Ardour fader scales velocity for any MIDI data passing through.
That’s why I explicitly mentioned post-fader synths.
Ardour fader scales velocity for any MIDI data passing through.
Ok, I’ll take a look at that workflow, I wasn’t aware of that. Then I guess it boils down to user interaction with the midi-data as you said.
If fader is in 0 dB position we have +6dB to top for scale and -infinite to bottom, how scales the velocity?
Does it also change the volume?
How velocity changes affect the volume of the sound depends on the synth. For an Organ the velocity makes no difference while for a piano velocity usually maps to a exponential loudness scale.
If there is also an audio-stream passing through the Fader, then both Audio and MIDI data are scaled.
same as Audio using a linear coefficient. * 0 (-inf dB) … * 2 (+6 dB).
Am I missing something or do I then no longer have a fader for leveling?
In addition, the handling is very cumbersome. For example, for a 4 bar Hi Hat loop I have to copy not only the Midi region, but also the automation. For me, this workaround is unfortunately not very practical.
Here is a quick and dirty screen capture showing a possible workflow. It isn’t perfect, it is still a little clunky but some things actually could improve it significantly (Being able to copy MIDI ranges and automation together for instance like I can with audio)
The first thing here, and while when midi editing most people already have it set, is to make sure you have snapping enabled to grid, it is what allows this to be much more viable.
You put the synth post-fader as Robin mentioned to scale Velocity data. Automate the fader to control velocity, and while I didn’t do it here you could draw in the automation with snap enabled to 1/4 notes or whatever to do it per note, I just rode the fader manually.
EDIT: I forgot to mention here, I inserted an ACE-Amplifier after the synth for volume control. This allowed me to ride volume and velocity separately and is included with Ardour, and obviously can be automated independently as well given this is Ardour.
In object mode, CTRL+Drag to copy (On MacOS at least) the region and place it elsewhere. Then use range mode, to select the automation, CTRL+C/COMMAND+C to copy, again with snap enabled you just snap to the 1/4, and paste that throughout. Again snapping makes it easy to do so on the note, but you could also use the ‘To Next Region Boundary’ shortcut (CTRL+SHIFT+Left/Right on MacOS) to jump to wherever your boundary of that loop is.
Is this a perfect workflow for what you describe? Not yet. The fact you have to COPY/PASTE the MIDI region separate from the automation at all is certainly a downside, but one that is fairly easily worked around as well.
It certainly could be improved and with methods other than a lollipop graph, but it at least is a start.
It’s not a workaround. it’s a workflow decision. Things have worked this way since Ardour 3.0.
You can use a MIDI bus for the instrument and use the Fader there, or even a subgroup bus if that’s more convenient.
But yes, if that doesn’t match your workflow, then this won’t help and be impractical.
Thank you for the detailed description. That’s more or less how I imagined it. It is good that there is this possibility of velocity automation - here I have learned something again. But as you also said, there is still a lot that can be improved.
The problem with the proposed workflow is, if you work on midi velocity you want to see the new values after edit, if you create a fader automation you control the output but don’t see the values (monitoring it’s posible on playback but playback only for see a region values is not reasonable).
Other problem is, an output from a score editor can be for default 64 for mf, another 80 (lilypond and musescore in fact manage this values) and anoter 75, fader for default in a non linear perspective is in 0 db close to top of fader, no midle, no in the same point in a linear velocity, then if is a 64 value another 63 values is above in a small space, and 64 values below in a big space, if you need more control on top values you need to move before automation the fader down? to middle? It’s no intuitive for new users coming from another software, in fact, fader automation for velocity control is not intuitive…
Maybe for me is a partial solution, downside on see the values is a important thing that delays any workflow, but is not the same reasons exposed before (volunteer and no consensous) polyphony is not a relevant desition because any software have the same problem, and in midi side this is the most important thing to add, most important than a clip method like Ableton or Bitwig for example.
I want to remind participants in this discussion that we strongly disapprove of the use of the term “intuitive” in this context. Saying “isn’t the same way that sofware X, Y and Z do it” is fine.
If you want to read more on why this is the case, please see: Reflections on "Intuitive"
Intuition is a well defined term, if you know or can do something without having learned it in a formal way but through previous experiences, it is intuition. All people that worked on midi velocity know in general terms how to edit without necessarily read a manual more than for very specific things. it is intuition too based in previous experiences.
Anyway, I believe in Ardour way to do many things is more efficient, and others than this no, how any software, but in this topic in particular every software I remember manage Velocity in a lane or in a special window for edit all midi. Maybe a more efficient way for edit midi parameters is possible, but the midi side in Ardour for this omission in specific is not the best yet and it’s delayed compared to other DAW.
Hi, intuition is not a «paranormal» word, is extensively used in psychology and antropology, the words I used is my own version but others use similar terms, for example:
If you perceives (unconciousness) that someone lies to you (and it’s true) is not for magic, is for your previous an unconciousness experience on patterns recognition like gestures, voice tone or speed, breath, etc. It’s intuition.
When this knowledge is formalized and theorized (by others or self) and aquired in a consciuos way is not intuitive, the language for native speakers is a intuitive thing mostly because we deduce meaning and proper grammar (my english is not the case ) and regular expressions of a particular social group.
Ardour is mostly intuitive because the things works like other daws, in others works slightly different and it’s normal, a fader that rescales velocity sound interesting but if you can’t see the new values, the proportional changes, or need to see a documentation for trivial things (edit velocity on a bunch of notes is trivial in midi) is not intuitive.
The function for aleathoric is cool, but insufficient, the same for the method used for UNFA for create a pseudo-curve, interesting, useful and funny, but insufficient.
I add to my comment, intuitive is not the same as good, Encore was intuitive at the time but it is not at all a comfortable way to edit a score. If you propose something totally new it is natural that it is not intuitive, but if it is well designed it will improve the user experience and allow better and more efficient workflows.
I would make an educated guess there are more Users (I am definitely one!) that would have gladly used a velocity lane feature for years already if it were implemented in an initial phase and simply handled notes and ramps on a horizontal selection basis . Indeed ‘chords’ would also be a terrific feature but for drum editing as a common popular example it is unnecessary and Users could easily modify single notes in chords one at a time in the meantime. Not doing it at all for all of these years because of a chord function that could be added as a logical future extension still seems kinda bizarre to me…
So? The problem remains:
…nobody has volunteered to implement it…
but for monophonic signals you can just ride the Fader.
And as previous experiences vary from one person to another then intuition and intuitive is not an absolute concept that can cover everyone’s needs and workflows.
Yes, is relative but not uncertain, in midi velocity we have a truth, every DAW can manage velocity for a group of notes drawing lines or curves, then intuition for new users on others daw search similar ways to edit them. I do not how a DJ works on a software like mixxx, but i know how midi works on orchestration, sampling and synths, in the same or very similar to every automation or MIDI CC Lane, then why we resist this way if we use this for all the other things?
In this point with the posibility on draw linear on a Lane (if this edit the values) I’m happy, and think all than works on midi too, in fact, is a longer wait feature (since v3!!!).
Hi, don’t know if it helps, but I was thinking about the possibility to edit MIDI regions with an external MIDI editor. I was using xjadeo to sync music and video with excelent result. Maybe it’s easier to implement a feature that allows to launch an external program to edit MIDI.