Lately I have been working from my own large orchestral template which has a few doubling instruments held by one player, as well as a large percussion section with all instruments held by one player (for the sake of saving space while writing), basically like so:
This is primarily to have them at the ready while I compose and pre-routed for mixing, but most of the time I rarely use all the instruments.
In which case, in addition to the option Setup > Delete Empty Players, I would love to have the option of āDelete Empty Instrumentsā, to more quickly batch remove any instruments held by players which do not have music on their staves by the end. Thank you!
Oh no, donāt even get me started on thatā¦ I have such a complex hybrid template involving NP/NPPE + VEP + Kontakt + MIR Pro that the normal playback template and endpoint configuration route is essentially unworkable for me (apart from having a base playback template which is NotePerformer). Until we can import endpoint configurations (or track presets) and have the option to switch instruments without flushing all mixing settings, Iāll be sticking with this workflow since it works well for me.
But that was besides the point - mixing & routing aside, the primary aim of this template is to already have these instruments available very quickly without leaving Write mode (that is to say, even if I am just using a basic playback template like NP, I would still use this template) ā e.g. Iām writing a snare drum is right there on the staff. But if I donāt use a snare, I just remove it at the end. Of course for a couple instruments no big deal, but for a lot of additional and doubling instruments, having the option to remove unused instruments from a template would be nice.
I guess I thought that with Family and Instrument Overrides there would be flexibility there, but perhaps not. Iād be interested to learn more about your template if you care to share.
Thanks! Itās been growing in complexity throughout the year, completely manageable to me on a daily basis but is a bit lengthy to explain. I need to sort it out of my head and will probably make a video on it at some point to share.
I did create a post the other day about my NPPE template workflow which utilizes multiple outputs and then into MIR Pro (this is one of the reasons that Iām ususally reticent to ever change playback templates because the sheer time it takes to set up all the MIR Pro plugins on dozens of channels ā changing your playback template will mean you lose all that work). But this is only one half of my pie, I have a lot going on with VEP to allow me to take advantage of alternate non-orchestral libraries as well as quickly swap libraries out for one exposed part, without going through an entire playback template change just to hear if I like another library (and then change my mind back to what I had before). Extended perc, Saxes, Synths, Guitars, etcā¦ as soon as I organize the puzzle to make sense outside of my brain I will share a video!
I trialed Note Performer forever ago and donāt use MIR, so the probability is high I wonāt understand a thing! My assumption was that you wanted to route Note Performer and all other individual instruments into MIR to glue them together, but maybe itās even more complicated than that. Iāll go over your other post, thanks.
Hi Wing As you mention you could do what you want rather fast if you do not put all e.g. percussion instruments to one player at the start of your workflow. If they would all be separate you could easily remove the empty players. When you are ready with your piece or flow you can then move the percussion instruments to multi instrument players and also choose the staff style for them (drum set 5 line style, grid or individual).
I usually do that with unpitched percussion as I never know from the start how many (real) percussion players I would need and if I need different dynamics for them at the same bar which would exclude the 5 line staff.
Hi, yes Iām fully aware. This is the approach I had taken for a very long time, when I just had about 3-4 percussion instruments (usually bass drum, snare, cymbal, tam-tam). My previous template I had used that all on single-line instruments to more easily access dynamics, and then I would reduce them down to the grid view for final presentation.
However, now that my percussion kit has grown to include more options, I have grown to prefer the consolidated 5-line staff where I can very quickly and easily access a plethora of instruments, without them taking up a lot of space, which is why my new template has gone in this direction. When I initially set it up, in fact I had them all on separate players as before, but they took up a lot of space in the middle of the score for instruments I may not use ā and I know I could use filters, but I would prefer to keep these auxiliary ājust in caseā instruments tucked away until I need them, which is why my new template approach definitely works better for me.
I could, of course, only add these instruments when I need them ā but I like working from a template of frequently-used instruments which are immediately available without leaving the score (write mode), and in case I wish to quickly experiment A/Bāing orchestration choices. Also, in my case, I have a bit of a complex routing on the mixer and midi side, where Iām using a hybrid kit because NotePerformer doesnāt support all the percussion techniques I want to use such as gong scrapes etc. So this enables me to have those instruments set up and prepared when I want a gong scrape, without having to manually set that up every time which would kill the moment of inspiration.
In any case, there is also a case for starting with a template with doubling woodwinds prepared as well. I think removing unused held-instruments by players would be helpful for anyone working with larger templates, regardless of their workflow or routing (Iām aware my setup is unusually complex).
For now Iāll just keep deleting them manually ā as I said, I prefer to have them condensed onto a single 5-line player to begin with. Most likely what I will do for now is extract the final used instruments onto separate players, and then delete the player which is holding only leftover unused instruments.
Donāt you have issues with dynamics if you use a 5 line staff?
it might be the balancing in my libraries but the cymbals and gongs are generally louder than the drums. at the same dynamic. So I have e.g. f for the drum but mf or mp for the Tam tam or piatti at same bar to get the oversll sound i need. So you have to enter those dynamics when the instruments are on separate linesā¦ If I understand several forum entries correctly, these dynamics will not be visible when reducing these instruments in a 5 line staff but they are reflected in the playback.
Being able to enter dynamics per focussed (highlighted notes) instrument in a 5 line staff would be on my wishlist.
Good question. I donāt have issues but thatās because I am aware of this functionality going into it. Indeed, when reducing from single-line instrument view to a 5-line staff view, the dynamics seem to ādisappearā but they still work fine for playback and are still discoverable when returning to the single-line view.
I have been asking for an easier key command (or even jump bar access) to be able to switch the percussion kit views on the fly (toggling from 5-line, grid, and single-line). I have to do it frequently so it would be helpful. I have recorded macros for this under the Script menu, but for some reason they only work half of the time.
To make it more obvious why I prefer to open a template with 5-line view, it may be helpful to understand that my current template has grown even since this original post, to now two separate percussion āplayersā with 5-line staves which I have separated by unpitched metals on the first, and unpitched wood + drums on the second. Therefore when I start a new project from this template, scrolling through it looks like this:
Iām still figuring out my preferred workflow but this makes sense to me since I know where the instruments are and I usually have them organized a certain type of way in an exact order. All of this is connected to NotePerformer so in fact it takes up very little space in the actual project. However, I have so many available percussion instruments ready that if I opened the template in single-line view it would be so long to scroll through!
So thatās why I am doing it this way, and itās working well for me. Of course I can add these instruments manually when I need them, but I personally prefer having them ready when Iām writing - the nice thing about a 5-line staff is how quickly it is to move notes up and down to find the right percussion sound for your composition (which manually adding individual instruments would hinder my creative flow).
You actually can ā itās a bit of hidden trick. With any selected note, invoke the Shift+D popover, type your desired dynamic, and hit ALT+enter. I can confirm that doing this on various notes within a 5-line staff, they will sound as desired with different dynamics, and if you change to single-line view, you will now see all the different unique dynamics for each note!
For the record this alt+enter trick works with a lot of other popovers, where you want to apply a local change to only selected notes and not the entire staff. One thing specific to percussion I like to do is set individual swing on only my tambourine or hi-hats, same thing - Shift+T, select a swing, alt+enter (rather than modifying all your percussion together).
I have such a complex hybrid template involving NP/NPPE + VEP + Kontakt + MIR Pro that the normal playback template and endpoint configuration route is essentially unworkable for me (apart from having a base playback template which is NotePerformer). Until we can import endpoint configurations (or track presets) and have the option to switch instruments without flushing all mixing settings, Iāll be sticking with this workflow since it works well for me.
