KVR Audio

mouse clicker · Post by **mouse clicker** » Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:48 pm

antic604 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:41 pm
mouse clicker wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:22 pm...
Do you understand the difference between "tune" and "single instrument"

"Don't move the goal posts."

I know sometimes it's hard for you to admit you're wrong. But, rather then for you to keep spreading rumors and misinformation about basic music theory, it's probably a good idea that someone calls you out, before it gets out of hand.

Not only does Jazz not use loops, along with classical, but you guys also forget about opera? Trust me no loops trying to tell a story through a vocal performance with an evolving story.

You might hear some of the same notes used again, because there's only 12 of them.

Research, experience and education is the key to knowledge but understanding how it all works together is the key to wisdom.

This will be my last reply on this subject, good luck on your musical adventures.

xbitz · Post by **xbitz** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:17 am

Trancit wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:06 pm
xbitz wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 2:17 pm ...
nope just one Distributor in poly mode (to disable its voice splitting)... https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... stributor/ but don't want to start a topic about it I've got it what you want to say
let me say it differently:

Trancit wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:54 pm ...
In Reason every instrument (beside any Player devices and i.e. Matrix) is meant to be triggered just from this track only without any wonky workaround and if you want to trigger 20 instruments from one midi clip you have to put them all into one combinator...

btw. Reason workflow also very unique is if u start using Reason "blocks" together with pattern selector based sequencer players like

https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... sequencer/
https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... ompulsion/
https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... sequences/
etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z6-piDAfgc
especially because blocks can overlap each other ...

ps. this is blocks if somebody doesn't know it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6UFCdD4Lyk

antic604 · Post by **antic604** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:21 am

xbitz wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:17 amespecially because blocks can overlap each other...

No, they can't. You can overlap clips - MIDI, audio, automation and pattern - over existing blocks, but 2 blocks can't overlap.

xbitz · Post by **xbitz** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:22 am

^^^ check my video from 1:30

the only problem is blocks aren't transparent ones like the top arranger layer (that would be a huge feature) u can draw any number of patterns on top of each other but they gonna cover the lower ones totally

antic604 · Post by **antic604** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:38 am

xbitz wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:22 am ^^^ check my video from 1:30

the only problem is blocks aren't transparent ones like the top arranger layer (that would be a huge feature) u can draw any number of patterns on top of each other but they gonna cover the lower ones totally

No. They just overlap visually, but don't play "together", i.e. you can't have Block #1 play and Block #2 - that's below Block #1 - "fill in the gaps" in tracks or segments of a track where Block #1 doesn't have any content.

That would make sense. Not having them transparent.

xbitz · Post by **xbitz** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:44 am

"No. They just overlap visually, but don't play "together"

yepp

this is why I've started to use it with sequencers where if there is no pattern selector they play nothing so where the "not playing" is a feature

xbitz · Post by **xbitz** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:41 pm

antic604 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:38 am
xbitz wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:22 am ^^^ check my video from 1:30

the only problem is blocks aren't transparent ones like the top arranger layer (that would be a huge feature) u can draw any number of patterns on top of each other but they gonna cover the lower ones totally
No. They just overlap visually, but don't play "together", i.e. you can't have Block #1 play and Block #2 - that's below Block #1 - "fill in the gaps" in tracks or segments of a track where Block #1 doesn't have any content.

That would make sense. Not having them transparent.

btw. you've also forgotten to mention that at least muting is working with visually overlapping blocks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VvWcerV2DQ
so different instances of the same block can be muted differently which is also a nice non-destructive arranger tool of Reason

so there are linear DAWs there are pattern-based ones and there is Reason

btw. how do you like the new Logic

ok-ok Fools' Day is coming https://www.gearnews.com/logic-pro-x-to ... g-feature/

antic604 · Post by **antic604** » Tue Mar 31, 2020 12:01 am

xbitz wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:41 pmbtw. you've also forgotten to mention that at least muting is working with visually overlapping blocks so different instances of the same block can be muted differently which is also a nice non-destructive arranger tool of Reason

And? If you mute part of the block that's on top it doesn't make the one below it play, does it? How does that help your false argument that we can overlap blocks?

xbitz · Post by **xbitz** » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:42 am

who has said it helps?

btw. this is a dedicated topic of blocks on reasontalk https://forum.reasontalk.com/viewtopic. ... 59#p493359 let's stop hijacking this one

antic604 · Post by **antic604** » Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:13 am

xbitz wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:41 pmbtw. how do you like the new Logic

Looks good. It's great that tracks can have various vertical sizes (can't do that in Bitwig, at least for the 'small' and 'normal' sizes), but I think it's a poor choice they went with clocks / pies to indicate loop time, instead of - like Bitwig - showing the actual content of the clip AND an individual, per-clip playhead. This looks way cooler and gives much more information.

roiikkata · Post by **roiikkata** » Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:01 am

Oh my gosh. My fault, guys LOL .. I didn't have my auto-subscribe turned on on the forums here. I literally signed back in to my KVR Audio account and "stumbled" back upon this. I really appreciate the replies! I guess that's one good thing about music & art is that we can be gone for years come back and be right back up & at em.

roiikkata · Post by **roiikkata** » Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:05 am

antic604 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 5:10 am
roiikkata wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 3:58 amTHEE most troublesome "woe" I can see right now is how in FL Studio when you change a loop, they ALL change, in the main "arrangement array" (they call it the "playlist. were everything is arranged.) in FL. In LINEAR, you have to go around and make sure you got each and every single one if you want to change them all (i.e. make changes if something doesn't sound right after you've put it all down). Any way around this (i.e. snapshots, save-states, etc.)?
This is probably the biggest issue I have with Bitwig

BUT, that's not the difference between linear and loop-oriented, though. Most linear DAWs (Cubase, Reaper, Logic, Studio One, etc.) have this workflow of so-called ghost / alias / linked clips.

Loop-based workflow involves having a time-agnostic clip launcher matrix, that you can leverage for live performance or while toying with arrangement ideas using a controller like Push or Launchpad. FL also has this (performance mode, I believe).

Perhaps look at this - it's an old review of Bitwig's early version but it's probably the most concise, complete & short discussion of what Bitwig is and what makes it special. This video made me buy it & abandon Live:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0cEybK76Gk

Also, just type "Bitwig clip launcher" into Youtube's search bar

And lastly, if FL works for you and you've been using it for 15+ years, then perhaps don't switch? What is it about Bitwig that made you interested in it?

Actually been trying to adapt to Bitwig somewhat, still. I still use FL Studio, but the reason I'm trying to switch is because FL is known to be resource heavy visually and I'm looking for something not so CPU intensive aside from VST processing and such.

antic604 · Post by **antic604** » Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:53 am

roiikkata wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:05 amActually been trying to adapt to Bitwig somewhat, still. I still use FL Studio, but the reason I'm trying to switch is because FL is known to be resource heavy visually and I'm looking for something not so CPU intensive aside from VST processing and such.

If that your criteria, then stick to FL. Its GUI is much more fluid and it seems to be GPU-accelerated, whereas Bitwig's - which is as lively, if not more with all the modulators - is still processed on the CPU, which means in heavier projects it can get choppy and unresponsive, as audio gets the priority.

Serhii Kot · Post by **Serhii Kot** » Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:23 am

FL Studio 20.9 beta works extremely well on mac mini m1, in native mode. I made my last project in FL just to see its progress. 20+ omnispheres 30-35 CPU load.

ozinga · Post by **ozinga** » Tue Jul 06, 2021 8:13 am

Serhii Kot wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:23 am FL Studio 20.9 beta works extremely well on mac mini m1, in native mode. I made my last project in FL just to see its progress. 20+ omnispheres 30-35 CPU load.

Side topic: M1 is crazy. I can not play one RC Juno 60 on my i7 4ghz iMac without cpu spikes every few seconds (Some RC Legendary instruments have really bad CPU performance, maybe it is intel related) but I can run several on my home use M1 Air. And it is in Rosetta mode plus not officially compatible with Big Sur yet.
Can't imagine the power of the next chip for MBP and big screen iMacs.

BitWig vs FL Studio (linear vs mixer/loop oriented)