# Orchestral Articulations: separate tracks vs key switches



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

Hello Great Composers,

I mostly use key switches to switch between different artics when I record strings, or any other orch. instrument. Others use separate instances tracks of the same instrument where each instance assigned to each artic but I believe this will increase the amount of tracks which in turn consumes more memory. Key switches are mainly beneficial in live performance but they are also beneficial on saving memory consumption in the studio.

What would be your approach?


----------



## Wenlone (Mar 26, 2020)

I am a Cubase Pro user. I use expression maps for everything. I cant find my way with separate tracks or key switches. Sometimes setting up expression maps might be time consuming but i think its the best way to manage articulations.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Mar 26, 2020)

I always do keyswitches.


----------



## Rob (Mar 26, 2020)

Cubase expression maps user here as well... some libraries use keyswitches, others cc values or velocity. The advantage with expr. maps is I can have one map for different libs, assigning notes, velocity or controllers to the same lane (articulation)


----------



## José Herring (Mar 26, 2020)

Rob said:


> Cubase expression maps user here as well... some libraries use keyswitches, others cc values or velocity. The advantage with expr. maps is I can have one map for different libs, assigning notes, velocity or controllers to the same lane (articulation)


Never used them but I think I'll give expression maps at shot. It will need to be on a gradient. I can perhaps start with my older libraries and then expand into the newer more complicated libraries. 

I hate using keyswitches and I hate using separate tracks as well. I've heard horror stories about maps but I'm willing to dive in and give them a shot.

Any pitfalls to avoid?


----------



## RonV (Mar 26, 2020)

Expression maps seem to work well in Cubase and I try to use the direction-type maps from Babylonwaves. Similar to keyswitches, you have to watch timing to make sure that the expression map is read first by MIDI. I've not done it, but I understand that some may use separate tracks for shorts and longs so that they can apply different amounts of reverb to each.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

RonV said:


> Expression maps seem to work well in Cubase and I try to use the direction-type maps from Babylonwaves. Similar to keyswitches, you have to watch timing to make sure that the expression map is read first by MIDI. I've not done it, but I understand that some may use separate tracks for shorts and longs so that they can apply different amounts of reverb to each.



Yes, this is another benefit of tracks separation is that each track has its own channel in the mixer so you can apply effects on each artic.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

Wenlone said:


> I am a Cubase Pro user. I use expression maps for everything. I cant find my way with separate tracks or key switches. Sometimes setting up expression maps might be time consuming but i think its the best way to manage articulations.



Never used exp. maps before but I watched a Logic Pro tutorial and there was a tool mentioned in the video from company called "Babylon Waves". I loved that tool as it dedicates track lanes for each artic. so you can use the pencil to apply which artic. is applied on which bar. I am a Cubase 10 user as well. Not sure if this tool is supported in Cubase though.

EDIT: The tool is called "Art Conductor"


----------



## chocobitz825 (Mar 26, 2020)

As a Studio One user, without expression maps, I use a few options depending on the type of project. I think Keyswitches are good, but what I normally do is write the music out, and then create another midi track and trigger the keyswitches on the second midi track. That way if I ever want to transpose the whole thing, I can do so without accidentally moving the keyswitches as well. 

I use separate tracks for different articulations at times when creatively, it makes sense and I want more control over the levels and sound. Not sure about other DAWS, but in studio one, its easy to copy midi notes in one track and transfer them to another track for making separate articulation tracks after its written.


----------



## José Herring (Mar 26, 2020)

RonV said:


> Expression maps seem to work well in Cubase and I try to use the direction-type maps from Babylonwaves. Similar to keyswitches, you have to watch timing to make sure that the expression map is read first by MIDI. I've not done it, but I understand that some may use separate tracks for shorts and longs so that they can apply different amounts of reverb to each.


I've heard this too and it makes sense for more hybrid type cues were you're alternating the root and the minor 3rd for 10 minutes . But, for that I might just use special patches. 

For me I've longed for an easier way to use multiple articulations in one line without having to split it up or use extensive keyswitches. If this works I could probably get my template down to a more manageable track count.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

chocobitz825 said:


> As a Studio One user, without expression maps, I use a few options depending on the type of project. I think Keyswitches are good, but what I normally do is write the music out, and then create another midi track and trigger the keyswitches on the second midi track. That way if I ever want to transpose the whole thing, I can do so without accidentally moving the keyswitches as well.
> 
> I use separate tracks for different articulations at times when creatively, it makes sense and I want more control over the levels and sound. Not sure about other DAWS, but in studio one, its easy to copy midi notes in one track and transfer them to another track for making separate articulation tracks after its written.



Good point here, thx.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

Just checked the price of Art Conductor and I think it's a little bit expensive for just an expression maps tool. It costs 59 euros. Do you think it's worth it or should I take the manual DIYs route of creating maps?


----------



## d.healey (Mar 26, 2020)

I use a combination of performance technique, key-switches, program changes, and CC data.


----------



## JJP (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Just checked the price of Art Conductor and I think it's a little bit expensive for just an expression maps tool. It costs 59 euros. Do you think it's worth it or should I take the manual DIYs route of creating maps?


That depends on how big your template is and how much your time is worth. Many professionals would say 59 euros is well worth the time it saves. An amateur who isn't facing deadlines and doesn't earn their living from this may see it as an unnecessary expense.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Just checked the price of Art Conductor and I think it's a little bit expensive for just an expression maps tool. It costs 59 euros. Do you think it's worth it or should I take the manual DIYs route of creating maps?



BabylonWaves is not really a separate tool. Its just a big collection of pre-configured articulation Sets for LogicPro (or Expression Maps for cubase). Think of it more like a preset collection that works with the features already built into LogicPro and Cubase. If you use the sample libraries they currently support, it may save you some time in setting up your own articulation sets (or expression maps in cubase), so long as you like the workflow they have adopted, which attempts to use the same input key switches across all products for a consistent work flow.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 26, 2020)

I think you will find people here are using all manner of approaches all over the board with no consensus about the best way to work. There are numerous challenges and I think just about everyone is making due with the tools which to date, are better then nothing...but also still lacking in some ways IMHO. so your method may depend on your specific needs, how you deal with some of those product deficiencies or complications, etc.. This is a big and deep topic and there has been a lot of discussion here over several years, so I suggest some searching and reading and experimentation and you will come to a method that works for you for now, but I feel this is an area where DAW's are currently evolving. slowly.


----------



## Rob (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Never used exp. maps before but I watched a Logic Pro tutorial and there was a tool mentioned in the video from company called "Babylon Waves". I loved that tool as it dedicates track lanes for each artic. so you can use the pencil to apply which artic. is applied on which bar. I am a Cubase 10 user as well. Not sure if this tool is supported in Cubase though.
> 
> EDIT: The tool is called "Art Conductor"


what you're descring is exactly what Cubase expression maps do... no need for extra tools. In the key editor, under the piano roll you can see as many lanes as you have articulations in your map, and assign them with the pencil wherever you want.


----------



## José Herring (Mar 26, 2020)

Ah, chalk using expression maps up to another brilliant idea I had several years ago that I fully tried out then abandoned. But, I remember now. The problem I had was that I couldn't figure out how to get the triggered keyswitch to happen before the note event. I think I figured out that I could use a separate track then use the offset to slide the separate track 100ms forward so that it would trigger before the midi note event. But...then I decided that was the same pain in the ass as just using a separate track for keyswitches.

Though I'm willing to try it again. I think it might actually be a little better than the Keyswitches now that I look back on it.


----------



## babylonwaves (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Just checked the price of Art Conductor and I think it's a little bit expensive for just an expression maps tool. It costs 59 euros. Do you think it's worth it or should I take the manual DIYs route of creating maps?


Absolutely. If you have time, or you want to educate yourself, you probably can setup expression maps yourself. Some are a bit tricky (e.g. the cinematic studio series) but of course it's totally possible to DIY maps.
Here's the thing: Art Conductor is about consistency. Consistent key switches for the main arts, consistent IDs so you can move regions from one instrument to another and a lot of your programming keeps working. Consistent naming etc. I use special software to get this done, it's totally tedious to do this manually and you'd need a lot of focus on top. Some others here pointed out that they use Art Conductor as a starting point and then tailor the maps to their personal requirements. That's a pretty good idea as well.

HTH

BTW if you use Attributes in cubase, you don't need to offset anything. With attributes you can also assign an articulation to an individual note in a chord, which is great when you do mockups and you want to introduce some live and "randomness". for instance, in an staccato ostinato you can replace some notes with spiccatos or marcatos and it instantly sounds more lively.


----------



## KEM (Mar 26, 2020)

It really depends, I was always a "separate midi track per articulation" kind of guy but when I bought JXL Brass it opened up my mind to what I could do with keyswitches, there are times where I love having separate tracks, and most of the time that's what I'm using, but I think when it comes to brass keyswitches are the better option.


----------



## Rob (Mar 26, 2020)

josejherring said:


> Never used them but I think I'll give expression maps at shot. It will need to be on a gradient. I can perhaps start with my older libraries and then expand into the newer more complicated libraries.
> 
> I hate using keyswitches and I hate using separate tracks as well. I've heard horror stories about maps but I'm willing to dive in and give them a shot.
> 
> Any pitfalls to avoid?


None that I can think of Jose... it's the only way I can see working on orchestral scores, really can't stand having different tracks for the same instrument. And they're easy to program once you've wrapped your head around them...


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

Ok


Rob said:


> what you're descring is exactly what Cubase expression maps do... no need for extra tools. In the key editor, under the piano roll you can see as many lanes as you have articulations in your map, and assign them with the pencil wherever you want.



Rob, can you tell me what were the problems the composers community were facing that exp. maps have solved for them? ... Were they time consumption problems or technical problems? .. Sorry if the question a bit naive but I want to know what are the overall benefits of exp. maps. What problems they solve?


----------



## J-M (Mar 26, 2020)

Expression maps. I have such a huge template anyways...even with Lemur handling my organization for me, a separate track for each articulation would be a mess.


----------



## Rob (Mar 26, 2020)

I can tell what they do for me... as I'm usually working on full orchestral scores, the first advantage for me is they translate the artculation symbol, like the dot for staccato, or the accent, or techniques like pizz. or tremolo, or slurred notes to the appropriate patch. The second is being able to stay on the same midi track for all the articulations belonging to the instrument. So if I'm working on a 28 staves score, I'll have 28 tracks and not 28Xn...


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 26, 2020)

Rob said:


> I can tell what they do for me... as I'm usually working on full orchestral scores, the first advantage for me is they translate the artculation symbol, like the dot for staccato, or the accent, or techniques like pizz. or tremolo, or slurred notes to the appropriate patch. The second is being able to stay on the same midi track for all the articulations belonging to the instrument. So if I'm working on a 28 staves score, I'll have 28 tracks and not 28Xn...



Got it.


----------



## RonOrchComp (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Others use separate instances tracks of the same instrument where each instance assigned to each artic but I believe this will increase the amount of tracks which in turn consumes more memory.



No. Track count does not increase memory. The amount of samples loaded will increase memory.


----------



## José Herring (Mar 26, 2020)

Yes, Expression Maps are going to work out nicely. Different way of working but is fairly musical and intuitive. 

So far I'm inputting the line using a regular sustain patch then applying articulations and then tweaking velocities and cc data, ect to get it all phrased correctly. I can't really think of any other way of doing it but maybe with practice there could be a way to input articulation changes on the fly. 

So far it does seem to align more with a musical mindset.


----------



## labornvain (Mar 26, 2020)

I don't know why no one else has figured this out, and as far as I know it only works in Cubase , but in my opinion the easiest way to do articulations in kontakt is to use midi channels.

First, load up a single instance of Kontact with all the different articulation patches you're going to use. Just drag and drop them in. This will automatically assign each articulation to a different midi channel.

Cubase has a nifty feature which allows you to assign different notes to different midi channels. For it to work, you have to set the master midi channel in the Track Inspector to "Any."

Then in the edit window, you just go in and select which notes you want to assign to different articulations, and then assign them the midi channel which corresponds to the articulation you have loaded into Kontakt.

It's super fast, really easy, and it doesn't require any pre-setup. You can just do it on the fly.

In the midi logical editor, I have a presets to select long or short notes so that I can assign them to the long or short articulation in one fell swoop.

So in the simplest example, I will load up an instance of Kontakt. In slot one, which is assigned to MIDI channel one in Kontact, I might add a legato string patch. In Slot 2, midi channel 2, I'll load a staccato patch.

Then, either using the logical editor preset, or manually, I will select all the short notes. Then go up to the top little drop-down menu and assign them to MIDI Channel 2. Done.

The benefits to doing it this way include being able to go in and individually tweak one of the articulations. Usually this just involves changing the level of the short notes.

For mixing, I much prefer having a performance all on one track. But of course, that depends.

The big limitation in using midi channel assignments to trigger different articulations within Kontakt is if those different articulations require midi CC data.

While Cubase will allow you to assign different notes to different midi channels, it will not allow you to assign different controllers to different midi channels. Unfortunately.

But I have found that in most cases this is not a problem since the only articulation that requires CC 11 or mod wheel is the Legato or sustain patch.

So this is a cool way to work really fast and conveniently when it applies. When it doesn't for one or more technical reasons, I still use key switches and expression maps.


----------



## jbuhler (Mar 26, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Just checked the price of Art Conductor and I think it's a little bit expensive for just an expression maps tool. It costs 59 euros. Do you think it's worth it or should I take the manual DIYs route of creating maps?


What do you pay yourself an hour? I deem that I pay them to type in the articulation names and to make a first pass at organization. For that $60 is well worth it.


----------



## babylonwaves (Mar 27, 2020)

labornvain said:


> The benefits to doing it this way include being able to go in and individually tweak one of the articulations.


This is what Attributes in expression maps do.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 27, 2020)

separate tracks...all the way now....Much prefer it. No nasty surprises

best

e


----------



## Rob (Mar 27, 2020)

ed buller said:


> separate tracks...all the way now....Much prefer it. No nasty surprises
> 
> best
> 
> e


of course it depends on the complexity of the score one's working on... I usually have from 20 to 30 instruments playing. Let's take just the strings, 5 tracks. Each one has sus-legato-staccato-pizz-tremolo-harmonics-gliss-sul tasto-pont-sord... there can be more, but this is a common configuration. If I had a track for each artic that would make 50 tracks just for strings. Not to mention the risk of losing the musical sense having a single phrase exploded through several tracks, and the hassle of having to scroll up and down. Add to that Winds, Brass, Percussion and Choir and the project becomes unmanageable.


----------



## labornvain (Mar 27, 2020)

babylonwaves said:


> This is what Attributes in expression maps do.


Well, as I said, I still use expression Maps. For the libraries that I have them set up.

But, as I also said, the midi route is faster, easier, and requires a lot less hassle. And it works the same no matter what library you're using.

It also gives you the ability to remix the articulations. I won't name names, but a lot of my libraries are kind of poorly sampled. Some articulations are too loud. Some are too quiet. Some even have different stereo imaging, which is kind of incredible.

So by loading them into different slots in Kontact, I can easily make adjustments to the level, pan, or even EQ, to make all the articulations match-up.

But the main thing, again, is it's just fast and easy. The truth is, expression maps in Cubase suck. They're glitchy, buggy, and an incredible hassle to set up. If I were to build expression maps for all of my libraries, it would take me weeks of work.

And then you get into the situation where libraries, and again I won't name names, don't even conform to their own key switch standards. So you're expression maps work on some patches, but not on others.

It's really just a whole world of horribleness.

That said, on the libraries where I do have expression mappes already set up, it works fine. And I use them.

Cheers


----------



## muk (Mar 27, 2020)

There is one disadvantage of the one track per articulation approach that is never being mentioned. It's the transition between articulations. If you use keyswitches, most libraries will take care of the transition automatically. If you use, say, a détaché and then a staccato. At the point where the staccato begins the library takes care of ajusting the release of the détaché automatically. The détaché gets stopped by the next note. If you have the two articulations on separate tracks, the library will play the full release of the détaché, because no other note follows on that track. So you have to adjust the release on that note yourself, and then adjust the beginning of the staccato note on another track. If you don't do that, the détaché and staccato can overlap, or not be connected enough. This becomes unbearably time consuming if you use a lot of different articulations and switch between them regularly. If the articulations are on the same track, the library will adjust automatically, and you only need to finetune where you are not happy with the automatic settings.

So, the advantages of keyswitching:

fewer tracks in your daw = tidier layout
automatic transitions between articulations
you can mimick a traditional score layout

Disadvantages of keyswitching:

you can't easily separate different articulations if you want to mix them differently (shorter reverb on short notes, for example).
can be time consuming to set up

Advantages of one track per articulation:

easier routing for mixing
very easy to apply individual mixing for individual articulations
stacking articulations very simple to achieve

Disadvantages of one track per articulation:

unwieldy huge count of tracks
transitions between articulations fiddly and time consuming
very time consuming to create a score out of a daw project, as you have to consolidate a huge number of tracks into single instruments.
can be difficult to keep an overview over what you have written because of large track number

Pick your poison. I am using keyswitches. Probably mainly because I have traditional education and a score layout feels more natural to me than individual tracks per articulation. Also I switch articulations often, so manually adjusting every single transition is simply way too slow for me.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 27, 2020)

Rob said:


> of course it depends on the complexity of the score one's working on... I usually have from 20 to 30 instruments playing. Let's take just the strings, 5 tracks. Each one has sus-legato-staccato-pizz-tremolo-harmonics-gliss-sul tasto-pont-sord... there can be more, but this is a common configuration. If I had a track for each artic that would make 50 tracks just for strings. Not to mention the risk of losing the musical sense having a single phrase exploded through several tracks, and the hassle of having to scroll up and down. Add to that Winds, Brass, Percussion and Choir and the project becomes unmanageable.



Folders are your friend

best

e


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

RonOrchComp said:


> No. Track count does not increase memory. The amount of samples loaded will increase memory.



lol of course you're not going to use empty tracks, are you?


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> What do you pay yourself an hour? I deem that I pay them to type in the articulation names and to make a first pass at organization. For that $60 is well worth it.



Yes, it's cheap but I am talking from the principal perspective not financial. In other words, spending only 60 dollars on a tool when there are other free ways is a waste of money eveb though the price is cheap. And so far I receive many cool ideas here for free.


----------



## babylonwaves (Mar 27, 2020)

labornvain said:


> Well, as I said, I still use expression Maps. For the libraries that I have them set up.
> 
> But, as I also said, the midi route is faster, easier, and requires a lot less hassle. And it works the same no matter what library you're using.



I just wanted to point out that one doesn't need your MIDI channel system to choose the articulation per note. to be honest, I have no clue how _I_ could work like you do but that's beside the point. many roads lead to Rome.


----------



## Rob (Mar 27, 2020)

ed buller said:


> Folders are your friend
> 
> best
> 
> e


yes I know, I have one folder for strings, one for brass etc. Don't want a strings folder that contains five folders that contain ten tracks each... that would drive me crazy, but to each his own of course


----------



## rrichard63 (Mar 27, 2020)

I don't think anyone has asked @HarmonyCore two questions. (1) Which DAW are you using? (2) How willing and able are you to change DAWs in order to use the method you decide is best for you?


----------



## robgb (Mar 27, 2020)

My DAW is Reaper and I use @tack's amazing Reaticulate. Couldn't work without it.


----------



## DANIELE (Mar 27, 2020)

When I was using keyswitch based libraries I preferred to use one track per instrument (or ensemble) because using many track is so dispersive.

Now I don't use articulation anymore (for the best part of my template), I hate them, and where I'm forced to do so I use them very sparingly.


----------



## jbuhler (Mar 27, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Yes, it's cheap but I am talking from the principal perspective not financial. In other words, spending only 60 dollars on a tool when there are other free ways is a waste of money eveb though the price is cheap. And so far I receive many cool ideas here for free.


No, it's a question of labor. Would you pay someone $60 for this work or rather do it yourself? It took me a full day to work out how to make an articulation set work for Berlin Strings. (Many of the articulations for that library are not included in the BW set.) If you have one of the big SF libraries like SCS, BW will pay for itself in the time it saves you on that. If it takes you 8 hours to sort all that out, then you'd be paying yourself a bit over $7/hour. Is making these articulation sets the best way to spend your time? For me, that's the principle.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

rrichard63 said:


> I don't think anyone has asked @HarmonyCore two questions. (1) Which DAW are you using? (2) How willing and able are you to change DAWs in order to use the method you decide is best for you?



Cubase 10.5 here.
I was on Ableton and Reason before that. I just didn't like their workflows. Despite many can argue that Cubase is hard and not workflow-friendly, I see it the opposite way.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

DANIELE said:


> When I was using keyswitch based libraries I preferred to use one track per instrument (or ensemble) because using many track is so dispersive.
> 
> Now I don't use articulation anymore (for the best part of my template), I hate them, and where I'm forced to do so I use them very sparingly.



Sorry, I am not following. Did you just say you don't use artics anymore? How is that? I think we can't live without them especially for orchestra.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

jbuhler said:


> No, it's a question of labor. Would you pay someone $60 for this work or rather do it yourself? It took me a full day to work out how to make an articulation set work for Berlin Strings. (Many of the articulations for that library are not included in the BW set.) If you have one of the big SF libraries like SCS, BW will pay for itself in the time it saves you on that. If it takes you 8 hours to sort all that out, then you'd be paying yourself a bit over $7/hour. Is making these articulation sets the best way to spend your time? For me, that's the principle.



I agree with that. However, I can't argue more because I haven't used exp maps in my life because I am new to orchestral arrangement anyway. Before, I used to arrange for rock and pop. So, first, I have to use the traditional exp maps found in Cubase and practice it for some time to decide if I need a tool or not to automate things for me.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

Awesome discussion everyone. I really love VI Control. I am literally learning a lot here.


----------



## DANIELE (Mar 27, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> Sorry, I am not following. Did you just say you don't use artics anymore? How is that? I think we can't live without them especially for orchestra.



I use libraries that put performance before everything else so every articulation is performed by how you write the line. There some improvements needed but the technology is already pretty good and it is moving towards even better results at a fast pace.

Look at Samplemodeling Libraries or Aaron Venture Infinite libraries or Audiomodeling ones and you will understand.

I hate articulations I don't want to use them anymore.


----------



## HarmonyCore (Mar 27, 2020)

DANIELE said:


> I use libraries that put performance before everything else so every articulation is performed by how you write the line. There some improvements needed but the technology is already pretty good and it is moving towards even better results at a fast pace.
> 
> Look at Samplemodeling Libraries or Aaron Venture Infinite libraries or Audiomodeling ones and you will understand.
> 
> I hate articulations I don't want to use them anymore.



Interesting, thx. Will check them out now.


----------



## jbuhler (Mar 27, 2020)

HarmonyCore said:


> I agree with that. However, I can't argue more because I haven't used exp maps in my life because I am new to orchestral arrangement anyway. Before, I used to arrange for rock and pop. So, first, I have to use the traditional exp maps found in Cubase and practice it for some time to decide if I need a tool or not to automate things for me.


Yes, this is true. I worked with Logic articulations sets a long time before I invested in the BW sets. That time was well spent in learning how the sets work. But when it came time to do up all my libraries and try to keep them relatively consistent, the BW sets were a godsend.


----------



## Glagoliath (Mar 27, 2020)

labornvain said:


> I don't know why no one else has figured this out, and as far as I know it only works in Cubase , but in my opinion the easiest way to do articulations in kontakt is to use midi channels.




That works in FL Studio too and Blake Robinson who was doing Kontakt programming for Spitfire Audio made this free plugin BRSO Articulate for FL Studio and made it available 6 years ago:








The Blake Robinson Synthetic Orchestra - BRSO Articulate


BRSO Articulate is a free plugin I've developed for FL Studio 10+ that simplifies the process of using 'Keyswitches' in your compositions. It allows you to utilise any of the 16 Voice Colours in the piano roll to activate a particular keyswitch, mod wheel value or UACC code in your sample...




www.syntheticorchestra.com






So, if you look at presets you have them for various sound libraries:


and from community too:


That plugin deals specifically with keyswitches and basically each keyswitch/articulation gets assigned to a different midi channel.

Same thing if you dump individual articulations in Kontakt it's a common knowledge that they are assigned to different midi channels and that you use them by changing midi channels.
Even Directwave, a sampler in FL Studio, works that way in a multibank mode, there are 16 slots for 16 midi channels:


In FL Studio community midi channels are referred to as "note colors":


Piano roll


----------



## ed buller (Mar 27, 2020)

Rob said:


> of course it depends on the complexity of the score one's working on... I usually have from 20 to 30 instruments playing. Let's take just the strings, 5 tracks. Each one has sus-legato-staccato-pizz-tremolo-harmonics-gliss-sul tasto-pont-sord... there can be more, but this is a common configuration. If I had a track for each artic that would make 50 tracks just for strings. Not to mention the risk of losing the musical sense having a single phrase exploded through several tracks, and the hassle of having to scroll up and down. Add to that Winds, Brass, Percussion and Choir and the project becomes unmanageable.


That's not what I meant. It's so easy on Cubase to Hide ( close ) all the folders you aren't working on. So if i'm doing solo flute I just close all folders except solo woodwinds and it's very manageable. 

best

e


----------



## CT (Mar 27, 2020)

The only reason I will use separate tracks is if I need to change articulations faster than I can realistically keyswitch. Otherwise I want my templates to look as similar to a written score as possible.

I'll second what was said about wanting to avoid articulations altogether. Sadly none of the VI's in this vein pass the sound test for me yet, though I would love to experiment more with them myself if that were not such a costly investment in something I'm not sure about.


----------



## Consona (Mar 27, 2020)

josejherring said:


> I've heard this too and it makes sense for more hybrid type cues were you're alternating the root and the minor 3rd for 10 minutes .


----------



## AlainTH (Mar 31, 2020)

some editors propose some expression map for cubase on their site:

on steinberg site :
https://steinberg.net.../expression_maps_for_vst_expression.html

spitfire :
https://spitfireaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360006315094-List-of-Expression-Maps

about the consistency with others expression maps of others library you have, just change the input midi note in existing expression map is fast and easy.


----------



## TimRideout (Nov 18, 2020)

DANIELE said:


> When I was using keyswitch based libraries I preferred to use one track per instrument (or ensemble) because using many track is so dispersive.
> 
> Now I don't use articulation anymore (for the best part of my template), I hate them, and where I'm forced to do so I use them very sparingly.



I used to think that - until I installed Reaticulate. Brilliant tool.


----------



## DANIELE (Nov 18, 2020)

TimRideout said:


> I used to think that - until I installed Reaticulate. Brilliant tool.



I know it and I tried it but I didn't manage to make it work well with my workflow. As I said I think that KS are in general a workflow and composition breaker.


----------



## kbhaines (Nov 21, 2020)

In case it helps anyone using Reaper, I wrote a quick & dirty JS plugin which sends Spitfire-style UACC controls (i.e. CC 32) in response to how the notes have been annotated in Reaper's notation. E.g. marking a note staccato will cause it to send value 40 to CC32. Anything not annotated gets defaulted to a good-old sustain note.









GitHub - kbhaines/reaper


Contribute to kbhaines/reaper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





The advantage is that per-note articulations are now visible in the notation view, the disadvantage is that Reaper may not have all the possible articulations you need; in this case I define a custom annotation.

I haven't mapped everything - only the ones I need for parts of my libraries (Albion 1), but it should be straightforward change/add anything you need. It'll evolve over time as time allows...


----------



## Trash Panda (Nov 21, 2020)

labornvain said:


> I don't know why no one else has figured this out, and as far as I know it only works in Cubase , but in my opinion the easiest way to do articulations in kontakt is to use midi channels.
> 
> First, load up a single instance of Kontact with all the different articulation patches you're going to use. Just drag and drop them in. This will automatically assign each articulation to a different midi channel.
> 
> ...


This post just made the World of Warcraft level up noise go off. I use performance patches to sketch then battle with key switches because my brain can’t process separating tracks. This is brilliant.


----------

