Why no improvements to Expression Maps since 2009? Steinberg please answer

[riflinka]

Also let us select articulation in the Inspector!

[Jari_Junttila]

The hardware also needs to support bi-directional communication(MIDI 2.0), otherwise there´s no point. I don´t know many devices that supports MIDI 2.0

[sintil8]

@Jari_Junttila
That is true in some respects, tho hardware is starting to move in that direction with some extended features making headway, allowing expressive gestures vis…Linn, Roli, Osmose, Haken, et al.
I would love to see advancements to Vst’s.
Profiles for Vst’s instruments should be able to expose things like keyswitches and Macro controls so that when instantiated into a daw they automatically configure.

What’s not to like if it allows folk to express their musical idea’s and talents.
Regards

[Johnny_Moneto]

I think it is not quite clear to many how MIDI in Cubase works and what MIDI 2.0 means for their ochestral library plugins.

So lets start with a graphic:

None of your VST3 plugins receive any form of MIDI whatsoever. Cubase as the host handles all MIDI data and transforms it into, let’s call it VST data.
Since the introduction of VST3, the communication between VST3 plugins and the host Cubase has been bi-directional.
The profile exchange? Already doing that for more than 10 years. The ability to send modulation data to individual notes (rather than a channel)? Already doing that for more than 10 years. Automatic setup? Already done for 10 years.
In fact all this is done so seamless that people don’t even realize that anymore.
I heard that there is even support for communicating articulations from the plugin to the host, so that you don’t have to set up things manually. If that is true, it seems that the plugin vendor just dont support this feature.

A full support of MIDI 2.0 can bring you the following advantages:

• better integration between your MIDI hardware and Cubase (no, not plugins because MIDI never reaches the plugins, see above graphic)
• finer resolutions for Modwheel, Pedal, etc. (both time and value)

That’s it.
Basically aynthing else exciting about MIDI 2.0 has been available to you, the Cubase and VST3 users, for more than 10 years already in form of VST3.

Q: So what about VST2?
A: It supports MIDI 1.0 and there are no plans to have it support MIDI 2.0.

[sintil8]

MIDI is an acronym that stands for Musical Instrument Digital Interface.
What more needs to be said, perhaps the idea that VST might be outdated?
Or that a plugin cannot be intelligent inside it’s host?.
IMHO, I just want stuff to work for me, not me work for it, spending hours setting up controls and key switches .
Isn’t that what we all would like.

[Trensharo]

@Johnny_Moneto

I don’t think Steinberg ever had the plan to write remote scripts for all or even all significant devices. They made a few and the rest is the job of the makers of said devices or the community.

I have a controller with a stock script and it’s still unusable with the remote script due to parameter jumps with pots and faders that don’t happen in Studio One, Logic, Ableton, Reason or Samplitude Pro X. All of those DAWs Takeover. Cubase doesn’t.

No point in using them for Quick Controls when parameters jump everytime you have to switch tracks or devices adjust a parameter.

I’d rather just use a Keystation and save on space.

[David_W]

@sintil8

What more needs to be said, perhaps the idea that VST might be outdated?

VST3 already supports many MIDI 2.0 enhancements.

[sintil8]

@David_W
Yes I agree.
I am not saying it doesn’t, but is it the be all and end all of what is possible for easy access to music creation.

Virtual Studio Technology

[RoRe]

I absolut agree with that. But Steinberg does nothing. They give us for example another PT Eq Simulation that nobody needs. It is maybe time to change the DAW.

[Johnny_Moneto]

@RoRe

They give us for example another PT Eq Simulation that nobody needs.

Can people please stop assuming that nobody needs a plugin just because they don’t need that plugin?
This is such a weird behaviour…

[markuc]

Steinberg will not fix anything, Expression maps are a typical example of how Steinberg works. They have fantastic ideas and are able to put them on the market as semi-finished products that they will never fix. I work with switching articulations massively, and for me, the non-functionality of Expression maps was the reason for switching to Studio One, even though I would have loved to stay with Cubase. Steinberg is losing customers and doesn’t care.

[mlib]

I too think Expression Maps is in dire need of an update. My biggest gripe with the current implementation is a lack of defining multiple key switch groups that can be used simultaneously.

[Greg_Purkey]

@Johnny_Moneto

Can people please stop assuming that nobody needs a plugin just because they don’t need that plugin?
This is such a weird behaviour…

For years, I used to say that about Loopmash. I thought ‘who in the world uses this thing…especially with the new Ableton DAW and exponentially expand the creativity?’ But then recently, the feature was sort of dropped and then you hear the complaints.

@markuc

Steinberg is losing customers and doesn’t care.

Do you have data to show that or is that just how you feel or think?

I disagree, they actually do fix, and/or expand features quite a bit. However some things as you say IMO are “semi-finished.” My guess as to the reasons go back to money/resources.

@mlib

I too think Expression Maps is in dire need of an update.

I agree. It’s well past time. The only thing I could suggest is have patience. However patience alone often isn’t enough for the end user. I’m pretty sure they know their customer cell groups better than any user. I’m sure they know their financial resources as well as their short and long term objectives.

After I saw the power of Melodyne, it took Steinberg a while to come up with their version of autotune. Then it took a bit more time with additional integration with other Cubase features. At that time, I thought why should Steinberg even bother “competing” with Melodyne, when it’s so good. But today, I see it in a different perspective, even though with ARA you can use Melodyne. Ironically today, I rarely have a need for Melodyne. Others however may definitely have that need.

Back to Expresson Maps, I would have a bit more patience. If not, switch to something that works for you.

[mk1x86]

You can have multiple groups at the same time (up to four). What’s your issue here?

[mlib]

Not really. Those groups are “priority groups”.

Here’s an example.

In the above expression map, Slot 1 has an output mapping of Note-On C#-2 (MIDI Note #1), Slot 2 is mapped to MIDI Note #2 and so on.

Each slot has articulations of type Direction and are all in separate groups.

Lets use this expression map in a MIDI part.

Here’s the output we get from this MIDI Track (monitored by MIDI-OX):

Group 1 always takes precedence.

Here’s another example. Two groups, each with two articulations.

And here’s the output of that.

---

I would love to see a system that allows you to use multiple groups at the same time. I have plenty of instruments that utilizes keyswitches in groups, but in Cubase, no two groups can be used at the same time.

[mk1x86]

I believe you got the wrong idea of how the groups work.

In your second to last screenshot, you have the mid area that says “Sound Slots”.
These slots are what should be played depending on which articulations are active in your four groups.

Group 1: Would be the main differences, e.g.

• Sustains
• Shorts

For the shorts you could have three different articulations in group 2:

• Staccato
• Spiccato
• Pizzicato

Selection “Shorts” as articulation for the first group and “pizz” for the second group, would select the sound slot that requires both articulations.

So, basically, regard the groups as a tree with group1 being the trunk that branches and group being the branches on the first branch.

That being said, I’m also not happy with how Expression Maps are handled.

[mlib]

I don’t think it matters how you view it. It is still not possible to create an expression map with multiple exclusive groups. Or can you give an example?

Here’s a real world example that can’t be done. At least to my knowledge.
An electric bass.
One exclusive group of key switches controls neck position. C 0 to B 0
One exclusive group controls up stroke and down stroke. C 1 and C#1
A third exclusive group controls play style—finger, slap and pull. E 1, F 1 and F#1

You need to be able to send one keyswitch from each group simultaneously. How would you create such an expression map?

The only way I know how is to create one Sound Slot for every possible combination. It can quickly become unmanageable.

[mk1x86]

@mlib

The only way I know how is to create one Sound Slot for every possible combination. It can quickly become unmanageable.

Indeed this is the way to do it and you are absolutely right that it is a PITA to do this. For exactly the purpose I created this:

Expression Maps Generator - Create expression maps quickly

Hello everyone. As a long-term user that never created a full template because creating expression maps is soooo tedious, I finally came around and created a fully functional webpage for creating expression maps. Make sure to check the help page to get started Some features Unlike Cubase’s own editor with this tool you can assign triggers (key/cc/pgc) to articulations! Slots are then generated from these articulations, combining the articulations’ triggers. You can assign increasing trigg…

Your scenario could be done in 5 minutes. Actually, I just did:

mlib_bass expression map · GitHub ← the expression map

gist:8e1bf0fb59f35163538c61928605ca9c · GitHub ← The file saved by my editor, in case you want to change anything.

[mlib]

I love you.

[mk1x86]

“I have a boyfriend”

You’re welcome. It’s free, donations appreciated though. Also, spread the word. I feel a lot of people are struggling with this and so far I haven’t been able to put the tool on the radar enough that new Cubase users can find it.