Stop event

VST Live
1

Hi dear Team,

I’ve never been so close to having my first gig with VL, but I’m still facing a few issues and I also have a new request…

I’d like to call a Song with Autoplay off, but still sending the MIDI configuration Data to my devices. It’s not just a Program Change and Controllers, but a whole Sysex bulk dump, so the Layers are not enough. This would allow me to start playing without tracks, then hit the pedal bound to the Start Action when I want the backing tracks to come in.

I’m thinking of 3 ways to reach that:

  1. In Cubase, we can insert a Stop event in any Midi track, that would do the job if it would be the same in VL. When it is called, a Song would play and send the bulk dump from 1.1.1 to 2.4.4, where the Stop event would pause the Song until it is manually started again.

  2. What if Pause Markers were introduced?

  3. A Bulk Dump Management System would obviously be fabulous!

Some of you will probably say that there are two other ways:

  1. Putting the Bulk Data at the end of the previous Song won’t fit in my case, as I never play Songs in a predefined order during a show.

  2. Creating a short Song placed just before the main one and containing only the bulk dump, with a Next-Song-at-Song-End-Marker Action would result in too many Songs in the Setlists and a great difficulty calling them via Program Changes.

Sorry for the verbose and thanks for reading!

2

That’s an interesting request - I’m intrigued - why do you need to send a bulk dump?

3

Do you have many songs that needs that or just sometimes, just for specific songs?

Because you could insert “dummy” songs (e.g. “Night Fever adlib intro”) that could play out your data beforehand…

4

Yes, this is exactly the #5 in my original post :wink:

I don’t know if we have other Miditemp users on this forum, the MSX has a “Job” feature that I use to accomplish the task. It works this way:

  • Call the song n
  • Play until position x.y.z
  • Pause

The memories are called Patches and can be songs or Jobs or just configurations.

1 Like
5

Meanwhile… were thinking about in the last 18hrs…
A third marker (next to START, END) e.g. “STOP” might be handy for another purposes too.

  • You. @Jihem want to send data, playalong, then continue playing with backing tracks
    while
  • able to automatically STOP at a predefined position would give option to pause backing tracks and e.g. teaching a refrain, clapping to the audience, etc… then hit PLAY again to continue.

But for sure, that brings up lots of theoretical questions about how to and what if…

1 Like
6

A Song action with “Stop” at End Marker would provide the same functionality, no?

7

Dear @musicullum , I’m not sure I get it right and if not, sorry.
The ENDMARKER currently doesn’t allows PLAY/GO ahead/afterwards of ENDMARKER-location, meanwhile ENDMARKER is lovely, great and essential for initiating nextsong changes, so - as user - I would be affraid of any touch in the code for. I just painted an another scenario where @Jihem 's idea “HALTMARKER” can solve another “typical” live gig/show element.

8

You are correct - didn’t know that :slight_smile:
We should change it so that when you start at or after the Song End action, it will ignore it for that run.

9

Dear @musicullum and @Jihem ,

Using the ENDMARKER for such a task can cause song change at ENDMARKER if user appies SongAction “goto nextsong at endmarker for ALL SONGS” and will facing while playing live… oh sh***t that was the song with ENDMARKER at the 8th bar… but too late… VL stepped to next song…

I know, why user didn’t clicked the button carefully… but… still seems to me way too risky

10

But if you want stop you would not set play?

11

Absolutely! And this can happen more than once in a same Song. That’s why I thought of this STOP event that could be set several times for one Song.

Also, it would be interesting to pause a song without sending Note Off nor Sustain Off messages, so a pad sound could continue sounding until the Song is started again.

12

Dear @musicullum , I’m affraid couldn’t explain my fear good enough, sorry for!
Emagine this real and average situation:

  • You have a large collection of songs (you have :slight_smile: )
  • All your songs are prepared, ENDMARKER’s are initianting song changes
  • Me and guess most of us are clicking ‘Apply to all’ or at least remembering what ENDMARKER does or behaves
  • The band decides… oh, what if stop this song before the last refrain to practice with the audience
  • but not always playing that song in every setlist
  • so currently this band can press stop (for sure, need to be precise with, but doable)
  • with your suggestion @musicullum I see some risk where we users will mix-up/forget there is a tricky one song where ENDMARKER behaves as STOPMARKER
  • Can fire an “unattended/accidental” NEXTSONG load
  • While with dedicated HALTMARKER or separated thing it can be pre-defined and can forget as it is a dedicated kind of MARKER-ACTION. Will behave dedicated.
13

Sorry @Jihem with my post it would be possible initiate once / song. I didn’t ever think you need to do it multiple times.

14

It might just as well be left or right locator, so you can use both?

15

You mean @musicullum , with adding option to “STOP” @ LEFT/RIGHT loc?

16

I can see a use for this:-

Consider the song “Starting Over” (John Lennon).

The start is a verse in “free time” which picks up after a drum fill. The initial state of my FX is dry for talkover, however I need the FX turned on when I start to sing. This would normally be done as soon as I hit play but in this song I want the FX turned on and then the song paused until I get to the end of the first verse, then hit play again to complete the song.
Currently I’m pedal stomping to achieve this, starting the song at the drum fill, but with automation it’s one less thing to remember.
The dummy sing idea would work (never thought of that) but it would break the idea that songs are self contained.

17

Yes. Then you can continue and it would still goto next Song at Song End.

1 Like
18

Actually my problem is about to be solved with an option to insert a delay between the transmission of bulk data packets. And as @musicullum just told me, it’s coming :star_struck: