# Studio One 5.1 - features for large orchestral templates



## Lukas (Oct 21, 2020)

Thanks to the new 5.1 update we finally have decent visibility management in Studio One for easier navigation in a larger template.

I did a video that shows my personal TOP 5 features. I apologize for my English - nobody will miss that it's not my first language 




Before 5.1 I made some scripts for myself that cover similar functions (Only Show Tracks with Events, Filter Tracks, Search Tracks) that worked quite well (although not quite as fast as the 5.1 features) but I'm really happy that PSL now added them natively. The great thing (in my opinion) is that all commands are available as commands so we can assign key commands to them and these can be used in macros.

Because I got so many requests to publish my Orchestral Template Toolbar, I made a second video to showcase the macros in my template (420 tracks).




It's no magic, it's just macros I built for myself to filter different instrument sections or sample libraries and navigate through my template (when folders like STRINGS, BRASS etc. are used). Pretty easy to create them with the new macro commands. I uploaded 4 macros ("Show Tracks with Events" and 3 "Navigate" macros) that can be duplicated to create own ones. But for everyone who does not want to do the work to add the buttons for every sample library, you can get them for the value of a coffee (because it took me some hours to figure out the best search strings for the > 100 library names). (If it's not allowed to post the link, let me know and I remove it.)









Studio One Orchestral Template Toolbar


A custom macro toolbar page for working with large library templates in Studio One 5 New (March 13, 2021): This macro toolbar has been updated to version 1.1 with new features and improvements. It also uses new functions in Studio One 5.2. See below ...




payhip.com





The 4 macros can be downloaded by clicking the "preview" link in the top right corner.






Maybe it's helpful for some. There are a couple of different ways to do this... for example, if you don't use folders and want to filter or search the tracks anyway, you could search strings like "Violin", "Viola", "Cello" etc. instead of "Strings". These would find tracks like "Areia Violins Pizz" too although they are not in a STRINGS folder. Maybe this approach doesn't work as reliable as the folder solution (unless you have one common thing like "Perc" or "Pandora" or "True Strike" to get your percussion tracks, for example).

Did someone already check out the new features? Do you use the "Find Track" / "Find Channel" function? And are there commands you miss (for example I miss "Show Tracks with Selected Events" or a native version of my "Show Tracks with Events" macro)?

Cheers, Lukas


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Oct 21, 2020)

Great tutorials! I noticed you use CSS - how do you deal with the advanced legato delay? Do you play ahead of the beat or do you manually shift each note depending on the velocity after the fact?


----------



## Lukas (Oct 21, 2020)

Thanks 

CSS ... the old legato delay problem. To be honest, I tend not to overthink this. Maybe it's because I'm a jazz musician and I'm used to adapting my playing to the sound (a church organ has a certain latency, a fender rhodes has a slight latency and a piano has very little latency  ). And as I usually record passages in real time I get used to the different delays depending on the velocity. And if the timing of a phrase is not as I would like it, I nudge it... but usually I do this by ear and not by recalling numbers.

I think that legato is generally more tolerant than short articulations (staccato, spiccato, pizzicato). When I record or program staccato or spiccato ostinato lines, I quantize them hard. For short notes I like to have it on the grid and I use track delay for that (which is finally working great in S1 since 5.0.1). But when it comes to legato... I think people make it more difficult than it needs to be. I record my melody, listen to it, edit it if necessary and that's it.

That's why I don't use any of the (very sophisticated) Kontakt multi scripts. I made a "Nudge by ms" / "Nude back by ms" script exactly for this so that I can nudge the notes in 1 ms or 10 ms steps depending on the macro... but I never really use it.

But course that's only my opinion and how I work... I understand everybody who wants an exact solution and I would prefer if CSS would get an update with the option to have the same delay for all legato modes.

Okay... very long answer  TL;DR: I play ahead of the beat.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 27, 2020)

I've deployed the first update of the Orchestral Template Toolbar 

Here is what I've added:

- "Show selected Tracks" button
- New macro / menu item for filtering libraries by "Native Instruments" (will filter all essential KOMPLETE libraries that are interesting for scoring... NOIRE, Una Corda, Grandeur, Maverick, The Giant, The Gentleman, Alicia's Keys etc.)
- New macro / menu item for filtering libraries by "Audiobro" (LASS, Genesis etc.)






https://payhip.com/b/0OeW

Hopefully PreSonus will add more filter commands in the future so these can be used in the Toolbar as well. I personally still miss a "Show Tracks with Selected Events" command.


----------



## samphony (Oct 27, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Hopefully PreSonus will add more filter commands in the future so these can be used in the Toolbar as well. I personally still miss a "Show Tracks with Selected Events" command.


Me too!!!


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 2, 2020)

I tried once to make a big template with more than 300 instruments. But then, even if I disabled the instruments, the CPU load was realy high - around 90% - no way to start composing at all. My PC is not the oldest and I have a lot of RAM.

It surprises me that it works on your PC. How is your CPU load, Lukas?


----------



## Lukas (Nov 2, 2020)

That sounds like something is seriously wrong. The template in the video above has about 350 tracks... but most of the tracks are disabled so these instruments aren't loaded into memory at all so they shouldn't consume any CPU. My CPU load is pretty low - I will take a look at the exact value tomorrow.

Two questions: What is your buffer size? And do you use the Studio One Dropout Protection (Dual Latency Engine)?


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

When had this template problem I tried different settings - but I can't remember well which exactly.

Currently I use these settings:










But what is your experience regarding that?

And yes, disabled instruments should not take any load at all - that is what confused me.

Now I simply cloned 300 tracks of disabled Novo and see a load of 11% CPU. Even that is a bit strange to me as they are disabled. I am not sure if it was maybe more a problem with filters or something around.

And now, for the quick test, I did not use any folders.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

A question regarding your large template. You sorted it in categories like "Brass", "Strings" etc. How do you manage frequencies then?

So far I always make template like "Bass", "Lead", "Strings/Low", "Strings/Low-Mid" etc. And then I forward the whole group to a Bus cutting e.g. high frequencies a bit from Bass/Low instruments. The idea is to have less work at the end.

Do I see it right in your video, that It will only work if I use groups like "Woodwinds", "Brass", "Strings" - independend the frequency? Or what would happen if I add subfolders like "Strings/Low"?


----------



## ProfoundSilence (Nov 3, 2020)

This is cool, along the lines of @storyteller 's OTR


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> But what is your experience regarding that?
> 
> And yes, disabled instruments should not take any load at all - that is what confused me.
> 
> Now I simply cloned 300 tracks of disabled Novo and see a load of 11% CPU. Even that is a bit strange to me as they are disabled. I am not sure if it was maybe more a problem with filters or something around.


I hardly look at the exact CPU load... unless I don't get dropouts or glitches, everything is fine. The thing with these meters is that this value is not very meaningful. It's only a very rough indicator that shows how likely it is to get dropouts. See it more as a dropout probability. I just loaded my template: With 26 enabled instances of Kontakt it shows a load of 9%. When I deactivate all Kontakt instance except one, it's still 9%. When I activate this instance too, it goes to 3%. That's interesting.

Your Dropout Protection is set to Medium (BTW: these values are just aliases for actual buffer sizes). What happens if you set it to Maximum? I usually set it to Minimum as long as everything works smoothly... When I get dropouts because of too many instruments / effects in the song, I set it to Maximum 

You mentioned a CPU load of 90%. In the Performance Monitor you can enable "Show Devices". Now you see more detailled which plug-ins cause this CPU load. Could you check that?


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> So far I always make template like "Bass", "Lead", "Strings/Low", "Strings/Low-Mid" etc. And then I forward the whole group to a Bus cutting e.g. high frequencies a bit from Bass/Low instruments. The idea is to have less work at the end.
> 
> Do I see it right in your video, that It will only work if I use groups like "Woodwinds", "Brass", "Strings" - independend the frequency? Or what would happen if I add subfolders like "Strings/Low"?


The buttons in my template are just examples with pre-defined names. If you have a "Strings/Low-Mid" folder, just right-click the button and edit the macro (change "Strings" -> "Strings/Low-Mid"). You can duplicate and customize the buttons / macros as you like...

I just saw someone on Facebook who loaded my toolbar and built his own buttons with his own icons... that was exactly my idea: You can load the template toolbar and use it as it is. But as everyone has his own workflow, it's much more interesting to load it and change it to your liking


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

Ah ok. I will give it a try. And great this payhip solution for such things. Before I always assumed an own shop is required to sell something.

Now I loaded the large template again with Studio One 5 and it does not looks so hard anymore (Studio one 4 before). Not I got a load of ca 15%.

But a stupid thing regarding those large templates is; load/save takes a lot of time, even the instruments are disabled. I am still not sure what a good workflow is regarding large-orchestral setups.

Did some experiements with macros to delete unused tracks, but was not successful. Maybe that will work easier with your macro if there is a way to show tracks without enabled instrument or without content.


----------



## ennbr (Nov 3, 2020)

I was seeing about a 12-15% load when using a 600+ track template even with all the tracks disabled. I've since changed from a Track template to a Template in the Files section of Studio One using music loops. Works just as well speed wise as enabling a track in my old template now I just drag and drop the instrument onto an empty track and start writing.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

Oh that is a great idea! I did not know about that feature. Just tried it. Ok, you need a second step, to insert an empty track before as inserting to a folder or so does not work. But the possibility of a preview is a great benefit - just a pitty that autoplay in browse window does not work.

Do you have a way (macro?) to make those exports to musicloops easier?


----------



## matthieuL (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> But a stupid thing regarding those large templates is; load/save takes a lot of time, even the instruments are disabled. I am still not sure what a good workflow is regarding large-orchestral setups.


Hasn't the 5 release a new feature to only save data and not all the instruments stuff ?
I have not S1 (yet), but it seems a real game changer !


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> Ah ok. I will give it a try. And great this payhip solution for such things. Before I always assumed an own shop is required to sell something.


It's kind of a shop... well, a very basic shop... but it's very modular but very easy to setup. I love it 



AndreasHe said:


> But a stupid thing regarding those large templates is; load/save takes a lot of time, even the instruments are disabled. I am still not sure what a good workflow is regarding large-orchestral setups.


Did you try to enable Options -> Locations -> User Data -> "Use cached plug-in data on save"? This should speed up saving a lot.



AndreasHe said:


> Did some experiements with macros to delete unused tracks, but was not successful.


What does that mean? You can simply create a button and assign "Hide unused tracks". Or assign it to a key command. As long as you only need that command alone, you don't need to create a macro.



AndreasHe said:


> Oh that is a great idea! I did not know about that feature. Just tried it. Ok, you need a second step, to insert an empty track before as inserting to a folder or so does not work. But the possibility of a preview is a great benefit - just a pitty that autoplay in browse window does not work.


It should work. You can drag a musicloop between two tracks. You can drag them before or after folders. Works here.



AndreasHe said:


> Do you have a way (macro?) to make those exports to musicloops easier?


How could it be easier? You simply drag an instrument part from your song to the files tab of your browser. That's all!?  It will save the note / part automation data, the instrument, insert fx and a FLAC file so you can preview the phrase before loading it into the song.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

matthieuL said:


> Hasn't the 5 release a new feature to only save data and not all the instruments stuff ?
> I have not S1 (yet), but it seems a real game changer !



It seems to be a bit faster. But to save the empty project takes already 20-30 seconds.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Did you try to enable Options -> Locations -> User Data -> "Use cached plug-in data on save"? This should speed up saving a lot.



Tried now with it enabled, but it does not change anything for saving time for an empty template.




Lukas said:


> What does that mean? You can simply create a button and assign "Hide unused tracks". Or assign it to a key command. As long as you only need that command alone, you don't need to create a macro.



Thought about a quick way to remove all unused tracks to keep the project small and also quicker load/save.



Lukas said:


> It should work. You can drag a musicloop between two tracks. You can drag them before or after folders. Works here.



Hmm, does not work for me. The mouse shows a symbol that I can not drop it.



Lukas said:


> How could it be easier? You simply drag an instrument part from your song to the files tab of your browser. That's all!?  It will save the note / part automation data, the instrument, insert fx and a FLAC file so you can preview the phrase before loading it into the song.



To have a useful preview it should have a some notes in. Those you need to create first. If you copy them from a different track, the new part has the same name as the origin and the exported file takes the event name. Better would be to take the track-name, which is more the instrument name.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> Tried now with it enabled, but it does not change anything for saving time for an empty template.


You have to try more than one time - for the case you didn't. The cache has to be created first.



AndreasHe said:


> Thought about a quick way to remove all unused tracks to keep the project small and also quicker load/save.


That's exactly what "Hide empty tracks" does.



AndreasHe said:


> Hmm, does not work for me. The mouse shows a symbol that I can not drop it.


Did you do anything differently?








AndreasHe said:


> To have a useful preview it should have a some notes in. Those you need to create first. If you copy them from a different track, the new part has the same name as the origin and the exported file takes the event name. Better would be to take the track-name, which is more the instrument name.


Well. I don't see the problem, to be honest. Double-click the track name and press Shift+Enter to rename all events on this track.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> You have to try more than one time - for the case you didn't. The cache has to be created first.



Tried it, but it still takes the same time.



Lukas said:


> That's exactly what "Hide empty tracks" does.



But they will be still part of the project and needs to be saved.




Lukas said:


> Did you do anything differently?



Oh, thanks for the video (which tool can do such?). Yes you are right. I tried to insert it between the instruments.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> But they will be still part of the project and needs to be saved.


Of course they are 



AndreasHe said:


> Oh, thanks for the video (which tool can do such?). Yes you are right. I tried to insert it between the instruments.


I use ScreenToGif (for Windows).


----------



## ennbr (Nov 3, 2020)

I noticed in the animated GIF there was data in the musicloop. I just create a 3 bar empty midi track and then drag the empty midi track to the files area


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

If you don't need note data, what's the point of creating a musicloop? If you just want to save an instrument preset, why not just save a preset or Instrument+FX preset (the latter also saves channelstrip parameters and the current keyswitch preset).

Of course both works


----------



## ennbr (Nov 3, 2020)

I use the musicloop as a replacement for my template a way to see all of my audio instruments in an organized list grouped in directories.

EDIT: I also find it faster to convert an existing template into a musicloop than saving as presets

yes they both work


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

I got that. I was only wondering why you use musicloops instead of presets which give you the same functionality.


----------



## ennbr (Nov 3, 2020)

I find it faster to convert an existing template into a musicloop than saving as presets. Example I add the 3 bar empty midi region to each instrument/midi track then highlight the group and just drag them into a previously created directory in the Files area. The only thing I'm finding missing is the delay comp setting is not saved.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

...because it is a musicloop. It makes no sense to save and recall a track delay parameter in a musicloop.


----------



## ennbr (Nov 3, 2020)

Not complaining just commenting that it was the only thing not saved so if someone used a musicloop to not expect the delay comp would not be there


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

It might be a good idea to save the track delay with a Instrument+FX preset. I'll set that on my list.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 3, 2020)

Bought your macro, thanks and for the fair price option. It will be very helpful!


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> Bought your macro, thanks and for the fair price option. It will be very helpful!


Thanks Andreas  Let me know how the toolbar works for you!


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Thanks to the new 5.1 update we finally have decent visibility management in Studio One for easier navigation in a larger template.
> 
> I did a video that shows my personal TOP 5 features. I apologize for my English - nobody will miss that it's not my first language
> 
> ...


I'm almost sorry I ditched Studio One but v4 was not great for the Orchestral world. But your tutorial has me thinking what I could do in script-strapped Cubase (I can't say that ONCE let alone three times real fast, lol).

BTW, your English is better than most people I know.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 3, 2020)

Haha, thank you  Fine for me... as long as it helps to get new ideas.



PaulieDC said:


> I'm almost sorry I ditched Studio One but v4 was not great for the Orchestral world.


Well... I'm using it since 2013 for orchestral things... and I would agree that it was VERY limited back then. Now, 7 years later, it's great to see more and more composers / scoring people working with Studio One. It's obvious that here and there are still missing features for some. For my work (composing, arranging, MIDI editing, and recording piano / synth parts) it's perfect.

I think it's great that there are so many DAWs so everybody can choose the one he/she likes best


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Haha, thank you  Fine for me... as long as it helps to get new ideas.
> 
> 
> Well... I'm using it since 2013 for orchestral things... and I would agree that it was VERY limited back then. Now, 7 years later, it's great to see more and more composers / scoring people working with Studio One. It's obvious that here and there are still missing features for some. For my work (composing, arranging, MIDI editing, and recording piano / synth parts) it's perfect.
> ...


Yeah, mine was a specific-to-me issue. I upgraded to an i9 processor in 2018 which is Xeon-based, and multicore support on Xeon processors wasn't great, even after they released a fix that worked for i7's. The audio crackling was pretty bad and nothing worked. I still had the first core maxing out before the next would be used. ALSO, Notion was TOTALLY not compatible, would not run at all on i9's. I waited a YEAR, still no fix. Since there was no basic score editor you HAD to use the Notion integration. They recently fixed it I think, two years later. So I had no choice. I loved Studio One, and was bummed I had to switch. I still use it at church but for home I'm all-Steinberg now. But WOW, do I miss some of the features in the Studio One UI. Especially things like Alt-dragging a Reverb onto the grid and BAM, your Reverb Send is ready to go and so easy to turn up the level from any number of tracks simultaneously. Cubase 10 just started getting features I was used to but for some reason in Cubase it feels like you are carrying 50 lbs under your arm when you go to do the same things as you would have in Studio One.

OKAY, enough off-topic chatter! For Studio One users that setup you posted looks awesome.


----------



## THW (Nov 7, 2020)

Is there a way to save template without any audio/midi content? For example, if I record some ideas I'd like to save, then decide I'd like to update the existing template with some edits, can I do that? Currently I'm "saving as", deleting midi, then saving the updated template. Not a big deal, but wondering if there might be another way to do this.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 7, 2020)

THW said:


> Is there a way to save template without any audio/midi content? For example, if I record some ideas I'd like to save, then decide I'd like to update the existing template with some edits, can I do that? Currently I'm "saving as", deleting midi, then saving the updated template. Not a big deal, but wondering if there might be another way to do this.



I never saw something like that. If you make a feature request, I will support it. A simple checkbox to skip events and automation could be fine.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 8, 2020)

THW said:


> Is there a way to save template without any audio/midi content? For example, if I record some ideas I'd like to save, then decide I'd like to update the existing template with some edits, can I do that? Currently I'm "saving as", deleting midi, then saving the updated template. Not a big deal, but wondering if there might be another way to do this.


You could make a "Remove Events and Save" macro. You still need to save and overwrite your current template so it's still not automatic... but maybe it's better than nothing...


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 8, 2020)

Its not only events, also chord progression, arranger etc. "save" is not the right thing to update the template.


----------



## THW (Nov 8, 2020)

Lukas said:


> You could make a "Remove Events and Save" macro. You still need to save and overwrite your current template so it's still not automatic... but maybe it's better than nothing...


Thanks, Lukas. That's an interesting idea -- I'll give it a try. I plan to make a feature request, I'd like to see if there is interest in this. To @AndreaHe point, I didn't consider things like chord progression, arranger, etc.


----------



## pinki (Nov 9, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Haha, thank you  Fine for me... as long as it helps to get new ideas.
> 
> 
> Well... I'm using it since 2013 for orchestral things... and I would agree that it was VERY limited back then. Now, 7 years later, it's great to see more and more composers / scoring people working with Studio One. It's obvious that here and there are still missing features for some. For my work (composing, arranging, MIDI editing, and recording piano / synth parts) it's perfect.
> ...



I am coming over to Studio One now they have an integrated score editor. I’ve been on DP for a long time but it’s become increasingly frustrating these last two years. It used to be as solid as a rock but now it just has too many problems.
So Ive spent the last week immersed in Studio One and Ive ordered a Faderport 8. I guess Im committing!

Im also a longtime Notion user and always loved the simple workflow in comparison to every other notation app. And Notion ios is amazing. I can now scribble with my finger on my ipad and have that scribble in Studio One in seconds. Impressed so far.


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 10, 2020)

pinki said:


> I’ve been on DP for a long time but it’s become increasingly frustrating these last two years.



What stands DP for?


----------



## pinki (Nov 10, 2020)

Digital Performer..
Well that says it all!


----------



## stigc56 (Nov 23, 2020)

Well... I'm using it since 2013 for orchestral things... and I would agree that it was VERY limited back then. Now said:


> It seems that you are the "go to man" regarding Studio One here at VI-Control. I like to ask you how you deal with the rather big number of libraries that need more than one key to switch articulations? Almost all of VSL, that I use very much, will need maybe 2 keys and a CC.
> As I understand it, until now S1 only supports 1 key to send to the VI right?
> If so, have you any idea when this could be improved?


----------



## Lukas (Nov 23, 2020)

> I like to ask you how you deal with the rather big number of libraries that need more than one key to switch articulations? Almost all of VSL, that I use very much, will need maybe 2 keys and a CC.
> As I understand it, until now S1 only supports 1 key to send to the VI right?


To be honest, I only have only one library that needs 2 keyswitches (+ CC) in order to change the articulation and that is the Big Bang free patch by VSL. I personally think that was a very bad idea to use more than one keyswitches... it's quite confusing and even worse that this can't be changed for each patch to have one unique keyswitch for each combination. That was no problem in Vienna Instruments so I could easily setup my keyswitches and add them in the Studio One keyswitch editor and this works perfectly. Same with SINE Player and all OT libraries I have as well as all KONTAKT or ENGINE libraries... most of them work fine with keyswitches (okay, some rely on momentary keyswitches - that's another topic).

I personally think that it's rather VSL that should make their instruments more flexible and add an option to adjust the keyswitches .... than PreSonus needing to implement a way to send multiple notes just because one sample developer insists in this approach. (Or am I missing other developers that use the same technique?)



> If so, have you any idea when this could be improved?


I only can tell that there's more to come in terms of keyswitches and articulations but that's obvious  But I'm not sure if sending multiple notes is one thing that most people need most currently.


----------



## pinki (Nov 23, 2020)

Synchron Player is highly flexible with articulations in other ways though, for example allowing programme change, which is really useful in DP. 
It's a real drag to discover only one key switch at a time is allowed in Studio One. Hopefully this will be addressed soon.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 23, 2020)

pinki said:


> Synchron Player is highly flexible with articulations in other ways though


But not in this way 



pinki said:


> It's a real drag to discover only one key switch at a time is allowed in Studio One.


It's a drag that Synchron Player does not allow unique keyswitches


----------



## stigc56 (Nov 23, 2020)

Well I think it would be a major draw back for Studio One if the implementation of KS doesn't improve. If Presonus want's to attract people with really big templates and with complex instruments as Vienna Synchron Strings + all the synchronised versions of their older libraries, which still is among the very best there is, they have to do better. Especially if new customers in this "class" comes from Cubase or Logic.


----------



## pinki (Nov 23, 2020)

Lukas said:


> But not in this way
> 
> 
> It's a drag that Synchron Player does not allow unique keyswitches




Not really. Synchron Player is fast becoming the industry standard (everybody loves it!) so it really becomes a Studio One problem if they want to entice people from the more “serious” compositional world.


----------



## MarcusD (Nov 23, 2020)

Great video Lukas! Here's some Free icons for anyone who needs them for tool bars


----------



## maestro2be (Nov 23, 2020)

@Lukas Apologies but I am having a really hard time finding where you posted the macros you were doing. Can you please remind me where I can find where these are or how to get them and where you demonstration video has been buried?

Thanks!


----------



## Lukas (Nov 23, 2020)

@maestro2beHere is the demo video:



And here's the page to get them:









Studio One Orchestral Template Toolbar


A custom macro toolbar page for working with large library templates in Studio One 5 New (March 13, 2021): This macro toolbar has been updated to version 1.1 with new features and improvements. It also uses new functions in Studio One 5.2. See below ...




payhip.com





As said below, nobody needs to buy the whole macro page, it's not difficult to create these macros yourself. It just takes some time. That's why I finally decided to share it for a small donation. But to everyone who made a donation - thanks for your support and I really hope you enjoy using the toolbar and/or get some inspiration from these examples!

I'm already thinking about a little upgrade with even more macros.



pinki said:


> Not really. Synchron Player is fast becoming the industry standard (everybody loves it!) so it really becomes a Studio One problem if they want to entice people from the more “serious” compositional world.


Well, of course they want to provide as many great and useful features as possible for everyone so of course I'm happy about every improvement (I want to use Synchron Player too  ). But already in the previous versions without any keyswitches or dedicated scoring features at all Studio didn't have a problem. It depends on the point of view.


----------



## maestro2be (Nov 23, 2020)

Thanks Lukas, just purchased. Well worth your effort. Installation was a breeze. Thanks again!


----------



## AndreasHe (Nov 24, 2020)

Regarding the question of multiple keyswitches in S1:






Or was it a different point?


----------



## Robert Kooijman (Nov 24, 2020)

Love the new visibility features in S1! Purchased the macro's from Lukas, thank you! Adapted them to include icons and some more choices. Still tweaking and learning, the goal is to have a single "universal" visibility macro bar that can be used for different projects. The use of icons also can save some precious real estate, handy when using many buttons.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> Regarding the question of multiple keyswitches in S1:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes! You are right, it works..


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

AndreasHe said:


> Or was it a different point?


I think the point was to send multiple notes with only one keyswitch to abstract the combined articulations. If I misunderstood that, yes, setting two keyswitches at one position works.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I think the point was to send multiple notes with only one keyswitch to abstract the combined articulations. If I misunderstood that, yes, setting two keyswitches at one position works.



I see. Confusion then on my part. I am more than happy with sending two/three keyswitches at the same time. That allows Synchron Player to work with Studio One. All good.


----------



## stigc56 (Nov 24, 2020)

I see your point, but I fail to see how to determine which articulation is playing in this system.
Let me give you an example. 
In VSL Synchron Strings Pro I need a a C#0 to select long notes, a C1 to sel. regular vib. a F6 to select normal release, and finally A6 to have normal attack.
So *4* KS to select this speciel art. You can rename C#0 KS to "Long", but you can't rename C1 to regular vib., because this KS is also a part of the Shorts seq art. 
So you can use the system, but you will have to set *4* KS for each note (!) and you can't determine which art. the server is playing by looking on any of the KS's!
That is simply not a viable solution if you are doing all this as a job.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

stigc56 said:


> So *4* KS to select this speciel art. You can rename C#0 KS to "Long", but you can't rename C1 to regular vib., because this KS is also a part of the Shorts seq art.
> So you can use the system, but you will have to set *4* KS for each note (!) and you can't determine which art. the server is playing by looking on any of the KS's!
> That is simply not a viable solution if you are doing all this as a job.



I'm not sure I understand but I'm new to Studio One. You have to send 4 key switches to do this in any DAW don't you? You have to control the 2/3/4/5 columns in Synchron Player with key switches (or PC or CC). In Digital Performer I send 4 PC's at the point I want to achieve the art you want.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> I'm not sure I understand but I'm new to Studio One. You have to send 4 key switches to do this in any DAW don't you? You have to control the 2/3/4/5 columns in Synchron Player with key switches (or PC or CC). In Digital Performer I send 4 PC's at the point I want to achieve the art you want.



The problem is the naming of the keyswitches.
E.g. C0 and C1 gives you a long note with vibrato, so you could name C0 'long' and C1 'vibrato'.
But with D0 and C1 you get pizzicato, so you could name D0 'short' but what with C1? You could now name it 'vibrato/pizzicato'. And so on, in the end C1 is named 'vibrato/pizzicato/foo/bar/baz/bla'


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> You have to send 4 key switches to do this in any DAW don't you? You have to control the 2/3/4/5 columns in Synchron Player with key switches (or PC or CC). In Digital Performer I send 4 PC's at the point I want to achieve the art you want.


Why would anyone want to do that? In my opinion, it's exactly the sense of articulation management that you don't need to think about which 4 (!) keyswitches you need to send at once.

I stick to it.... that was a pretty bad idea VSL had there.


----------



## studioj (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Why would anyone do that? In my opinion, it's exactly the sense of articulation management that you don't need to think about which 4 (!) keyswitches you need to send at once.
> 
> I stick to it.... that was a pretty bad idea VSL had there.


Really enjoying my experience with Synchron Strings Pro so far. I sort of had that same initial reaction about the key switches but I'm seeing how it was really a good solution to manage 60+ patches in a single preset. This way you can keep the primary/secondary/third keyswitches consistent across sections and articulation types. Otherwise it would be a mess and difficult to sort visually and mentally I think. I am just starting to check out Studio One ... I think in case for SSP I would probably not use the S1 key switch editor in it's current state with this library. I have Logic, and the BabylonWaves art set for SSP is brilliant but also pretty overwhelming since it is soooo many patches... he has it set up as ONE patch per key switch. But I am considering not using articulation sets in Logic with this Library and just memorizing the VSL programed switches as there is a method to the madness. but I'm not sure yet.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

The problem is not Synchron Player. It‘s Studio One. And hopefully Presonus addresses it sooner rather than later. Sort of like being able to nudge by milliseconds (which is not a “problem” of the Cinematic Studio Series).


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> The problem is not Synchron Player. It‘s Studio One. And hopefully Presonus addresses it sooner rather than later. Sort of like being able to nudge by milliseconds (which is not a “problem” of the Cinematic Studio Series).



If VSL is the outlier... then VSL is the problem my man. Remember that many DAWs don't even allow creating expression maps or anything alike. I'm not saying VSL isn't good, because they are at the top of the game. But why should DAW manufacturers make exceptions for libraries that stray outside of the norm? I've honestly never come across what is described here with any sample library, ever, so why would Presonus be the problem if I don't have that problem with anyone else except Vienna?


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> If VSL is the outlier... then VSL is the problem my man. I'm not saying VSL isn't good, because they are at the top of the game. But why should DAW manufacturers make exceptions for libraries that stray outside of the norm? I've honestly never come across what is described here with any sample library, ever, so why would Presonus be the problem if I don't have that problem with anyone else except Vienna?


Well you can't access all artics in CSS (lack of cc switching) nor can you have all spitfire artics in 1 track (lack of channel definition).

No matter how you slice it, S1's keyswitches are undercooked and inferior to the competition. There's no point arguing that fact.


----------



## studioj (Nov 24, 2020)

The problem is not necessarily that Presonus needs to accommodate VSL or vice versa ... its that Presonus needs to build an articulation management system that provides ultimate flexibility so that sample developers aren't boxed in to specific frameworks for their products and users can find new and creative ways to make use of the tools. TBH I was surprised at how basic the keyswtching editor / function was... happy to see devs putting time into stuff like this, but not crazy about half baked solutions. Its a very simple concept really - the input information needs to be independent of the output information, and there shouldn't be excessive limits on either side via number of parameters or what parameters are possible (cc, ks, pc, midi ch etc). This provides the most flexibility.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> If VSL is the outlier... then VSL is the problem my man. Remember that many DAWs don't even allow creating expression maps or anything alike. I'm not saying VSL isn't good, because they are at the top of the game. But why should DAW manufacturers make exceptions for libraries that stray outside of the norm? I've honestly never come across what is described here with any sample library, ever, so why would Presonus be the problem if I don't have that problem with anyone else except Vienna?



Actually my man, VSL is not the outlier as a number of other instruments do this (such as CSS and CSB as mentioned). And remember, the DAWs that most composers use (Logic and Cubase) do allow this. So either S1 wants to be taken as a serious contender for composers or it doesn’t.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> I'm not saying VSL isn't good, because they are at the top of the game. But why should DAW manufacturers make exceptions for libraries that stray outside of the norm? I've honestly never come across what is described here with any sample library, ever, so why would Presonus be the problem if I don't have that problem with anyone else except Vienna?


I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

studioj said:


> The problem is not necessarily that Presonus needs to accommodate VSL or vice versa ... its that Presonus needs to build an articulation management system [...]



You can stop here  What they did was nothing more than a workaround by having the ability to name some notes. Their support for articulation management is actually worse than almost all other DAWs: Logic, Cubase, Cakewalk, Reaper (more or less full articulation system), FL Studio (don't know much about BRSO Articulate https://www.syntheticorchestra.com/articulate/), even Bitwig and Live have better articulation management as default (that's just a byproduct of their automation features and not planned as such). So: it's better than DP in that regard.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Actually my man, VSL is not the outlier as a number of other instruments do this (such as CSS and CSB as mentioned).


No. CSS does not do multiple keyswitches for ony articulation. It only uses additional switches for legato on/off, con sordino etc.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> No. CSS does not do multiple keyswitches for ony articulation. It only uses additional switches for legato on/off, con sordino etc.



CSS uses CC to change between articulations (like shorts) - just like with Synchron Player (do you even have it? It would be obvious if so). You can use multiple keyswitches (notes or CC) to trigger different shorts, attack types, vibrato types, etc.

Not sure why you continue to argue that Presonus’s implementation of key switches is not absolutely bare bones.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Actually my man, VSL is not the outlier as a number of other instruments do this (such as CSS and CSB as mentioned). And remember, the DAWs that most composers use (Logic and Cubase) do allow this. So either S1 wants to be taken as a serious contender for composers or it doesn’t.



It is a serious contender. However, all sample library manufacturers should start to adhere to some damn standards. The standard being... lo and behold... Native Instruments Symphony Series. Why? I can choose to switch articulations via keyswitch. But, also via Program Change. And also, gasp, via a CC fader (which is my much preferred method). The way Native Instruments did it is the way, because it allows the same functionality across all DAWs, all platforms, and all sorts of users. Presonus is not to blame here. You can customize the Symphony Series to work on any platform and DAW. This should be standard in sample libraries, not the other way around. You shouldn't be expected to switch DAW in order to be working comfortably with some sample library. That's a turned upside world if I ever saw one. The DAW is more important than any single sample library. That is your workstation. The sample library is an add-on to that workstation. It should work with the workstation, not the other way around. It's like asking a DAW developer to implement some strange communication protocol in order to retrieve patches from your synth. No, your workstation isn't out of touch, it's that that synth manufacturer chose to implement some weird exotic system that not everybody incorporates...

I know Studio One's keyswitch system needs some work, it does. I'm not apologizing for it. But there are lots of ways that developers can integrate systems that benefit all kinds of DAW users. If you want to make your sample library really big, better be on that then.

Remind me if I'm waaaay out of touch...


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Well you can't access all artics in CSS (lack of cc switching)


I can!?! 






It's a breeze.



ALittleNightMusic said:


> Not sure why you continue to argue that Presonus’s implementation of key switches is not absolutely bare bones.


Because I prefer to make music instead of discussing details. I was always able to get my things done pretty well... even in earlier versions like Studio One 3 or Studio One 4.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> No. CSS does not do multiple keyswitches for ony articulation. It only uses additional switches for legato on/off, con sordino etc.



Synchron kinda does the same- additional keyswitches for vibrato, non-vibrato etc. But this discussion is becoming very polarised and unnecessarily so, because didn't Presonus say this was just a start and they were going to be developing it?


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> [...] because didn't Presonus say this was just a start and they were going to be developing it?



Yes (inofficially). But they also said that about Notion :(


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> It is a serious contender. However, all sample library manufacturers should start to adhere to some damn standards. The standard being... lo and behold... Native Instruments Symphony Series. Why? I can choose to switch articulations via keyswitch. But, also via Program Change. And also, gasp, via a CC fader (which is my much preferred method). The way Native Instruments did it is the way, because it allows the same functionality across all DAWs, all platforms, and all sorts of users. Presonus is not to blame here. You can customize the Symphony Series to work on any platform and DAW. This should be standard in sample libraries, not the other way around. You shouldn't be expected to switch DAW in order to be working comfortably with some sample library. That's a turned upside world if I ever saw one. The DAW is more important than any single sample library. That is your workstation. The sample library is an add-on to that workstation.
> 
> Remind me if I'm waaaay out of touch...



You can do all of that with Synchron Player - plus more  The additional functionality that Synchron Player gives you, which not required to use but certainly extremely useful, is multi-dimensional triggers. Combining a note + CC + velocity for example to choose exactly the patch you want. VSL makes deep and flexible libraries and therefore they have a deep and flexible player, which is a joy to use with key switches assuming the key switches can be multi-dimensional too. If they aren’t, it’s not as much fun (though still useable). VSL designed for the two major players - Cubase and Logic - which do support that.

I hope Presonus is not as adverse to valid feedback as some folks here.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ReleaseCandidate said:


> Yes (inofficially). But they also said that about Notion :(



Well, the integration with Notion and Studio One got way better, didn't it? Perhaps better than any DAW and it's neighbor notation program? What is wrong with it?

Or perhaps you're disappointed with Notion updates. That one I can understand. It needs an update, yes.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> ..all sample library manufacturers should start to adhere to some damn standards. The standard being... lo and behold... Native Instruments Symphony Series. Why? I can choose to switch articulations via keyswitch. But, also via Program Change. And also, gasp, via a CC fader (which is my much preferred method). The way Native Instruments did it is the way, because it allows the same functionality across all DAWs, all platforms, and all sorts of users.



I agree with you. However Synchron Player does work with Programme Change and CC. The issue it seems is their grid column system.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> You can do all of that with Synchron Player - plus more  The additional functionality that Synchron Player gives you, which not required to use but certainly extremely useful, is multi-dimensional triggers. Combining a note + CC + velocity for example to choose exactly the patch you want. VSL makes deep and flexible libraries and therefore they have a deep and flexible player, which is a joy to use with key switches assuming the key switches can be multi-dimensional too. If they aren’t, it’s not as much fun (though still useable). VSL designed for the two major players - Cubase and Logic - which do support that.
> 
> I hope Presonus is not as adverse to valid feedback as some folks here.



They are certainly not adverse. But the DAW world is bigger than Cubase and Logic. In scoring, I am beginning to see a lot more Reaper, and Studio One, and even Ableton Live. Should they be left behind? Remember how popular Live is, by the way. Even for scoring. It might surprise people.

Again, Studio One's articulation system needs some serious work, agreed. But sample libraries should be able to operate to their fullest extend in any DAW, no matter which it is. I stand by that because the DAW is the central system, not the sample library. It will always hold second place.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Well, the integration with Notion and Studio One got way better, didn't it?



Actually no, it didn't. Well, but yes, any integration is better than none, so yes, it got better 



DS_Joost said:


> Or perhaps you're disappointed with Notion updates. That one I can understand. It needs an update, yes.



It needs that since years.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Well, the integration with Notion and Studio One got way better, didn't it? Perhaps better than any DAW and it's neighbor notation program? What is wrong with it?
> 
> Or perhaps you're disappointed with Notion updates. That one I can understand. It needs an update, yes.



Notion-Studio One integration is a JOY- and great value for money. It's the reason I'm going over to SO from DP after many years. The score editor introduced in version 5 swung it. Notion ios><Notion><SO bidirectional all three, ...that is an amazing achievement by Presonus


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ReleaseCandidate said:


> Actually no, it didn't. Well, but yes, any integration is better than none, so yes, it got better
> 
> 
> 
> It needs that since years.



I might be too estranged here because I don't use notation but... can you give me an example of integration and exchange between DAW and notation program that is better than Presonus? Because I can't recall any, honestly...


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I can!?!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Excuse me how did you do that.

@ka00 how did he do this?


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> Notion-Studio One integration is a JOY- and great value for money spent IMO.



Sorry, but the 'sync' buttons in S1 and Notion are not a joy but a PITA. Anything but realtime exchange of data isn't an integration, but an import and export function.

And your losing the expression maps of Notion (because Studio One doesn't support them and also won't, because I don't think they will ditch their keyswitch lanes they have now).



DS_Joost said:


> I might be too estranged here because I don't use notation but... can you give me an example of integration and exchange between DAW and notation program that is better than Presonus? Because I can't recall any, honestly...



Well yes. Any DAW that has a working MusicXML import and export has the same level of integration as S1 and Notion (and don't remind me of the MusicXML import of Notion).


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> CSS uses CC to change between articulations (like shorts) - just like with Synchron Player (do you even have it? It would be obvious if so). You can use multiple keyswitches (notes or CC) to trigger different shorts, attack types, vibrato types, etc.
> 
> Not sure why you continue to argue that Presonus’s implementation of key switches is not absolutely bare bones.



It is bare bones. But so was Cakewalk's system until a month ago, so it Pro Tool's system, so it Reason's, so is Live's. Are sample library developers really gonna ignore all that potential market just because they have to have that certain system? Customizability is key here. Native Instruments did it right with their Symphony Series.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Not sure why you continue to argue that Presonus’s implementation of key switches is not absolutely bare bones.


Because I prefer to make music instead of discussing details. I was always able to get my things done pretty well in Studio One... even in earlier versions like Studio One 3 or Studio One 4.

I think we all agree that we all appreciate more improvements to the articulation management in Studio One. I'm actually one of the first people saying that the keyswitch management in Studio One is too limited as it is now  But I don't expect all these things to have YESTERDAY which is maybe why I am rather calm here. But I'm sorry to say that Studio One will never be Cubase. When I look at Cubase's GUI, it seems to me that Cubase offers any features you might think of - and more... (of course it's not really true). Studio One does not have this approach to provide ultimate flexibility for every possible use cases. And articulation management is a tricky thing because there are no standards and every developer does a slightly different implementation. MIDI channels. MIDI CCs. Keyswitches. Velocity. Pitchbend. Speed. Note overlap. Sustain Pedal. And any combination of them.

I think developers should rather all sit together at one table and think about a new standard of transmitting articulations and articulation changes. Then DAW can implement these standards. For example only a few people know that VST 3 has an interface to expose keyswitches and report them to the DAW. Studio One supports that. PreSonus additionally created a extension to the original SDKs which allows them to query keyswitches from VST 2 instruments. That's a really innovative approach if you ask me. CCs, MIDI channels... if you are honest, these are all workarounds from the early MIDI era in the 80s


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Because I prefer to make music instead of discussing details. I was always able to get my things done pretty well... even in earlier versions like Studio One 3 or Studio One 4.
> 
> I think we all agree that we need some improvements to the articulation management in Studio One. I don't expect all these things to get YESTERDAY which is maybe why I am relatively calm here. As I said, I could do my work for the last five years. But I'm sorry to say that Studio One will never be Cubase. When I look at Cubase's GUI, it seems to me that Cubase offers all the features anybody might possible need some day (and some more). Studio One does not have this approach to provide ultimate flexibility for every use cases. And articulation management is a tricky thing because there are no standards and every developer does a slightly different implementation. MIDI channels. MIDI CCs. Keyswitches. Pitchbend. Speed. Note overlap. Sustain Pedal. And any combination of them.
> 
> I think developers should rather all sit together at one table and think about a new standard of transmitting articulations and articulation changes. The DAWs can then implement it as a VST extension. That would be a well-rounded thing. For example only a few people know that VST 3 has an interface to expose keyswitches and report them to the DAW. PreSonus additionally created a extension to the original SDKs which allows them to query keyswitches from VST 2 instruments. That's a really innovative approach if you ask me. CCs, MIDI channels... if you are honest, these are all workarounds from the early MIDI era in the 80s



Yup, buddy of mine and me got down to it and we came to the conclusion that sample library developers should develop standards. It's the old wild west out the right now. Not good for the consumer. Come on, there are things developed that work already! (please, East West, take note!)

I disagree about your view about Studio One, however (even knowing you are the biggest Studio One advocate in these lands). For me, Studio One represents ultimate flexibility, much more so than Cubase. Can you make a multiband compressor with your own chosen compressor for every band inside Cubase? Yes you can. But good luck with that. Can you create a chain where the left and right channels have a different amp simulation? Yes you can, but again, good luck with that. Can you create multi-instruments inside Cubase? No. Simply no. You can't.

Cubase is great. Used it for years. But goddamn if Steinberg doesn't innovate anymore like they used to. Seems to me Presonus took that crown. With ARA, and a really useful Chord Track, and Multi-Instruments, FX Splitter.

Steinberg used to be at the forefront of development. Not anymore. They are losing ground there.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

I really like Presonus as a company. But whilst I have Studio One, it won’t be getting much use until it gets a solid articulation System.

For a company that has shown such innovation and panache in other areas of the DAW, the articulation system looks as if little thought were put into it.

For a long time (since V2) I thought they were only interested in the non orchestral market. When I heard that V5 had articulation management I was very pleased, until I saw how basic it was.

I look forward to it being improved, but equally, Presonus might just have ticked it off as job done - in which case, I’ll be sticking with Cubase.

I’m not going to give up my VSL libraries over a DAW.....

I was told that Notion for IOS was getting a big upgrade - too lat e for me as I’m fully invested in Staffpad now, but does anyone know if this is still on the cards.....


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> It is bare bones. But so was Cakewalk's system until a month ago, so it Pro Tool's system, so it Reason's, so is Live's. Are sample library developers really gonna ignore all that potential market just because they have to have that certain system? Customizability is key here. Native Instruments did it right with their Symphony Series.



As I stated, the issue is not Synchron Player’s ability to customize, which it has in spades. S1 just has a very limited system currently. Why should VSL limit what it’s software can do when it works perfectly well in the DAWs that primarily are being used with its software?

It’s not about ignoring markets - it’s about understanding their potential (which for something like Reason or Live or Reaper is almost zero right now in terms of sequencing mock-ups in a professional setting).



Lukas said:


> Because I prefer to make music instead of discussing details. I was always able to get my things done pretty well in Studio One... even in earlier versions like Studio One 3 or Studio One 4.
> 
> I think we all agree that we all appreciate more improvements to the articulation management in Studio One. I'm actually one of the first people saying that the keyswitch management in Studio One is too limited as it is now  But I don't expect all these things to have YESTERDAY which is maybe why I am rather calm here. But I'm sorry to say that Studio One will never be Cubase. When I look at Cubase's GUI, it seems to me that Cubase offers any features you might think of - and more... (of course it's not really true). Studio One does not have this approach to provide ultimate flexibility for every possible use cases. And articulation management is a tricky thing because there are no standards and every developer does a slightly different implementation. MIDI channels. MIDI CCs. Keyswitches. Velocity. Pitchbend. Speed. Note overlap. Sustain Pedal. And any combination of them.
> 
> I think developers should rather all sit together at one table and think about a new standard of transmitting articulations and articulation changes. Then DAW can implement these standards. For example only a few people know that VST 3 has an interface to expose keyswitches and report them to the DAW. Studio One supports that. PreSonus additionally created a extension to the original SDKs which allows them to query keyswitches from VST 2 instruments. That's a really innovative approach if you ask me. CCs, MIDI channels... if you are honest, these are all workarounds from the early MIDI era in the 80s



I‘ve owned S1 since version 3 as well. Nowhere have I said I expected this functionality “yesterday”. You seemed to be arguing that VSL’s approach was too complicated and Presonus should not have to support it when I was making the point that it is using just a multi-dimensional approach that the big DAWs in this space support and so should Presonus if it wants to play in the same game. Nobody is looking for a Cubase copy, but to ignore functionality that is helpful in other DAWs does not really benefit Studio One’s future. You think they invented half the stuff they’ve been adding? Of course not.


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

ReleaseCandidate said:


> Sorry, but the 'sync' buttons in S1 and Notion are not a joy but a PITA. Anything but realtime exchange of data isn't an integration, but an import and export function.
> 
> Well yes. Any DAW that has a working MusicXML import and export has the same level of integration as S1 and Notion (and don't remind me of the MusicXML import of Notion).



Oh I see, the word integration is the issue. In that definition then no, you are right, Notion is not a live score editor for Studio One or vice-versa. But that isn't available anywhere is it?

What you do get is a really convenient journey from scribbling something on the ios app with your finger and then pushing a few buttons before you can develop it in Studio One. That's a good thing is it not?


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> I really like Presonus as a company. But whilst I have Studio One, it won’t be getting much use until it gets a solid articulation System.
> 
> For a company that has shown such innovation and panache in other areas of the DAW, the articulation system looks as if little thought were put into it.
> 
> ...



It will never do what Staffpad does. Different markets and all that. As per the articulation system, Presonus aren't known to leave features just as they are. So that gives some hope.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> For example only a few people know that VST 3 has an interface to expose keyswitches and report them to the DAW.



That's maybe because only a few need to know. 
https://steinbergmedia.github.io/vst3_doc/vstinterfaces/keyswitch.html
Btw. what really only a few people know is, that MIDI 2.0 supports sending articulation information with every note (in the atrribute type and attribute fields). 
And profiles:


> Advanced MIDI users might be familiar with manually "mapping" all the controllers from one device to another device to make them talk to each other. If 2 devices agree to use a common Profile, MIDI-CI Profile Configuration can auto-configure the mappings. Profiles can be written for device types or for unique applications that are used across multiple device types. Profiles might be written for instruments such as pianos, electric pianos, drawbar organs, drum sets, analog synthesizers. Feature Profiles could define common messages to control orchestral articulation, direct pitch control models, or per-note expression.











Details about MIDI 2.0™, MIDI-CI, Profiles and Property Exchange (Updated November 2022)


The core MIDI 2. Specifications are available for download by MIDI Association Individual MembersCorporate Members have access to all specifications including those under development You must be logged in as a TMA member to download the spec. If you are not a member yet (or not logged in) ...




www.midi.org


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> As I stated, the issue is not Synchron Player’s ability to customize, which it has in spades. S1 just has a very limited system currently. Why should VSL limit what it’s software can do when it works perfectly well in the DAWs that primarily are being used with its software?
> 
> It’s not about ignoring markets - it’s about understanding their potential (which for something like Reason or Live or Reaper is almost zero right now in terms of sequencing mock-ups in a professional setting).
> 
> ...



I find this funny because one of the big ''serious professional scoring DAWs'', aka Digital Performer, hasn't implemented anything of the sort yet it is still seen as being more professional than Studio One...


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> even knowing you are the biggest Studio One advocate in these lands


I'm not, to be honest. I'm a big advocate of good features. I only know the program quite decently so I know what is possible and what is not.



DS_Joost said:


> It's the old wild west out the right now. Not good for the consumer.


Not good for the consumer. I agree. Things have to be simple and just work. Okay... Cubases's Expression Maps are very powerful. But I would never want to use them. They are horrible  I develop apps and know how to write code... but I don't want to use do complex routings when I setup my virtual instruments.



Michael Antrum said:


> I’m not going to give up my VSL libraries over a DAW.....


I don't think PreSonus will force you to do that...


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> In that definition then no, you are right, Notion is not a live score editor for Studio One or vice-versa. But that isn't available anywhere is it?


That's actually the problem. It's bad, but still the best (that's a general problem with notation software).


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I'm not. Really! I only know the program quite decently so I know what is possible and what is not.
> 
> 
> Not good for the consumer. I agree. Things have to be simple and just work. Okay... Cubases's Expression Maps are very powerful. But I would never want to use them. They are horrible  I develop apps and know how to write code... but I don't want to use do complex routings when I setup my virtual instruments.
> ...



We agree on all points. It's on the developers to develop standards. The DAWs will then follow. Otherwise, how are people gonna use VSL inside Pro Tools and Digital Performer, which both don't feature any articulation features... yet are still seen as both being some of the top composing DAWs. Isn't that a little strange? Are sample library developers gonna leave those two behind while they are still in the upper echelons of film scoring usage?


----------



## pinki (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> I find this funny because one of the big ''serious professional scoring DAWs'', aka Digital Performer, hasn't implemented anything of the sort yet it is still seen as being more professional than Studio One...



Very very true!


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

pinki said:


> Very very true!



That's another problem (of software development in general).  
People are more likely to not complain about a missing feature than a not fully/bad/wrong/... implemented feature. Because, as a user, that's actually worse because you would like to use it, if it would be usable.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

Yes, steinberg made a selling point out of the fact you can auto generate the expression maps in their Iconica Libraries.

I’m really surprised other developers haven’t got on this bandwagon...


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

Actually DAW developers are developers too :D In the best case they are involved here. Like PreSonus and Celemony when they created ARA. It needed this impact and two or three brilliant masterminds that designed it. For some time ARA was Studio One (and Melodyne) only. Now almost all of the big DAWs support ARA.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ReleaseCandidate said:


> That's actually the problem. It's bad, but still the best (that's a general problem with notation software).



That is... well you know I actually understand it. But isn't your argument pointed then at any developer, not just Presonus?


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> Yes, steinberg made a selling point out of the fact you can auto generate the expression maps in their Iconica Libraries.
> 
> I’m really surprised other developers haven’t got on this bandwagon...


Do they use just keyswitches or more techniqures to switch articulations? If it's the VST 3 standards which Iconica uses, Studio One 5 should be able to read them too.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> Yes, steinberg made a selling point out of the fact you can auto generate the expression maps in their Iconica Libraries.
> 
> I’m really surprised other developers haven’t got on this bandwagon...



Because not everybody can afford a 500 euro DAW. And you can't run a good trial without the Steinberg key. There's a reason so many producers flocked to either FL Studio, Reaper, Live, or what have you. They shot themselves in the foot with their anti-piracy practise.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> That is... well you know I actually understand it. But isn't your argument pointed then at any developer, not just Presonus?



Of course. Steinberg for example!


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Do they use just keyswitches or more techniqures to switch articulations? If it's the VST 3 standards which Iconica uses, Studio One 5 should be able to read them too.



Just key switches....


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

Then you were wrong...


> I’m really surprised other developers haven’t got on this bandwagon...





Lukas said:


> For example only a few people know that VST 3 has an interface to expose keyswitches and report them to the DAW. Studio One supports that.



Studio One reads keyswitches from compatible VST3 instruments like HALion (Sonic), UJAM instruments... but sadly not all sample players implemented this standard. However I'm confident that Orchestral Tools will take a look at that at some point (once their player is VST3-ready).


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> I find this funny because one of the big ''serious professional scoring DAWs'', aka Digital Performer, hasn't implemented anything of the sort yet it is still seen as being more professional than Studio One...



Because DP has been around a long time and is therefore, engrained in the industry (though articulation management continues to be a feature request) and it has other features that are extremely unique and helpful for film scoring, like chunks. And still, it has lost a significant amount of audience over the years because it didn’t keep up fast enough.

Very few composers percentage-wise actually sequence mock-ups in Pro Tools.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Because not everybody can afford a 500 euro DAW. And you can't run a good trial without the Steinberg key. There's a reason so many producers flocked to either FL Studio, Reaper, Live, or what have you. They shot themselves in the foot with their anti-piracy practise.



I’m not sure what the dongle has to do with developers utilising a very nice feature of the VST3 standard ? There’s no dongle required to use that.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

You know what, on that last point, I'm gonna come clean here, I have pirated Omnisphere before I started buying stuff. Got remorse. Didn't feel right. Also pirated Studio One. Made lots of my projects inside a pirated Reason 5 (I mean, who didn't?). But it did give me a chance to seriously try things out. And right now, Studio One 5 Professional, Reason 11 suite, and Omnisphere 2.6 are all in my possession legally right now. I own everything legally now. But I wouldn't own half of it if it weren't for piracy.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Then you were wrong...



I meant the VST developers - not the DAW developers.....


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Actually DAW developers are developers too :D In the best case they are involved here. Like PreSonus and Celemony when they created ARA. It needed this impact and two or three brilliant masterminds that designed it. For some time ARA was Studio One (and Melodyne) only. Now almost all of the big DAWs support ARA.



In an ideal world, the DAWs and instruments would talk per standardized articulation via MIDI 2.0 information, and special devices would also send that.
In the real world ...


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> I’m not sure what the dongle has to do with developers utilising a very nice feature of the VST3 standard ? There’s no dongle required to use that.



Because that fricking stupid dongle keeps people away from the program, not draw them towards it...

Also, it's Steinberg trying to force ideas unto other developers whilst not being ready. Steinberg is not the be all end all in VST even though they created it. The market is. And the market is not ready for everything Steinberg tells them to do.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> I meant the VST developers - not the DAW developers.....


OK, I'm sorry. Agree 1000%.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> Because DP has been around a long time and is therefore, engrained in the industry (though articulation management continues to be a feature request) and it has other features that are extremely unique and helpful for film scoring, like chunks. And still, it has lost a significant amount of audience over the years because it didn’t keep up fast enough.
> 
> Very few composers percentage-wise actually sequence mock-ups in Pro Tools.



No but some of the biggest names still are. Hollywood is married to Pro Tools, DP and Cubase (for better or worse).


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

So steinberg’s dongle is preventing developers like, say, spitfire, from putting in articulation descriptions in their instruments, that could be used with othe DAWs

What has the dongle got to do with that ?


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> So steinberg’s dongle is preventing developers like, say, spitfire, from putting in articulation descriptions in their instruments, that could be used with othe DAWs
> 
> What has the dongle got to do with that ?



The dongle doesn't do that but which other DAW supports it?


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> The dongle doesn't do that but which other DAW supports it?



Studio One, apparently....


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

And the others? How much is it worth pursuing that? I have never heard of this even though I've been going in the game 15+ years... I've literally never have had a use for that. I mean, cool feature but...


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

It’s part of the VST3 standard. It would be useful. if more VST developers included it, you can bet the DAW developers would get on board....


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> It’s part of the VST3 standard. It would be useful. if more VST developers included it, you can bet the DAW developers would get on board....



So you agree with me that it's up to the sample library developers to start talking about some standards?

I mean, as long as Kontakt is VST2... not much is gonna change...


----------



## Michael Antrum (Nov 24, 2020)

1000%

Edit: it needs to be a heavyweight, though. Perhaps a VST developer wouldn’t have enough clout.

It’s all there in the VST 3 standard from Steinberg. Just needs to be deployed...


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> 1000%



I agree with you btw. But unless Kontakt is going VST3, not much is gonna happen.

When Kontakt is gonna go VST3, well in fact all of Native Instruments starts going VST3, then stuff is gonna happen. I mean, Omnisphere too is still VST2. But I agree, it's high time for all of them to switch over. (For real, parameter automation in Omnisphere is so frickin' outdated it hurts... I mean, right click to enable host automation? What for?)


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> However I'm confident that Orchestral Tools will take a look at that at some point (once their player is VST3-ready).



Sine doesn't propagate _any_ parameters at all to the DAW, would _really_ surprise me if they do that with keyswitches.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> The dongle doesn't do that but which other DAW supports it?





Michael Antrum said:


> Studio One, apparently....


----------



## Toecutter (Nov 24, 2020)

I'm testing Studio One coming from Cubase and the one thing I miss the most is the option to create track presets and assign custom tags searchable in the browser (media bay in Cubase). Can you do that in Studio One? I looked everywhere and saw someone asking the same question on Facebook the other day, no answer... seems like a basic thing that I can't figure out how to do.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

ReleaseCandidate said:


> Sine doesn't propagate _any_ parameters at all to the DAW, would _really_ surprise me if they do that with keyswitches.


Some of the frameworks OT use for SINE do not support VST3 yet.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Toecutter said:


> I'm testing Studio One coming from Cubase and the one thing I miss the most is the option to create track presets and assign custom tags searchable in the browser (media bay in Cubase). Can you do that in Studio One? I looked everywhere and saw someone asking the same question on Facebook the other day, no answer... seems like a basic thing that I can't figure out how to do.



Studio One wipes the floor with Cubase in that regard, so rest happy.

Edit: I'm sure some other users are gonna give you help with this. But rest assured, Studio One's system is much better.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> The framework OT uses for SINE's GUI does not support VST3 yet.



Which, I think, in this day and age, considering how young Sine is, is stupid as all hell... what where they thinking?


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

In software development things take time. You just need to be patient.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Some of the frameworks OT use for SINE do not support VST3 yet.



I rephrase: Sine now doesn't tell the DAW anything. I would be very, very surprised if they change that.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 24, 2020)

Lukas said:


> In software development things take time. You just need to be patient.



I get you but I learned from a developer friend of mine that investing in VST2 right now is just...really stupid...

It's the equivalent of developing a game for Unreal Engine 3...


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

People were surprised that Studio One focused on scoring users at all. Now it happened. So what!?  People claimed that PreSonus would ignore them. They didn't. It only took some time.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> I get you but I learned from a developer friend of mine that investing in VST2 right now is just...really stupid...


Nobody said OT had "invested" in VST2. They support it. Of course they do, it's still the standard which all host support. Now they are (probably) working on VST3 support.  I wonder why people often accuse companies / developers of certain (bad) intentions. They just release something... and then people get angry because they haven't implemented the 10.000 other things


----------



## Toecutter (Nov 24, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Studio One wipes the floor with Cubase in that regard, so rest happy.
> 
> Edit: I'm sure some other users are gonna give you help with this. But rest assured, Studio One's system is much better.


I hope so because I'm clueless here.


----------



## ka00 (Nov 24, 2020)

SimonCharlesHanna said:


> Excuse me how did you do that.
> 
> @ka00 how did he do this?



@Lukas very interesting. Are you using a Kontakt script that translates key switches to midi CC values? I’m not sure how it can be done in S1 otherwise but you’re the expert here.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 24, 2020)

Yes, I use a Kontakt script as middleware for CSS.


----------



## jonathanwright (Nov 25, 2020)

Toecutter said:


> I hope so because I'm clueless here.



Studio One doesn't have tagging in the same way as Cubase. Preset search is very simple and robust though. I've written an article on using presets which may help.

https://www.jonathanwrightmusic.com/use-studio-one-and-instrument-presets-for-large-orchestral-projects/
Once you get used to it, along with Folder buses, the workflow is very fast.


----------



## samphony (Nov 25, 2020)

Hopefully PreSonus can innovate on their keyswitch system in a way that lets users define (compensate) latency per articulation setting so there is no need for negative delays and such. It would also allow to have notes tight on the grid but playing back correctly etc.


----------



## stigc56 (Nov 25, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> We agree on all points. It's on the developers to develop standards. The DAWs will then follow. Otherwise, how are people gonna use VSL inside Pro Tools and Digital Performer, which both don't feature any articulation features... yet are still seen as both being some of the top composing DAWs. Isn't that a little strange? Are sample library developers gonna leave those two behind while they are still in the upper echelons of film scoring usage?


I don't think Pro Tools is used that much with midi, do you? And the users of DP - I have been there - are mainly complaining about the lack of articulation management, so hardly by numbers, one of the top composing DAWS.
But it's a silly discussion. Nobody will expect users who have invested maybe more than 20.000$ on libraries to pick a DAW, that doesn't support all those fancy articulations.


----------



## EgM (Nov 25, 2020)

Lukas said:


>



Cool, I noticed UJAM also imports keyswitches but it broke note overlapping with their drums :(

I do notice that your wrench icon on the left is still there with Halion, with UJAM the wrench isn't there so you can't bypass it.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Nov 25, 2020)

EgM said:


> Cool, I noticed UJAM also imports keyswitches but it broke note overlapping with their drums :(
> 
> I do notice that your wrench icon on the left is still there with Halion, with UJAM the wrench isn't there so you can't bypass it.



I believe it only applies to the VST3 version if I recall. You can bring up the AU version and just import the keyswitches to have full control.

I think the keyswitch overlap is a bit misleading, and I hope they change the design so that you can clearly see the overlapping keyswitches, because it only seems to display overlapping keyswitches when they start on the same beat.


----------



## EgM (Nov 25, 2020)

chocobitz825 said:


> I believe it only applies to the VST3 version if I recall. You can bring up the AU version and just import the keyswitches to have full control.
> 
> I think the keyswitch overlap is a bit misleading, and I hope they change the design so that you can clearly see the overlapping keyswitches, because it only seems to display overlapping keyswitches when they start on the same beat.



I'm on Windows though  The other way around is keeping latch on, but then you have to make sure you put a "Stop" keyswitch otherwise the drum part never stops. It worked perfectly until the new update, I wish I could find that version... I hate doing those with keyswitches, the drum transitions were way more faster to do with the main part spanning 4 measures, and hitting the last quarter of the 2nd measure to hit the transition.


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 25, 2020)

I have a question that I think is related to the topic of this thread, if that's okay.

Is it possible to create nested sub-sub folders in Studio One's instruments tab? I'd like to create Kontakt presets for each Afflatus patch and arrange it in the instruments tab section the same way Afflatus does, i.e "Kontakt > Afflatus (first subfolder) > Violins I (second subfolder) > Multi Patches OR Single Patches (third subfolders) > all the first violin patches. So far I can't figure out how to do this. I could only create one subfolder, I think. If it isn't possible, does anyone have any ideas on how to organise something similar? For the longest time I've been dragging Kontakt onto a new track, then selecting and routing my Afflatus patches from the Kontakt library view, but I much prefer the workflow of being able to drag and drop the patches directly from Studio One's instruments tab.


----------



## Ozinga (Nov 26, 2020)

Fenicks said:


> . If it isn't possible, does anyone have any ideas on how to organise something similar? For the longest time I've been dragging Kontakt onto a new track, then selecting and routing my Afflatus patches from the Kontakt library view, but I much prefer the workflow of being able to drag and drop the patches directly from Studio One's instruments tab.




Hi,

You could use Files tab for organizing presets.
Create a folder in a location of your choice for your library
Create as many sub folders as you need. Rename all.
Load Kontakt and one of the Instruments and use Export Preset (or Export Preset+Fx if you have Articulation Maps or insert FX)from the plugin top menu and save it to one of the subfolders you created and continue for each preset.

Alternatively you could use the musicloop format.
For that, create a one bar empty event on the Kontakt Instrument track and drag it to the folder you created. This way is faster than opening up the export preset menu all the time. You could also put in some notes for preview purposes so you can listen how a library sounds before loading.
You can than right click on your main folder and select ''New Tab From Here'' so it is always visible at top.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 26, 2020)

You don't need to use the Files tab for that. You could if you prefer not to have your presets grouped by (VST) instrument. But it's still possible to create sub folder structures in the Files tab. It's just not as convenient to create these folders in the browser itself or to move presets by drag'n'drop (this is not implemented in the Instruments tab yet).






There are two ways to achieve this:

1.) In the "Store Preset" dialog you can enter a whole subfolder path. If there are already subfolders, you can select them in the dropdown list.







2.) The second way is to create your folders and move your presets in the Explorer / Finder. Therefore you can select a preset in the browser, right-click and choose "Show in Explorer / Finder". Then you can actually do the same as if you had these presets at another location and organize them in the Files tab.






The subfolder is also stored in the preset files itself but the actual file path is considered first (and updated if you re-save the prest).


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 26, 2020)

Lukas said:


> You don't need to use the Files tab for that. You could if you prefer not to have your presets grouped by (VST) instrument. But it's still possible to create sub folder structures in the Files tab. It's just not as convenient to create these folders in the browser itself or to move presets by drag'n'drop (this is not implemented in the Instruments tab yet).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This was more detailed than I could have dreamed.  I will give it a try tomorrow! Thank you!


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 26, 2020)

Hi @Lukas ,

Are you still planning to make an in-depth video tutorial/s on how to make and organize custom Instrument Presets in Studio One Pro 5 ? 

I think that would be something many users, inlcuding myself would benefit a lot from, and would love to watch, there are no such videos on YouTube at this time. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## Lukas (Nov 26, 2020)

Here it is!! I finally had some time to finish the first part of my video... again with my horrible German accent... 
I tried to mention everything I considered important when getting started with Studio One and presets.




I hope it is helpful for some people. And I hope I can finish the second one this weekend. If you have questions or ideas about what to mention in the second video, I can maybe add a few things to it...


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 26, 2020)

@Lukas ,

Thank You so much for the video.  I will watch it later this evening.

What a surprise.. I wasn't expecting you to post it today.  

Cheers,
Muzsculp


----------



## Lukas (Nov 26, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> What a surprise.. I wasn't expecting you to post it today.


Funny that you asked while I was sitting in front of Camtasia... :D


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 26, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Funny that you asked while I was sitting at Camtasia... :D



Yes, I thought about how you posted the video right after I posted asking you to make it. Instant delivery service... haha.. OK, so maybe I should ask you for something else ...


----------



## Lukas (Nov 26, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> OK, so maybe I should ask you for something else ...


Could you please ask me to finish the five big-band arrangements I haven't started yet...??


----------



## ka00 (Nov 26, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Here it is!! I finally had some time to finish the first part of my video... again with my horrible German accent...
> I tried to mention everything I considered important when getting started with Studio One and presets.
> 
> 
> ...




Very helpful, Lukas! Thanks!

By the way, have you tried adding a random insert (like the MixTool) to the different outputs channels of a multi output instrument? If I’m not mistaken, when I did that it was able to save all the channels into the musicloop as well.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 26, 2020)

Indeed - that works. Saving was not the problem... "empty" channels are always saved. But they're only recalled if they contain at least one insert. The last time I tried this, it didn't work.

Great hint. I will address this in the second video... That makes instrument + FX presets more useful.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Nov 26, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Here it is!! I finally had some time to finish the first part of my video... again with my horrible German accent...
> I tried to mention everything I considered important when getting started with Studio One and presets.
> 
> 
> ...




incredibly thorough! I love all of the options Studio One provides! whatever the task there's generally a way to attack it.


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 26, 2020)

I was successfully able to create my desired nesting folders for Afflatus patches. Yay! Thank you @Lukas for your help. My next question is: is there a quicker way to create instrument presets for large sample libraries? I just did all the Violins I patches one-by-one and it was tedious to say the least.  It's daunting to look at the rest of the library...


----------



## ennbr (Nov 26, 2020)

I used the musicloop method and found converting my existing temple very fast. It was the second option show in the video


----------



## Lukas (Nov 27, 2020)

Fenicks said:


> My next question is: is there a quicker way to create instrument presets for large sample libraries? I just did all the Violins I patches one-by-one and it was tedious to say the least.  It's daunting to look at the rest of the library...


Yes I agree... it's way too much work. One thing that helped me is creating a keyboard shortcut for "Store Preset" and "Update Preset". Unfortunately there is no command for "Store Instrument+FX" so no key command is possible yet.

I have some ideas to improve this whole process of saving presets for many library patches... but I need to investigate first.


----------



## pinki (Nov 27, 2020)

Thanks for the video Lukas.


----------



## DS_Joost (Nov 27, 2020)

Anyone ever tried going above a 1000 tracks with Studio One with one of the latest versions? I like to make a hybrid template with MusicLoops for some instruments, track + fx presets for others and have instruments disabled inside the template, but because I am mostly a track per articulation person I would love to know whether that works now, particularly with the save plug-in cache option?

If nobody tried it I guess I'll have to try it myself.


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 28, 2020)

Back again with another question...

Since setting up instrument presets I've noticed that for some reason, when I select and drag Kontakt instruments saved as Studio One presets into the main frame, they present a 'instrument not initialized' error (Spitfire libraries) or the instrument will refuse to sound (Afflatus). The error only occurs when dragging and dropping the preset to create a new track and channel in the mixer. If I drag it onto a track that already exists, then the instrument will load. My previous method of dragging Kontakt to create a new track and then selecting samples from the Libraries view still works, too.

Kind of defeats the point of setting up all those presets for easy creation of new tracks when I have to revert back to my previous method to avoid this error. 

This is only a problem for libraries using Kontakt. Dragging Engine 2 instruments into the main frame loads them correctly.

Is this an issue with Studio One or Kontakt? I don't see how I can use Studio One instrument presets while this error continues. A real bummer.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Nov 28, 2020)

Fenicks said:


> Back again with another question...
> 
> Since setting up instrument presets I've noticed that for some reason, when I select and drag Kontakt instruments saved as Studio One presets into the main frame, they present a 'instrument not initialized' error (Spitfire libraries) or the instrument will refuse to sound (Afflatus). The error only occurs when dragging and dropping the preset to create a new track and channel in the mixer. If I drag it onto a track that already exists, then the instrument will load. My previous method of dragging Kontakt to create a new track and then selecting samples from the Libraries view still works, too.
> 
> ...


Have you tried recreating them? Maybe something went corrupt...


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 28, 2020)

chocobitz825 said:


> Have you tried recreating them? Maybe something went corrupt...



The presets? I would if I hadn't spent a tedious amount of time yesterday making them.  If push comes to shove then yes, I will recreate them.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 28, 2020)

Indeed this sounds VERY weird. I've never had or seen this. But did you try the usual things... restarting Studio One (maybe even the computer)?

Can you post a screenshot of this error message? I assume the message is shown by Kontakt and not Studio One?


----------



## Fenicks (Nov 28, 2020)

So far, restarting my computer hasn't helped and the problem is present across all projects.

The error message showed up specifically in my Spitfire libraries. Afflatus didn't have an error message but it refused to sound. I went to take a screenshot of the message just now in Chrysalis but it's not showing up even though the instrument still refuses to sound. The GUI displays correctly but it doesn't respond to any midi or onscreen keyboard input.

After fiddling around a bit more I discovered that some presets ARE working and some are not. Afflatus no; Tundra yes; Chrysalis no. That's promising.

I searched the internet and found that other people have also encountered this kind of error, but there doesn't seem to be consensus on exactly what causes or fixes it.

I don't know why using Studio One presets in particular triggers it. As previously mentioned, loading Kontakt on its own and then selecting instruments from the Libraries view works fine.

I think I'll just remake the presets for the affected libraries. Maybe something got broken when I was creating them.


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Dec 2, 2020)

The macros are interesting! I've been using Logic, but I'm thinking about switching to another DAW.

Is it possible to control the macros with an external controller? And how good are the controller assignment possibilities of Studio One in general?

I'm asking, because I have an APC Mini programmed to select instrument sections/colour groups and single instruments (e.g. Solo Violin, Flutes, Horns). If I click a button, Logic jumps to this specific track.


----------



## Lukas (Dec 2, 2020)

Pixelpoet1985 said:


> Is it possible to control the macros with an external controller? And how good are the controller assignment possibilities of Studio One in general?
> 
> I'm asking, because I have an APC Mini programmed to select instrument sections/colour groups and single instruments (e.g. Solo Violin, Flutes, Horns). If I click a button, Logic jumps to this specific track.


Yes it should work with your APC Mini. At least I have no problems assigning the buttons on my old Axiom Pro 61. You have to add the APC Mini as a control surface and then you can learn these controllers and assign commands to them.


----------



## Lukas (Dec 3, 2020)

I did a quick video on setting up a MIDI controller (or keyboard) as a control surface to trigger commands and macros.

It's important to either add it as a control surface (instead of keyboard) because otherwise you wouldn't get the "MIDI Learn" button. Then you need to set the controller to "button" instead of "knob" (because you can't assign commands to knobs).


----------



## Pixelpoet1985 (Dec 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I did a quick video on setting up a MIDI controller (or keyboard) as a control surface to trigger commands and macros.
> 
> It's important to either add it as a control surface (instead of keyboard) because otherwise you wouldn't get the "MIDI Learn" button. Then you need to set the controller to "button" instead of "knob" (because you can't assign commands to knobs).



Thank you very much! Looks easy.

Is there an option/macro for "jumping" (= selecting) to a track, as in my example? Sorry for asking, but I have absolutely no clue of what's possible with Studio One.


----------



## Lukas (Dec 3, 2020)

Have a look at my video showing the macro toolbar I created. I contains "Shows Strings" macros and it has "Navigate to" macros.


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Yes it should work with your APC Mini. At least I have no problems assigning the buttons on my old Axiom Pro 61. You have to add the APC Mini as a control surface and then you can learn these controllers and assign commands to them.




Hi Lukas,

A million Thanks for posting this video. This is a game changer for me, since I'm trying to design my custom Lemur based faders for CC, buttons for Key-Switching articulations for various libraries, Buttons for Key-Commands, and Macros, and that's where I got stuck. Since I couldn't do that using Lemur.

Well.. now I can setup Lemur buttons to send key-commands and macros, I'm extremely Thankful, and happy you posted this, you deserve a medal for this post. 

Oh.. and I'm still looking forward to watch your part 2 video about organizing Instrument Presets in S1. By the way, I decided to use the Music Loops method, which is quite powerful, and easy to use.

Cheers
Muziksculp


----------



## Lukas (Dec 4, 2020)

Awesome!!  Glad to hear. Let us know how it works for you. I know how to do it in theory but I don't have such a sophisticated touch screen controller setup. Maybe a nice pre Christmas project.

Yeah... part two of the video... I'm on it. Some family things going on and the usual December stress but I hope I can finish it soon


----------



## mopsiflopsi (Dec 17, 2020)

This looks like the right place to ask my question, and sorry if it's been answered before: is there any way to filter the track list in the edit view? I like being able to see the ghost notes from other tracks in the editor, but with an orchestral template the list is waaay too long to be practical. And I can't find any way to filter them. Any ideas?


----------



## Lukas (Dec 17, 2020)

You can't filter the Editor Track List currently.

Why do you need this Track List? I usually have it hidden because when I do multi-part editing (string or brass arrangements), I only need to click one note to switch to another voice/track so I don't really need the Track List there.


----------



## mopsiflopsi (Dec 17, 2020)

Lukas said:


> You can't filter the Editor Track List currently.
> 
> Why do you need this Track List? I usually have it hidden because when I do multi-part editing (string or brass arrangements), I only need to click one note to switch to another voice/track so I don't really need the Track List there.



Haha nevermind, I just figured out the proper workflow. I'm very new so S1 and I didn't realize the arranger track list selection can control the edit view visibility too.


----------



## Fillup147 (Dec 22, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Thanks to the new 5.1 update we finally have decent visibility management in Studio One for easier navigation in a larger template.
> 
> I did a video that shows my personal TOP 5 features. I apologize for my English - nobody will miss that it's not my first language
> 
> ...



I have a question about this, is it the toolbar by itself and we need to create the tracks to coincide with it or are the tracks on the left already created as well?


----------



## Lukas (Dec 23, 2020)

It's just the toolbar and the custom macros assigned to it.

You have to create the tracks yourself anyway - I don't know which libraries you have so my tracks are rather useless for you I guess. I never add tracks for all patches of a library... I always play through the patches and see which of them I like best. So I think this is always a matter of taste.


----------



## Lukas (Dec 23, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> Oh.. and I'm still looking forward to watch your part 2 video about organizing Instrument Presets in S1. By the way, I decided to use the Music Loops method, which is quite powerful, and easy to use.


Okay, this one took more time... 

I included the method of inserting effects in order to keep the multi outs in the presets and musicloops... which is still a workaround but it works fine and I'm sure PreSonus will change this behavior at some point.






Tips for Orchestral Templates & Instrument Presets in Studio One 5


Many have asked for the second part of my template / preset organization video, I could finally finish it and here it is: Most aspects apply to Studio One 4 or even earlier versions too. Only the "Use cached plug-in data on save" is V5-exclusive. I hope this is helpful for some of you. I...




vi-control.net


----------



## muziksculp (Dec 23, 2020)

Hi @Lukas ,

That's Great ! 

I will watch it soon. 

Thanks,
Muziksculp


----------



## mopsiflopsi (Dec 25, 2020)

Lukas said:


> You can't filter the Editor Track List currently.
> 
> Why do you need this Track List? I usually have it hidden because when I do multi-part editing (string or brass arrangements), I only need to click one note to switch to another voice/track so I don't really need the Track List there.


Ok so now I can do multi part editing by ctrl+clicking tracks and I can see the notes in the background. So far so good. But then I'm running into this problem where if I highlight a bunch of notes, it selects notes from the background track too. With the edit view track list, I could click on the pencil icon next to a track to imply that I want to see that track but not want to have it editable at the same time. I can't seem to do that with the arrangement track list.

There's also a weird selection persistence thing. Say I click on Violins 1, then I shift or ctrl click on Violins 2, then viloas, celli, etc. Now they are all visible and editable. But assume I wanted to remove the violas from that selection. I can't seem to do that without clicking some other track that was not part of the original selection (e.g. some brass track), which cancels the entire multi-edit mode. 

Am I making sense? What is the easiest way to turn on/off visibility of notes from another track in the edit view? Is there a way of doing that without using the edit track list?


----------



## Lukas (Dec 26, 2020)

mopsiflopsi said:


> There's also a weird selection persistence thing. Say I click on Violins 1, then I shift or ctrl click on Violins 2, then viloas, celli, etc. Now they are all visible and editable. But assume I wanted to remove the violas from that selection. I can't seem to do that without clicking some other track that was not part of the original selection (e.g. some brass track), which cancels the entire multi-edit mode.


This is a bug in the current 5.x versions. Before - in 4.x - you could add and remove parts from the multi edit view by shift+click. Currently, parts can only be added this way... but when you shift+click a part again, it does not disappear. It's a bug and I hope it will be fixed soon.



mopsiflopsi said:


> Ok so now I can do multi part editing by ctrl+clicking tracks and I can see the notes in the background. So far so good. But then I'm running into this problem where if I highlight a bunch of notes, it selects notes from the background track too.


Yes, if you draw a selection it will select notes from all visible parts. One workaround is to select the single notes manually by holding shift and clicking on them. Or: If you need to edit the whole part, you can press Ctrl/Cmd+A to select all notes. This will select only notes from the currently focused part.

Once the multi part selection bug is fixed, the visible parts can be easily toggled - as in 4.x.


----------



## mopsiflopsi (Dec 26, 2020)

Lukas said:


> This is a bug in the current 5.x versions. Before - in 4.x - you could add and remove parts from the multi edit view by shift+click. Currently, parts can only be added this way... but when you shift+click a part again, it does not disappear. It's a bug and I hope it will be fixed soon.



Alright, that's good to know. It was driving me crazy thinking there must be a solution to this and I can't seem to figure it out. Thank you again.


----------



## aka70 (Mar 7, 2021)

Lukas said:


> I can!?!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How do you do this? Can you share with us mortals???


----------



## chocobitz825 (Mar 7, 2021)

aka70 said:


> How do you do this? Can you share with us mortals???


I'm sure Lukas has a more elegant way of doing it, but I've a keyswitch generator macro that hands all the articulations for CSS. theres no reason it cant be controlled fully even in studio one.


----------



## Lukas (Mar 7, 2021)

aka70 said:


> Can you share with us mortals???


Yes, I will, in a few days. Promise!


----------



## chocobitz825 (Mar 7, 2021)

Lukas said:


> Yes, I will, in a few days. Promise!


I sense a v5.2 teaser here...


----------



## aka70 (Mar 7, 2021)

I just saw it in my sphere account, for the 5.2 upgrade. 

Veeeery happy. 
Thank you @Lukas


----------



## aka70 (Mar 7, 2021)

chocobitz825 said:


> I'm sure Lukas has a more elegant way of doing it, but I've a keyswitch generator macro that hands all the articulations for CSS. theres no reason it cant be controlled fully even in studio one.


Right now, you can only do keyswitch, but no velocity sensitive keyswitch ( example g# for legato - non legato). 

Maybe Lucas have implemented the CC way as described by the CSS manual. That way it would be indeed very easy but not without hard work scripting it! 

Thats great news


----------



## chocobitz825 (Mar 7, 2021)

aka70 said:


> Right now, you can only do keyswitch, but no velocity sensitive keyswitch ( example g# for legato - non legato).
> 
> Maybe Lucas have implemented the CC way as described by the CSS manual. That way it would be indeed very easy but not without hard work scripting it!
> 
> Thats great news


scripting seems to be the Lukas magic. 

I'm sure v5.2 will make this finally obsolete for me, but this was my solution back in the v4 days


----------



## aka70 (Mar 7, 2021)

This is one way, but a very time consuming one , but yeah it works.


----------



## Lukas (Mar 7, 2021)

chocobitz825 said:


> I sense a v5.2 teaser here...


 This was not a 5.2 teaser actually. I planned to release one of my Studio One projects in March but couldn't finish it yet... because of certain Studio One things


----------



## Lukas (Mar 7, 2021)

chocobitz825 said:


> I'm sure v5.2 will make this finally obsolete for me, but this was my solution back in the v4 days


Yep, it works but is very clumsy.

What I showed in my screenshot was a Kontakt multi script, btw...


----------



## mscp (Mar 7, 2021)

The real question to some of us is: will we see better video handling?


----------



## chocobitz825 (Mar 7, 2021)

Lukas said:


> Yep, it works but is very clumsy.
> 
> What I showed in my screenshot was a Kontakt multi script, btw...


lol v4 ...they were wild days. Suppose I'll have to get into scripting some day


----------



## LynxUK (Mar 8, 2021)

Can anybody give updates on what they are announcing for 5.2, seeings that MyPresonus Sphere website is throwing a 503 error. You would have thought they would have learnt from previous software releases to prop up their server for big events. Sigh!


----------



## aka70 (Mar 8, 2021)

@Lukas, awesome presentation.

My workflow now just got waaay better. Thanks to you and all the team. 

I just saw the video by the way


----------



## Lukas (Mar 8, 2021)

Thank you! Appreciate this.


----------



## lucor (Oct 1, 2021)

Apologies if this has been answered before but I couldn't find it: 
Is there a way to specify _multiple _keywords when filtering out tracks? So for example, when I want to show my strings I can specify "Violins", "Violas", "Cellos" and "Basses" instead of just "Strings"? 

Since I don't use a template in S1 I usually don't have a "Strings" folder in my project, but it would still be nice to quickly show all my strings with one click (which would then also make it a breeze to quickly drop them all into a folder).
I've tried separating the different keywords with a comma, but that doesn't seem to work.

Thanks!


----------



## Lukas (Oct 1, 2021)

Yes. Separate them with a comma.


----------



## lucor (Oct 1, 2021)

Lukas said:


> Yes. Separate them with a comma.


I've tried that, but it's not working for me, so I must be doing something wrong:

Typing "Violins, Violas, Cellos, Basses" into the filter on the bottom of the Track List only shows the Violins, everything else stays hidden.
Same thing happens when I build a macro, only the Violins will show


----------



## lucor (Oct 1, 2021)

Nevermind I'm an idiot, I just found the problem: the blank space before the words...
Thanks for the quick help, Lukas!


----------



## Lukas (Oct 1, 2021)

Exactly. No spaces


----------



## Lukas (Feb 1, 2022)

samphony said:


> Hopefully PreSonus can innovate on their keyswitch system in a way that lets users define (compensate) latency per articulation setting so there is no need for negative delays and such. It would also allow to have notes tight on the grid but playing back correctly etc.


Yes, the idea has been around for some years. Digital Performer has added a similar feature in one of the last updates. However, there have been some problems:



dts_marin said:


> The articulation delay feature is extremely promising but at the same time rushed.
> 
> 
> 200ms limit which is too low for some libraries. You can stack multiple delays but I don't know if this breaks anything else and deviates from intended functionality/stability of the feature.
> ...





Dewdman42 said:


> Some of us have put a lot of thought into this issue and it seems like they just thought they could throw in an easy offset to make everyone happy, but its going to need more attention to really get it "right". I guess at least what they did is is not much different then if you had each articulation on its own track and using track offset. It would behave about the same way.


I wonder if there have been any updates here and if the feature works well by now. Has it turned out useful and do people use this feature?


----------



## Marcus Millfield (Feb 1, 2022)

I'm pretty new to S1 5.5, having used version 3 for a few years and coming back for the Sound Variations feature, which is great for all my VSL Synchron libraries.

I'm building a template now and to save some resources, I disable tracks. The problem with this approach is that S1 crashes a lot when enabling tracks. It looks like that has something to do with the Synchron Player.

Any thoughts how to start tackling this issue?

Another related question: is there an option to disable the instrument/VST of a track but keeping the Effects enabled? This would help me a bit because I use MIRPro as an effect on all tracks. Having the effect still enabled helps me tracking placement and mixing in MIRPro.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

Lukas said:


> I wonder if there have been any updates here and if the feature works well by now. Has it turned out useful and do people use this feature?



I am unaware of any improvements since it first came out. Yes it is still helpful and better then nothing, as the case with other daws.


----------



## studioj (Feb 1, 2022)

Marcus Millfield said:


> I'm pretty new to S1 5.5, having used version 3 for a few years and coming back for the Sound Variations feature, which is great for all my VSL Synchron libraries.
> 
> I'm building a template now and to save some resources, I disable tracks. The problem with this approach is that S1 crashes a lot when enabling tracks. It looks like that has something to do with the Synchron Player.
> 
> ...


I have found this also, that deactivating and activating tracks in Studio One can be a little unpredictable, resulting in crashes every now and then. I'm choosing to work with always on VEP instances and presets instead.


----------



## Marcus Millfield (Feb 1, 2022)

studioj said:


> I have found this also, that deactivating and activating tracks in Studio One can be a little unpredictable, resulting in crashes every now and then. I'm choosing to work with always on VEP instances and presets instead.



I did so too and initially was very pleased with VEP, but as I build my templates I realized VEP was eating more resources then when hosting everything in my DAW, so I switched back to DAW only. No issues with Reaper, but S1 keeps crashing on me. And to clarify: "every now and then" would be 3 to 4 times a day. That's a bit too much to be comfortable with the issue. I don't mind an error now and then, but this has cost me a lot of work.

Just realized it's not only enabling/disabling tracks, but also had some crashes while saving presets in Synchron Player.


----------



## Lukas (Feb 1, 2022)

Dewdman42 said:


> I am unaware of any improvements since it first came out. Yes it is still helpful and better then nothing, as the case with other daws.


Okay thanks. I just wonder how it can be helpful if it breaks things and event chasing does not work correctly - isn't this very unpredictable when using this in actual projects?


----------



## studioj (Feb 1, 2022)

Marcus Millfield said:


> I did so too and initially was very pleased with VEP, but as I build my templates I realized VEP was eating more resources then when hosting everything in my DAW, so I switched back to DAW only. No issues with Reaper, but S1 keeps crashing on me. And to clarify: "every now and then" would be 3 to 4 times a day. That's a bit too much to be comfortable with the issue. I don't mind an error now and then, but this has cost me a lot of work.
> 
> Just realized it's not only enabling/disabling tracks, but also had some crashes while saving presets in Synchron Player.


I don't use the Synchron Player much, and so I don't think it's specific to that plugin. I think it was mostly Kontakt for me. Yes I tested that approach of disabling for like a day and got multiple crashes, so that tracks. I sent a support ticket about it with repro steps to presonus but they couldn't reproduce, probably mostly because they don't have the same instruments...and I had some trouble reproducing it also with new tracks, it was very intermittent. So I moved on. Interesting about the VEP performance. I like not having to reload the big libraries multiple times in a day so VEP for me.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

Oh Lukas your posts are more like typical trolling from you since I know you're dredging up old posts to evangelize Studio One. Buy yourself a copy of DP11 and try it yourself!


----------



## studioj (Feb 1, 2022)

Lukas said:


> Okay thanks. I just wonder how it can be helpful if it breaks things, event chasing does not work correctly - isn't this very unpredictable when using this in actual projects?


personally I have become accustomed since forever to hand timing pretty much everything and so this is not a feature I am super eager for. I appreciate when companies like CSS edit their samples uniformly however and detail the delays in their documentation. Orchestral Tools could learn from this...

I would rather see Presonus add event delay and advance to the event inspector so we can add unique delays to events rather than whole tracks.

please vote  https://answers.presonus.com/73093/event-delay-setting-in-event-inspector


----------



## Lukas (Feb 1, 2022)

Dewdman42 said:


> Oh Lukas your posts are more like typical trolling from you since I know you're dredging up old posts to evangelize Studio One. Buy yourself a copy of DP11 and try it yourself!


Trying out a feature briefly usually gives not enough insight about whether a feature will prove itself in daily use or not. Besides, I personally don't really need this functionality - I've never had problems with articulations with different delays myself. That's why I would like to hear from people who actually worked with it for some time.

I'm interested if this old feature idea of mine still makes sense and could be helpful for Studio One users in the future or not - to maybe actually add it to the program someday. If that means trolling for you, I've actually had good experiences with that kind of trolling.

Thanks for your reply, though.


----------



## samphony (Feb 1, 2022)

Maybe it’s time for another thread regarding how users handle articulation switching in regards to delays. 

I personally prefer if my notes are on the grid that’s why i still cannot work with 1 track per instrument.


----------



## dts_marin (Feb 1, 2022)

Hi Lukas. The one library that doesn't like at all negative delay in DP is CSS. It causes the weird wrong octave issue that happens with some Kontakt scripts that do similar shiftings in time. Since this is a very popular library I suggest starting from there...

For simpler use cases and for non-legato articulations it works really well and it is shocking why this hasn't been a thing for a long time.

If you get into the trouble of adding it please consider separate delay settings for the attack and the releases of the notes. You will quickly find out during testing why that is important..

The breaking of event chasing may as well be the fault of sloppy programming which isn't unheard for MOTU (still, I love DP ). Articulation Maps are a very new addition to DP and since their appearance there are a lot of small bugs that take months to be discovered since their team is a bit slow.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

Yes I think you should add it and make it even better! I am always in support of all known DAW's being improved and I am in danger of jumping ship at any time. Make StudioOne good enough and I will jump to it without blinking an eye. Its not quite there yet (for me).

MOTU's first attempt at this issue could be better also IMHO, but at least its a step in the right direction, they were the first DAW to recognize the issue and do SOMETHING about it. It was a last minute add to an 11.x update. The main criticism is that -200ms is not enough available negative delay, they need to set the max to 500ms or better yet 1000ms and most people will be happy with it. MOTU has provided the best solution so far.

Lots of people ask about this on a daily basis so I'm not sure what your resistance to the idea would be. 

If you are actually asking for information that might help PreSonus make a better version of this feature I can provide some insights that might help PM me.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

dts_marin said:


> Hi Lukas. The one library that doesn't like at all negative delay in DP is CSS. It causes the weird wrong octave issue that happens with some Kontakt scripts that do similar shiftings in time. Since this is a very popular library I suggest starting from there...


Can you fill me in with more detail about what the problem with CSS is? 



dts_marin said:


> For simpler use cases and for non-legato articulations it works really well and it is shocking why this hasn't been a thing for a long time.



agree!



dts_marin said:


> If you get into the trouble of adding it please consider separate delay settings for the attack and the releases of the notes. You will quickly find out during testing why that is important..



100% yes. Its important that a feature like this only offsets NoteOn's. Some people do want to also offset NoteOff's, depends on who you talk to, but remember that the primary issue being addressed is a slow attack time of certain articulations compared to other articulations. In most cases we don't want the note release to also be offset early.

One more thing worth mentioning is that CC, PitchBend and Aftertouch, as expression, should NOT be offset early. That is one reason why using track offset is less-then-optimal. When its handled via articulation manager, then only the notes are offset...which is a good thing! However, if and when any of those midi event types are being used as instrument switches instead of expression...then they do need to be offset early in order to make sure they switch the instrument before the the NoteOn that is being offset early.

This opens a small can of worms in some cases, the best approach in my view is to avoid CC instrument switches, stick to Note-based keyswitches.. The articulation manager should know when a CC is being used as a switch and can do that right thing. 

But note still, if you switch an instrument early, in order to get ahead of the actual NoteOn, and yet the previous note is still sustaining..some instruments may not handle that well.. I don't see any way around that other than putting each articulation in its own instrument instance.



dts_marin said:


> The breaking of event chasing may as well be the fault of sloppy programming which isn't unheard for MOTU (still, I love DP ).



Can you please elaborate on the broken event chasing? I have not encountered that yet.




dts_marin said:


> Articulation Maps are a very new addition to DP and since their appearance there are a lot of small bugs that take months to be discovered since their team is a bit slow.



No doubt. At least they are heading in the right direction...I look forward to the day all the DAW's have competed with each other and improved themselves to work perfectly on this point.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

another thing worth considering would be something where each articulation is hosted in a seperate instrument instance and somehow the articulation management system routes notes to the right instrument instance....along with any expression events (cc, pitchbend and aftertouch). Then the latency compensation can be handle in the audio domain for each instrument plugin instance..that avoids problems with overlapping articulations like I mentioned above...but introduces more complexity and a lot more plugin instances. But anyway its worth mentioning.


----------



## dts_marin (Feb 1, 2022)

Dewdman42 said:


> Can you fill me in with more detail about what the problem with CSS is?


The CSS legato script does something behind the scenes that clearly doesn't like getting moved. The transition breaks and the second note sounds an octave higher. I can't remember if it was only during recording. I think playback was fine. But recording with articulations with negative delay was wonky as hell.


Dewdman42 said:


> Can you please elaborate on the broken event chasing? I have not encountered that yet.


Maybe something has changed since then, it was a few versions back when the feature first appeared and during my testing I found a very strange behaviour with event chasing on tracks with articulations with negative delay. The continuous data wasn't processed correctly every time maybe because it tried to read events that were supposed to be read later in the timeline.


----------



## Lukas (Feb 1, 2022)

Dewdman42 said:


> Lots of people ask about this on a daily basis so I'm not sure what your resistance to the idea would be.


The reason is that it can be very problematic and there's a couple of things to consider. You already mentioned some aspects.



Dewdman42 said:


> 100% yes. Its important that a feature like this only offsets NoteOn's. Some people do want to also offset NoteOff's, depends on who you talk to, but remember that the primary issue being addressed is a slow attack time of certain articulations compared to other articulations. In most cases we don't want the note release to also be offset early.


You want note delays triggered by articulation cause note start + end to get out of sync? This can lead to entirely unpredictable results. What happens if you set a delay for a quarter note that is not negative but positive and lasts half a note? You want the start of the note to happen after the end of the note?



Dewdman42 said:


> One more thing worth mentioning is that CC, PitchBend and Aftertouch, as expression, should NOT be offset early. That is one reason why using track offset is less-then-optimal. When its handled via articulation manager, then only the notes are offset...which is a good thing! However, if and when any of those midi event types are being used as instrument switches instead of expression...then they do need to be offset early in order to make sure they switch the instrument before the the NoteOn that is being offset early.


You want part automation not to be moved. That means notes and part automation (a note recorded with pitch bend) would be out of sync - what you see on the screen wouldn't represent the actual state anymore. You might want that - but it's problematic again. Things can become extremely confusing. And some people certainly want it to be offset to keep things like vibrato automation exactly with the notes.

All I'm saying is that it's not as easy as it looks at first glance...


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 1, 2022)

Lukas said:


> The reason is that it can be very problematic and there are many things to consider. And you already mention some aspects.



"it" is not problematic. Some programming bugs are just that. My view is that none of the DAW developers even understand the issue completely right now to be able to offer complete solutions. It is very well possible for smart minds to solve this problem for composers. You are either on the side of a solution or the side of complainers with no solution. which is it? I think you are just finding a troll way to evangelize S1, but let's see how that goes.



Lukas said:


> You want note delays triggered by articulation cause note start + end get out of sync? This can lead to entirely unpredictable results. What happens if you set a delay for a quarter note that is not negative but positive and lasts half a note? You want the start of the note to happen after the end of the note?



Obviously don't allow that. Misuse of a system is user-error.

I don't personally see any reason for an articulation management system to support positive delays, but hey someone may differ with that opinion. We are really only talking about negative offset of NoteOn's of some articulations...




Lukas said:


> You want part automation not to be moved. That means notes and part automation (a note recorded with pitch bend) would be out of sync



why would it be out of sync?



Lukas said:


> - what you see on the screen wouldn't represent the actual state anymore. You might want that - but it's problematic again. Things can become extremely confusing. And some people certainly want it to be offset to keep things like vibrato automation exactly with the notes.



No.

And no it doesn't have to be confusing. This discussion is becoming confusing...

What you want first and foremost is for WHAT YOU SEE to match WHAT YOU HEAR. WYSIWYH.

Right now that is definitely not the case with latent articulations...and worse...its inconsistent from articulation to articulation in some instruments.

In order to have the display match what you hear......

NoteOn's have to be sent early because they don't start making any sound until some ms go by or have a very very slow attack.

Any expression that is programmed does not have latency and should not be queued early. The expression needs to happen on the timeline when the composer desires it to happen, not when a NoteOn is prequeued ahead of time in order sound on time.

Only key switches and CC switches that are designed to change the instrument setup before the actual note is performed, those need to be queued early. They are not making sound anyway, they are being used as switches.

In the case of legatos, the noteOn is coming early because in real life the player would start playing the legato or portamento transition early, arriving on the new pitch on the beat so to speak. Those are usually the articulations with the most latency...can be as long as 300-400ms..maybe longer..whch is substantial. Especially with portamentos...could be even longer I guess.

So still, you want the expression data to be visually on the timeline exactly on the time when you want expression such as vibrato to be happening. WYSIWYH. If that means some vibrato CC is showing in the 300ms before the beat...that is actually what we hear and what we want to see.

However, you see the problem now, without some kind of delay feature added to articulation maps, in that case the CC expression curve we see visually does match what we hear, but the piano roll notes do not. The piano roll has to have that destination note placed 300 or 500ms early ahead of the beat (whatever amount it is), so that the destination note of the legato transition will actually sound on the beat. The visualization is out of sync with what we hear.

If you're talking about NoteExpression, then that may need to be programmed to be handled in a different way that makes sense for StudioOne and Cubase so that what we see visually matches up with what we hear...and not having to manually nudge notes early. It is all doable by a DAW that is in charge of managing an articulation map of some kind that knows the latency of each articulation. it is just a matter of programming.

The only issue I mentioned which cannot be programmed by DAW programmers is that one about overlapping articulations. Because that comes down to the instruments themselves and how they handle each note. Will an instrument change the sound of a currently sustaining note if it receives a keyswitch while its still sustaining. If so, there is nothing the DAW can do about it..and nothing a composer can do about it either even if they aren't using articulation maps at all. In that case if they nudge the second note earlier to compensate for latency...and it overlaps with a note that is still playing...if the instrument doesn't react to key switches well that way, there is nothing the DAW nor composer can do about it other then use separate plugin instances for each articulation.


----------



## Lukas (Feb 1, 2022)

Dewdman42 said:


> I think you are just finding a troll way to evangelize S1, but let's see how that goes.


What benefit would I have from this?


----------

