Forum Replies Created

Viewing 18 posts - 1,461 through 1,478 (of 1,478 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @givemenoughrope wrote:

    Just throwing this out there. It might not be the greatest idea. I’ve been A/B’ing how playing a Full Violin I patch sounds against simultaneously playing A, B and C divisi, both with Legato patches (haven’t tried any other patches yet). Besides the obvious volume difference (I brought A, B, and C down 6 db), does anyone think there is significant advantage? Sound more realistic? It eats up more voices but I’m thinking it sounds a bit better. I dunno.

    Hello givemenoughrope,

    Welcome to the forums!

    Personally, I like layering the divisi sections as well. For one, you’ll get some differences in timing between the sections which just sounds more ‘right’ to my ears when layered. You can also manually tweak some settings among the different div. sections as others have to get faster legatos, etc..

    Of course, the biggest advantage to separation is that you can then really write divisi when you want. And even in instances where all violins are unis. you still have the ability to record in the same line on all sections. A little more time consuming, sure, but having some different dynamics among the sections really adds to the realism as well. Some just copy the actual notes to all 4 sections, but then re-record the CC data for variation.

    It all comes down to what your ears tell you is right! :)

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246
    in reply to: CC question #33157

    I believe M-Audio also used to have something called ‘Enigma’ which was software that let you build templates from on your computer and then upload them to your keyboard. I’ve never used it myself, but often find it more intuitive to edit templates on my computer than on the keyboard itself.

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    I assume you could get similar results in a different way by splitting out the A/B/C parts onto different midi tracks and playing in the part multiple times and using less or no quantizing? I guess that wouldn’t give any pitch variation though. The general idea is to simulate some degree of inaccuracy between the different players, right? With one monolithic patch, you are going to hear all players switch notes at the same time regardless of how fast the passage is (unless it’s a “loose staccato” recording, but that would be hard to do with more legato runs).

    Sure, why not. You could also quantize and use the humanization facilities built into your sequencer (although your mileage may vary in quality depending on the sequencer). Since you have separate div. sections you shouldn’t need to worry too much about too much pitch randomization.

    A huge problem in getting realistic faster strings has always been the inability to have different timings within a section. In the past a lot of us have layered a bunch of libraries together to try and achieve that effect. Of course then you are left with timbral differences not only in the instruments, but in the sound of their reverberations. Thankfully, LASS lets us achieve these calculated imperfections within a lovely homogeneous string section.

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @andreasOL wrote:

    @Andrew K wrote:

    Also, it’s always good to remind people that when CC1 is up all the way, you are in effect playing back fff. fff is really loud and should be used rather sparingly in my opinion… otherwise it just sounds too “loud”.

    Cheers,

    Andrew K

    Hi,

    regarding the relationship between CC1 and volume, am I right to assume that it’s about like this:

    16 = ppp
    32 = pp
    48 = p
    64 = mp (=mf)
    80 = f
    96 = ff
    112 = fff

    I am just starting with LASS and this is my first posting. I’m going to introduce myself later in the lounge.

    regards,
    Andreas

    Hi Andreas,

    Welcome to the forums!

    It helps me to think of CC1 (mod) as dynamic, and CC11/7 as volume. I’m not sure exactly what the numbers would be; even in a symphony orchestra, one conductor’s f is anothers mp. I’d wager your best bet is to (1) follow what your ears tell you is correct and (2) not forget about the extreme ends of the MIDI CC range. I would think of ppp starting at 0, and fff at 127.

    Hope that helps!

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246
    in reply to: CC question #33154

    Hi toledoo1,

    Welcome to the forums!

    Keyboard setup can be very different depending on the manufacturer/model, but as long as you have faders, I’m sure there’s a way to assign the proper CCs to them. What are you currently using?

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246
    in reply to: Logic 9 setup #33153

    This was for Logic 8, but may prove useful in further expounding upon the multi-proc point:

    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3161

    Best,
    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246
    in reply to: Logic 9 setup #33151

    @dt2080 wrote:

    Hi all.
    I’m David Tobin and I’m a new LASS user – (sounds a bit like admitting alcoholism…)

    Anyway – I’m an experienced Logic Pro user of many years and this is a question for the logic guys out there.
    How do you configure your setup for optimal integration of LASS?
    I have and sometimes use VE Ensemble Pro, but I’m not sure it’s the right way for me…

    I haven’t even received LASS yet – but I’m trying to figure out the right setup for me so i can make a template that will make sense.
    I don’t really understand the ART script yet or how you use it practically (until i play with it) but maybe there’s some sensible means of getting the learning curve started. Mostly I wanted to ask how you logic guys set this up for sensible use? Do you use multi’s with 1 x Kontakt and 16 MIdi Ch. and then use multioutputting, or is that less sensible than multiple versions of instruments?

    Any thoughts?

    Hi David,

    Welcome to the forums! I think that once you get your copy installed and start getting a feel for the library that you will find it a lot easier to figure out how you want to get setup.

    Since you’re a longtime Logic user, how are you accustomed to running other multi-timbral audio units? I’m also a longtime Logic guy… personally, I prefer everything separated onto its own channel rather than using keyswitches or patch-changes. I’m also making heavy use of VE Pro. That said, everyone finds what works for them. I know that some people who are using VSL extensively are used to working with a single instrument per track (using keyswitches/ CCs to change articulations). Willem’s approach is one example of working that way. Other examples of this style of setup can be found around these forums as well.

    From a performance standpoint, you may already be aware of how Logic handles multi-proccesor support. Long story short, Logic can assign only a single proccessor/core to a channel strip. When you create another channel-strip, it can get the second proc/core, etc. That means that everything contained within a single instance of Kontakt is affectively using the same processor no matter how many your system contains. Therefore, you get a lot better performance out of Logic by doing some smart divisions of your heavily-used patches. One good approach is to use a different instance of Kontakt for each section in LASS (meaning 5 instances total).

    Hope that helps a bit. Again, once you start playing with LASS you’ll have a better idea what you want to do (what you want to load, etc..), and I may be able to offer more specific advice.

    Best,
    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @chlady wrote:

    Thanks Sebastian,
    So you find it easier create your own with a template rather than using Automap?

    Craig

    Hey Craig,

    Yes, I do. Plus, using Automap is only a button/knob away if I do want to use it on some plugins. I generally keep my SL on a MIDI CC page that has my most used controls, and I find that I rarely switch to Automap mode anymore. Automap certainly has its uses (truly an excellent technology, IMO), just not in my workflow at the moment. Your mileage may vary. :)

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @chlady wrote:

    It’s probably user error but I just can’t seem to get a handle on getting my remote SL 37 to respond to these cc controllers like 83 amnd 111. Seems overly complicated.

    craig

    Hey Craig,

    I’m using a Remote Zero SL successfully here. Have you downloaded the latest editor software from Novation? I found it a lot easier to program the knobs/faders via my computer and then upload the template to my SL than to create templates from scratch on the SL itself. Plus, when you use the editor, you can keep a copy of the template on your computer to make further changes to it later.

    Best,
    Sebastian Katz
    audiobro support

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    Hello Dan,

    Welcome to the forums!

    It almost seems like a performance skill in it’s own right for modern digital composers using keyboards and mod wheels.

    Definitely agreed. The better we learn to play our instrument (the computer) the more expressive a performance we can get. Nowadays that really amounts to getting really good at riding those faders/knobs/pedals. The more you can do in real-time, the less you have to do after the fact.

    I’m sure others will chime in here with different ideas, but for my own part I can say that I quite like controlling LASS with just the MOD wheel (for the leg patches, and CC111 for short articulations), as I feel that very closely resembles the dynamic range of a real string section. Of course, bear in mind that if you’re only playing one divisi section, say 3 players, that the dynamic range will be different than if you’re layering a bunch of sections. It is my opinion, and I don’t think I’m totally alone on this, that it’s easy to overestimate the dynamic range of string instruments. In a lot of modern film/tv scores short strings are pushed especially hard (often affected to be louder with additional processing).

    I’d say that if you’re feeling that the MOD wheel is not giving you quite enough range, you may want to try it in conjunction with CC11.

    The more layering that you do the better. The cohesiveness of 1 patch of 16 players all perfectly following the same exact dynamic shape can sound artificial, especially for phrases with a wide dynamic range. If you split that line up with 3 independent cc1 shapes the results can be much more convincing, especially if the first chair is added. It’s best to independently record all of the individual ensembles performing a phrase but that can take a lot time and might be overkill for most material. Usually I just record a phrase and the cc1 info with the largest ensemble and then copy the whole track over to the remaining sections, then I’ll randomize the note on and note off times pretty liberally and with the pencil tool I’ll sloppily redraw over the modulation curve so the shape is basically the same but the values are different enough to keep them from sounding too matched. Works pretty well.

    What John said! :)

    Bottom line is that I’m sure you’ll figure out what works best for you and your music. If you feel you need a lot more dynamic range, you’ve got a huge amount of dynamic and volume control between CC1, 11, and 7.

    Hope this helps!

    Best,
    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @nicos kev wrote:

    I don’t understand very well the utility of delay and humanisation but i guess those are very needfull tools…

    Do these particulars functions have to be used systematicaly on every patches or maybe especially on legato / sustain patches?

    Hi Nicolas,

    I don’t want to speak for Andrew, but the delay and humanization script can definitely help to add some realism to fast legato lines by injecting some timing variations to each division of a section. For instance, if you wanted to do some faster legato violin writing, you might:

    1. Load up the First Chair, A, B, and C sections
    2. Apply different delay/humanization/legato settings to each
    3. Play all 4 sections simultaneously, either by setting them all in record mode or setting them all to the same MIDI channel

    The variations better mimic a real string section, where (even with great players) timings on fast passages won’t be perfectly uniform.

    Hope that makes sense!

    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @nicos kev wrote:

    I kind of understand the only way to play fast legato licks is to changes values on the legato tweak pages… is that correct?
    Doses somebody have favorites settings to have realistics fast legatos?

    Thanks everyone.
    Best regards

    Hi nicos kev,

    Yes, making some subtle changes to the Legato Tweak Page would be the way to go about getting faster legato performances. There is a good section in the manual about what the knobs do (starting on page 21).

    As per the manual:
    ‘For reasons too complicated to explain, Before you turn any knobs on this page, make sure you select the type of legato you want to adjust from the drop-down menu even if it is already showing when you come to this page. Otherwise you may inadvertently mess up the settings for one of the other transitions by mistake.’

    There are also two threads on this forum that you may find useful (one with some example settings you can try).

    http://www.audiobro.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=79
    http://www.audiobro.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=81

    As for doing portatos, I would just try playing them in using the Leg patches… you can achieve a nice short-string sound out of these patches through performance.

    Hope that helps! Let us know how it goes.

    Best,
    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    Here’s the fixed multi for 16-bit Vlns Div Spiccatos. Let me know if you have any problems.

    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @mconnellw wrote:

    My apologies if someone has reported this already.

    A and C are right, B is Staccato. Looks fine in the 24 bit multi.

    Hi Mike,

    Thanks for reporting this. I can verify that here as well. Should be an easy fix.

    Best,
    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @thpmusic wrote:

    I did a search and couldn’t find this being mentioned, but on the Viola Full Trill patch all of the F#’s are reversed so that the Db1 causes a WHOLE STEP trill and the C1 causes a HALF STEP.

    fyi

    (As it turns out I’m working on a scary cue and have the violas playing a C and an F#, but I can not get them to trill together….)

    Hi thpmusic,

    Thanks for your post. I believe this is actually working correctly. LASS handles trills differently than a lot of other libraries. Basically, it sounds like you’re thinking C1=Whole Step Trill / Db1=Half Step Trill, and that is not how LASS works. Basically you select the major key (or relative major key) you want to play in, and the trills will automagically stay diatonic. Cool, huh? This is also explained in the manual on pg.30 if my explanation is lacking.

    In your example, playing C1 tells LASS you are in the key of C Major and the diatonic note about F# is G (half step trill). When you hit Db, LASS is in the key of Db, so the diatonic note above F#/Gb is G#/Ab (whole-note trill).

    Hope that makes sense and helps you with your project!

    Best,
    Sebastian K

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @labcomp wrote:

    Sure wish there was an easier way though!

    Me too! I am going to take a closer look at the AU SDK to see if this is possible and just not implemented on the sequencer side. If not, I’m afraid we’re stuck with these less-than-ideal solutions until AU is updated.

    Sebastian

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @Sebastian K wrote:

    We’re not sure if this is a limitation of the AU spec, but we’ll look into it. Does anyone else happen to know for sure?

    Okay, still haven’t been able to determine if the AU spec even provides for this functionality, but I was able to get Kontakt MIDI routed into Logic/DP via Plogue Bidule. The setup is not the prettiest or most intuitive thing in the world, but it does work.

    Simply put, in either Logic or DP (or any host, really)

    1. Load in the AU version of Bidule as a software instrument.
    2. Inside of Bidule load in a Kontakt VST (important that it’s a VST and not an AU).
    3. Also inside Bidule create MIDI Input 1 (Found under MIDI Devices->Input->Bidule AU 1).
    4. Connect the MIDI output port on Kontakt (the last one which is white/grey) to ‘Bidule AU 1).

    Here’s where the setup differs per host…

    Create a new MIDI/Software instrument track where you’d like to record the MIDI. Bidule has now created the MIDI port ‘Bidule AU 1’ behind the scenes and you can use that as the MIDI input for your new track. In DP this involves going into ‘Multi-Record’ mode. In Logic, you need to do some manual cabling in the environment. Now that the routing is done you should be able to play the Bidule instrument and trigger the second software instrument/MIDI track. This would allow you to capture the output of the A.R.T. tool, or any other Kontakt MIDI.

    I’ve attached a screenshot of this setup running in Logic 9.1. Not the ideal solution to be sure, but possibly the only one currently doable for Logic/DP users. You could probably also achieve a similar setup running a separate plugin host alongside your sequencer or via Rewire into a VST host.

    [attachment=0:4ht26kzo]logic_midi_route.jpg[/attachment:4ht26kzo]

    Sebastian K
    Participant
    Post count: 5246

    @labcomp wrote:

    Would anyone know if this is do-able inside MOTU DP? And how?

    Thank you

    Good question. We’re not sure if this is a limitation of the AU spec, but we’ll look into it. Does anyone else happen to know for sure?

    Sebastian K

Viewing 18 posts - 1,461 through 1,478 (of 1,478 total)