MOTUnation.com

Michael Canavan wrote: ...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...

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.

stubbsonic wrote:
It's true that using NRPN's would require several more bytes per value to get through the pipe, whereas it seems MPE can take advantage of fewer bytes per value. Perhaps MPE's using an entire port for one instrument sound, one track is the price you pay to get that functionality to work. But it is hard for me to think of it as anything but a workaround, since it uses MIDI in a weird way.

I fully understand your desire to have DP work with MPE as it should. And I don't really have a dog in this fight right now. I'm fantasizing about one day owning a Touch Keys.

I hope that MIDI 2.0 replaces MPE entirely, in a way that makes everyone happy.

dix wrote:Since it’s not actually part of DP10, I’m thinking MPE could use it’s own thread m’be....?

cuttime wrote:I know this is way off topic, but if anybody wants to play with MPE, here's a free pretty good demo:
https://www.fxpansion.com/products/cypher2/

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

tremo wrote:

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

That would be awesome, Andy. I'll gladly pay to upgrade my ampguimods themes to DP10 versions!

dix wrote:

@ 1:00 he said, "We have the MOTU Instrument Soundbank which we're including with DP10 as an upgrade, which is basically the entire UVI and parts of the Mach Five 3 library....".

He clearly misspoke. The UVI World Suite alone is 30GB. Maybe a NAMM goer can get clarification.

dix wrote:Since it’s not actually part of DP10, I’m thinking MPE could use it’s own thread m’be....?

EMRR wrote:What’s the practical difference between VCA’s and fader grouping? Another fader bank window? Fader grouping has never quite behaved as expected with changes sometimes unrelated across the group. Perhaps VCA’s will maintain proper relationships.

EMRR wrote:What’s the practical difference between VCA’s and fader grouping?

VCA’s will maintain proper relationships.