity & release velocity in the original 1.0 spec. I think MPE just adds 3 dimensions of control. And since we already had polyphonic-aftertouch, it really only adds two. AND, it REMOVES multi-timbral operation-- which was always a deal-breaker in my mind.

How does it remove multi timbral operation? I think you're missing something here.

I don't get the point of this. If you use multiple MIDI channels for the sound, one note per channel, you can have separate controllers for each note anyway. And you can have polyphonic aftertouch set to control various parameters. So what does MPE bring to the table? Does it just do some of the work of allocating to channels behind the scenes?

stubbsonic wrote: Perhaps. But as I understand it MPE uses 16 MIDI channels to get 16 voices of polyphony. Those are 16 channels that cannot be used for multi-timbral operation. So you tell me what I'm missing.

Simple really, what exact scenario has you using your MPE device on a specific track where on that track you're going to need multimbral operations? Remember this is a single port, for a single MIDI controller, not all ports in your DAW. MPE devices use their own port...

Maybe you've only looked at MPE support in Logic? I know that Logic has a built in limitation where it does not recognize MIDI controllers by port on soft synth tracks, but that's not at all true of DP, and it's not true of MPE capable DAWs like Cubase, R, Bitwig etc. It's one of the reasons I chose not to use Logic for MPE support after buying it and went with an unmentionable on these forums DAW.

stubbsonic wrote:I say it is clunky because of the previously mentioned issue of needing all 16 channels to operate 1 one polyphonic instrument. Instead, they could easily have used sets of NRPNs (one NRPN per note per control stream) to create more than enough CC's for each note and done it all on one channel, and all the control streams would be 14-bit. Still clunky, but nothing is sacrificed.

Personally I tend to error on the side of 'I know only what I know'. I've never designed a hardware controller or tried to use NRPNs VS MIDI tracks so I couldn't begin to second guess Roger Linn and Roli. I can say that NRPNs are slower than regular CCs and that huge amounts of MIDI data on a single track can lead to issues because that's a known fact, but that's about it. I could guess from that knowledge that using 16 channels is much less prone to hiccups because of this. You're literally using MIDI data steams that are already there, in regular CC format.
But that's about it, at this point Linn and Roli are established companies, other companies are already putting out MPE devices, it's an ecosystem in place. MIDI 2.0 isn't going to really change MPE much from what I can tell, it might give it smoother operation, but that's about it.

Honestly I think it's sort of obvious that MOTU will roll out a MIDI upgrade and/or update at some point and rolling XML support, MIDI 2.0, MPE etc. all into that, is probably in their best interest, deal with one part of DP and clear out the cobwebs all at once. I agree on that 100%, I just think second guessing MPE and considering it half baked is a waste of time at this point, it's cooked, it's a cottage industry etc.

questions part 2...

I would also like to know if there is (or are there plans for) a MIDI scripting system so that devices like the APC 40 or a launchpad could be used with the new DP clips system.

as I see it in the video he is directly mapping a MIDI note to only 1 slot in the clips grid, but I want to know if there are systems in place to allow a grid based controller to work in a bankable style.

bayswater wrote: I don't get the point of this. If you use multiple MIDI channels for the sound, one note per channel, you can have separate controllers for each note anyway. And you can have polyphonic aftertouch set to control various parameters. So what does MPE bring to the table? Does it just do some of the work of allocating to channels behind the scenes?

OK this makes sense now, I mean that you're not 100% sure about what MPE does.
Yes, it assigns all 15 (one for MPE operation info I guess), channels to the same synth and gives note, pitch, aftertouch, strike, and Glide (cc74 usually), on separate channels so each can have separate things happening on them.

In a regular soft synth or hardware synth the pitch is controlled by the hardware on one channel or to an Omni channel. Hardware wise, MPE controllers like the Roli use pitch bend on each note as a separate MIDI track, so a single synth gets 15 channels of MIDI pitch bend information, so you can bend the pitch of a single note, while holding down other notes on the synth that are not being bent at all. This holds true for aftertouch, (which is the one control that Polyphonic afterouch already does), strike, glide and release velocity. The difference with the ones we already have had is how they can be assigned. Glide ads 15 separate possible variations per note of CC74 assignable to anything in most MPE soft synths.

This is better shown than talked about, it makes simple polyphonic aftertouch look ancient.
The playing is standard demo, not anything special, but listen to the notes when he bends or glides that are not being bent or glid [sic?]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... yzwoc1l5e0

Jordon, of course!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P14JcRyJCEI

mike_o wrote:questions part 2...

I would also like to know if there is (or are there plans for) a MIDI scripting system so that devices like the APC 40 or a launchpad could be used with the new DP clips system.

as I see it in the video he is directly mapping a MIDI note to only 1 slot in the clips grid, but I want to know if there are systems in place to allow a grid based controller to work in a bankable style.

Man I wish I knew! I would hope MOTU are talking to Novation and AKAI about incorporating their Clip launching control surfaces to their new Clips window. So far it doesn't look like it's there yet or they would have shown it on the video.

Michael Canavan wrote: This is better shown than talked about, it makes simple polyphonic aftertouch look ancient.
The playing is standard demo, not anything special, but listen to the notes when he bends or glides that are not being bent or glid [sic?]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... yzwoc1l5e0

Ok, thanks, I see what's going on with the controller end of things.

Why does it matter at the sequencer end? If the controller sends out 15 or 16 channels of MIDI data, each channel carrying independent controller data, any multichannel sequencer record all of it, edit it, and send it all back out (?)

bayswater wrote: Ok, thanks, I see what's going on with the controller end of things.

Why does it matter at the sequencer end? If the controller sends out 15 or 16 channels of MIDI data, each channel carrying independent controller data, any multichannel sequencer record all of it, edit it, and send it all back out (?)

It's got to do with the way a DAW handles MIDI input. So in R, it has a true "All" setting for a track, for instance my Roli Seaboard Block (24 key tiny verison of what Jordon was playing) assigned to a track in R, it sends that track 15 MIDI channels, each note is assigned a random channel along with CC data etc. and the synth on that channel does it's duty.

The differences are clear, in Live and DP it's not an "All" setting it's an "Any" setting, so the DAW filters MIDI to that one track, i.e. MPE doesn't work, CC messages get sent to all the notes at once. Except polyphonic aftertouch.

Logic has an "all" type setting as well, but it does not sort software instruments by port, so MPE works, but you can't really play other synths at the same time without going into the Environment and hardwiring ports to certain tracks... That's why I thought you had only used MPE in Logic, because with soft synths, (95% of MPE synths), what you said about MPE using all the channels is true, you really can only use one MPE synth at a time in Logic.

I have no doubt that in probably a shorter time than we think both Live an DP get MPE. In DPs case I bet you're right though, they want to tackle any issues with MIDI all at once in one go. I'm hoping for an update, and not 3 years from now.

Michael Canavan wrote:it's not an "All" setting it's an "Any" setting, so the DAW filters MIDI to that one track, i.e. MPE doesn't work, CC messages get sent to all the notes at once. Except polyphonic aftertouch.

Logic has an "all" type setting as well, but it does not sort software instruments by port, so MPE works, but you can't really play other synths at the same time without going into the Environment and hardwiring ports to certain tracks...

So in DP, using multirecord wouldn't deal with this?

I can see how you'd do this in the Logic Enviroment. You have to use a channel splitter object in Logic in many cases where you want to use multiple channels on a single instrument.

Looks like I’m going to have no choice but get back into the fray

bayswater wrote: So in DP, using multirecord wouldn't deal with this?

I can see how you'd do this in the Logic Enviroment. You have to use a channel splitter object in Logic in many cases where you want to use multiple channels on a single instrument.

Yeah Logic's Achilles heal to me is that. The part that sent me to R is that the fix is to fix this really you have to wire crap around in the environment. In Cubase, R and Bitwig, it's just like Live and DP, but the notes coming in aren't blended into a single track more or less like they are in DP and Live.

The way to deal with it in DP and Live is to set up 16 tracks of MIDI set to each MIDI channel, pointing to the same soft synth. Multi record has to be on in DP for sure. Honestly, it's really not that bad. After setting it up it's just a matter putting it all in a folder and saving that whole setup to a Clipping. This sort of playing isn't really the kind you would be editing much anyway, it's not really suited for hard edits so I dunno? in that sense I guess I get why it's not top priority. It's MUCH easier setting this up in DP than Live 1,000%!!! what with Instruments With Options and Track assignments commands.

amplidood wrote:Looks like I’m going to have no choice but get back into the fray

DP is looking good again for sure! Do a deep dark theme and I'm all in!