Is Project5 v2 Better Than Live 4 or Reason 3 (IYHO)?

[Solarfall]

here is tutorial for you: http://www.eqmag.com/story.asp?sectionc ... ycode=4718

[braj]

There is definitely on thing about Live and Reason that is better than P5: they run on both Macs and PCs. That lets me use them on all my machines, and gives me the ability to choose either Mac or PC as I upgrade computers through the years. I'm sure P5 is great, I just couldn't consider it because of this. Besides Live keeps me pretty happy.

One thing with P5, just out of curiosity, how easy is it to map controllers? Live and Reason3 are wonderful in this area.

[headquest]

Fantastic! Thanks for the link Solarfall

[headquest]

One thing with P5, just out of curiosity, how easy is it to map controllers? Live and Reason3 are wonderful in this area.

They certainly are, braj One of the big advantages for me as a keyboard player.

[xylyx]

*sigh* Probably gonna regret getting involved in this but anyway...

I checked project5 demo and I found out that p5v2 cannot handle multitimbral synths properly: multitimbral synths are handled by layers

BUT:"Each new lane that you add to a track is controlled by the same volume and pan controls as the original track"

If the synth has multiple outputs (and how many multitimbral synths don't have this?) then you can control the volume, pan and width separately for each output...

AND "You can display and edit different automation parameters in separate lanes, but the parameters apply to all the lanes (it's still only one track)."

Which parameters are you referring to? Each layer can have a separate midi channel assigned to it, so you can ensure that any midi controller info you send on one midi channel will not be responded to by layers that are a different midi channel...

I have used GPO in P5v2 and assigned different layers to each channel with different mod wheel settings for each (GPO uses the mod wheel for volume automation) and it works as it should; if what you say is true then all the instruments in GPO would have to have the same midi volume, which would be useless...

AND "an original track and all of its track lanes use the same output on a multi-output instrument."

Wrong. Multi output synths have separate outputs available with volume, pan and width controls, as well as the ability to put different effects on each output.

AND "you can only patch Project5's Arpeggiator into an original track, but the Arpeggiator affects all lanes of the track."

True. The Arp 'sits' in between the midi channels and the softsynth. Not a big deal to assign another channel for non-arp tracks though is it? It isn't as if you are going to use 6 or 7 arps in one track is it?

these issues make multitimbral synths virtualy useless....what a pity..

It would if all the above were true...

[xylyx]

One thing with P5, just out of curiosity, how easy is it to map controllers? Live and Reason3 are wonderful in this area.

Right click in the Track Inspector on the parameter you want, choose Midi Control, then Learn, move the control you want to assign, click OK.

[braj]

One thing with P5, just out of curiosity, how easy is it to map controllers? Live and Reason3 are wonderful in this area.

Right click in the Track Inspector on the parameter you want, choose Midi Control, then Learn, move the control you want to assign, click OK.

Ah, still sounds like it is a few clicks more than Live. The great thing about Live is you put the whole app into a learn mode and just click and move, click and move, I can remap the whole app in two minutes to any new controller. No separate dialogs for each control. It's stuff like that in Live that makes me shake my head in disgust at the way some other apps do this. (not saying P5 is bad, but try mapping anything in Logic!)

[xylyx]

I never tend to map that many controllers, so there is probably a way to do more controls with less steps. When you choose Midi Control it brings up a dialog box with currently assigned controls etc down the left and it may well be possible to do things more efficiently from there.

Still, it doesn't sound quite as efficient as Live's way, but I only have 8 rotary's on my controller so it doesn't make too much difference for me

[headquest]

I think that Live is pretty unique in this respect, braj.

People make a fuss about how "easy" an app is to learn, but let's face it - how many apps have MIDI learn right there in the main screen permanently poised for use? Several programs I have tried hide MIDI learn function away in a window somewhere (Cubase, Tracktion, Sonar) and you need to consult the manual to even discover whether the feature exists! A big thumbs up for Live, I think

(the only other app where I found MIDI learn so easy was/is FLS... and Reason is fairly good too - I'm still on 2.5, but as I understand it 3.0 is simply great for controller support )

[billybk1]

I checked project5 demo and I found out that p5v2 cannot handle multitimbral synths properly: multitimbral synths are handled by layers.

I am using P5 2.0, with my TTS-1 (multi-timbral SONAR 4 GM synth) and it seems to be working properly for me. Yes, you do use Track Layers, but these multi-lane tracks are much more versatile than you give them credit for when using multi-timbral synths. Of course, you have the normal solo,mute,record for each individual track layer, BUT, each track layer can have it's own unique automation,(drawn or recorded) of output, MIDI, softsynth, effects & arpegiator data. I am able to automate the individual volume, pan or any MIDI controller data for each track layer, as long as each track layer is assigned to a different MIDI channel. I can automate each softsynth output individually, at the Track Layer level. Each Track Layer can be assigned a different output, with separate FX, once you expand the tracks, pick the parameter and use the automation tool.

BUT:"Each new lane that you add to a track is controlled by the same volume and pan controls as the original track"

True, they are controlled by the same sliders, BUT, by clicking on the multi-output box, to the left of the volume slider and moving your mouse, you can essentially change what the sliders (Volume, Pan etc.), are controlling. After you enable all or some of the softsynth outputs, you can then set up each Track Layer to a specific enabled output.

AND "You can display and edit different automation parameters in separate lanes, but the parameters apply to all the lanes (it's still only one track)."

Well, not exactly, once you set each track layer to a specific synth output and patch, you can automate the parameter's separately. Except, of course, those parameter's that are common to the the entire synth, like the Master Volume or Master Pan.

AND "an original track and all of its track lanes use the same output on a multi-output instrument."

Not quite, once you enable additional synth outputs (I believe it defaults to just left/right stereo outs), you can assign each track layer to a specific output and each output can be assigned different FX plugins.

AND "you can only patch Project5's Arpeggiator into an original track, but the Arpeggiator affects all lanes of the track."

That is partly true, while you can only patch P5's Arpeggiator to the original track, you can assign it to any specific MIDI channel. So while my TTS-1, is assigned to Track 1, it's (4) stereo outputs are enabled and each assigned to a separate track layer (1-4) and MIDI channel (1-4). I can assign the Arpeggiator to MIDI channel 3, and only that patch will be affected.

these issues make multitimbral synths virtualy useless....what a pity..

Maybe for some people, but with a little more knowledge you can be setting up and using multitimbral synths just fine, in Project 5 2.0. Can't wait to hook up my new GPO, which arrived today, and use it multitimbrally, in P5 2.0 (thanks for the group buy, Gary)

[braj]

ImpOSCar has a similar midi learn. I guess many VSTs do. I actually find myself mapping stuff out of convenience, so if I want to use a controller on a track I'll just remap it really quick, do my stuff, and switch it back when I'm done with no fuss. Every dev should do this one feature like Live. It really is far superior than any other DAW in this regard IMO.

[René]

Different tools, different preferences. I don't think it just limits to a click race.

P5 offers the ability to map the same controller to any number of parameters. This means, you can have multiple things controlled with a single controller. You won't get any 'This assignment will override...' message when trying to control two things at once. Or ten.

It also offers the ability to map MIDI messages incoming for different MIDI ports independently. This is very handy when having the master keyboard and the rotary controllers in different MIDI ports, so even when you use the same MIDI controllers they won't overlap in the parameter destinations, as they're not merged. BTW, it's not limited to two remote control ports.

It also offers the ability to select in what incoming MIDI channel the remote activator would control the parameter. And it also offers RPN and NRPN, offered by several high resolution (14-bit) MIDI controllers and mixers, as MIDI sources. Also the ability to identify MIDI On only, or MIDI On/Off messages.

Then, there's the issue of finding parameters to MIDI-Learn in modern synthesizers with millions of parameters (like z3ta+ or Albino for instance). I think Project 5 even the clickrace for those cases as well. Fortunately both offer their own MIDI Learn.

Anyways, I wouldn't conclude this might make a difference for particular users. However, comparing things superficially might lead to wrong impressions. Even to precisely-wrong conclusions.

-René

[braj]

Point taken. I know the midi controller setup is getting overhauled to some degree in Live 5, hopefully it addresses some of the stuff you mentioned.

[Solarfall]

my complaints were ****copy/pasted**** from help file! they should make tutorial for p5v2 and multitimbral synths!

all I did with p5v2 demo was that I tried to setup mutitimbral sampler.. I checked help file and p5 wiki with b rock's tutorial.

it shouldnt be problem for programmers to make possible to assign volume and pan slider and output selector for each lane . I dont care about arpeggiator.

I will check it again tonight.

[x_bruce]

I saw the heading but haven't read the thread - too much time.

I think all three are different. Project 5 v2 is an excellent platform if you appreciate it's logic. I think all programs have their own way, or as I say logic, that they follow.

LIVE 4, soon to be 5 is great for live opportunities and remixing on the fly and will get better.

P5 v2 is well suited for looped recording and has the necessary tools to write music in linear style too. Dimension is a great sample based synth and comes with a good sample set. Also, it's easy to import samples into.

But in the end, it's how you like working.

All three are exceptional platforms that work well together. I think the growth of P5 v2 is exceptional and quite refined compared to v1.5 which was what I started testing.

I'm reviewing all three at musicFAQ http://www.musicfaq.net and will post when all reviews are up there.

Also, I think Orion Platinum is an underrated product. It's content is excellent and it's capable of recording live which the others don't do.

Of the three you are asking about, P5 v2 reminds me of a cross between Orion and Sonar; but it is it's own product.

All the programs mentioned are excellent. All do well with Rewire. Try the demos, they'll give you an idea of how you like working.

None are the best. The best are whatever you like working with.