clavi as controller
- Thread starter zenguan88
- Start date
yea one pressing problems which the salesman couldnt really comfirn with me is that weather you can play its preset in your DAW, as in it might be hard to intergrate the patches.
actually i am looking at this 401 model because of its great touch.
also the time i went forward to find logic enviromnet for the x8 but the sounds didnt pull through its like theres 128 polyphonic and although the presets were right not all 128 polyphonic is play, i am afraid this would happen to the clavi again which i am rather worried in.
but i plan to use it mainly as MIDI controller although its abit of an overkill, i tried the CP33 too and the S90es but i still prefer the 401 model and it cost around 3600 to get one.
actually i am looking at this 401 model because of its great touch.
also the time i went forward to find logic enviromnet for the x8 but the sounds didnt pull through its like theres 128 polyphonic and although the presets were right not all 128 polyphonic is play, i am afraid this would happen to the clavi again which i am rather worried in.
but i plan to use it mainly as MIDI controller although its abit of an overkill, i tried the CP33 too and the S90es but i still prefer the 401 model and it cost around 3600 to get one.
Cheez
Moderator
I wouldn't recommend it unless you really need the clavinova for something - e.g. you want a nice looking non-mobile digital piano. Calvinovas is not designed to be a midi controller.
The key about midi controller is in the name: control. For maximum control, you need a number of things other than good touch. Assignable fadrs and/or knobs are almost indespensible nowadays; mod wheels; ability to divide the keyboard in zones; afterouch is an option depending on the type of music you are doing; preferably balanced rather than graded since getting a midi controller=sequencing and sequencing=balanced keys.
If you purpose is for controlling midi, then get a midi controller. Proper one.
The key about midi controller is in the name: control. For maximum control, you need a number of things other than good touch. Assignable fadrs and/or knobs are almost indespensible nowadays; mod wheels; ability to divide the keyboard in zones; afterouch is an option depending on the type of music you are doing; preferably balanced rather than graded since getting a midi controller=sequencing and sequencing=balanced keys.
If you purpose is for controlling midi, then get a midi controller. Proper one.
Cheez
Moderator
Another thing. You don't get 128 polyphony because of the way the sounds are designed and programmed. They combine different elements into one patch. That's pretty common for synth/keyboards. The more elements they use in one patch, the richer that patch becomes but the polyphony also decrease. If they use 4 elements (famous of Yamaha style), then you get 4 times less polyphone since one note = 4 notes polyphony.
Since the clavinova uses AWM, then there's a high chance that they are going to combine elements. And their specs says 96 note polyphony - so you'll be getting much less.
But if you are looking for a midi controller, usually the sound is not our concern since we are looking at triggering sounds from other sources.
Since the clavinova uses AWM, then there's a high chance that they are going to combine elements. And their specs says 96 note polyphony - so you'll be getting much less.
But if you are looking for a midi controller, usually the sound is not our concern since we are looking at triggering sounds from other sources.
I really do not tend to use faders and knobs. usually i would use a mouse and i dont feel it as an inconvience. hmmms
the only problem which i fear is playing extensively on such a controller for too long will make me lose the classical touch therefore i am in the market for a good controller keyboard.
the reviews of the studiologic VMK 188 plus touch seems pretty good but i heaven had a chance to try one. would anyone care to comment on it?
i find it really upsetting where by products such as fantom x8 motif xs and even korg m3 do so much to put in so much polyphonic for its products only to not be able to recall its properties back in DAW. hmmms... seriously is the only way to get the full polyphony it , is through Direct In?
the only problem which i fear is playing extensively on such a controller for too long will make me lose the classical touch therefore i am in the market for a good controller keyboard.
the reviews of the studiologic VMK 188 plus touch seems pretty good but i heaven had a chance to try one. would anyone care to comment on it?
i find it really upsetting where by products such as fantom x8 motif xs and even korg m3 do so much to put in so much polyphonic for its products only to not be able to recall its properties back in DAW. hmmms... seriously is the only way to get the full polyphony it , is through Direct In?
for digital piano, the sound is usually quite as it is. there's not much to edit.
in the sequencer software, just assign a midi channel to record/playback the digital piano.
you should try to find out more about midi and how it progress to todays' electronic music production. i sense that you might have some misconcept in the workflow.
Cheez
Moderator
I agree with soft. I think you're a little confused re: the properties of DAW and how it works. I don't understand what you mean by "recall it's properties" in DAW. Why would you want to do that? The only reason for that is to program the patches in detail (which can be done in the keyboard itself anyway). Most synths will let you do that with a free software the come packaged with it. As for digital pianos, you can't change or program the patches much. That's the difference between a synthesizer/workstation and a digital piano.
As for getting full polyphony, a DAW would not do any difference. If you keyboard has 128 notes polyphony, that's the maximum it can get and you can't increase that no matter what you do. If the patches they use has more than one element (eg - 2 elements per patch for a piano sound), then playing one note actually gives you 2 polyphony. So you end up getting 64 notes polyphony for that patch. Actually, it is still 128 - but 2 elements are sounded when you play one note. And a DAW does not make any difference to that.
As for getting full polyphony, a DAW would not do any difference. If you keyboard has 128 notes polyphony, that's the maximum it can get and you can't increase that no matter what you do. If the patches they use has more than one element (eg - 2 elements per patch for a piano sound), then playing one note actually gives you 2 polyphony. So you end up getting 64 notes polyphony for that patch. Actually, it is still 128 - but 2 elements are sounded when you play one note. And a DAW does not make any difference to that.
okay i shall rephrase my question then , for example, i got this EPiano patch in fantom x8, when i am playing it out without entering my DAW, the sound sounds very lush however when i hook it up to logic and played the sample patch the quality of this EPiano patch is lost. The details that i once heard before entering it to logic is lost.
I though it was maybe a patch mess up with the enviroment however it happen to the other patches as well.
I though it was maybe a patch mess up with the enviroment however it happen to the other patches as well.
Cheez
Moderator
Can you please define clearly what you meant when you say you "hook it up to logic"? Do you mean via midi or do you mean you route the audio into your soundcard and going a recording with logic? I do not see how this relate to what you said in your previous post about "no able to recall its properties in DAW".
what i mean by properties is actually the samples properties! okay i hook it up to logic to use fantom preset as MIDI, because i want to use fantom x8 sounds.
that time i already had import fantom enviroment into it, however whenever i play the patch like EPiano (MIDI) the audio that i get is a totally different sound, the properties or qualities of the sample is lost.
Since you mention about polyphonic i am wondering if polyphonic was the cause of this problem whereby logic is not able to read too much of the elements.
( They combine different elements into one patch. That's pretty common for synth/keyboards. The more elements they use in one patch, the richer that patch becomes but the polyphony also decrease. If they use 4 elements (famous of Yamaha style), then you get 4 times less polyphone since one note = 4 notes polyphony. )
the Epiano was not so bad, some patches were still alright, but when i get to the Eguitars patches its totally messed up all the patches in the Eguitars caterogy sounds the same~
that time i already had import fantom enviroment into it, however whenever i play the patch like EPiano (MIDI) the audio that i get is a totally different sound, the properties or qualities of the sample is lost.
Since you mention about polyphonic i am wondering if polyphonic was the cause of this problem whereby logic is not able to read too much of the elements.
( They combine different elements into one patch. That's pretty common for synth/keyboards. The more elements they use in one patch, the richer that patch becomes but the polyphony also decrease. If they use 4 elements (famous of Yamaha style), then you get 4 times less polyphone since one note = 4 notes polyphony. )
the Epiano was not so bad, some patches were still alright, but when i get to the Eguitars patches its totally messed up all the patches in the Eguitars caterogy sounds the same~
Cheez
Moderator
This is highly irregular. The Fantom environment in Logic should only be programmed for patch change only. But Iansoh may be right here. However, it does sound strange. Unless you did a midi dump or actually run the sequencer. Simply playing back the patches is a simple midi trigger.
Zenguan - you can do 3 things. One is to check the environment's programming. Look at all the virtual cables etc and see if anything is wrong. If that's too complicated for you, you can check your Fantom itself to see if anything was amiss (or changed from the default setting). If all else fails, you may want to start searching for another source of environment to download.
As for polyphony, Logic is not involved at all. All Logic does is to trigger the patches in the Fantom via midi. The power to generate the patches lie on the Fantom, not on Logic. It can, however, change parameters within Fantom patches. Whoever who programmed your environment must have done something else than simple midi triggering, although I'm still curious how that might have happened.
Zenguan - you can do 3 things. One is to check the environment's programming. Look at all the virtual cables etc and see if anything is wrong. If that's too complicated for you, you can check your Fantom itself to see if anything was amiss (or changed from the default setting). If all else fails, you may want to start searching for another source of environment to download.
As for polyphony, Logic is not involved at all. All Logic does is to trigger the patches in the Fantom via midi. The power to generate the patches lie on the Fantom, not on Logic. It can, however, change parameters within Fantom patches. Whoever who programmed your environment must have done something else than simple midi triggering, although I'm still curious how that might have happened.
zenguan88, which mode(Fantom) are you in when you do your sequencing on the Logic?
like what iansoh said,
"Q: Although the same Patch is selected, it sounds different when I
listen to it in the Performance.
A: In Performance mode, the parameters of each part of the
performance can apply further modification to parameters such
as pan, octave, and filter, relative to the settings specified by the
patch. Thus, Patches in a Performance may sound different than
they do when heard in Patch mode. To return these settings to
their initial conditions, select the Patch after execute Factory
Reset Temporary for the Performance. (p. 235)
Additionally, although a Patch may comprise tones created
with the use of the multi-effects, the multi-effects used in the
Performance may differ from the multi-effects selected by the
Patch. Check the multi-effect settings of the performance. Also
do the same for the Chorus and Reverb settings."
* as for the clavi, using it in your setup is definitely not a problem. if you know what it is for.
like what iansoh said,
"Q: Although the same Patch is selected, it sounds different when I
listen to it in the Performance.
A: In Performance mode, the parameters of each part of the
performance can apply further modification to parameters such
as pan, octave, and filter, relative to the settings specified by the
patch. Thus, Patches in a Performance may sound different than
they do when heard in Patch mode. To return these settings to
their initial conditions, select the Patch after execute Factory
Reset Temporary for the Performance. (p. 235)
Additionally, although a Patch may comprise tones created
with the use of the multi-effects, the multi-effects used in the
Performance may differ from the multi-effects selected by the
Patch. Check the multi-effect settings of the performance. Also
do the same for the Chorus and Reverb settings."
* as for the clavi, using it in your setup is definitely not a problem. if you know what it is for.
Cheez
Moderator
Ah ha! If you are in performance mode when using Logic, then soft is right on the note. In a performance mode, you LOSE all the parameters setting (reverb etc) of the patch. All the instruments in the performance mode (ie the 16 instruments selected) has only ONE mode - that is the mode of the performance settings. You can, however, assign each instrument to how much of the performance mode setting you want (eg 60% of reverb 1 and 40% of chorus for one instrument, and that can be different for the others). You cannot, however, retain all the parameters particular to that patch. If you do, then the other instruments in the performance mode will sound wierd.
This is one compromise of a workstation and sound module. Using it to play individual patches is fine. In a performance mode (sequencing), you have to forgo some of the nice sounds.
That's why if you seriously into sequencing, go the software path.
This is one compromise of a workstation and sound module. Using it to play individual patches is fine. In a performance mode (sequencing), you have to forgo some of the nice sounds.
That's why if you seriously into sequencing, go the software path.
yep i guess that is the very problem i am in performance mode so i can layer all the 16 sounds. AND thats the very reason why i am disappointed where the full parameters of the sounds couldnt be utilize!
It's going to be troublesome having only one patch at a time and trying to bounce them in all the time. but nevertheless i would try to find a way out through this.
thanks soft
It's going to be troublesome having only one patch at a time and trying to bounce them in all the time. but nevertheless i would try to find a way out through this.
thanks soft
Cheez
Moderator
No Zenguan, bouncing individual patches is not recommended. In sequencing, you'll need to listen to the individual tracks and change the sequencing dynamically. If you record one track, then after adding a few tracks, you may decide the first track need changes. Then you'll need to re-record it again. That's very troublesome workflow. Midi is always the way to go. You'll have to tweak the settings the best you can do to get satisfactory sound from all the patches.
Actually, in my workstation days (before moving to software), what I would do is this:
There are usually 2 reverb/effects processors in a workstation (minimum) nowadays. E-piano is usually the only instrument that uses a lot of chorus effect compared to the others. One reverb unit will always be set at chorus (with setting as close as to the original e-piano patch as possible). The other reverb unit will be a normal reverb (eg hall). So, one effects processor is dedicated just for the e-piano, and the reverb is for the entire pallette. Then I would make sure each instrument is tweaked accordingly - eg very minimal (close to zero) reverb for bass, stronger reverb for strings, moderate effect for solo instruments etc.
The other way, if you are going the hardware path, is this. Electro/mechanical keyboard sounds (eg: e-piano, acoustic piano, clavs, organs, wurlis etc) are usually a tax on the polyphony. That's because we usually use 2 hands to play electro/mechanical keyboards sounds. So it would be prudent to use a dedicated hardware sound module just for playing these sounds. The workstation itself can be dedicated for other sequencing instruments. This way, your e-piano/piano etc runs off another external unit which will retain it's patch programming (and you get your "sweet DX7-like E-piano sound" setting), and you'll also have a lower risk of running out of polyphony. That was also what I did in the past.
Or the easier way - swtich everything to software!
Actually, in my workstation days (before moving to software), what I would do is this:
There are usually 2 reverb/effects processors in a workstation (minimum) nowadays. E-piano is usually the only instrument that uses a lot of chorus effect compared to the others. One reverb unit will always be set at chorus (with setting as close as to the original e-piano patch as possible). The other reverb unit will be a normal reverb (eg hall). So, one effects processor is dedicated just for the e-piano, and the reverb is for the entire pallette. Then I would make sure each instrument is tweaked accordingly - eg very minimal (close to zero) reverb for bass, stronger reverb for strings, moderate effect for solo instruments etc.
The other way, if you are going the hardware path, is this. Electro/mechanical keyboard sounds (eg: e-piano, acoustic piano, clavs, organs, wurlis etc) are usually a tax on the polyphony. That's because we usually use 2 hands to play electro/mechanical keyboards sounds. So it would be prudent to use a dedicated hardware sound module just for playing these sounds. The workstation itself can be dedicated for other sequencing instruments. This way, your e-piano/piano etc runs off another external unit which will retain it's patch programming (and you get your "sweet DX7-like E-piano sound" setting), and you'll also have a lower risk of running out of polyphony. That was also what I did in the past.
Or the easier way - swtich everything to software!
uhs yeaaa I WILL PROBABLY DO THAT. i actually have enough software instruments to take over the x8 already, but i just felt its like a waste, i mean its a 5k board and leaving it at home as a controller isnt it like a waste? been trying to sell x8 at the right price, but theres only one offer for 2800 . should i...? or should i just keep that board and use it in an upcoming studio so that at least people can have a pallate of sounds to deal with when they jam.
uhhhsss a wrong investment
uhhhsss a wrong investment
Similar threads
