![]() In your case some environment trickery is needed to prevent that PB receives the same MIDI which it's sending out to IAC 2. The simplest way is to subtract the IAC 2 port from SUM input, by cabling that port directly to an instrument for playing. Thinking about it, there is also a solution without using the environment:ġ Make sure that PB sends to IAC 2 only on MIDI channel X, andĢ Make sure that NO instrument in your arrangement is receiving on channel X except the instrument for playing the output of PB. Here's how I arrived at my conclusion (which, to reiterate, was preliminary). I recorded a part on track 1 (the Logic instrument) and then copied it to the other two tracks.Īn audio instrument hosting its own Kontakt Player 2 (GPO) The Kontakt Player shown in the screencap is an instance of GPO. Then I played back track 1 and 2 and listened for flamming/phasing. I compared what I heard to tracks 1 and 3 playing back. Overall, tracks 1 and 2 playing back simultaneously sounded tighter than tracks 1 and 3.Īt one point I threw a gain plug across the Aux returning the Plogue-hosted Kontakt Player and set it to flip the phase. At an I/O Buffer size of 64 was able to get near perfect cancellation of the original and ReWire tracks (1 and 2), whereas the original and Bidule-played tracks (1 and 3) didn't cancel as much. ![]() The following three parameter have, understandably, a tremendous influence on how tight the ReWired tracks sounded against the original track: Still tight, just not as tight as 1 and 2. It appears you are correct SKi, timing is tighter with Rewire. I just opened Addictive Drums in PB and as a software instrument in Logic. I played a simple kick and snare part on the PB Midi track and copied it to the AD in Logic, and yes, there is a small amount of flamming. If I adjust the delay in the Inspector on the PB version to -1/192, they are dead on. So now I have to weigh what seems to be the better stability of the Soundlower methodolgy with the better timing of the Rewire methodology. Usually, I come down on the side of stability. Something tells me that the combination of LE and Logic could prove to be an elegant solution in terms of hosting a greater number of EXS-24 sounds, something which PB can't do. ![]() And of couse you can also host 3rd party plugs in LE as well. ![]() So if you're saying that LE and Logic can co-exist nicely together, LE would seem to have an advantage over PB. If you were to return LE's audio into Logic via Soundflower (or similar), you could use my scheme to have metering, level, panning, sends, and automation appear in a channel strip right next to the track you're recording on in Logic - and that's the whole point of my lil' system. You get standard Track-Based Automation on the MIDI tracks in Pro (right where you want them):Volume, Pan plus any MIDI automation (no direct level metering of the audio) With Express as a slave ( and a 16ch Soundflower return to Pro): Unless I've overlooked something important. With individual Aux SF returns (not busses.IMHO unnecessary), you get the sends + FX slots if needed, and the metering of the audio coming backĪ quick switch of screenset takes you over to Express, which has the same look n feel ), where you can still access individual Inserts, sends (within Express or back to Pro via an SF channel).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |