# The Big Note/Release Callback Mystery Laid Bare!



## Big Bob (Jan 1, 2007)

Hi Everyone,

I've completed my *Note/Release Callback Study and Report *and I'm attaching a copy of the zipped .pdf to this post.

I'm afraid the situation is pretty much of a Royal Mess and in spite of my best effort to orgainize the data in a friendly way, I'm really rather unhappy with the way it turned out. My concluding remarks on page 9 pretty well summarizes the situation. But, perhaps others can jump in here and run with the ball.

It would be kind of nice if we could arrive at a concensus as to what the major problems are and how we would like to see them fixed. But, in the meantime, this report can be used as a guide for predicting how the KSP will react to your scripts and trigger NCB/RCBs (sometimes in very surprising if not *ASTONISHING* ways :wink: )

Happy New Year Everyone

God Bless,

Bob 

BTW Nickie, I didn't know that I was a Script Kiddie, I'm feeling younger already


----------



## Thonex (Jan 1, 2007)

Thanks for posting this Bob. What a ton of work!!!

I skipped to your conclusions and they were very clear. I'm filing this away so I can refer to it when I come across some Note CB mysteries.


Cheers,

T


----------



## kotori (Jan 14, 2007)

Thanks a lot for doing this Bob!

This made many things much clearer to me. :smile: 

Cheers,
Nils


----------



## Franz (Jan 14, 2007)

Wow, what a nice demystification!
Thanks, Native ows you an award.

I want to add that I have worked with note release since the Akai S1000.
I have use silent loops at the start of samples (EMU) and Kontakt is the most awkward I have seen in a while.


----------



## Big Bob (Jan 19, 2007)

I'm bumping this up because I uploaded a corrected version. There was a minor problem with two page 9s and no page 10. I'm also in the process of editing the text to add some newly discovered behavior of note_off calls from the RCB. As soon as I complete my research of this situation, I'll update the report again.

I've just completed the revisions to this report so you may want to download it again. The changes are all in Section 2.3. I'll upload it right after I complete this edit.

God Bless,

Bob


----------



## Big Bob (Jan 19, 2007)

Bump****

Just want to call your attention to the revision of Section 2.3 now incorporated into the report. You may want to re-download it.

Bob


----------



## Big Bob (Jan 20, 2007)

I'm going to bump this up one more time because I just uploaded a further revision to this report.

For those who have read this report you know that there are a number of quirks and some non-uniformity of behavior connected with triggering NCBs and RCBs. But probably the most significant of these, is the difference in behavior of slots N and N+1 versus all the higher slots. In the original report I concluded that before we attempted to get NI to make this behavior uniform, we should first decide which of the two behaviors would be preferable.

I'm now reasonably certain that we would need the behavior of the higher slots rather than the behavior of N and N+1. N and N+1 only provide a single shot at an RCB trigger and there are many situations where we need to retrigger the RCB (such as after using ignore_event in the RCB or releasing a key while the sustain pedal is active). So I have edited the conclusions on page 10 of the report to reflect these thoughts.

So, those of you who like to keep current on this may want to download the latest version.

God Bless,

Bob


----------



## Big Bob (Jan 24, 2007)

Hi all,

I almost hate to post this but, I've just discovered yet another anomaly regarding when *note_o*ff will and won't trigger an *RCB*. This is going to be a very difficult one to test and characterize so I don't know when I'll be able to get to it.

However, I thought I'd mention what I already know about it and maybe I can keep someone else from having trouble related to this. As I already mentioned in my last update, when a *note_off *call is made from an *RCB*, triggered by the same event, the *RCB* (if it would have retriggered otherwise) *will not re-trigger*. However, I erroneously reported that a *note_off *to a different event (than the one which triggered the current *RCB*) would always be acted upon according to the 'rules'. Apparently it is not so simple  .

I have just uncovered a case where a *note_of*f to a *different* event is *not acted upon *when the *RCB* is associated with the slot where the note originated (even if this is the first *note_off *to the event). This one may be tough to fully characterize, but the common denominator is calling *note_off* from an *RCB*. As long as *note_of*f is called from somewhere else, the *'rules' *should hold.

Also, I stated on page 8 that *"I can't imagine why the KSP wants to treat a Key Lift so differently from a note_off call" *(relative to Orphan events). I now think I see an important reason for this :oops: .

The bottom line for all this is that you can expect yet another revision of this miserable report  . Meanwhile, if any of you discover some quirk not covered in my report (or contradicting it), I would sure appreciate you calling it to my attention.

God Bless,

Bob


----------

