![]() Or alternatively you can use the external instrument plugin and send the midi over IAC back around to the input of logicPro and then route to multiple instruments that way. That one instrument could be another instance of Patchwork hosting multiple instruments inside listening on different midi channels. Then it would work just like we are doing now in other DAW's using midi routing to do it.Įxcept that even then, LogicPro doesn't provide a way to route that midi output to more than one instrument. In that case then that particular OPUS will not be outputting any audio, just midi. You can host the AUmfx into LogicPro.and inside Patchworks host the VST version of OPUS. Right now today its possible to do the above video steps in LogicPro by using BlueCatAudio Patchworks. Not sure what they are going to change for "export" of midi, but that sounds more like a button that will export a midi file or something, as opposed to actually routing the midi through the DAW to other instruments.which basically is just not very easy or impossible in LogicPro. ![]() ![]() But in any case, that is what would have to happen to make it work in LogicPro as it does now in a ll the other DAW's when using the VST version of the plugin, VST does support midi out from the plugin. Or alternatively they could provide virtual midi output ports directly in OPUS which would send the midi over IAC directly that way. In order to have midi output.you'd need to actually compiled OPUS as an AUmfx plugin, which I happen to know is only a 10 minute job that they could do if they want to.but a lot of people out there don't know how easy it is to compile an AU instrument plugin as an AUmfx that simply ignores the audio. The reason it doesn't work in LogicPro is because LogicPro doesn't allow MIDI plugins to run as instruments. There are other plugins such as RapidComposer, Jamstix and others that all suffer from this same problem because of extreme limitations in LogicPro. That seems to work, since the input midi is going to channel 16 and I'm only paying attention to midi channels 1-4 on the output. Then inside Orchestrator I can load up a couple instruments in woodwinds with whatever instrument, doesn't matter because I'm also going to mute them. As long as you don't need to use all 16 parts.then should be no problem, but just kind of pay attention to what you're doing. On the output we will just ignore channel 16 (which is normally the part handling String basses from OPUS). Orchestrator will take that input regardless of the midi channel.and orchestrate it. That channelizes my midi controller to channel 16 and sends the midi into Orchestrator as being channel 16. I could do the following (In DP for this example) So just to elaborate a bit more.if I wanted to use OPUS orchestrator strictly for the arp function to control some external instruments.no OPUS sounds at all.let's say 4 tracks. So as Zoot showed in his earlier photos, you gotta load an instrument and mute it ( unless you also want to hear OPUS instruments layered with external sounds). Theoretically, I need to test that theory too.Īnd just for clarity on it, it looks like the orchestrator is not enabled for any one of the parts UNLESS it has an actual instrument assigned. If you don't want to ignore the first woodwind part because you are trying to layer some OPUS flutes with an external instrument, then you'd have to pick a different midi channel, make sure yourĭAW is channelizing the midi from your controller to that channel prior to hitting OPUS.and ignore that midi channel on the output.and also don't use that Orchestrator part.there are 16 parts. Because if we do try to use that and listen to midi channel 1 on the midi out.then we'll also pickup the input midi being echoed thru, as I explained above. Because we are going to ignore midi channel 1 on output, we can't use OPUS orchestrator for the first part (the first part on the woodwinds page). The midi is passed thru, as I explained earlier.but presuming the midi controller is playin on midi channel 1, we can just ignore midi channel 1 on the output. I just tested it and basically if you ignore part 1, then it can work. ![]() Is there some reason for needing a mod? Strange. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |