Polyphonic aftertouch: what is the problem?

Anything about hardware musical instruments.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am Your world may revolve around you but mine is infinitely broader.
:o

Post

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am You might be surprised. I've managed 3 and 4 octave parts from a two octave keyboard. Like playing anything, it's just a matter of practice and your fingers will be darting to the buttons without you having to think about it. The good thing about most keyboards is they'll hold the note you are playing after you change up/down so it's easier than you might think.
Here we go again... you might pull that out (as impractical as it is) with monophonic lines.
No way you're going to play anything two-handed on the 4 or 5 octave range using a 2 octave controller and octave up/down buttons.
And please don't say you could do that with midi splitting because the ranges of each hand constantly overlap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn4k5WCCx0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVdSQWGm53I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzJj65QRexU
You do your music genre very well, as I've already said. Respect for that 8)
You do whatever you like with your 2 octave controllers. I didn't come at you.
You randomly came at me, sarcastically asking if I ever heard of the octave up/down buttons after I stated I personally wouldn't want to play on anything less than 5 octaves.

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am All well and good, but my opinion is not based on my own needs but on my observations of many, many demos where MPE didn't add anything.
Plenty of those demos contained different kinds of self-evident polyphonic articulations based on the MPE technology, as some users also pointed out, but you somehow failed to realize it.
Here's another one (simple PolyAT)... although I'm sure at this point it'll prove nothing to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwCFWk7Oow
Not even necessarily on purpose, by simply digging your hands and therefore pushing 4 or 5 fingers into a MPE controller, pressure naturally varies for every finger, giving different volume/cutoff/lfo-rate/lfo-depth/anything...
X-direction (or even Y) could vary sliglty for each finger/voice, naturally bending notes, when applying pressure and moving a little.
And whenever you say that's still useless or not musical or irrelevant or whatever, it shows you're the one living in a bubble of your genre/workflow/knowledge.

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am Your world may revolve around you but mine is infinitely broader.
Totally :party:

Post

AdvancedFollower wrote: Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:49 pm for me, an extra mod wheel would be much more "expressive" than poly AT (why do synths still only have two wheels? My left hand has five fingers)
That'a very cool idea! :clap: 2good2B4gotten, as the cool people said back in the day. :wink:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:15 pm Passing Bye wrote:
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!

Post

The "log" on the Korg Prohecy did something like that, in that the mod wheel had a horizontal touch-strip built in, so you could do two different modulations at once.
Niowiad wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:23 pmHere we go again... you might pull that out (as impractical as it is) with monophonic lines.
No way you're going to play anything two-handed on the 4 or 5 octave range using a 2 octave controller and octave up/down buttons.
Which would be an issue if I only had one keyboard but I can play one with my right hand and another with my left. I'd never want to play the same instrument with both hands but if you did, it would be a simple matter of setting them both to the same MIDI channel. So yes, if I only had one keyboard, two octaves would not be enough but between my hardware synths and MIDI controllers I have 10, so it's not a problem, even though the biggest of them is only three octaves and the smallest just one.
Plenty of those demos contained different kinds of self-evident polyphonic articulations based on the MPE technology, as some users also pointed out, but you somehow failed to realize it.
Yes, but in every one of those instances, a keyboard split could have achieved the same result. Note that I say "could", that MPE isn't giving us anything we can't already do another way. That's not to say MPE doesn't do it just as well, it's just that MPE feels like a much bigger kludge to achieve it - you can set a simple keyboard split or you can use all 16 MIDI channels on one instrument.
Here's another one (simple PolyAT)... although I'm sure at this point it'll prove nothing to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwCFWk7Oow
When he says "stressed each note", what he was actually doing, at least with one of them, was retriggering it, so it was hard to hear any value in what he was doing.
Not even necessarily on purpose, by simply digging your hands and therefore pushing 4 or 5 fingers into a MPE controller, pressure naturally varies for every finger, giving different volume/cutoff/lfo-rate/lfo-depth/anything...
Ditto for velocity, which most of us would find much easier to control.
Another problem with this stuff is that I don't think it's pressure that makes a difference. Being able to slide your fingers up and down the keys, for me, is a much more achievable/controllable/nuanced way to play, whether it's a mono or polyphonic piece. That seems to be the bit you don't understand - MPE is difficult, whereas implementing the extra dimensions of touch in a monophonic way is much easier and, therefore, a more achievable goal. Get that in first, then worry about MPE later, when the new MIDI standard makes it much less of a kludge. But attitudes like yours, where it has to be full MPE or nothing, just means it will be nothing for the foreseeable future.
NOVAkILL : Asus RoG Flow Z13, Core i9, 16GB RAM, Win11 | EVO 16 | Studio One | bx_oberhausen, GR-8, JP6K, Union, Hexeract, Olga, TRK-01, SEM, BA-1, Thorn, Prestige, Spire, Legend-HZ, ANA-2, VG Iron 2 | Uno Pro, Rocket.

Post

BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 amBut attitudes like yours, where it has to be full MPE or nothing, just means it will be nothing for the foreseeable future.
I’ve got 3 MPE controllers and a couple dozen synths (hardware and software) that support MPE. Both my DAW’s support it too.

So I already got full MPE... today

Post

BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 am Which would be an issue if I only had one keyboard but I can play one with my right hand and another with my left. I'd never want to play the same instrument with both hands but if you did, it would be a simple matter of setting them both to the same MIDI channel. So yes, if I only had one keyboard, two octaves would not be enough but between my hardware synths and MIDI controllers I have 10, so it's not a problem, even though the biggest of them is only three octaves and the smallest just one.
I had no doubts you wouldn't want to play the same instrument with both hands.
A lot of people (and all keyboardists) like to do that, though, on controllers up to 7 octaves wide.
All idiots™ I'm sure... so much for the infinitely broader worlds and broader horizons :love:

In a part you cut out, I even wrote "please don't say those parts could be played with two separate keyboards, as you can see ranges of each hand are constantly overlapping", but of course you said it anyway :P
I dare anyone to play those parts (not even dreaming about asking for harder stuff), with separate controllers to extend the octave range, unless they're trying to pull some freaky stunt to go viral on YouTube.

BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 am Yes, but in every one of those instances, a keyboard split could have achieved the same result. Note that I say "could", that MPE isn't giving us anything we can't already do another way. That's not to say MPE doesn't do it just as well, it's just that MPE feels like a much bigger kludge to achieve it - you can set a simple keyboard split or you can use all 16 MIDI channels on one instrument.
People already told you. Achieving poly-expression on instruments which don't support it, requires multiple syncronized instances (1 per voice) and sloppy midi signal/channel splitting, which still doesn't solve the issue of overlapping ranges. And it gets worse and worse on each added voice.
According to you it's fine, but as a matter of fact literally nobody does that, as that actually sounds like the authentic definition of "kludge", compared to an MPE-ready setup (1 instance and 1 controller: done).
You play mono and don't see any purpose in that? Not the same for everyone. Broader worlds :wink:

The latest example of the guy showing poly aftertouch... you could (if only you wanted to) hear independent articulation of 4-5 notes, and he wasn't even fully using his left hand.
He had a couple retriggers by mistake, but at some point you can clearly hear each voice rising/falling independently during the sustained phase, according to how he wanted to push in those fingers.
You might not have the slightest interest in those kind of polyphonic textures, which is totally fair... but again, it's not the same for everyone else.
And there are obviously more evident kinds of modulation targets than filter cutoff, for any kind of application for instruments and sFX sound design.

BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 am Ditto for velocity, which most of us would find much easier to control.
Another problem with this stuff is that I don't think it's pressure that makes a difference. Being able to slide your fingers up and down the keys, for me, is a much more achievable/controllable/nuanced way to play, whether it's a mono or polyphonic piece. That seems to be the bit you don't understand - MPE is difficult, whereas implementing the extra dimensions of touch in a monophonic way is much easier and, therefore, a more achievable goal. Get that in first, then worry about MPE later, when the new MIDI standard makes it much less of a kludge. But attitudes like yours, where it has to be full MPE or nothing, just means it will be nothing for the foreseeable future.
Of course it's going to seem difficult or even impossibile if you're not used to play chords, especially with both hands. Desn't make it impossible for everyone, or useless.

I have no idea how you got the impression that for me it has to be "full MPE or nothing" :o
I sure never wrote or implied anything like that. MPE is optional. It doesn't take antything away from people who don't want to use it.
I'm so NOT of that idea, that I sometime find myself preferring monophonic filter behaviour on some polyophonic patches, and get a little annoyed by the fact that so few polysynths allow this.
There's a place for mono sources of modulation, there's a place for poly, and any combination of those.

For the forseeable future and even present we're already seeing a constant growth of both SW and HW supporting polyphonic expression, so it isn't nearly as bad as you're picturing it.


It's fine BONES, we don't have to necessarily agree, but we're again starting to run in circles and I don't have time for that.
I shouldn't have taken the "octave up/down" bait in the first place :oops:
You win, as always :cry:
Take care :hug:

Post

BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 am
Here's another one (simple PolyAT)... although I'm sure at this point it'll prove nothing to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwCFWk7Oow
When he says "stressed each note", what he was actually doing, at least with one of them, was retriggering it, so it was hard to hear any value in what he was doing.
I'm sorry I failed to demonstrate PolyAT with sufficient clarity, Bones. I was not intentionally retriggering any notes. I was trying to demonstrate using variable pressure on each key to change the sound under the key. The patch does not have much movement in it, except for that induced through pressure (either channel or per-key).
Regards

Post

Sorry, nothing personal, it just wasn't a very compelling demo and proved nothing as far as the usefulness of MPE is concerned. It was more like a "this is what it can do" rather than a "this is why it's worth doing".
pdxindy wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:24 pmI’ve got 3 MPE controllers and a couple dozen synths (hardware and software) that support MPE. Both my DAW’s support it too.
So I already got full MPE... today
I had to change hosts three times - Bitwig to Cubase to Studio One - to get something I am happy with and I reckon only around 10% of the VSTi I own are MPE-compatible. Of those, only a very few do it well, the others pay little more than lip service to it. Ultimately, Equator is the only one that I actually like using, the others are installed only because of their MPE compatibility. You may have jagged compatibility easily but that's not everybody's experience.
Niowiad wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:00 pmA lot of people (and all keyboardists) like to do that, though, on controllers up to 7 octaves wide.
Piano players, maybe, but only out of habit. To me it doesn't make sense when you can tailor the sound of each part to suit it better. Insisting on playing the same sound with both hands is ignoring progress.
In a part you cut out, I even wrote "please don't say those parts could be played with two separate keyboards, as you can see ranges of each hand are constantly overlapping", but of course you said it anyway :P
I said it because there is no reason the keyboards can't overlap if they need to, too. You need to think things through a little better, there are simple solutions to pretty much every problem you seem to think is insurmountable. How would you get on, for example, if you had to fly half-way around the world to perform? You could pay several hundred dollars for a flight case, then several hundred more for excess or unaccompanied baggage, or you could pack a KeyStep and Seaboard Block into your carry-on luggage.
I dare anyone to play those parts (not even dreaming about asking for harder stuff), with separate controllers to extend the octave range, unless they're trying to pull some freaky stunt to go viral on YouTube.
Blech! I used to be able to play with two hands and sing at the same time but those days are now in the dim, distant past. I have much more important things to do these days that practice my arse off so I can feel a bit clever.
People already told you. Achieving poly-expression on instruments which don't support it, requires multiple syncronized instances (1 per voice) and sloppy midi signal/channel splitting, which still doesn't solve the issue of overlapping ranges.
No-one said anything of the sort. If they had, I'd have pointed out that if the MIDI is sloppy with two channels, it will also be sloppy when you are sending data on separate channels using MPE. i.e. What will make it sloppy is the amount of data being put through, which will be exactly the same, either way. In fact, if it was a problem, you could send data from each instance through a different virtual MIDI port, whereas with MPE you'd have to use a single port.
According to you it's fine, but as a matter of fact literally nobody does that, as that actually sounds like the authentic definition of "kludge", compared to an MPE-ready setup (1 instance and 1 controller: done).
The kludge is that MPE takes up 16 channels of MIDI and 16 channels is ALL THERE IS. So you can't run your MPE controller through the same MIDI IN as anything else because it takes up all the channels you have. That's more channels than you have fingers, so it's hardly an elegant solution.
You play mono and don't see any purpose in that?
Mostly I don't play at all, I let the computer do all the heavy lifting. No reason to have a dog and bark yourself.
He had a couple retriggers by mistake, but at some point you can clearly hear each voice rising/falling independently during the sustained phase, according to how he wanted to push in those fingers.
Of course you can hear it but what does it achieve? Nothing, it's a feature for the sake of having a feature. He'd be much better off practicing until he can play the piece properly and not worrying about trying to get 4 or 5 articulations at once (and failing dismally).
Of course it's going to seem difficult or even impossibile if you're not used to play chords, especially with both hands. Desn't make it impossible for everyone, or useless.
Not difficult for us, the end-users, but difficult for developers to incorporate into their products. They were two disconnected thoughts that probably should have had a paragraph break between them. My bad.
I have no idea how you got the impression that for me it has to be "full MPE or nothing"
Because that's the way it comes across. I have nothing at all against MPE, I just don't see it as the best thing about a controller like a Roli Seaboard. I can also see how reluctant devs are to support MPE, presumably because of the amount of work involved, so it seem much smarter to ask for simpler things first, things that we might actually get from them.
For the forseeable future and even present we're already seeing a constant growth of both SW and HW supporting polyphonic expression, so it isn't nearly as bad as you're picturing it.
Yeah, but how much of it is really useful and how much of it is just a token effort? e.g. All Synapse did for "MPE support" in Obsession was extend the pitch bend range and make CC74 available in the mod matrix Which, BTW, is just giving us the extra dimensions of touch that I think is what we need first. But if we'd pushed for full MPE support on the beta, I am pretty sure we'd have got nothing at all because Rich would have seen it as way too much work.
NOVAkILL : Asus RoG Flow Z13, Core i9, 16GB RAM, Win11 | EVO 16 | Studio One | bx_oberhausen, GR-8, JP6K, Union, Hexeract, Olga, TRK-01, SEM, BA-1, Thorn, Prestige, Spire, Legend-HZ, ANA-2, VG Iron 2 | Uno Pro, Rocket.

Post

prodigal_sounds wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 4:41 am
BONES wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:29 am
Here's another one (simple PolyAT)... although I'm sure at this point it'll prove nothing to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwCFWk7Oow
When he says "stressed each note", what he was actually doing, at least with one of them, was retriggering it, so it was hard to hear any value in what he was doing.
I'm sorry I failed to demonstrate PolyAT with sufficient clarity, Bones. I was not intentionally retriggering any notes. I was trying to demonstrate using variable pressure on each key to change the sound under the key. The patch does not have much movement in it, except for that induced through pressure (either channel or per-key).
Regards
Oh, good day Sir.
I didn't intend to write further posts on the issue, but now I feel a little sorry for draggin you in.

The video manages to demonstrate the poly articulation well enough, which is why I linked to it :wink:
But as always in life, you can't please everyone. I even wrote/anticipated he would have rejected it, like everything else.
On the other hand, when you manage to get your point across to 99% of the audience, you can still rightfully call it a "success".

Regards :harp:

Post

Niowiad wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:23 pm
BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am You might be surprised. I've managed 3 and 4 octave parts from a two octave keyboard. Like playing anything, it's just a matter of practice and your fingers will be darting to the buttons without you having to think about it. The good thing about most keyboards is they'll hold the note you are playing after you change up/down so it's easier than you might think.
Here we go again... you might pull that out (as impractical as it is) with monophonic lines.
No way you're going to play anything two-handed on the 4 or 5 octave range using a 2 octave controller and octave up/down buttons.
And please don't say you could do that with midi splitting because the ranges of each hand constantly overlap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn4k5WCCx0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVdSQWGm53I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzJj65QRexU
You do your music genre very well, as I've already said. Respect for that 8)
You do whatever you like with your 2 octave controllers. I didn't come at you.
You randomly came at me, sarcastically asking if I ever heard of the octave up/down buttons after I stated I personally wouldn't want to play on anything less than 5 octaves.

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am All well and good, but my opinion is not based on my own needs but on my observations of many, many demos where MPE didn't add anything.
Plenty of those demos contained different kinds of self-evident polyphonic articulations based on the MPE technology, as some users also pointed out, but you somehow failed to realize it.
Here's another one (simple PolyAT)... although I'm sure at this point it'll prove nothing to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNwCFWk7Oow
Not even necessarily on purpose, by simply digging your hands and therefore pushing 4 or 5 fingers into a MPE controller, pressure naturally varies for every finger, giving different volume/cutoff/lfo-rate/lfo-depth/anything...
X-direction (or even Y) could vary sliglty for each finger/voice, naturally bending notes, when applying pressure and moving a little.
And whenever you say that's still useless or not musical or irrelevant or whatever, it shows you're the one living in a bubble of your genre/workflow/knowledge.

BONES wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:56 am Your world may revolve around you but mine is infinitely broader.
Totally :party:
I wish people would stop quoting him. We get it, BONES hates MPE and filters where the resonance kills the bass. A very good example of the Dunning–Kruger effect, he doesn’t understand either thing to any degree of depth and can’t imagine that someone different could find use in what he disregarded.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

What I don’t understand is why software developers choose to ignore it. I passed on a great sounding synth yesterday because it only responded to channel aftertouch. When the $25 Cherry Audio Juno emulation does full MPE, you can’t say that it’s too much work to implement basic polyphonic aftertouch.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

zerocrossing wrote: Fri Oct 02, 2020 5:09 pm What I don’t understand is why software developers choose to ignore it. I passed on a great sounding synth yesterday because it only responded to channel aftertouch. When the $25 Cherry Audio Juno emulation does full MPE, you can’t say that it’s too much work to implement basic polyphonic aftertouch.
Most soft synth developers are fairly open to Poly AT and MPE at this point. It’s generally not a lot of work on their side. There has been a significant shift since a few years ago... well, except for NI. Old Massive supported PolyAT and new Massive X doesn’t. They are going backwards.

Post

Yeah I mean, as far as SW goes, I started buying way before I had an actual interest in poly expression/pressure, but later found out the vast majority of my softsynths already supported either PolyAT or MPE, to my surprise.
For new poly soft-synths it's almost a standard.

My concern is actually more about lack of HW to exploit those features already present in SW.
And although I love my Sensel-Morph, I like the Seaboards and the concept of the Linnstrument, I'm precisely referring to controllers with at least 5 octaves and standard keyboard "topology".
It's been like 30+ years that nothing ever hit the stores to replace stuff like the Roland A80, Kurzweil Midiboard, some old Ensoniq keyboards...
Looks like HW (Osmose, Hydrasynth, Behringer) is starting to catch up with SW, but this whole thing moves painfully slow.

Post Reply

Return to “Hardware (Instruments and Effects)”