lolster

Hi - Logic (Pro X) has started to 'not find' the samples associated with EXS24 instruments, in particular, they seem to be the samples for those EXS instruments which I have made myself by converting from REX2 to EXS. If I load an existing song, it doesn't find those samples, they are marked with a ! in the EXS editor. If I start a new song and load a problem EXS instrument, it does seem to find and load the samples, but information regarding pitch settings seems to have been lost. However, if I open an older version of Logic (Logic 9) and then load the problem EXS instrument, the samples all load just fine. (These are songs which were started in Logic X, not Logic 9) Any suggestions welcome! Thank you.

I’m not sure when this problem started, but I can’t work it out! I still use recycle (import recycle to EXS) quite a lot. I would use it during a track, then (when finished) move the completed track to a backup hard drive. When I went on to start a new project, all the EXS instruments I made previously with recycle import still appeared in the list of sampler instruments - and were able to find the associated audio files for the EXS instruments without any problems. I’ve recently noticed that when I try to load some of the newer EXS instruments made with recycle convert (newer as in, ones I made in the last year or so, maybe longer) - EXS is unable to find the associated audio files. EXS is set to look for samples on all drives. Even more strange: if I go to my backup drive and (as a test) load up a old song which I know had recycled EXS instruments it, EXS still can’t find the files - even though I can see the files it seeks are in the Media folder of the same Logic Package. And if I click on the ‘edit’ button of one of the problem EXS instruments, whilst I can see there is the ! symbol next to each ‘missing’ sample, if I click on the name of the missing sample to the left of the !, it brings up the 'missing' waveform and I'm able to play it ok from that window. Any suggestions welcome. Thanks.

Well, there’s always something to learn and do better! Anyway.. to report back: create tempo fader object; adjust scale carefully; record tempo changes *without* looking at the screen = same result. Thanks again

Hmm. Maybe during the course of trying to get it sounding right I’ve come up with a ‘solution’ that sounded right and then ‘decided’ that’s the thing that made it work - but in fact was unnecessary. Wouldn’t be the first time. What you say makes complete sense, thinking about it objectively. I’ll do a couple of experiments with the current track to see and report back. Thanks for the help / interest, much appreciated.

For sure! It's for quite specific purposes, admittedly. I was writing a couple of tracks to a brief which required an underlying mechanical / music box feel, so needed to find a way of simulating the mechanical / winding 'push' and 'pull' of the machine. This worked by rolling the tempo up and down in a particular motion over 5-10bpm with each ‘wind’. But in whole bpms it just didn’t sound smooth and natural enough. So I had to make a tempo operations curve with a higher density and then cut and paste it. Hope this isn’t desperately boring! Anyway, it worked ‘ok’ but was a touch repetitive - it would have benefitted from being a bit more loose with more fluctuation rather than cutting a pasting. I’m doing a couple more for another client in a similar style, but would like to do it better this time.

Hi All - don't know if anyone can help here, something of a specific query RE recording fine tempo changes on the fly: I can use a fader object in the environment to manipulate and record tempo changes on the fly (either by pushing the fader with the mouse or linking to a controller) but the bpm only moves in whole numbers. Is there any way to do this but have it move in smaller increments / fractions of a bpm? The only workaround I have come up with is to create a curve in 'tempo operations' with a high density (up to 1/32 which is plenty) but then I am left with having to draw the tempo variations in manually, rather than do it on the fly, not so good. Any ideas welcome! Thanks