Now Kushview can respond to PC messages in your DAW and that will cause the appropriate graph to be loaded, which will point to the particular VePro instance you want. Inside Kushview you have 5 graphs, and each one has a single VePro Plugin, which is connected to its own devoted instance on VePro server. Ou could have those in one big graph or they could each have their own graph. (not in Vepro) Inside that plugin you have 5 instances of VePro plugin. Let's say you have Kushview sitting as a plugin in Your DAW. And then in the main DAW you are using you switch which VePro plugin instance depend on however you want to do it. You could use a separate VePro instance for each "specific" FX instance. So here's another possible way to work to consider. So I am not just using Reaktor FX is my main point here. Guitar Rig loaded within Elements fine and I have discovered it is a versatile multi FX processor that needn't just be used for guitar FX. Using Kushman Elements I began building a BiPhase preset list and was preparing to experiments to see if I could select those via VEP parameters while the plugin was inserted in an audio bus. In any case, I also placed Guitar Rig and Reflektor XT in two of the other loops as well as an Arturia replication of the classic Mutron Bi-Phase as that was an instrument I had years ago that I was fond of. Maybe that is a stretch and something best left for a Reaktor forum,, but you seem knowledgable in this topic. Because Reaktor has numerous FX to choose from and they all seem to use snapshots, I wonder if snapshots from a variety of FX can be placed in a folder and treated more or less like a bank, so that when a snapshot is called, it loads said FX instance. Selecting though parameter change may very well be the only way. I have yet to get into selecting snapshots via MIDI and I am not quite sure how that is done. ![]() I had previously set these up with fixed multiFX processors. Out of the 5 FX loops I have integrated in my rig, two are Reaktor based. He kind of does his demos in a weird way.īut seems to me you will get more mileage out of tweaking your reaktor setup to use parameter automation instead of midi Ask the author and tell him you need to test inside vepro. ![]() Then I occasionally had some weird GUI bugs, which I can’t remember now if they were specifically related to using vepro on a remote slave and ms remote desktop, but anyway I would not buy without a proper demo either. The main issue I have had with plogue bidule inside vepro is that the vst version sometimes crashes vepro, at least in the past. If not you can always put expert sleepers latency fixer on the same channel strip in vepro where bidule is, and manually report the latency that way which should solve that issue. It does have a lot of tools inside and probably there is a way to manually insert a module that will report the latency that needs to be reported to the host. It’s possible that plogue does not even automatically report the resulting latency of the graph to the host but I haven’t tested that Find out. Their excuse is that graphs are too complicated to figure it out automatically. This is both a benefit and a drawback: Mulch and Bidule both lack the kinds of MIDI sequencing abilities that your other preferred programs have, but this means that you can work more directly with sound and play with the considerable routing possibilities that BiduleMulch (to coin a term) has to offer.Plogue bidule does not do any automatic plugin delay compensation. The Mulch/Bidule double-whammy would be a very different kind of music-making than anything involving Logic, MainStage or Digital Performer. As far as I know, Mulch still lacks Rewire, so you can use Bidule and Mulch together by loading Bidule as a VST plugin within Mulch. ![]() ![]() There is a fair bit of overlap in functionality between Mulch and Bidule, but they really are pretty diverse in the range of things they can do. Bidule pros: very powerful (in many ways it rivals the power of sound 'programming languages' like Csound, Max/MSP and PD), but easier to use more MIDI capability than Mulchīidule cons: steep learning curve rough user interface not always the most stable (but most of the instability seems to come from third-party plugins)ĪudioMulch pro: easy and fun to use, fairly open-endedĪudioMulch cons: no way to save 'groups' of contraptions as you can do in Bidule, less of a 'programming language' and more of an audio patcher.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |