Auto token mapping to create matrices?

[pixpop]

I have a collection of piano samples, about 500 in all. I can rename them however I want. The files all begin with the midi note number, and then have other tokens appended to represent the key code, the dynamic, and sustain.

There are two sets of samples.. one with sustain off, and one with sustain on. For each note there are three velocity levels. So I guess this would be modeled in TX16Wx by using a matrix per note, with 3x2 cells. 3 for the velocity levels, and 2 for the sustain on/off.

Some samples are missing. e.g. for some notes there may be only 2 velocity levels. Some notes are missing altogether. Some have 3 velocity levels for sustain off but only 2 for sustain on. Maybe 75% of them have all 6 samples present.

My question is, can I set up the token automapper to do this? i.e., to automatically create the appropriate matrices for these samples? If so, are there any examples or tutorials about this?

[elcallio]

The token mapper does not create matrices, though that might be a worthwhile extension (albeit somewhat difficult to express in some cases).

For your case I might suggest instead using two groups and a group switch. In the first you use token mapper (or normal mapping) to add all the sustain on samples, and the second the off ones.
Of course, normally this might be some work, assuming a naming scheme like you described, with sample names starting with note number. But if you can rename freely and simply, just partitioning either by name or folder on the sustain status should deal with that.

You will need to map twice, once for each set. And I see an obvious added feature to the token mapper here (creating multiple groups).

[pixpop]

Thanks for the idea. I did create a script to create the .matrix files, and that worked fairly well. I had to go back and edit the matrices with the matrix editor to deal with the missing samples. But I'm going to try your group suggestion as well. I'm having a lot of fun getting to know this tool.

Just out of curiosity, how would one go about implementing true sustain pedal behavior? i.e., when the pedal is down, it would ignore note off events but act on them when the pedal is released.

[pixpop]

Re: group key switcher:

I can set this up to work with CC 4. But When I save the program, it forgets the state of the 'enabled' checkbox, and also forgets the source controller that I specified. I do see that it records the source in the .txprog file as tx:source="Midi CC 4" but that doesn't seem to help. There's no xml for the 'enabled' checkbox.

[elcallio]

Re: group key switcher:

I can set this up to work with CC 4. But When I save the program, it forgets the state of the 'enabled' checkbox, and also forgets the source controller that I specified. I do see that it records the source in the .txprog file as tx:source="Midi CC 4" but that doesn't seem to help. There's no xml for the 'enabled' checkbox.

Bug verified. Fixed in next build.

[elcallio]

Thanks for the idea. I did create a script to create the .matrix files, and that worked fairly well. I had to go back and edit the matrices with the matrix editor to deal with the missing samples. But I'm going to try your group suggestion as well. I'm having a lot of fun getting to know this tool.

Just out of curiosity, how would one go about implementing true sustain pedal behavior? i.e., when the pedal is down, it would ignore note off events but act on them when the pedal is released.

Uhm, both sustenuto and dampener should work exactly like that. However, in mono mode the sustain/dampener is ignored. Not sure if it really should do that though. (Historical/compatibility reasons)