Possible bug, but need some testing

Harbinger · September 15, 2009, 19:32:52

After much testing, i have discovered the following (for formats that can apply VSTs to instruments), with a possible bug:
1. When a note with a VST-attached instrument is called in a channel with a VST assignment, the Instrument VST OVERRIDES the Channel VST, so that 2 VSTs are never applied to one channel. My tests have verified that the Channel VST receives no audio signal. Bug or limitation?
2. However, when using macros in the same situation, the SFx assignments and its succeeding Zxx commands assign themselves to the CHANNEL VST, and never the instrument VST, whether or not a note was called in the channel with an instrument designation. I was under the impression that if a macro was called WITHOUT an instrument, it was applied to the channel VST, and WITH an instrument would be applied to the INSTRUMENT VST.

So in other words, when different VSTs are applied to both an instrument and the channel, and the instrument is played within the channel, the AUDIO comes from the INSTRUMENT, but macro control is applied to the CHANNEL.

I request that others test it themselves so that we can determine if it's in fact NOT a bug, or if something else needs to be done for proper macro assignment, or if the VSTs have something to do with the macro assignment (for my test i used the MDE-X VST FX against the GTG-44 VSTi, in various configurations within the channel slot and the instrument slot). Or if i've completely lost my mind!

If this is found to be a bug, i'll transfer to the proper section. For now, it's possible there may a variety of limitations affecting this behavior (which may mean it's not necessarily a bug but an "anomaly")... :wink:

Saga Musix · September 15, 2009, 19:46:35

Quote1. When a note with a VST-attached instrument is called in a channel with a VST assignment, the Instrument VST OVERRIDES the Channel VST, so that 2 VSTs are never applied to one channel. My tests have verified that the Channel VST receives no audio signal. Bug or limitation?

Does the Instrument VSTi output its signal to the channel VST? If it's not set up to do so, it will output to the master output. Also, note that the VSTi has to have a lower FX number than the channel FX.

LPChip · September 15, 2009, 19:57:12

I remember having a chat with Rewbs. Its a limitation that you cannot have a VST(i) assigned to both an instrument and a channel at the same time.

Harbinger · September 15, 2009, 20:07:40

Quote from: "Jojo"Does the Instrument VSTi output its signal to the channel VST? If it's not set up to do so, it will output to the master output. Also, note that the VSTi has to have a lower FX number than the channel FX.

No, the VSTs are not chained, and for the purposes of this test, was not intended to be. But i did confirm the Channel VST does not "hear" the Instrument VST (MDE-X has an audio signal indicator to monitor signal coming into the VST). Also, i tested in various configurations, and the slot number of the VST had no bearing on the output. Nor did it matter whether the Channel VST or the Instrument VST was a VST FX or a VSTi. The same held true for all situations as far as I could tell...

The Channel vs. Instrument VST limitation is tolerable, in that only one or the other can output, but it seems the use of macros in its current state is illogical.....

g · September 16, 2009, 16:02:00

Quote from: "Harbinger"The Channel vs. Instrument VST limitation is tolerable, in that only one or the other can output, but it seems the use of macros in its current state is illogical.....

I agree it's not the most logical thing ever, my solution would be to ditch the support for adding plugins to channels completely as it only confuses things.

Harbinger · September 22, 2009, 19:34:59

Oh i disagree completely. VST channel assignments streamline a process, and enable a VST to "sit" in a channel, waiting for any instrument that uses it. I can put a Delay in a channel and call notes with various instruments into the channel to apply the Delay; this saves me from having to route the instrument to the VST and apply Wet/Dry settings. Believe me -- this little feature is worth having in one's tracking repertoire. :wink:

It looks as though the one-VST-per-channel is a time-honored limitation. The fact that macros control the wrong VST is perhaps a bug. I will write this up later in the Bug section, so the devs can look at it more closely at a more convenient time.

Thanks for those who helped.

g · September 23, 2009, 16:44:56

Quote from: "Harbinger"Oh i disagree completely. VST channel assignments streamline a process, and enable a VST to "sit" in a channel, waiting for any instrument that uses it. I can put a Delay in a channel and call notes with various instruments into the channel to apply the Delay; this saves me from having to route the instrument to the VST and apply Wet/Dry settings. Believe me -- this little feature is worth having in one's tracking repertoire. :wink:

I prefer just cloning the instrument and a VST to the clone. I agree sometimes just adding a VST to a channel is easier, but also less control. If I want to have a little less delay (as in your example) on a particular instrument then I can just make a new instance of the VST and change the assignment on the instrument instead of having to fiddle with macros or moving an instrument to another channel.

OT: My vision of MPTM (or MPT2 or why not my own tracker) involves ditching any channel specific settings and making the mixer instrument based. It made a lot of sense with sample based music, but now when we (some of us) mainly use VSTi it's not as useful any more.

Quote from: "Harbinger"It looks as though the one-VST-per-channel is a time-honored limitation.

I'm not sure what you mean, but you can definitely chain VSTs assigned to channels.