Why no VST Arranger? - Synth Zone BBS

SYNTH ZONE

Visit The Bar For Casual Discussion

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

General Arranger Keyboard Forum

Why no VST Arranger?

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Why no VST Arranger?
Clif Anderson Member	posted 12-05-2003 09:35 PM Wouldn't a VST/Dxi arranger be better than what we have now. A single environment into which you could plug in sounds (e.g., Kontakt) and effects (e.g., DecaBuddy). Isn't this better than arranger + MidiOx or Hubi + VST Host + Sounds + Effects? Why hasn't this been done? IP: Logged
Jos Maas Member	posted 12-06-2003 02:54 AM VST is not an official standard like MIDI. It is something that was implemented in Cubase to control audio effects. It was adapted by others "big ones". Making software able to host VST will cost a lot of programming effort. That may not be a problem for sequencer and non-real-time arranger software wich is a multi million dollar bussiness, but it is not worth it for real-time arrangers that are in a penny and nickle market. Jos IP: Logged
Clif Anderson Member	posted 12-06-2003 04:50 AM Thanks for your reply Jos. Of course, many of us appreciate the fact that you helped make software arrangers available at all. I am not planning to program a VST arranger and I am not trying to tell you to do it. But, don't you think the market for a VST-host arranger would be bigger than the market for software arrangers that have to be connected to other programs using MIDI-Ox? IP: Logged
Frank L. Rosenthal Member	posted 12-06-2003 05:08 AM Clif, you are exactly on the mark from a user perspective - one operating system hosting everything. There is a product like this available but with little style support, namely,: https://www.evolution-uk.com/acatalog/software_online.html We are relatively close with Brainspawn's forte which is specifically designed for live performances. Could another alternative be where OMB and otheres are re-done as a VSTi/DXi? Jos, what once may be a nickle and dime market can become a multi - million dollar market! This will depend on control surfaces, software, computers and so on. It will also depend on alternatives and their costs. IP: Logged
Clif Anderson Member	posted 12-06-2003 05:37 AM Hi Frank, I was hoping you would join in this discussion! I had though about an arranger as an MFX plug-in (which are MIDI-IN to MIDI-OUT). This might be a better solution for those that use arranger functions only a fraction of the time. Having the arranger be the host would work better for those who used the arranger functions most of the time. I think BIAB is on the right track, except it is non-real-time. IP: Logged
Frank L. Rosenthal Member	posted 12-06-2003 05:54 AM Clif, I agree with you that it makes more sense to have the arranger software be the host. In a small way both Live - Styler (Soundfonts, B4) and OMB (sequencer) are moving in this direction. I may have inadvertently discouraged N. Stellberg to proceed along these lines by showing a screen shot of my live performance system. It shows Kontakt, B4, DecaBuddy, etc. loaded within forte and Live - Styler below it. I contacted PG Music (BIAB) a long time ago about providing the option for real time arranger. They showed no interest. Similarily, Soundtrek is slow to update their JammerLive. I believe these people are not keeping up with the times or progress in computers, software and control surfaces. In fact, the big music companies (Yamaha, Roland, etc.) may see an opportunity slip away. It almost seems like the usual 'chicken & egg' syndrome! IP: Logged
sk880user Member	posted 12-06-2003 06:46 AM Cliff, That is a great idea that I strongly support. That is one step between hardware and software based synth. Jos, your evaluation is faulty at best. Highend arranger keyboards are even more expensive than their synth/workstation counter parts. Furthermore, newer technology come first to high end arranger keyboards before non-arranger keyboards in a wide-scale distribution. Finally, VST is now a standard and there is no reason why it cannot be adopted by Highend arrangers. This comes from a person who owns a studio based on Cubase SX and Nuendo 2 and use them extensively with High end arrangers. IP: Logged
Jos Maas Member	posted 12-06-2003 09:57 AM I was talking about real-time arranger software. Jos IP: Logged
MusiKMan Member	posted 12-06-2003 07:01 PM For me, that I dont do any gigs, I think this would truly be the best solution. I use cubase vst32 for my recordings. Well, im learning how at the time, but I think that this will not only save me space by not needing my hardware synth, but really save me money... I can now sell my hardware synth and use the money to update my pc and have an awsome arranger pc with recording capabilities.. Boy, I dreamed of the day when this became possible.. With OMB, and the other arranger progrms this is getting better and better. Jos, I think a while back I mentioned that you have a gold mine in your hands.. But some one should help you promote it. Really, if you could make this work as a plugin for VST, Boy, I know a lot of people would buy it !! Right now, I guess I would have to first use your program, and record the file as a midi file. Then, I think I would be able to add or edit it more in cubase right? I think I asked this already, so please for give me.. Peace, Musikman ------------------ IP: Logged
BuleriaChk Member	posted 12-06-2003 10:51 PM Are you talking about automatic chord recognition as a vst/dxi interface between a Midi keyboard (not arranger) and a sampler like VSampler3 (mapping midi channels to software samples per channel) to a sequencer (like SONAR)? Seems like one could set drum tracks to loop from a program like Fruity Loops (dxi'd to sonar) + bass/style voices and play realtime (say on the first 4 channels), also being able to select sampled voices there. VSampler3 will work with the PA-80, for example, if the tracks are set up properly (i.e., playing the Sampler's voices for a style rather than the PA-80s) All that's missing is the chord recognition AI.. I think, anyway IP: Logged
Jos Maas Member	posted 12-07-2003 02:10 AM Musikman, Porting a midifile from OMB to a sequencer program like Cubase or Cakewalk for the finishing touch (audio recording with VST plug in's) would be a good idea. In professional studios OMB is used as what they call a "preproduction tool". That's OK by me. Jos IP: Logged

All times are PT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Synth Zone

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.42a
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.

Help keep Synth Zone Online

Add Yourself To The Synth Zone Map