#Midi delay melody assistant full#

There is a lot of timbral goodness contained in that full attack of instrumnets, but the reality is that if you trigger that sound via midi exactly on the grid, then the perception will be that the main transient peak of the attack is late, becuase a real player would be doing certain things intuitively with their instrument to start making sound 10's of milliseconds early, or perhaps even 100's such that the transient sounds on the grid. When real players play, they start sliding their bow on the string ahead of the grid in such a way that the transient peak will sound like its on the grid. Some instruments, such as strings, have a lot of sound that happens ahead of the grid. When you do, is it to correct errors in your playing or to keep everything in a strict rhythm? When you play, are you consciously emulating the fluid rhythm inherent in orchestral conducting or are you playing with the idea that you're going to quantize to a strict grid at the end of the day? You mention that you don't always quantize.

#Midi delay melody assistant pro#

If you don't have VI Pro then you'll have to do everything manually which can be quite laborious and painstaking.

#Midi delay melody assistant full size#

If you have VI Pro you can use the humanization feature in conjunction with the bigger full size libraries to automate much of what we did back in the day manually. Nowadays I still fluctuate the tempo but thanks to the miracles of VSL humanization and repetition performances those other processes can be automated and randomized. Back in the day, you used to have to play sloppily then automate the tempo, then slightly fiddle with the tuning using a wide variety of articulations to try and achieve a natural sounding performance.

I play most of my compositions on my keyboard then end up going back and quantizing most of what I played.

Hey all, A question for anyone with an answer: When sequencing orchestral type music using VSL (or any other VST's, for that matter), do you stay on the grid and let the computer 'conduct' the orchestra (using tempo mapping to create rhythmic fluidity) or do you un-snap from the grid, ignore quantization completely and play the lines in yourself, using your own sense of rhythm to 'conduct' the orchestra?. When you mention latency discrepancies, are you referring to actual errors in the sample start times or the musical differences in attack and timing inherent in certain articulations? (i.e. It makes my midi editing about 1000 times easier to deal with. I myself prefer to have my notes on the grid and find other ways to dynamically add humanization, as well as latency adjustment for inconsistent attack transients. Humanization is another reason perhaps to avoid the grid, but there are other more efficient means to provide timing humanization. Other people may using scripting in the DAW to adjust for that. But that is a laborious and painstaking process. So sometimes people will move their notes ahead of the grid in order to compensate for that. For orchestral mockups, a lot of samples have inconsistent amounts of latency, this is in order to capture the full sample attack, which for some instruments, especially strings, are kind of slow. I'm not sure there is one right way to answer this.

When sequencing orchestral type music using VSL (or any other VST's, for that matter), do you stay on the grid and let the computer 'conduct' the orchestra (using tempo mapping to create rhythmic fluidity) or do you un-snap from the grid, ignore quantization completely and play the lines in yourself, using your own sense of rhythm to 'conduct' the orchestra?