Same input and same setting (copy).
No t98ime to read all this sorry for now either implemnent or read both not possible
When you do have time to read I think it will be helpful… 
talking about programming, no time for that rather do it. of course we can implement “knowing” what deactivated objects do but the less one object knows about the other the better in terms of safety which is always No. 1. pls just test next version and lets just do it
1 Like
Of course I understand that you mostly need to “do it” and not read about it, but seriously, it was “just testing the next version” that got me into this mess…and led to me using a 10 month old version. If you don’t care to listen to constructive feedback that’s fine. I’ll wait and see if you hit the target “blind”…
1 Like
That’s a joke, right?
1 Like
You can do everything with a global stack, a simple example is 4 different inserts, you can set another 8 in the mixer, and switch everything with automation and control any effects, try it yourself as an option, you won’t need to breed 10 stacks (figuratively)
instead of ambox you can put anything guitar rig, amplitube etc…
I don’t think that someone uses 12 different amplifier heads during a concert), but 12 sound options, although if you also take into account that additional effects are organized on group channels and controlled, then you can make a lot of sound variations) this is for you to think about while the developers think about solving this problem
are the inserts not enough for you? do you need more? please add the free one (StudioRack by Waves) in it everything is automated, and you can turn off unnecessary inserts
What I need is to have patch changes all automatic along the timeline. The only pedal I want to press is start stop. If this can be achieved easily with global stacks then great. And activate different inputs as required for different instruments.
naturally, where else, on the timeline you draw automation and it will switch for you anywhere
1 Like
even if your TC Helicon Voicelive 3 Extreme will switch with the help of Program Change if it has it, by creating a midi track and selecting Program Change there, you will only need to install a midi loop
Hi, it’s not my intention to start a debate — I just want to share my experience. There are simply different ways of approaching the program, and each person might find one method more comfortable than another. The great thing is having more than one option.
I’ve been using VST Live since it was first released. Back then, there was no automation, and if I remember correctly, the Global stack didn’t even exist yet. I built our band’s entire repertoire from scratch using stacks for each part (always using the same input for each instrument — bass and guitar). That workflow feels much more comfortable and much faster for me.
I save the stacks as presets, and by simply dragging the right one into the correct part of the song, I can build a structure in just a few minutes.
When automation was added to the program, I already had the whole repertoire built using stacks and parts. I did try starting from scratch using automation, but it didn’t feel as practical — I was spending more time programming detailed automation than actually playing the instrument. That said, if you want or need to save resources, automation can definitely be a great option.
But what’s strange here isn’t the difference in workflow, it’s that in earlier versions there were no issues with part transitions — no volume jumps or clicks. As I mentioned earlier, we’re currently using version 2.1.12 live. In my case, the latest versions (2.2.53/54) work almost as well, with the only difference being some occasional clicks a few milliseconds after changing parts.
The Steinberg team has always been super attentive and responsive to my feedback. The developers really know how to listen, and they’ve been very patient. I’m confident the program will keep getting more intuitive, as it’s clearly being developed based on the needs we users bring up — and there are indeed many different ways to prepare a live show.
2 Likes
Hey guys, you know that you can have a global stack with “amplitube”, then set as many presets as you like and assigns. Program change to them in Amplitub…
and then you can have PARTS WITH LAYERS THAT SEND THE PROGRAM CHANGE on virtual midi out, link virtual midi in in Amplitube et voila’ … you have both a global stack so less resources for the VST processing, always active, no volume bumps, no crackles etc etc , and the part structure via layers without needs for automation (at least for sound changes inside global plugins)
Give developers time and space please they’re doing a great job, just … please deeply learn all the features and possibilities before ranting!!
2 Likes
I realise there are many ways to use the program - and like @Cucuso I do not wish to start a debate. It’s enough to say that any program should make life simpler not more complex - or at least not more complex than it needs to be to get the task done.
I appreciate the comments about Global stacks and automation, however, I can’t help feeling that will create more work, when simple patch changes via stacks should work. I refer to my analogy with the Helicon Voicelive 3 - I want VSTL to replace this and to add further instruments and microphones. The idea of having to program a lot of automation does not look attractive to my way of working. And any changes in arrangement will require far more work to update the automation, where a part stack would automatically follow.
But that’s just me. I’d like to be able to create Stacks for each type of effect or instrument in more or less the same way I go about it on the VoiceLive, but with greater flexibility.
If the part Stacks are not meant to be used in this way, I’m interested to know how most people are using them? What are they for if not for creating patch like settings for different parts of the song? Given that they “should” function without glitches or volume change, then my intended use is surely reasonable and very straightforward.
My question / comment for possible improvement or better functionality and use of resources, is whether having the ability to leave a part stack active across subsequent parts until cancelled/replaced is a reasonable suggestion?
active stack (which is not used) is unnecessary load and waste of memory
managed to download and try, 2.2. 55 is amazing now the transitions from stack to stack are all seamless and the sustain fades out, and there are no sound jumps.
A huge thank you to you developers) you can do anything!
Glad it works out for you, we worked very hard on that one.
1 Like
Sadly though not as pronounced as previously, it still audio bumps on part change. Wasn’t at home to test .55, but the latest version .56 is what I’ve just installed….
1 Like
The problem seems to be very plugin insert dependent. And not consistent. For example, simple Steinberg Chorus plugin is OK between parts, using Harrison Microglide isn’t - or at least some of the time it is, and others not. I’ll start playing around with Global stacks and see how that goes.
2 Likes
Yes, it is noticeable, unfortunately
The transition is still noticeable, there should be no string hits after the transition, only the decaying sustain set to 1 second in this example (clean sound is not counted, this is from the loop back, otherwise you will not record the sound through OBS Studio). Try to fix this