New MPE synths...

[Echoes in the Attic]

I can't believe I didn't know about the Orange tree polybend. According to youtube videos they added this to their instruments mid 2018 at least. From what I can gather, it could work either in normal MPE mode or channel per row since it simply responds to any midi channel and separates the pitch bends. I don't really see the benefit of using channel per row in this case, seems like regular mode would be fine. I'd be somewhat doubtful that adding CC74 or aftertouch modulation would also be applied separately per channel. I wouldn't assume it anyways since it is a scripted polybend, so there's no reason to assume other modulations would be per channel/note. I am curious though so I'm planning to ask them about this.

[Roger_Linn]

Are you sure about Audio Modeling being single channel only?

Yes.

[Roger_Linn]

I added Orange Tree Samples to the Recommended Sounds page, stating that Polybend provides MPE capability for pitch bend only.

[Echoes in the Attic]

I added Orange Tree Samples to the Recommended Sounds page, stating that Polybend provides MPE capability for pitch bend only.

Yeah that's accurate. I asked them about that and this was their reply:
"Currently only the pitch bend responds to individual channels. Automating controls to MIDI CCs is done through Kontakt's built-in automation, which doesn't differentiate MIDI channels, and therefore behaves in a monophonic way. That's something we'd definitely like to improve on in order to provide more complete MPE capabilities instead of just the pitch bend."
Still good to list it as compatible because they are the only full scripted guitars with polybend so that's pretty cool.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Are you sure about Audio Modeling being single channel only?

Yes.

Strange that the Audio Modeling VST is responding to all (rotating) midi channels then for me eh? Tried in both Bitwig and Ableton (which of course doesn't work as well because no MPE mode, but can still receive external midi from all midi channels). And it works fine with Bitwig's MPE note editing, which is only possible when an instrument receives on all channels, which audio modeling instruments do in rotating fashion. I could send a video, but all you need is a midi monitor before the VST to confirm while using linnstrument in MPE mode.

[Reckon104]

I added Orange Tree Samples to the Recommended Sounds page, stating that Polybend provides MPE capability for pitch bend only.

Yeah that's accurate. I asked them about that and this was their reply:
"Currently only the pitch bend responds to individual channels. Automating controls to MIDI CCs is done through Kontakt's built-in automation, which doesn't differentiate MIDI channels, and therefore behaves in a monophonic way. That's something we'd definitely like to improve on in order to provide more complete MPE capabilities instead of just the pitch bend."
Still good to list it as compatible because they are the only full scripted guitars with polybend so that's pretty cool.

Yeah, sorry for overstating the case relative to their MPE compatibility, I should have checked that before chiming in. But as you say, it's still pretty cool and, for me at least, extremely useful.

[Roger_Linn]

Are you sure about Audio Modeling being single channel only?

Yes.

Strange that the Audio Modeling VST is responding to all (rotating) midi channels then for me eh? Tried in both Bitwig and Ableton (which of course doesn't work as well because no MPE mode, but can still receive external midi from all midi channels). And it works fine with Bitwig's MPE note editing, which is only possible when an instrument receives on all channels, which audio modeling instruments do in rotating fashion. I could send a video, but all you need is a midi monitor before the VST to confirm while using linnstrument in MPE mode.

You have recorded LinnStrument's MPE data into Bitwig, so yes you are editing MPE data because you are editing LinnStrument's MPE data. Then Bitwig is sending all of that MPE data (multiple channels) to Audio Modeling, which is mixing all the channels together into one channel, losing all the benefits of MPE. Why? Because Audio Modeling's instruments are all one-channel. They are also monophonic (except for limited-case duophonic for the bowed strings) so they couldn't possibly be MPE.

Here's the test of whether a synth is MPE or not:
1) Perform two simultaneous pitch slides on LinnStrument in opposite directions. If the synth is MPE, you will hear one note slide up in pitch while the other note slides down in pitch.
2) Hold two notes on LinnStrument and change their Y-axis positions in opposite directions. If the synth is MPE, you will hear the Y-axis parameter increase on one note and simultaneously decrease on the other.
3) Hold two notes on LinnStrument and vary their pressure differently-- hard on the first while light on the second, then decrease pressure on the first while increasing pressure on the second. If the synth is MPE, you will hear the two notes change volume proportional to your pressure, and independently for the two notes.
4) On the synth's web site, if it states "MPE", then it is MPE. If it doesn't, it is not MPE. Notice that Audio Modeling's web site does not state "MPE".

Echoes-- could you please email me to let me know which LinnStrument owner you are? That will allow me to better help you in any future support requests.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Are you sure about Audio Modeling being single channel only?

Yes.

Strange that the Audio Modeling VST is responding to all (rotating) midi channels then for me eh? Tried in both Bitwig and Ableton (which of course doesn't work as well because no MPE mode, but can still receive external midi from all midi channels). And it works fine with Bitwig's MPE note editing, which is only possible when an instrument receives on all channels, which audio modeling instruments do in rotating fashion. I could send a video, but all you need is a midi monitor before the VST to confirm while using linnstrument in MPE mode.

You have recorded LinnStrument's MPE data into Bitwig, so yes you are editing MPE data because you are editing LinnStrument's MPE data.

I think you missed the most important point of that which is that the Audio modeling cello is playing back all notes, regardless of which midi channel it is receiving. Therefor it can not be single channel. It is listening to all channels (not simultaneously of course since it's monophonic!). There is even a setting to allow keyswitches to work on a single channel or from all channels.

Then Bitwig is sending all of that MPE data (multiple channels) to Audio Modeling, which is mixing all the channels together into one channel, losing all the benefits of MPE. Why?

I thought I explained this but I will reiterate. In Bitwig (and I believe other hosts), the only way to be able to record and edit pitch and expression data that is attached to a note, is to use MPE mode for the device, which allows the device to interpret the per note data on different midi channels. Similar to velocity, the pressure, timbre and pitch are all attached to a note, which means you can move the note and those modulations move with it and will not ever affect any other note. Recording midi data on a single channel without MPE mode means that for example pitch bends would be recorded in the pitch bend midi data automation, which is independent of the notes. Same for other midi cc's like timbre's cc74. In this case the data does not move with notes and can also affect multiple notes if there is overlap (for example for intentional legato triggers in monophonic sounds). On top of that, for pitch, it is much more difficult to edit the data to go to exact notes, because the pitch bend automation lane does not have notes, it's just a midi value whose range depends on the pitch bend range of the instrument. With MPE editing, you edit or draw the glides right there to the notes over the piano roll where you want it to be. So for monophonic instruments as well, this is orders of magnitude easier than trying to use single channel pitch bend and midi cc automation.

Because Audio Modeling's instruments are all one-channel. They are also monophonic (except for limited-case duophonic for the bowed strings) so they couldn't possibly be MPE.

I do see what you are saying and I think we are both correct but meaning slightly different things. When you say they are not MPE, of course this is correct because they can not apply expressions to notes individually based on the channel. In duophonic mode a pitch bend on one note will bend both notes, not independently. So no MPE, as it is not separating the voices by channel. When I said that they are not restricted to receiving notes on a single channel, I meant that literally they are listening to all channels, even in mono mode. This is very useful, because as I explained above, it allows us to use these instruments in MPE mode, thus allowing the use of the pitch and expression data attached to specific notes, MPE style. And the audio modeling instruments playback perfectly from that MPE data (for example a pitch glide in one note followed by an abrupt legato note does not confuse the pitch bend of the new note, it plays independently with pitch bend reset. Many instruments don't handle this well. So while not being an MPE instrument in the true polyphonic sense, it does seem to be compatible in a useful way. But I don't how you would classify that exactly. An MPE compatible non-MPE instrument?

Perhaps you do not use MPE midi editing for monophonic sounds in your DAW (maybe you're old school and record directly to audio!), but I happen to think it's quite useful. And perhaps you do not agree that the term MPE should be used at all for monophonic sounds, but it seems others, like the folks at Roli, would disagree. Equator and Cypher and Strobe have many MPE sounds that are monophonic. For example you can go into the Cypher presets and chose "MPE factory" presets and select many leads etc that are setup for the 5D/MPE style, but are mono. So using one of these sounds, I've got my linnstrument or seaboard set to MPE mode, I've got the device in Bitwig set to MPE mode, playing a synth which is categorized as MPE type and responding to multiple channels independently even though it is mono (so for example you can slide one note while interrupting it with another note and it plays monophonically while tracking both separately - very useful!). So in this scenario, perhaps you could say that this is not true MPE, but given that an MPE hardware is recording MPE data and triggering a synth in MPE mode in a DAW as an MPE device, isn't it kind of just semantics? Seems like it's easier just to say it's an MPE mono sound sound, no? Otherwise I don't know what to call it. Anyways not all instruments work correctly in mono in an MPE set up, but like the Roli synths, the audio modeling instruments do also, which is great! So if we can't say they are MPE (which they aren't technically because no independent note expressions), maybe we could say compatible with MPE in mono mode or something. Again, I don't how else that could be described. 3D doesn't cover it, for all the reasons and benefits I've mentioned here.

Echoes-- could you please email me to let me know which LinnStrument owner you are? That will allow me to better help you in any future support requests.

I have no need for support currently but I do appreciate the offer!

P.S. Sorry for the long post. I will copy this over to a new thread to try to keep it a separate discussion away from MPE synths in general.

[Roger_Linn]

I thought I was clear but apparently I am unable to solve Echoes’ confusion adequately. Can anyone else help him?

[Echoes in the Attic]

I thought I was clear but apparently I am unable to solve Echoes’ confusion adequately. Can anyone else help him?

Hi Roger, I don't personally feel that I have anything confused. I enjoy my linnstrument, seaboard rise and block and and have done extensive testing of different instruments so I am very familiar with the peculiarities of the different responses of the software instruments. I think this experience is useful to share.

Is there anything specific in the details that I provided which you feel are inaccurate? I tried to be as accurate as possible with my language, and acknowledged that that there is a fair amount of grey area in these concepts. If you are not interested in discussing this that's ok, but I think it is not really correct nor polite to simply brush everything off as "confusion".

[Roger_Linn]

All I can suggest is that you read what I have posted, which I don't believe you have. There's really nothing more I can add.

[Echoes in the Attic]

All I can suggest is that you read what I have posted, which I don't believe you have. There's really nothing more I can add.

Ok, no worries we'll stop there. Of course I read everything you posted, and understood it well, it was very basic stuff and most of it I don't disagree with. I agreed that it was technically not right to call audio modeling an MPE instrument (I originally said it was "MPE compatible", but conceded that wasn't really accurate either), though I think it's useful info to know that it is compatible with mpe data (someone might like to know this). Part of the reason is that it can play notes coming from any midi channel, but also in it's response which I won't get into now. Just thought it was useful bit of info for clarity. My intention was just to help and clarify.

And I too was concerned you might not have read everything I wrote, but i didn't want to say that (that's a bit rude actually). It's disingenuous to say you don't think I read what you wrote when I quoted the relevant parts when I responded to them! I'm not sure if you disagree with the way I've described Bitwig's mpe mode and editing, or other instruments like roli synths, or if you aren't aware of some differences in instruments that can receive on all channels like Kontakt (in Omni mode), which do not handle MPE data in mono mode well, and something like Audio modeling instruments, which listen to all channels, but do handle MPE data in mono mode. These are subtle differences I've encountered and thought it was worth talking about. There's lots of little details in how these things work! I know you obviously know what you're talking about as the maker of one of these fine devices, but you can't be expected to know everything about how all the other software works, so I thought I might contribute some useful info. But I guess I won't know what exactly you disagree with where I went into more detail so not much more I can say either.

I hope you don't mind if I start another thread about this stuff. I know you might not be interested and might not want to chime in (though I hope you do as I was hoping to get your thoughts!), but others might find it useful as they encounter different behaviors from various sound sources.

Thanks and have a great rest of your day! I think I need a drink now.

[Tj Shredder]

One note which might help here. Bitwig is not recording the incoming MPE Midi information as Midi. It is recording it as expression with the corresponding much higher resolution. If you set your Instrument to MPE, it will translate that information back to MPE Midi.
There are two scenarios:
One is the default and it will change all incoming Midi channels to channel 1! If you then set your instrument to MPE, the original Midi channel is lost! Bitwig will distribute the channels according to their own voice allocation, playing the same pitch on different LinnStrument pads will only play a single voice, the first not off will stop the note - very useless for LinnStrumentalists!
For the other you have to set the Midi channel to "same" in the track inspector. Then all Midi channel information will be preserved!
I would call Audio Modeling "expressive" instruments. It isn't MPE (not at all). In Bitwig you can turn it into Channel per voice at least, with the aid of an instrument layer. For each layer load a separate instance and set the receiving channel to only one of those you send. I restrict it usually to 6 instances... With this trick you can turn any monophonic instrument into an expressive polyphonic one... (If your CPU is strong enough to support several instances)

[Echoes in the Attic]

One note which might help here. Bitwig is not recording the incoming MPE Midi information as Midi. It is recording it as expression with the corresponding much higher resolution. If you set your Instrument to MPE, it will translate that information back to MPE Midi.
There are two scenarios:
One is the default and it will change all incoming Midi channels to channel 1! If you then set your instrument to MPE, the original Midi channel is lost! Bitwig will distribute the channels according to their own voice allocation, playing the same pitch on different LinnStrument pads will only play a single voice, the first not off will stop the note - very useless for LinnStrumentalists!
For the other you have to set the Midi channel to "same" in the track inspector. Then all Midi channel information will be preserved!

Yes it's always best to set the Bitwig Midi "To" to "Same" otherwise Bitwig does indeed change the channels. I don't know why this isn't the default setting, it's generally how anyone would want it. Unfortunately it does not always preserve the channels though. Something to be aware of in this scenario is that it still only preserves the received channels when there are no overlapping notes of the same channel. If there are two notes of the same channel that overlap, Bitwig will bump the second note up a channel as well as all subsequent channels. So this can mess things up if you are using channel per row with linnstrument for example and you want to play a multi-channel instrument on a single track (you may want legato on a given row for example). If one row is channel 2 and two notes overlap in it, it will bump the second note to channel 3 and then the row that is supposed to be channel 3 gets bumped to channel 4 etc. Not a lot of people know about that. Something to be aware of.

I would call Audio Modeling "expressive" instruments. It isn't MPE (not at all).

Yes I agree. Though there is an important compatibility not present in many other instruments which is very useful and not many people understand. Like I explained earlier, in order to use the very handy MPE per note expression editing (which even for solo instruments is much better than the standard midi lanes), the device has to be set to MPE on. This requires an instrument to be able to listen to all midi channels. For instance in Kontakt, you can set it to listen channel 1 or channel 2 etc. or set it to "Omni", which means it will listen to all channels. Similar settings exist in other instrument like GForce Oddity, which can also be set to Omni. So that's good, but of course doesn't mean you can play them in MPE mode and have separate simultaneous expressions per note (unless duplicating instruments in kontakt). But you can use solo mono instruments and make use of the mpe note editing. BUT, and it is a big BUT.... most instruments, like Kontakt, even if they can be set to Omni channels in, will get confused by a sudden change in expression from one note to the next. And of course with an expressive solo instrument, this will happen quite often. You might bend up from one note and immediately cut that note off with a new note. Kontakt and many other plugins, can't handle this, there will be pitch glitches and artifacts. With Audio Modeling instruments (and a few others), thankfully in addition to being able to listen to all channels (like kontakt in Omni mode) it also is able to handle this type of playing and reset the expression of every new note played. So you can quickly bend one note and cut it off with a new note and have no interference. So you can record them set to MPE mode and use Bitwig's MPE note editing, which is really very handy, especially for the pitch data. I'm not sure why there is resistance to these facts, or why it should be controversial in any way. I find it very useful to be aware of!

I'm not sure how other hosts handle it, and I do wish that in Bitwig we could use the per note expression editing with a single channel set up for mono instruments, but alas, that isn't the case.

[SteveElbows]

If left to my own devices I would describe SWAM instruments as 'MPE aware'.

Because I totally get why MPE seems inappropriate given the level of polyphony on offer with these instruments. And Audio Modeling dont use the term MPE to describe their own instruments. But their manuals and release notes make various references to MPE controllers (eg when talking about things like the pitch bend range settings).