Forums
I've added this mini "How to" that solves a recurring problem.
https://sourceforge.net/p/qtractor/wiki/How%20To%20-%2015%20Use%20Multi…
I've added this mini "How to" that solves a recurring problem.
https://sourceforge.net/p/qtractor/wiki/How%20To%20-%2015%20Use%20Multi…
Creative!
Creative!
I'm preparing a "How to" that will interest you
Maybe you already do it this way.
It's easy to handle the audio of multiple drum instruments separately.
The trick is to send auxiliary sends to MIDI buses instead of auxiliary audio.
Each instrument bus starts with a MIDI filter that only lets the instrument's note pass through.
This allows you to create a stable flow regardless of the plugin you use. It doesn't require multi-channel plugins, but it will work with them too.
It's also possible to use different plugins for each instrument.
Therefore, it's not only simpler than multi-channel audio, but also more versatile.
re. How to - 15 Use Multiple SoftSynths on a Track...
jfyi. it is now live:
timestamp: 2025-06-20 09:00+0100
cheers
Thanks
Thanks
Interesting. I'll have to…
Interesting. I'll have to give that a read. I'm pretty happy when my existing strategy of sending my drums (generated from a multi-out plugin) to a multi-in audio bus which is then split (by channel) to individual bus' (and then back into a single stereo). It takes a bit longer to setup but it's an obvious pattern (which means I'll understand it if I don't look at the material for months) and more importantly, I have access to several key areas. If I want to get into the snare drum, there's a place for it. If I want to get at the whole kit, there's a place for it... etc, etc...
I tend to think managing things at the MIDI note level (the mappings needed for the filter) wouldn't scale well for 2 reasons:
That said, I can see the MIDI filtering approach being MORE efficient for certain scenarios where drum performances are more simplistic and subject to less ongoing interaction during the writing phase.
I'll give you a silly example
I'll write the How-to soon, but in the meantime, I'll give you a silly example.
1. You don't have to map anything; you simply filter the instrument's note (the one assigned in the plugin and therefore in the piano roll) and place the instrument on its own MIDI bus.
2. You can have multiple synths per instrument. (Several synths to create a kick, for example).
3. The synths can be different for each instrument.
4. Each instrument is worked on separately (EQs, reverb, gate).
It's simpler and more controllable than the separate audio channel flow.
Example:
https://www.rncbc.org/drupal/files/MIDI-MultiInstrumentDrum.zip
...
PS
Rui, if you're reading this, I'd like to let you know that Drupal sometimes uses incorrect paths when uploading files.
See the link below that Drupal automatically adds and compare it with the one I hand-written above.
G3N-es, Right. I understood…
G3N-es,
Right. I understood what you meant. However, notice that work needed in step 1? That's fine when you're talking about a very small number of notes... doing that on a larger scale (even a reasonably sized 5 piece kit with a few cymbals) is the work I've been talking about. Again, it's about scaling the workflow. If you know you're going to use the same exact plugin all the time, that's one thing.... that workflow could be a good fit. If, like me, your drum parts can (or do) come from multiple sources (each using their own, sometimes quite whacky, note assignments, the work flow simplyy falls down and you realize you're better off capturing things at the audio layer.
But again, for a simple and consistent environment, mapping at the MIDI layer could be a good fit.
Add new comment