Midi Summing ?

[BadOrange]

Is it possible to sum 2 midi cc tracks.

 

I find the rel cresh quite useless and it would be great if I could lets say overlay a midi lane cc 1 that is a diagonal line with another CC that represents the motion with the mod wheel I want to preserve ? I want to apply this to an instrument track whose CC 1 has already been recorded.

 

R

 

 

(I do apologize for posting this in the wrong forum initially)

[Jordi Torres]

So you're saying you want 2 lanes of the same controller (CC1 / modwheel) controlling the same instrument? That's not going to work. What you can have multiple lanes with different cc's controlling the same instrument.

 

J.

[BadOrange]

i Know it won't work but if there was a way to sum them together or do some mean root sort of calculation. Unfortunately , the plugin does not allow multiple ccs to control the same parameter and even if it could, you would get the same up and down distortion you would get if you did what I described without first adding both tracks.

[BadOrange]

i wonder if there is some hidden feature that allows midi signals to be summed, divided, multiplied by each other and not a constant. I even tried sending the alias cc1 to a second transformer swithcing the values to the first data byte then redirecting that value to the 2 nd value byte with the the first transformer.

[Matt Mayfield]

You're probably best served by going about the whole situation a different way. What exactly are you attempting to do?

 

I'm sure someone can suggest a different and more efficient approach, perhaps one that doesn't even involve CCs. Will you please explain your desired result in terms of sound, or how you want a synthesizer to behave?

[fuzzfilth]

Well, in essence, it is the request of a Trim mode. Initially for automation, but tremendously useful for Hyperdraw Region Automation and the underlaying MIDI CC data.

 

You could do it in the Environment, but it would be very clumsy and not worth the effort. It involves transforming the second set of CC data into Meta data which then can control the amount of Add or Subtract to the original data values in real time. The time it'd take to construct would be far more than just redoing the rides properly.

 

Then again, you could build a re-usable Environment module which takes, say, four freely definable MIDI CCs, adds them up and spits them out as yet another MIDI CC. This would be easy to implement and you avoid the problem of patching and adding several tracks of identical data CC1 into one lump.

 

Then again again, this would bring up the question if so much effort is actually justified or if the proper rides are just a question of muscle control.

 

So, what is it that you actually want to achieve ?

 

Christian

[BadOrange]

You're probably best served by going about the whole situation a different way. What exactly are you attempting to do?

 

I'm sure someone can suggest a different and more efficient approach, perhaps one that doesn't even involve CCs. Will you please explain your desired result in terms of sound, or how you want a synthesizer to behave?

 

I have a passage which has relative velocities that I want to maintain as the velocity does not just control the loudness but also the timbre of the orchestral instrument which means just using volume automation is not an option. What I want to do is apply an overarching crescendo over the passage so that the original velocity map is still maintained with a few adjustments as the crescendo takes effect. The problem is that rel. cresh. in the transform is absolutely useless and does not allow for a step enough curve. I

 

So what I would like ideally is have the original CC 1 pattern multiplied by lets say a diagonal line and then averaged in a way that the pattern does a rel. crescendo but in a way that serves my purposes.

 

I can do it by hand but it is time consuming.

[BadOrange]

You're probably best served by going about the whole situation a different way. What exactly are you attempting to do?

 

I'm sure someone can suggest a different and more efficient approach, perhaps one that doesn't even involve CCs. Will you please explain your desired result in terms of sound, or how you want a synthesizer to behave?

 

I have a passage which has relative velocities that I want to maintain as the velocity does not just control the loudness but also the timbre of the orchestral instrument which means just using volume automation is not an option. What I want to do is apply an overarching crescendo over the passage so that the original velocity map is still maintained with a few adjustments as the crescendo takes effect. The problem is that rel. cresh. in the transform is absolutely useless and does not allow for a step enough curve. I

 

So what I would like ideally is have the original CC 1 pattern multiplied by lets say a diagonal line and then averaged in a way that the pattern does a rel. crescendo but in a way that serves my purposes.

 

I can do it by hand but it is time consuming.

 

I am interested an willing to spend the time. Could you guide me to a starting page ? Greatly appreciated.

[ski]

To use CC1 to affect velocities after the fact requires that you process the output of the track itself through a transformer which, in turn, scales the velocity using CC1.

 

In the attached project you'll see the following: a part originally recorded on track 1, instrument 1. I duplicated the instrument channel strip (instrument 2). Then I bypassed the inst#1 plugin. If you open the Environment you'll see that Inst #1's output is processed through a transformer which scales the velocity of the notes using CC#1 via another transformer. The CC#1--->scaling processing is assigned to a track. If that track is selected you can use CC#1 to scale the velocities of the part playing from track 1, though the sound comes from track 2.

 

If you want to hear the original velocity, CC#1 needs to be all the way up, as the scaling function in a transformer -- as manipulated by an external CC -- can only scale down. If you want to be able to scale up you'll need to use a different process in the transformer.

 

This is just one approach. But maybe this'll get you started.

CC to Velocity.logic.zip

[fuzzfilth]

So now you're talking about velocities instead of CC1 ? That's an entirely different matter.

 

Get hold of the Expressor.

 

http://home.arcor.de/fuzzfilth/Other/expressor.png

 

It does probably exactly what you want.

 

http://home.arcor.de/Other/Expressor.zip

 

Christian

[BadOrange]

no i'm sorry. I mean CC 1 , The program does not respond to velocity in its traditional manner so CC 1 is sort of the velocity control. Sorry for the confusion. The thing is that I could technically have another CC lane and actually solve the problem quite easily within the program but the project i'm working on does not have this set up and it would add about 12 hours of work adjusting all the CC1 and CC2 values to reflect the original setting of all the instruments which there are about 12 or so.

 

I'm suing the WIVI plugin. its a brass, woodwind plugin.

 

So yes, in the future, I will definitely use the 2 CC lanes but this is my first project with it and well hindsight is a bitch.

 

 

And Ski, thanks for the time you put into this. Really appreciate going out of your way.

[fader8]

OK, to do what you want, you'll need to use a Transformer in the environment that your cc1 message flows through. Set the Operation of byte 2 to Scale. Then create a new fader object: New-Fader-Specials-Transform Operation Par. 1. Cable that into the transformer.

 

You can now create a track for that fader and automate it, which will scale the cc1 data. It's going to work best if you first set the fader to 64 and then record your initial cc1 data. Since you're cutting the values in half at that point, you might have to adjust the influence it has within the software instrument. After that, automating the scaling fader will trim the data up or down.

[nev17]

I have a passage which has relative velocities that I want to maintain as the velocity does not just control the loudness but also the timbre of the orchestral instrument which means just using volume automation is not an option. What I want to do is apply an overarching crescendo over the passage so that the original velocity map is still maintained with a few adjustments as the crescendo takes effect.

 

This has probably been solved elsewhere but I want to add my tip for performing the above ie. to apply a velocity ramp crescendo whilst maintaining the relative velocity values within the part.

 

I needed to apply such a velocity ramp to a shuffle snare track that is several minutes long and, therefore, unrealistic to adjust each note by hand.

 

After much searching and hair-pulling, I found the easiest way was to just divide up the regions into the smallest manageable new sub-regions, so to speak, and adjust the velocity for each new region in the inspector. It takes longer than ideal but it works. I combined this with volume automation and ended up with a very passable pressed-roll and shuffle snare crescendo.

 

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere but I hope it helps.

[fader8]

I needed to apply such a velocity ramp to a shuffle snare track that is several minutes long and, therefore, unrealistic to adjust each note by hand.

You might find this environment useful:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=42440

[nev17]

Super. I'll give it a try. Thanks.