User 905133

Does "dedicated MIDI I/O" mean 5-pin DIN connectors (female)? If so, you can use standard 5-pin DIN cables (male-to-male). Are the file *.syx files? UPDATE: I just looked at an image of the Focusrite 18i20. On the back there is a pair of 5-pin DIN connectors. Cakewalk still has a sysex module / view. Load the file(s) into a bank; send them one at a time. As for configuration / settings, if the D-50 shows that the data is being sent too fast, Cakewalk settings (but you might not need them). I have also uses MIDI-OX, but I prefer SONAR/Cakewalk. I have used it for years to back up presets for different sound modules. I have sent sysex to some Roland gear, but not in a while. I don't think they had hardware switches to enable/disable the receipt of sysex data. Also, other gear I had required software parameters to be set correctly to successfully receive sysex commands. I d not recall the older Roland gear having that. If the sysex data/commands were properly formed, they should work. UPDATE: From the D-50 manual: "The Bulk Dump and Bulk Load processes function whether the exclusive switch in MIDI Functions is ON or OFF." Roland sysex uses a checksum byte, but that only has to be calculated if you have hand assembled the sysex commands. If you are restoring factory data, or a download previously sent from the Roland, you would not have to recalculate the checksum.

I am a big fan of echo/delay--sometimes synchronized, but often fractionally random. So in terms of musical preference, random midi latencies of the miniscule variety (jitter) is often OK. On the other hand, a few days ago, I tried to synchronize a software sequencer in a particular soft synth with a BPM hardware sequencer. I have had no problems synching hardware across a span of 15 feet via MIDI. I would go crazy with all sorts of pitch wheel, pitch bend, and CC data, even testing the setup by wildly changing from 0 BPM to 300 BPM from the hardware sequencer to all the gear. Those modules never lost any clock bytes!!!!! However, with the BPM sequencer and the PC both within arms distance, the software got totally messed up with some very basic BPM changes--like from 120 to 78 over the span of several seconds. Since the hardware could handle extreme changing in timing but the software couldn't, I don't think it was a problem with MIDI but with how MIDI was implemented. Yup!!!! I have spent over 2 years trying to see if I can make a move to software synths. After the attempt to sync my BPM sequencer to a PC based soft synth less than a week ago, I am now wondering if even basic MIDI synchronization can be done much less eliminating miniscule latencies. Maybe time-stamping all midi data in MIDI 2.0 will work with PC based tools music-making. Great discussion!! Thanks for raising the subject.

Thread Chronology: Q &A sub forum : Feedback forum (this one): Q &A sub forum: Feedback sub forum (this one):

Which category do you think the Elka-X falls into--more like generic trash or more like GX-80 quality? Personally, I have been enjoying it more than a couple of the other recent original instruments. As for the GX-80, I think they went all out to assemble an amazing team of sound designers. Do you think that helps make it a quality instrument?

The transpose function and the key signature are separate things. Key signature relates to which notes are sharp and flat. Transpose relates to note pitches and how they look on a staff. There are threads where this is discussed complete with screen shots if I recall correctly. Unfortunately, it is too late in the day for me to look. Transposing notes in a song to change the pitches regardless of the instrument is different than transposing notes so instruments of different keys will sound the same. Sorry. It is late and I know that explanation is not as good as it can be, but I hope it points you in the right direction.

I don't currently have a full-featured multitimbral soft synth that I can use to test, but I used to do this with hardware and a now-legacy multitimbral soft synth. I am not sure how it would work with TX16Wx, but assuming you have multiple midi tracks each having data on a single track, here are some steps to try: Using the Track Widget Control set to "All" point each midi track to the same synth [O = Output Track Widget] point each midi track to a different channel [C = Destination Channel Widget] I don't have TX16Wx, so it might need some other set-up steps and it might not work with that synth. When you say Cakewalk only sends data to MIDI channel 1 to a multitimbral synth, it sounds to me like a setup issue. The last time I looked, Cakewalk still sends midi data to different midi channels. CONFIRMED! If those steps don't help, maybe post an image of the track header containing the widget settings to show the routings of each midi track. PS: I am installing TX16Wx now to give it a try. I downloaded and installed TX16Wx and rescanned my plug-ins. UPDATE: Conclusion: Try the steps. I don't have the time to look for samples to load up, but Cakewalk definitely sends midi data to different slots. Here's what I did: Created an Instrument track with TX16Wx. Created three MIDI tracks by recording random midi keypresses on each of three midi tracks. NOTE: I did not record midi data on the instrument track. (Its simpler that way, but it could be done if you record the data on different midi channels.) Pointed each of the three midi tracks to the TX16Wx (using the Output Track Widget). Pointed each of the three midi tracks to a different midi channel (using the Destination Channel Widget). I can tell by the virtual LEDs on each of the TX16Wx Slots, the different midi tracks were sending data to different slots. Thanks for mentioning the TX16Wx. Looks cool. ?

Friendly suggestion--wait until everyone has upgraded their systems (including all gear) to MIDI 2.0. As you know MIDI is serial communication. I haven't read the 2.0 docs in a couple of years, but as I see it, when all software and gear uses all the extra data in the expanded formats, there will be a period of what Thomas Kuhn called a paradigm shift which will result in chaos until the "normal science" of MIDI communication settles in into something a tutorial can safely talk about with any accuracy, reliability, and practical value (usefulness). PS: As a hobbyist, several years ago I gave some thought to how I might use a microprocessor to create a MIDI data converter to actually do something with the extra data. But I decided that manufacturing teams were also probably working on it and they could devote more resources to it than I could. From what I've seen of a few videos over the past few years that document midi latency and what some call jitter, with widespread marketing of MIDI to MIDI 2.0 converters, routers, handlers, or whatever they will be called, all the current video documentation will be out of date. JMO: Good to do the research to keep track of what people are saying, but postpone your judgments and have a very probative stance in any videos. Maybe a series on "What we know now" that take snapshots of current ideas where subsequent videos do a recap ("The last time we discussed _____________, _____________________." + an update to add new information, changes, etc.) Trying to be helpful so you don't have to keep on revising videos. More of a historical approach, than a how-to-use-it approach.

LOL: We found it at the same time!!!!! (See the PS to my post.) Glad you found it. I used Type = ChAftertouch, but if Type NRPN gives you more control great!

You can add midi data after the fact in realtime with this method using a midi control track. If your knob turning skills are not great you can edit the data in the Event List View. But, my guess is you want to do it by drawing some dots or lines in. Since I don't use the PRV, I will refer to others who do use the PRV. PS: I just looked at the Controller section in the PRV, chose a MIDI Lane and Selected Channel Aftertouch. Maybe that will work?

On my usb keyboard, I have a knob programmed to send Channel Aftertouch. Not sure if that would meet your needs. Just a thought in case it might.

I don't have that synth, but I see it is listed in Roland's Patch Script Builder.

Dedicated to all those looking for roadmaps on their respective journeys. Peace!

IK is on a roll with updates to ToneX. The following thread has the details.

If anyone has Arturia's Buchla Easel, there's also free banks with presets available for the Easel.

This would be handy. I'm wondering what's actually in the buffer/on the clipboard. Is it the actual audio or midi data? Or is the source, the start and end points, and the data type options chosen? I had assumed the latter. If so, changes to a project in time (placement/location within the project) might mean all clipboard items would have to be updated quite often with typical editing. Just wondering about that.

WOW. For the 25th anniversary Group Buy it was $200.

Thanks for asking. The instrument plug-in I have used to route midi data to and from Cakewalk is a virtual modular synth called Voltage Modular (from Cherry Audio). I haven't used it to distribute Midi FX from Cakewalk back to Cakewalk. I have used it with self-designed modular effects using MIDI. To take a couple of simple examples, I have had used LFOs and ADSR envelopes within Voltage Modular to send midi CC data to control multiple software synths hosted in Cakewalk. I will schedule some time to see if this process can be done with CW's Midi FX.

I'm on Win 10 Pro, so maybe that's part of it. Also, I was copying to a clean track but you might be doing a copy and replace. I defer to others for possible explanations.

I just did the following: Created a short recording on an Instrument Track Used my mouse cursor to highlight/select a 2 measure section Used Ctrl+C to copy the highlighted/selected measures into what I assume is a copy bufffer Created a MIDI Track Placed the cursor at a random spot on the new track Used Ctrl+V to paste a copy Moved the cursor to another random spot Used Ctrl+V to paste a second copy I repeated this several times. Next I repeated the cut-and-paste process several times with an audio track. Ctrl+C and Ctrl+ V worked. What steps did you use? If you used the same steps, maybe someone else can offer possible explanations for why it might not work for you. Maybe there's something that I have enabled that you don't? Possibly one of the Menu Bar > Edit > Select options?

I agree with learning the strengths and weaknesses of all music-making tools and how to use them to meet our own individual needs. Oddly enough, over the past three days I have been going through the Pigments Expansion Packs (Half-Price Sale) and there are a lot of mallet/percussive sounds that sound very much like sounds I already have (esp. such as many in Chromaphone). On my PC Pigments (which I like) has a high CPU %, but I have some work-arounds for using Pigments in context. I have not specifically compared the Chromaphone load with the Pigments load, but generally Pigments is rather high when I am testing presets, tweaking them, and developing compositional layers. I haven't extensively compared interactivity of sounds from different soft synth makers either. Thanks for reminding me to put that on my list of things to do. Generally I find that the FX that manufacturer's put on factory presets (presumably so they sound good in isolation) tend to clash with FX on other synths and I end up using dry or nearly dry tweaks. One of my to-do tasks is to further explore using multi-band FX with integrated dry/semi dry sounds from different synths. BTW, I have been exploring soft synths for the past 2-3 years with the intent of moving away from hardware. But yesterday I fired up the audio from one of my vintage D-to-A sound modules. If they all had reliable D-to-D outputs, I am now thinking I'd like that more than fiddling with soft synths and FX to get the sound that I want. Come to think of it, I generally preferred the FX chips of one manufacturer and tended to use dry (or nearly dry) sounds from other sound modules when combining them.

Yup! I did two updates in rapid succession. Simply turning on layer B with no guts (an "init" layer) added 2-4%. Good to know!! Both turning on and adding the guts to layer B (such as by loading a layer as you describe) added approx. 8-10%. I agree with your assessment of Chromaphone 3 (unique, sounds great, etc. Thanks for the insights into the architecture. I have been pleased with the textures I have gotten with single layers, crazy settings, and built-in FX. I had no idea that piling up notes with a single layer was so efficient!! Thanks also to @Jan Schmitz for raising the issue of extreme CPU load under certain conditions. It is good to know the strengths and limitations of each plug-in.

Thanks for this. I will have to check specifically with dual layer sounds. That might account for the 30% CPU. Not sure I have every Chromaphone Expansion Pack, but if you or others can suggest some high CPU dual layer factory presets, I saved my test CbB project and can try to verify that its the dual layer causing CPU being doubled. Update: All of my randomly chosen factory presets are single layer. As a simple test, I just turned on layer B. That generally increased the CPU load by 2-4%. Update: Turning on layer B and randomly loading sounds added approx. 8-10% CPU. So, with 1 instance of Chromaphone 3 playing my midi loop, I was able to get CbB up to 28%. Thanks for helping me to sort out what to avoid!

My PC is a vintage 2011 formerly Win 7 PC with up-to-date Windows 10 Pro. I get 30% CPU usage when only when I boot Chromaphone. After that it drops down considerably. When not making sound, it drops down to less than 1%. Typical sounds run from single digits to maybe as high as 15%. As I assume you know, it can vary quite a bit. For example, I have one woody mallet sound I tweaked to have mondo delay/echo trails. It starts off at 8% CPU and as I swipe my hand across the keyboard up and down, it does up to 10-11% CPU. This is in standalone mode. In Cakewalk with a single instance I get comparable results above Cakewalk's baseline (1.4% to 2.7% at rest). It spikes to above 30% upon insertion, constant runs with my woody mallet mondo delay/echo preset pushes Cakewalk to the 13-16% range. It is roughly the same during live practice, recording, and playback. I have not tried multiple instances. That being said, I have noticed repeatedly, with my vintage PC I sometimes don't have issues which others report with newer PCs. Not saying that newer PCs can't do more tracks and more effects faster than I can. Just saying that I am not getting any where near 30% CPU with Chromaphone. I looped my test recording (15 measures of midi data) and randomly switched presets (several factory banks). The note density starts low and total CbB CPU starts at 8-10% CPU based on the sound and by the end it goes up to 12-20% CPU. With the 15-measure loop going, I used 2 hands to rapidly play dense random cluster chords to increase the note density (approx. 12-14 notes at a time). The sound playing was at 17-18% CPU max without the additional notes. Pounding the keyboard live, the CPU went up to 18-19%. If there's a way to post/share some of your custom Chromaphone, I am curious to see what results I get with them. It would be good to know if there are some Chromaphone settings that I should stay away from based on a higher CPU load.