EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

Eli Krantzberg wrote:
> I haven't ever used any settings with EXS instruments before yours. Is it
> normal that when you call up one of the settings patches, it automatically
> calls up the corresponding instrument?
>
> If it is normal, this would seem odd. By odd I mean the fact that the
> instrument itself and the settings are somehow tied together; and that you
> can't call up the settings with a different instrument.

At first I wondered about all that as well, I allways thought the "plugin
settings" would only affect the UI settings. But then, as the EXS is
somewhat different in terms of saving sounds, it's all understandable.
And, just think about, if the plugin preset menu would only contain UI
settings, how often would you use it? I would most likely stick to the EXS
instrument selector then.
And, after all I find it a nice thing.
A) You can copy your UI settings from one patch to another. OK, this only
works with patches that have no settings applied, but it's still a nice
thing.
B) You don't have to save an extra EXS instrument everytime you want a
slight alteration.

I even removed some UI settings from quite some instruments after I saved
them as plugin presets.
Now, whenever I need say a pad, I can just call up a patch which has some
proper ADSR, maybe a bit of dynamic filtering too and then step through my
EXS instruments to see which one will fit nicely.

I do however agree that there might be better approaches. For example, I'd
like the copy/paste functions of the preset menu only to work for the UI
settings rather than having the complete instrument copied. And I'd like to
see some indexing happening at the EXS instrument selector, showing whether
a UI setting was applied or not. That way I could load a preset and then
scroll through my instruments without ever loading a "UI setting applied"
instrument which would erase the settings of the preset.

Anyways, I find the current way things work good enough to fool around with
both UI settings and instruments. I just started creating a new folder of
instruments, all without any UI settings. This will make surfing through
them easier (using the +/- keys in "Control" mode) while the last loaded UI
setting will just stay active.

Regards,
Sascha

Hi Sascha

> Anyways, I find the current way things work good enough to fool 
around with
> both UI settings and instruments. I just started creating a new 
folder of
> instruments, all without any UI settings. This will make surfing 
through
> them easier (using the +/- keys in "Control" mode) while the last 
loaded UI
> setting will just stay active.

I do understand that the ability to use one UI setting for like 
instruments (pads for instance) can be a time saver but I personally 
find that the ability to save instruments and presets presents too 
much of an overlap to make real sense to me. Better to browsw through 
you instruments (.exs files) having saved different variations under 
different, meaningful names. The UI settings you use to examplify 
your method, don't they take about two seconds to apply on a 
tentative basis just to check out if a given instrument might be the 
right one in your song?

You method, Sascha, is more intelligent and deep than mine but also 
less clear if you want to see all your options in one view. 

Kind regards,

Soren Riis-Vestergaard

Hi Soren (I guess this has got to be S\ufffdren, no? But I know, the internet
isnt compatible with all these...),

> I do understand that the ability to use one UI setting for like
> instruments (pads for instance) can be a time saver but I personally
> find that the ability to save instruments and presets presents too
> much of an overlap to make real sense to me.

Actually you're right with that...

> Better to browsw through
> you instruments (.exs files) having saved different variations under
> different, meaningful names.

Sure, I do this as well. But...

> The UI settings you use to examplify
> your method, don't they take about two seconds to apply on a
> tentative basis just to check out if a given instrument might be the
> right one in your song?

I don't know. There's some settings requiring very careful adjustments, such
as the LFO 1/2 amount sliders, the Glide slider, the Filter ADSR amount
sliders and also the Filter ADSR sliders. Sometimes it takes well over a
minute to adjust them properly, so it's quite some time saviour to have some
of your preferred setting being copied instantly to a "UI-less" patch.

> You method, Sascha, is more intelligent and deep than mine but also
> less clear if you want to see all your options in one view.

It's defenitely less clear... I mean, sometimes I even manage to confuse
myself ;-))
Anyways, usually I prefer to use the EXS patches (makes especially sense
since in LA5 you will be able to scroll through them by userdefined
messages), but for some more or less "raw" patches (I would consider most of
the patches I posted to be pretty much raw)  I still find it nice to have a
bunch of "UI-presets" to apply.
But then, there's another advance of using Plugin-Presets rather than EXS
instruments: Instead of opening them through the scrolling menu Logic offers
you can just use the a standard Windows (well, guess that's true for Macs as
well) open dialog to have all your settings visible on one big screen.
Btw, it would be kickass if those settings were loaded instantly as soon as
you touch them with your mouse, some sort of "preview setting in context"
mode, and if they only would actually be loaded when pressing OK.

Regards,
Sascha

Hi Sascha

--- In exs-users@y..., "Sascha Franck" <saschafranck@s...> wrote:
> Hi Soren (I guess this has got to be Søren, no? But I know, the 
internet
> isnt compatible with all these...),

Yup, it's Søren, but I almost forget that myself 'cause I have gotten 
used to being Soren on the Net. No problem.

> Anyways, usually I prefer to use the EXS patches (makes especially 
sense
> since in LA5 you will be able to scroll through them by userdefined
> messages), but for some more or less "raw" patches (I would 
consider most of
> the patches I posted to be pretty much raw)  I still find it nice 
to have a
> bunch of "UI-presets" to apply.
> But then, there's another advance of using Plugin-Presets rather 
than EXS
> instruments: Instead of opening them through the scrolling menu 
Logic offers
> you can just use the a standard Windows (well, guess that's true 
for Macs as
> well) open dialog to have all your settings visible on one big 
screen.
> Btw, it would be kickass if those settings were loaded instantly as 
soon as
> you touch them with your mouse, some sort of "preview setting in 
context"
> mode, and if they only would actually be loaded when pressing OK.

I see your point. There are definitely advantages to your way of 
doing things, the biggest advantage being the ability to have a 
standard pad-preset (or whatever) to easily wrap around different exs 
instruments that might be your next pad-killer. 

Kind regards,

Soren Riis-Vestergaard

Its fairly easy for Windows programs at least to include a little 'Explorer'
inside of them - If you are in a regular Windows Explorer just clicking on
different files doesn't do anything, you would have to either drag them into
EXS or double click them. But if the (hopefully resizable etc) file browser
was built into EXS it could do the preview as you suggest.

Jeremy (who wishes he had cool symbols in his name like Søren does!!)

> But then, there's another advance of using Plugin-Presets 
> rather than EXS
> instruments: Instead of opening them through the scrolling 
> menu Logic offers
> you can just use the a standard Windows (well, guess that's 
> true for Macs as
> well) open dialog to have all your settings visible on one big screen.
> Btw, it would be kickass if those settings were loaded 
> instantly as soon as
> you touch them with your mouse, some sort of "preview setting 
> in context"
> mode, and if they only would actually be loaded when pressing OK.
> 
> Regards,
> Sascha

Sascha Franck wrote:

>
> At first I wondered about all that as well, I allways thought the "plugin
> settings" would only affect the UI settings.

That was my assumption as well.

> f the plugin preset menu would only contain UI
> settings, how often would you use it?

It could be cool to build a library of UI settings to apply to various sounds.

>
> B) You don't have to save an extra EXS instrument everytime you want a
> slight alteration.

At first I didn't understand what you meant by this, but upon thinking about
it, I get it. Yes; this is one nice advantage of the current setup.

>
> Now, whenever I need say a pad, I can just call up a patch which has some
> proper ADSR, maybe a bit of dynamic filtering too and then step through my
> EXS instruments to see which one will fit nicely.

As long as you don't accidentally call up an instrument that has UI settings
burned in to it. What exactly is the difference betweeen the save settings to
instrument command under the EXS options menu, and the save settings command
under the little downward pointing triangle.

> And I'd like to
> see some indexing happening at the EXS instrument selector, showing whether
> a UI setting was applied or not.

Yes.

> That way I could load a preset and then
> scroll through my instruments without ever loading a "UI setting applied"
> instrument which would erase the settings of the preset.

Exactly. It's a lot to "remember".



--
Eli Krantzberg
Nightshift Orchestra / Almat Productions
http://www.nightshiftorchestra.com

Eli Krantzberg wrote:
> It could be cool to build a library of UI settings to apply to various
sounds.

Maybe a "copy only UI setting" option would be nice to have. I doubt we will
see that though.

> What exactly is the difference betweeen the save settings to
> instrument command under the EXS options menu, and the save settings
command
> under the little downward pointing triangle.

Is that a question? I think so...
The difference is that:
a) It's a different file format (guess you knew that allready ;-) which is
acessable by a different menu structure. Sometimes for me that's enough of
an advance. Even if since 4.7 we have directory structures for the EXS, I
sometimes simply prefer the standard "open" boxes Windows offers. Should be
the same on Macs.
b) The plugin settings don't get saved with your EXS instruments which
allows to *copy* different UI settings to them. As you said by yourself,
that's an advance sometimes.

> Exactly. It's a lot to "remember".

This unfortunately is true. I allready have problems naming different
versions of one and the same basic instrument, be it as an EXS instrument or
as a plugin setting.

Regards,
Sascha