Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
On 4/26/19 7:57 AM, Sami Jumppanen wrote: 3. Import song to the default empty studio project. Just pushed r15492 which was a memory access issue related to deleting segments and the segment parameter box. This may have fixed a crash related to File > Merge that might have affected this particular case. Ted. ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
> >Actually, upon further thought, you can create a Device for each > synth and assign multiple Devices to the same port. Indeed, good points. With daisy chaining there's always the need of setting the channels correctly in each physical device - which I did, and now I really got a hard one: should I expand the limited per synth settings (allow more channels on each device)? Will it create problems in the future? I have two multi-output devices. Yamaha TG33 (the one that doesn't listen "All notes off", but luckily rg sends note offs at stop, hooray!) has four physical outputs. Yamaha V50 has two outputs assignable, and I've decided to have MIDI channels 5 - 8 in use. Channel 5 is assigned on the "L" output, others to the "R". That way, in my analog mixer, I can have dry and wet sounds mixed form a single synth. If I add more channels for that synth, I get a question how should I assing the L/R split? If I mix the settings freely, I get away of remembering that in rg by naming the tracks wisely (L/R appendix or dry/wet). But for other uses, it may not be that handy. If, OTOH, I keep the current 5 = "L" / 6,7,8 = "R" channel split, all my old songs would work fine as they are, even if I have more channels activated. This is no way related to the rg problems I started to write about, but as this is a user list, I thought why not to write :) For a short moment I thought what if the device setup could incorporate division into physical outputs per device... but more options tend to have negative effect on usability. Sami ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
On 5/9/19 8:32 AM, Ted Felix wrote: This is a good point. RG restricts the user to one synth per MIDI port. That's unrealistic. The concept of a synth needs representation in the Studio. I'll open a feature request. Actually, upon further thought, you can create a Device for each synth and assign multiple Devices to the same port. Assuming this works as it should, one can do daisy-chaining in this way. It's a little clunky since the MIDI channels aren't enforced by rg and one could accidentally set a Track up to talk to a channel on the port that is incorrect for a specific Synth in the chain. Ted. ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
Hi, thank you for the thorough reply! Really appreciate it. The first setback I encounter is that I have a studio set up, the default studio project has tracks with all the device assignments done. When I try opening older simpler song, I don't see the devices I had configured. With all things considered, I will not get stuck with this, and I already tried creating the missing devices. Just didn't bother to remake the banks, got the right sounds playing anyway. Connecting to the first device - good info! That seemed to work. The song then ended up having the names of the devices like before (the old physical devices), but first of them pointed to the first new MIDI port. Ok. I'm sure I can take the time to try all the methods again with better documentation. to 9. toukok. 2019 klo 15.34 Ted Felix (t...@tedfelix.com) kirjoitti: > On 4/26/19 7:57 AM, Sami Jumppanen wrote: > > I'm having problems with my changed hardware synth studio (physical MIDI > > ports) and continuing the old songs. I have found and tried different > > ways to migrate songs to new studio, but none of them seem to work well > > or at all. > >I would just create the studio from scratch and assign each track to > the proper device/channel. This might be a rather large undertaking, > though. > > > 2. Open the old song and then import a new studio from a newer RG file. > >I tested this with a very simple (one Device) setup. It worked fine > for me. RG assigns all Tracks to the first Device it finds. This is > probably the best guess it can come up with. So, then it should be a > matter of assigning the Tracks to the proper Devices/Channels. > >You mentioned that with one of these approaches (2 or 3), you ended > up only with "one port of the new MIDI device". That certainly sounds > like a bug that would be easy to track down and fix. Was that this > case? Can you provide more details so I can try to reproduce this and > fix it? > > > 3. Import song to the default empty studio project. > >I'm not sure how you did this. I tried doing this with File > Merge > > Merge File... Is that what you tried? For me, it did nothing. I > ended up getting an exception thrown and caught in > RosegardenApplication. (I'm running a debug build, so that might be why > I didn't crash. Still, it was a std::bad_alloc which is probably fatal > at some later point.) > >Was this the case that crashed for you? Crashes are certainly cause > for concern, so I'll have a closer look. If you can give me more > details of the crash you encountered, I'd appreciate it. Would like to > get it fixed before the 19.06 release if I can. > > > Device configuration should be detached from sequencer work, it makes > > very little sense anyway. Firstly mixing the terms device and port. One > > MIDI port can feed many devices (synthesizers) by daisy chaining (or > > other splitters/processors), so it's not rational to think about a MIDI > > port as a "device". > >This is a good point. RG restricts the user to one synth per MIDI > port. That's unrealistic. The concept of a synth needs representation > in the Studio. I'll open a feature request. > > > If no > > settings are found, so what? Just display patch numbers. > >See Feature Request #455: > > https://sourceforge.net/p/rosegarden/feature-requests/455/ > > Ted. > > > ___ > Rosegarden-user mailing list > Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user > -- Sami Jumppanen http://netti.nic.fi/some-e ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
On 4/26/19 7:57 AM, Sami Jumppanen wrote: I'm having problems with my changed hardware synth studio (physical MIDI ports) and continuing the old songs. I have found and tried different ways to migrate songs to new studio, but none of them seem to work well or at all. I would just create the studio from scratch and assign each track to the proper device/channel. This might be a rather large undertaking, though. 2. Open the old song and then import a new studio from a newer RG file. I tested this with a very simple (one Device) setup. It worked fine for me. RG assigns all Tracks to the first Device it finds. This is probably the best guess it can come up with. So, then it should be a matter of assigning the Tracks to the proper Devices/Channels. You mentioned that with one of these approaches (2 or 3), you ended up only with "one port of the new MIDI device". That certainly sounds like a bug that would be easy to track down and fix. Was that this case? Can you provide more details so I can try to reproduce this and fix it? 3. Import song to the default empty studio project. I'm not sure how you did this. I tried doing this with File > Merge > Merge File... Is that what you tried? For me, it did nothing. I ended up getting an exception thrown and caught in RosegardenApplication. (I'm running a debug build, so that might be why I didn't crash. Still, it was a std::bad_alloc which is probably fatal at some later point.) Was this the case that crashed for you? Crashes are certainly cause for concern, so I'll have a closer look. If you can give me more details of the crash you encountered, I'd appreciate it. Would like to get it fixed before the 19.06 release if I can. Device configuration should be detached from sequencer work, it makes very little sense anyway. Firstly mixing the terms device and port. One MIDI port can feed many devices (synthesizers) by daisy chaining (or other splitters/processors), so it's not rational to think about a MIDI port as a "device". This is a good point. RG restricts the user to one synth per MIDI port. That's unrealistic. The concept of a synth needs representation in the Studio. I'll open a feature request. If no settings are found, so what? Just display patch numbers. See Feature Request #455: https://sourceforge.net/p/rosegarden/feature-requests/455/ Ted. ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
Re: [Rosegarden-user] Any way to continue a song with different studio?
On 4/26/19 7:57 AM, Sami Jumppanen wrote: The problem is how to continue with old songs made for the two-port studio setup? There are at least these possibilities: 1. Settings: always use default studio when opening songs. That option came about when I raised these same issues with the original developers. Device configuration should be detached from sequencer work, it makes very little sense anyway. Firstly mixing the terms device and port. One MIDI port can feed many devices (synthesizers) by daisy chaining (or other splitters/processors), so it's not rational to think about a MIDI port as a "device". I raised such arguments with the original developers. Part of the solution to understanding what they were thinking with this design is to understand what "device," "port," and "instrument" mean within Rosegarden's framework. My attempt to explain this to users was the foundation that developed into the book I wrote. Rosegarden was originally trying to pretend there was no such thing as a "port." It was supposed to be a more friendly model that abstracted certain concepts and hid them from the user for ease of use, or something like that. It's fair to say I disagreed with it philosophically, but by the time I arrived on the scene, it was well established. In the years since, I pretty much just learned to deal with it. I haven't thought about this in so long I'm not in a good position to explain it now. I'm pretty sure the explanation I wrote back then in about 2004 is available on the wiki somewhere. Just to be able to send MIDI out, I need to define a device, but defining a device requires defining patches as well. That's a problem I was trying to address with the all-numbers.rgd and raw-numbers.rgd contained in the collection of devices that ships with Rosegarden. I'd say their usefulness in the real world has been less than I would have hoped. At this point in the game, I definitely have no interest in rearranging a model that has been in place for 20 years, and I have had similar problems working on old files with other software. I mostly work with audio now, and I mostly use REAPER on Windows. At one point, I doubled the size of my recording rig and rearranged what microphones were connected to which inputs. If I load files from before that change, everything is hooked up incorrectly, so if I want to go in and record new material, I have to spend some time making adjustments manually. When I load old files into Rosegarden, everything is hooked up incorrectly, and I usually just spend some time making adjustments manually. I think the bottom line is that working with old files in anything comes with a set of issues you just have to deal with. With that being said, one of the tools I have used is to go hack the XML manually. I have occasionally managed to cut XML out of this file and paste it into that file without breaking things. I'm curious if other users have come up with better solutions than mine over the years. If I was an expert once, I'm certainly no longer an expert. I haven't thought about these problems in years. I definitely feel your pain here. This is exactly the issue that sucked me into contributing to this project, and eventually resulted in my becoming a developer here. A frustrated, burnt-out, retired developer who didn't achieve most of his goals, I might add. This stuff is hard. That's why I pay somebody else to write the software now, and even then. -- D. Michael McIntyre ___ Rosegarden-user mailing list Rosegarden-user@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-user
