Multiple VSTi on one midi port?

[mOjO Fet]

Hi!

Is it possible to assign multiple VSTi to one midi input port?

I know when a VSTi has one port assigned to it you have to first disable it
in it's input port menu in order to use it for another one.

I also tried the MWS demo and it would seem that only one virtual channel
is assignable to only one VSTi each.

What I'm trying to do is using multiple patches of one synth or more synths at once.
Is there a workaround to this?

Michael

[mako]

You need a multi-timbral synth like Edirol's Hypercanvas (16 channels at once) or add more instances of any VSTi you choose.

I.E. if you have one VSTi and you want it to play 3 parts, then you need to insert it into 3 tracks.

Alternately, you could have it record each sound separately.

Good luck

mako

[Bob L]

Most of the good VST synths do multiple midi channels... one patch per midi channel up to 16 midi channels... just like a hardware synth...

One Virtual Port is good for 1 VST whcih should be good for 16 patches.

So there are 16 Virtual ports times 16 midi channels each... that's a lot of patches all at once... and your cpu will probably give out before you can use that many anyway.

Bob L

[mOjO Fet]

OK. If I have two instances of one synth on two tracks is there a way to
play and record them simultaneously?

Michael

[MMP]

On most multitimbral VST synths you can change the default channels and stack multiple sounds on the same MIDI channel. GVI & all the Native Instruments synths have this capability. What VST instruments are you working with?

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

I'm using atmosphere.

[mOjO Fet]

Sometimes I even layer different synths together.

Michael

[MMP]

I understand the problem now. It is the one to one correspondence of plugin to MIDI channel. I run my VSTs externally on a couple of laptops so I don't run into this. You would need something like this:

http://www.xlutop.com/html/chainer.html

I have never used it, but it would allow you to route one channel of MIDI in SAW to a stack of VST instruments with effects chains if wanted. $60. US.

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

Thanks!
I'm gonna try it.

Michael

[Dave Labrecque]

I understand the problem now. It is the one to one correspondence of plugin to MIDI channel. I run my VSTs externally on a couple of laptops so I don't run into this. You would need something like this:

http://www.xlutop.com/html/chainer.html

I have never used it, but it would allow you to route one channel of MIDI in SAW to a stack of VST instruments with effects chains if wanted. $60. US.

Regards,

MM

Hey, Michael,

Do your laptops have their own audio hardware? Or are you somehow able to bring 'em back over a network?

[MMP]

Hey, Michael,

Do your laptops have their own audio hardware? Or are you somehow able to bring 'em back over a network?

Hardware. A Layla24 and Indigos on two others.

Regards,

MM

[Dave Labrecque]

Hardware. A Layla24 and Indigos on two others.

Regards,

MM

And so are you using the TCP/IP sync method between SAW sessions on each computer to host the VSTi's?

[Michael Naz]

I understand the problem now. It is the one to one correspondence of plugin to MIDI channel. I run my VSTs externally on a couple of laptops so I don't run into this. You would need something like this:

http://www.xlutop.com/html/chainer.html

I have never used it, but it would allow you to route one channel of MIDI in SAW to a stack of VST instruments with effects chains if wanted. $60. US.

Regards,

MM

I've tested Chainer with the demo of SS/MWS and it works great..

[MMP]

And so are you using the TCP/IP sync method between SAW sessions on each computer to host the VSTi's?


I may lose face in higher geekdom, but no...no TCP/IP sync...or MIDI sequencing!

Cue harp arpeggio....

I used to make my living years ago creating MIDI arrangements for song writers and mix to picture work. I had actually started using pre MIDI sequencers. As time went by and I wanted to get more control over my synths in realtime, I started requiring so much controller data that all my MIDI gear choked on it, so I gave up MIDI sequencing entirely in the early 90s. Now, I play each part one at a time into SAW Studio, and if I don't like it, I play it again. So even though I own MIDI Workshop, I really am not using it.

There are other reasons I still don't MIDI sequence...mostly having to do with shortcuts that are tempting, but make the music less musical...but these are issues of self control (I have little).

I still use MIDI to control all the instruments with my keyboard, percussion, ribbon & breath controllers, and assorted pedals, but I have decided to handcraft the notes instead of pasting them. And trust me, I do not mean that as a comment against anyone's musical choices...these are just mine.

I use the VST computers the same way one might use a synth module, and use V-Stack, GigaStudio, & Kontakt2 as the synth hosts.

So that's my dark secret....;)

Regards,

MM

[MMP]

I've tested Chainer with the demo of SS/MWS and it works great..

Great! That's good news.

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

Now, I play each part one at a time into SAW Studio MM

I know what you mean. I come from cubase and I always recorded my VST as midi first (which you have to do) and then either bounced them throughout the project or during final mixdown.
And now in Saw Studio (I don't have MWS yet) I record every VST as audio right away and I have to make sure the performance is right everytime. As opposed to that with midi I can tweak every note even if it's a tiny timing correction only.
I realized that I miss that now and I think I'm gonna get MWS.
It's so nice and the timing is rocksolid man. It really turns me on.
So if any of you guys would like to sell their license :D just let me know.:cool:
Otherwise I'll have to wait til X-mas.

cheerz
Michael

[Microstudio]

One thing i do not understand here. If you are playing something and you want 2,3,4 or 5 sounds at once why not just play and record you proformence and then just run in through each sound one at a time and svae the CPU from over loading?

[MMP]

One thing i do not understand here. If you are playing something and you want 2,3,4 or 5 sounds at once why not just play and record you proformence and then just run in through each sound one at a time and svae the CPU from over loading?

Well, I know this wasn't asked of me, but I like to hear and react to the sound I am playing as I play it.

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

I like to hear and react to the sound I am playing as I play it.
MM
I have to agree.
I mean you create a unique sound and that makes you feel a ceratin way and that influences your performance.
Of course you can layer only that many synths or pathes as you cpu allows it but today it's not really a problem.:)

On the other hand if you do have the performance as midi you may send as many sounds thru it as you like and have it always available for later if you decide to add or change something.

Michael

[jazzboxmaker]

I've been demoing Chainer too and lo & behold.. It finds the data files and runs the ?,./..!@#$%^ drum vsti's like magic! Groove Agent, EZ Drummer, Latigo. They all run in SAW with Chainer. Just gotta figure out how to trigger them when I hit Rec or SRP to get em to start on 'One'

Wish it wasn't necessary cause I'd rather give Bob the 60 bucks towards one of his great plugs.

[Microstudio]

Well, I know this wasn't asked of me, but I like to hear and react to the sound I am playing as I play it.

Regards,

MM

I guess you have something there.....;)

[mOjO Fet]

Just tried chainer.
Really amazing tool very easy to use!

Thanks again Michael!

But I wonder if you can assign each channel to a seperate track in SAW.
I didn't find anything in the description on their site.

Michael

[MMP]

It doesn't look like that would work, but once you have the MIDI stream it would be an easy thing to render each layer individually and move them to new tracks.

Another idea to try is to see if one MIDI channel can drive multiple Chainer instances.

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

to see if one MIDI channel can drive plugin multiple Chainer instances using the non-VSTI version

...not sure what you mean.:)

I also find chainer more practical to use as a base for VSTi beacuse when you
have VSTi spread on seperate tracks you always have to disable one's midi input first to use it for another which is a slight hassle.:D

I think that getting MWS will be a benefit in workflow also the solid timing...

Michael

[MMP]

...not sure what you mean.:)

IMichael

Yeah me either...

What I meant to say, and have since edited above, is that the chainer seems to break the one MIDI channel per track limitation, so if you want to trigger multiple sounds using one channel of MIDI, but render to separate tracks, try using Chainer on multiple tracks, fill only one slot on each track to a synth but assign all of the chainer/one slot instances to the same MIDI channel.

Is that any clearer? Hope so...

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

Could you explain it in detail?

I load a chainer on each track and the only way I can assign a midi input to either of them is thru the blue pyramid and that only works for one at a time.

Did you get it to work otherwise?

Michael

[mOjO Fet]

Are you using MWS 'cause I don't have it yet..:D

Michael

[MMP]

Could you explain it in detail?

I load a chainer on each track and the only way I can assign a midi input to either of them is thru the blue pyramid and that only works for one at a time.

Did you get it to work otherwise?

Michael

I thought I had...but, in rechecking I have found I am totally deluded.

Time to go back on the meds....:eek:

Sorry for the wrong turn....

Regards,

MM

[mOjO Fet]

no problem! :D

Michael

[Dave Labrecque]

I may lose face in higher geekdom, but no...no TCP/IP sync...or MIDI sequencing!



Wow. An actual musician. We don't need your type around here. Now, git! :)