Old 02-05-2012, 04:20 PM   #41
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coises View Post
If there are any such effects on the send-MIDI-receive-Audio track, how could REAPER tell that there isn’t a “real” loop? How could it know that none of those effects will use the Audio received from the VSTi track to influence the MIDI sent to the VSTi track?
Reaper knows that simply because "Send to track xx" is set to "post-fader" by standard. MIDI will be sent from track A to the VSTi-track B before it gets to the fx on the MIDI-sending track A you described. Audio comes back from the VSTi-track B and may alter the MIDI-stream via fx on track A. But who cares, as MIDI from now on is sent from one fx to the next without getting into another track (like track B) and thus cannot feed back?

Maybe I misunderstood your post, had to read your idea three times at least to think to have understood it.

EDIT: I wanted to write "pre-fx", not "post-fader. Sorry ^^

Last edited by Reaktor:[Dave]; 02-08-2012 at 02:22 AM.
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 06:51 PM   #42
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaktor:[Dave] View Post
Reaper knows that simply because "Send to track xx" is set to "post-fader" by standard. MIDI will be sent from track A to the VSTi-track B before it gets to the fx on the MIDI-sending track A you described. Audio comes back from the VSTi-track B and may alter the MIDI-stream via fx on track A. But who cares, as MIDI from now on is sent from one fx to the next without getting into another track (like track B) and thus cannot feed back?
That is not actually true.

Consider this:

which is about how we think of the sort of routing discussed in this thread.

It doesn’t really work that way, though; it works like this:


You can test this with feedback routing allowed using a MIDI-only effect like ReaControlMIDI and an audio effect. Both effects work, and if the audio effect can learn MIDI controllers, they will work, too.

I’m confident that if the audio effect did affect the MIDI, such as by filtering out CCs linked to effect parameters, that would happen, too; but I didn’t yet find an effect like that to try. If I’m wrong, then my second diagram isn’t correct. If I’m right, then the latency of the audio effect — or the “MIDI latency,” if there is such a thing as distinct from the audio latency — would be part of the delay in getting the MIDI on the track to the VSTi; and it would add to the latency ordinarily allowed for the audio effect in computing the total latency between playing the MIDI on the track and getting audio out of the track, since that effect is being passed through twice: once as MIDI and once as audio.

How can REAPER know that the audio effect doesn’t modify the MIDI output in a way that depends on its audio input? I think that it cannot; but the more I contemplate it, I’m not even sure that is the predominant problem.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 08:24 AM   #43
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coises View Post
That is not actually true.
Yep, sorry. I didn't mean to send MIDI via "post-fader", your illustrations and descriptions are right for these scenarios.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coises View Post
How can REAPER know that the audio effect doesn’t modify the MIDI output in a way that depends on its audio input? I think that it cannot; but the more I contemplate it, I’m not even sure that is the predominant problem.
In my previous post I wanted to point out that the MIDI-sending track A should send MIDI-data "pre-fx" -> before MIDI get's into the fx-chain, it will be sent to track B. Thus, your audio effect on track A will alter the MIDI-data on track A after the data-stream is received on track B.

Last edited by Reaktor:[Dave]; 02-06-2012 at 08:33 AM. Reason: illustration added
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 12:34 PM   #44
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaktor:[Dave] View Post
In my previous post I wanted to point out that the MIDI-sending track A should send MIDI-data "pre-fx" -> before MIDI get's into the fx-chain, it will be sent to track B.
Understood.

The problems being that it doesn’t work that way, and we (or at least I) wouldn’t want it to — it should be possible to apply MIDI-to-MIDI effects in the “single instrument” channel.

I’m beginning to wonder if we’re all looking at this wrong. What is it we’re actually trying to accomplish in this scenario? We’re trying to use a single instance of a multi-timbral VSTi to drive the MIDI-to-Audio processes on several distinct tracks. All the routing is just a way to rig that.

I don’t have a “proposal” yet, but maybe thinking of it that way will lead to something less confusing. Something like a way to have an instance of an effect (the VSTi) that can be inserted in multiple tracks’ effect chains (with different pin out assignments in each) while remaining a single instance.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 01:02 PM   #45
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coises View Post
The problems being that it doesn’t work that way, and we (or at least I) wouldn’t want it to — it should be possible to apply MIDI-to-MIDI effects in the “single instrument” channel.
It is possible. It depends on what you activate here:

Pre-FX: MIDI is routed directly to track 1 before the fx-chain.
Post-FX: MIDI-to-MIDI effects can be applied on this track (2). MIDI data will be sent to destination after the fx chain.
With the MIDI sending track set to Pre-FX, I cannot think of any reasonable scenario raising feedback loops.

You're propably right, I guess we would care less about this topic if REAPER already gave us a pleasent solution for mixing multi-out VSTis.
Though, this matter is not really confusing to me. I got confused after routing all MIDI tracks to Kontakt, audio back to the MIDI tracks and then hearing nothing ...
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2012, 04:44 PM   #46
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,159
Default

Coises is right. I would certainly want to preserve the possibility to have MIDI FX on the way to the VSTi, and that means the MIDI send needs to be post FX for me.
gofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2012, 01:17 PM   #47
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

Then leave it that way. All I wanted to say is that there is no feedback loop when the sending track is set to pre-fx, even with midi-altering audio effects in the fx chain.

Additionaly, I see no problem in placing a midi-to-midi fx on the midi-receiving track right before the multi-out-VSTi ...
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2012, 02:47 PM   #48
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

Suppose we had a built-in SendReceive effect that could be inserted in an effects chain like any other effect.

The SendReceive effect would allow you to select a target track (to which to send and from which to receive), and it would have separate send and receive controls similar to those that currently exist for track sends and receives (MIDI none/all/channel to all/channel, Audio none/mono/stereo source to target with fader and pan).

Instead of the send being either pre-fx, post-fx or post-fader, it would always occur at the point in the fx chain where SendReceive was inserted. Likewise, the return would always occur just after the send (instead of pre-fx, which is where all returns go now). The return should still have a pre-fx/post-fx/post-fader selection, but this would relate to the target track. MIDI and audio pass-through should also be available and optional.

What I’m thinking is that this could easily be used to achieve exactly what we’re trying to accomplish—using a single instance of a multi-timbral VSTi as if it were several simple VSTi-s each on a single instrument track—without creating a feedback routing quandry. I suspect it would have other uses as well.

I still don’t know if it would solve the PDC problem, because I still don’t know what that actually entails; but perhaps this is an alternate solution that would be more practical to implement than “fixing” the feedback routing issue.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 03:02 AM   #49
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

A SendReceive fx would be a great workaround as it even adds an interesting new feature! Can this be done with JS? Would it take a lot of time?

EDIT: Look at this!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpunk_w View Post


MIDI and audio on the same track on a multiout VSTi
No feedback enabled
Why did no one told me of that plugin? It's quite what Coises suggested! Happy mixing now

Last edited by Reaktor:[Dave]; 02-08-2012 at 05:36 AM.
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 06:44 AM   #50
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

A terrible drawback is reamote won't load these specific JS plugins and if, reamote won't send audio back, who knows why.
Additionally, buffer errors can occur all the time, also during rendering!

FYI - this method needs 0.1% processor power per track.

All in all, a native solution still has to be done!

Last edited by Reaktor:[Dave]; 03-01-2012 at 11:34 AM.
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 01:55 PM   #51
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Why the hell did gpunk_w remove that GIF?


Where's that JS now? ...
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:24 AM   #52
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

They are based on LOSER's gmem send/receive plugins. It's very simple code, I modified it without ever having written program code. But if you just want to start, you can use my files:
https://stash.reaper.fm/manage_file/1...ltiVSTiOut.rar

They work fine, but this JS Plugin method is not without it's flaws ... read my post above!
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:53 AM   #53
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

I don't use ReaMote, so I'm good, I think.


Thanks!
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 11:19 AM   #54
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I don't use ReaMote, so I'm good, I think.
If that JS works the way I think it must, REAPER doesn’t even “know” that one track’s audio is being sent to another track... so I would think that delay compensation for any plug-ins in (logical) line with the gmemReceive could not be applied correctly. That other anomalies occur:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaktor:[Dave] View Post
A terrible drawback is reamote won't load these specific JS plugins and if, reamote won't send audio back, who knows why.
Additionally, buffer errors can occur all the time, also during rendering!
doesn’t surprise me.

There were two questions I asked in that other thread about this that were never answered; I’m still wondering:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coises View Post
Am I correct in guessing that the gmemSend/gmemReceive hack is just that — a hack — and that in a real project it’s more likely to cause trouble than just enabling feedback routing?

Does enabling feedback routing disable all PDC, or just PDC that’s “in” the feedback loop(s)?
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 11:46 AM   #55
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,332
Default

Well, as I don't use plugins that need a lot of PDC... I'm good.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:36 PM   #56
run, megalodon
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,860
Default

Welp, I just tried setting up a multi-out vst (shortcircuit) for composing for the first time, and I really don't like having to have separate midi and audio tracks, so I thought I'd bump this.

I'd love to be able to just set up 8 tracks for my 8 outs, and write a midi item and get the output on a single track. No clutter from double tracks, no hiding/unhiding two tracks at a time, no writing midi and mixing in two different places.
run, megalodon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2012, 06:15 AM   #57
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

I'd love to have a solution for that!
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2012, 10:42 AM   #58
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default Note to Cockosians: this is really a UI problem, not a processing problem

I keep thinking that the answer to this problem might lie in understanding the use case — many instruments that are logically individual to the user but are synthesized in common by a single VSTi. What we have is not really a processing problem (actual, intentional “feedback routing” is much less common) but a user interface problem.

Maybe there could be a solution like this:

Suppose there were a track option that caused Reaper internally to create two tracks — one for MIDI and one for audio — but to display them as a single track. MIDI send/receive would apply to the MIDI sub-track and audio send/receive to the audio sub-track. MIDI items in the track would go to the MIDI sub-track and audio items to the audio sub-track. Volume/pan controls and their envelopes would apply to the audio sub-track. Mute and solo would apply to both sub-tracks.

There would be two effects bins, so the user would be responsible for putting MIDI effects in the MIDI sub-track bin and audio effects in the audio sub-track bin. (If I recall correctly, there is a problem in attempting to “auto-detect” which are which that is inherent in the VST standard, so the simplest and safest would be to let the user work it out.) Automation envelopes for effects in both sub-tracks would be shown in the combined, visible track display.

Limitations would be the logical result of doing exactly what we are doing now: handling the MIDI in one track and the audio in another track. (For example, if an effect in the MIDI bin generated audio, that audio would be ignored.)

At least, this would replace an apparently tricky audio processing problem with a user interface problem... which is what this has always been, anyway. We can do what we need to do; it’s just visually and organizationally clumsy to do it without the ability to put one instrument on one track, even when many instruments are being synthesized by a single VSTi.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 04:18 AM   #59
Reaktor:[Dave]
Human being with feelings
 
Reaktor:[Dave]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 458
Default

Sounds like some kind of meta track, I like that idea! It should work like this in order to not break REAPER's No-Track-Types-Approach:
  1. Load up a multitimbral VSTi
  2. Create 16 MIDI ins and 16 audio outs
  3. Make the usual I/O settings
  4. Select the first MIDI track and it's corresponding output track
  5. run the action "create meta track from selected tracks"

In order to speed that up, there could be an option like "create multiple meta tracks" which opens a dialog asking of the number of tracks each meta track should consist of.

Though I really like that idea and think we should discuss it, there is (atm) another problem. As I pointed out in this thread http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=98478, the more channels a track has the higher is the CPU use (not FX CPU). In fact, CPU use is lower when using one kontakt instance per instrument, at least to me. I'm not sure if this is a bug and why it's happening, but I think it's woth to know.
Reaktor:[Dave] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 11:03 AM   #60
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

I was thinking more of a switch on the track labeled something like Process MIDI and audio independently. Turning it on would split the effects bin into two (one MIDI and one audio), but otherwise have minimal effect on the user interface.

By “internally... create two tracks” I meant that however Reaper’s internal timing and audio logic handles tracks, it would handle this as two separate processing tracks — thus avoiding all the problems associated with feedback routing — connected to a single user interface track. To the UI it would be one track with an option selected; to the processing internals it would be two tracks, hooked up to just one set of track UI elements (with the extra effects bin).

Whether that’s any easier that solving the feedback routing problem directly as a processing problem (in fact, whether it makes any sense at all) depends entirely on how Reaper’s internals are organized. Reaktor:[Dave]’s meta-track approach might be easier for the coders.

I doubt that we’re going to come up with the answer, because that does depend on Reaper’s internals; I’m just tossing out ideas that hopefully will ring a bell with someone at Cockos, because I think:

1. To a certain subset of Reaper users, this is not a minor detail, it’s a major inconvenience. It could even be a deal-breaker for someone who uses a full orchestra’s worth of MIDI parts in one project.

2. To folks not in that subset, it appears trivial... and I think the designers/programmers of Reaper must not be in that subset.

3. It’s easy to miss the crux of this complaint, because we stumble across it when we think we can set up the routing the way we want, then we discover we have to enable “feedback routing” to get it to work, and that breaks plug-in delay compensation. That makes it seem like the problem is with feedback routing and PDC, but we don’t really care about that. It’s a user interface issue. It is, ironically, Reaper’s routing flexibility and absence of track types that make it look like something deeper than that.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2012, 11:07 AM   #61
Coises
Human being with feelings
 
Coises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaktor:[Dave] View Post
In fact, CPU use is lower when using one kontakt instance per instrument, at least to me.
That is one way to solve the problem.
Coises is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2012, 07:10 AM   #62
Dan-Jay
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 60
Default

That's why Reaper should have Instrument Tracks. PT/LOGIC/STUDIO 1/CUBASE have these.

What I do in PT - Open an instance of Kontakt on 1 instrument track, then depending on how many instruments I'm using, say 8, I then create 8 instrument tracks and route them properly and that's all I have to do. I can get audio and midi on the same track without any clutter.

It's very annoying. If there wasn't feedback routing in Reaper, then if you wanted to load 8 instruments in one instance of Kontakt, then that equals 16 tracks. Totally annoying, especially for big templates.
Dan-Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2013, 02:48 AM   #63
matthias.matthias
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 169
Default Still waiting for a better handling of multi-out vstis ...

I've been asking for the separation of audio and midi feedback routing for a long time now. In fact the lack of it was one of the things that made me switch to use mostly Pro Tools in the last year or so. Still, I love so much about Reaper, that I keep coming back to it.

Since I also own VE Pro 5, I thought I had found a workaround, but it's not working. Does anyone have ideas on why?
See my post here: http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php...04&postcount=8

Thank you for any comments or ideas.
matthias.matthias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2013, 02:44 AM   #64
matthias.matthias
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 169
Default

I thought this was old news, but anyway. This is exactly what I would like to see working in Reaper:
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...nt-tracks.html

P.S.: Any ideas on my previous post?
matthias.matthias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 05:45 AM   #65
matthias.matthias
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 169
Default

Anyone with new ideas? Thanks.
matthias.matthias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2014, 11:15 PM   #66
alindsay55661
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 23
Default

Bump... +1 for the ability to send midi and receive audio on the same track. My template has over 30 instruments, unmanageable in Reaper when the midi is separated from the audio.

I really love Reaper, but unfortunately it is unsuitable for professional orchestral music. Can't wait until a solution for this exists so I can use it more often!
alindsay55661 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2014, 01:54 AM   #67
matthias.matthias
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alindsay55661 View Post
I really love Reaper, but unfortunately it is unsuitable for professional orchestral music. Can't wait until a solution for this exists so I can use it more often!
I so second that. I'm back on reaper for the moment after being on Pro Tools for the last year or two, because Reaper is so much more efficient on a laptop (and does not need a dongle).

But working with kontakt in Pro Tools is so much easier: 1 instance of kontakt, 16 Instrument channels, each containing midi and audio and automation. The screen clutter in Reaper is so annoying, but I can't hide the audio tracks since they have automation data on them.

I"m still hoping... What makes this so hard to implement?
matthias.matthias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 03:05 AM   #68
Goldberg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 13
Default

Guys we really need this feature!

Reaper is perfect for big orchestral templates(performance with many vst is astonishing) for everything EXCEPT for this feature!

and this really breaks it for me....
Goldberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2014, 08:16 PM   #69
Nightowl4272
Human being with feelings
 
Nightowl4272's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 31
Default Don't forget to vote... ;-)

There's a link to request this feature at the very beginning of this thread. Just a heads up to anyone who stumbles into the middle of this thread from a search without reading from the top like I did.

Coming from Sonar where using a multitimbral VSTi also meant having separate tracks for MIDI and Audio cluttering up everything, I too would love to see this feature added. So......bump.

edit: Oh...and if this feature has already been added and I just haven't figured it out yet due to user error. My apologies, please disregard.
Nightowl4272 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 02:49 AM   #70
michail03
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 23
Default

bumpp
michail03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2019, 03:23 PM   #71
Audio_Birdi
Human being with feelings
 
Audio_Birdi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 48
Default Possible feature for REAPER 6.0?

This particular FR would be amazing to implement into the next full version of REAPER! As it would make working with Kontakt / Play a heck of a lot easier and more are using huge templates inside the DAW nowadays too! Eliminating the need for having duplicate MIDI and Audio tracks entirely!

+1 from me!
Audio_Birdi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2019, 04:42 PM   #72
YuriOl
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: lugansk
Posts: 16
Default

+1000!!!
YuriOl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2019, 09:33 AM   #73
Nightowl4272
Human being with feelings
 
Nightowl4272's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 31
Default

Just did a project with Multitimbral instances of Kontakt and Omnisphere...a mess of redundant MIDI tracks. I would love for this FR to be implemented.
Nightowl4272 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.