Step 1: create a new trackSolderman wrote:It would depend on one's work style, I think.Yoozer wrote:I quit after SX3 and jumped ship to Ableton. The amount of work you have to do to create a new track and get a softsynth going is ridiculous...
Step 2: open the VST devices menu
Step 3: add a VST device
Step 4: route track 1 MIDI to VST device
Step 5: route track 1 MIDI so that it listens to your controller keyboard.
Step x: god help you if you ever want to assign controllers and the softsynth doesn't have MIDI learn.
Drag a softsynth from the list of devices somewhere in the screen. Hit Ctrl+M, choose a parameter, move the knob, hit Ctrl+M again. Done.
It's the logical thing to do - sort of like Reason plugging the cables in the right order when you create a new instrument - when you pick a softsynth. Of course you want to use it on a track, otherwise you wouldn't have picked it. Of course it should use the default controller. Of course, MIDI out should be directly routed to the softsynth - why are those assumptions not made on beforehand? Why even hide a list of softsynths in a device panel at all, why (again) insist on a define-once-never-touch-again order of using them?
Step 1: open the FX window
Step 2: think really really hard on where you want to use it in the chain.
Step 2a: forget using more than 6 in a row, by the way.
Step 3: choose the effect
Step 4: save all your stuff if for whatever reason you have to move it, reopen it. Yes, I know that has been fixed with version 4, but:
Drag the effect to a spot anywhere in the chain (which was possible already in 1999 when it first came out).
Yes, there's the issue of keeping workflow as plain and same-as-previous-version as possible, but something as minor as making effects draggable does not break key combinations or workflows. Software does not adhere to physical reality, and even physical reality is more flexible - just change the cables in the patchbay. I do not have to screw open my rack and change the order of the effects in the real world - why force me to do the same in the software world?
AFAIK, yes. An analogy of that would be to use an instrument in a mono- or multitimbral fashion, but that's again a construct in the physical world where it was not economical to implement effects in a true multitimbral mode (exception being the Novations with 7 effects per track), and it was not economical to buy 2 of the same synths just so you didn't have to bounce each time.In Ableton, aren't you forced to keep all Midi events for one VSTI instance in one Midi track?
It's the same with sends and inserts - while sends have their use, the distinction blurs when you have an infinite supply of them and flexible routing.
Linear Time Base, Active MIDI Timing, whatever you want to call it to avoid USB's issues with timing. It's probably one of the only reasons I want to try Logic for.Also, what is special sauce, timing? Does it come with a sesame seed bun?