I used to have some bigger racks that included multiple synths for a certain purpose (e.g. epiano rack, solo synth rack, pads rack) and switched them on and off per state. So I could have one epiano rack state that played LoungeLizard, another one that used Pianoteq. Made it really easy to set up a song from very few racks and select ready-made sound - but the editing became more and more complex and unwieldy; lots of song-specific presets necessary for each of these multi-racks, so over time it began to defeat the purpose.
These days, Iām in the process of cleaning out my racks, reducing them to one or two (max) Instruments each (with some specific effects plugin if they are specific to the respective instrument, e.g. a guitar amp with some stomp boxes before it). Also, all my racks have a volume control (FreeG) inside them bound to CC7; most also have an EQ before the volume.
At the same time, Iām re-working all my songs to use ākeyboard abstractionā racks that encapsulate my MIDI keyboards and provide separate outputs for notes, pitch bend, modulation, aftertouch, so connecting keyboards to instruments gets easier to manage.
Yes, my songs now have a couple more racks in them, but as @Neil_Durant wrote, this approach is far more flexible and resource-efficient.
Once Iāve reworked my setlist to the new approach, Iāll create a couple of video walk-throughs of my setup and some songs to illustrate how some of Cantabileās features can be used in āreal-lifeā setups. Stay tuned
Another approach for this filtering is to do it inside each instrument rack, potentially in routes within a utility rack file added as an embedded rack, and then set that rackās filter configuration as exported state for the song to manage.
That way, you avoid adding the clutter of extra racks at the song level, and each sound source can have its own MIDI filtering built in cleanly. So you use a single MIDI route from your keyboard to a lead synth rack that has pitch/mod/aftertouch enabled, and another to an organ rack that has those all disabled, without having to have multiple abstraction racks/states and groups of MIDI routes at the song level.
Interesting as well - but for me, the approach of explicitly having separate output ports from my keyboards makes creating complex songs so much easier and transparent at song level:
KB 1 notes go to epiano and strings
KB 1 aftertouch goes to strings only
KB 1 modulation is routed to strings, remapped to CC 7 (control string layer volume via modwheel)
KB 1 pitch bend controls bend for a synth sound played on KB 2
KB 2 modulation goes to solo reverb, remapped to CC 7 - controls solo reverb level
*ā¦
All this visible and editable just by un-folding the keyboard racks routes!
Iāve considered something similar to your āexported stateā, but I prefer a very explicit approach that happens fully at song level and doesnāt hide within the racks - lots easier to edit and de-bugā¦
Stay tuned for the video - it will all become clear
What I love about Cantabile is how there are so many ways to do things, that can be tailored to everyoneās different setup, as well as mindset.
I think your approach would get confusing for me because a typical song state for me has routes for anything up to 3-4+ different zones on my main keyboard, plus a route for my secondary keyboard (Moog Voyager). And all my zones change target and range with each song state. If I was having to deal with multiple routes at the song level for different controller information, for every single zone, Iād have a routing list the height of my screen, and lots of scope for setup mistakes! With my approach I always typically have one route per zone. And actually, much of the filtering (enabling/disabling aftertouch etc.) is driven by rack states a lot of the time for me anyway - typically for a given patch I either want it or not, regardless of song.
I also donāt do as much bespoke fiddling as you, by the look of it - I would never map KB1 pitch bend to control the sound played on KB2 for example (although I can guess why you might need to). Actually the only real modulation I do live is with an expression pedal and a foot switch, for which I use a utility rack for each, that are configured differently for each song state as necessary. With those I can control volumes, effects, Leslie, filters etc. I even use expression pedal for pitch bend in a couple of tracks, due to not having enough spare hands. So I usually have a single simple route from their utility rack to the required destination rack.
Like I say - I love the way Cantabile gives us so many ways
Thx guys, same here, rethinking my c3 setup. Thatās why i asked the best practises in a former topic.
The best practise to be most flexible afterwards.
wow - that would be too much for me to manage in this little brain of mine
Iāve reduced the songs where I have more than one zone to very very few - with my double duty as lead / background singer, those multi-zone setups became too distracting (where was I supposed to play the synth brass riff again???).
In my āsingle keyboardā phase, I resorted to layered sounds mostly, with some of the layers activated by modwheel, or expression or soft pedal, which was a completely new and far more intuitive experience for me. I could simply keep my hands around the comfortable middle C and keep on playing there. Worth a try!
But I totally get that with your progrock repertoire there are never enough keyboards, zones or whatever - good thing you donāt have to do parallel lead vox duty . Sometimes I wish for one song in our repertoire where I could āsimplyā be a keyboarderā¦
I completely get what you mean by the singing aspect. If youāre dividing your brain between two or more instruments like that, thereās not much left for handling anything complex configuration wise, whilst also trying to deliver a good musical performance!
With my band, Iām almost always playing different sounds on each hand, so two zones is absolutely normal, except for solo piano bits, which happen occasionally. At other times I may have an extra zone or two for a few special patches, to add as occasional ornamentation. It is problematic remembering which zone is which, but it comes with practiceā¦although I do sometimes go for the wrong octave!
Hi @Brad, thank you very much for the really good video!
I saw there new things for me very useful in working with Kontakt.
But I also saw, how easy bindings could be. I created in some
cases so far too much single bindings instead of changing values on
already existing bindings
The thing with the different playing zones on my two 88 key hardware synthesizers
is the next thing I have to work on
Here I studied already the manual. But, this is also a thing to learn until to
be in routine
Yes, I can live with two zones - left-/right split is pretty normal for any pianist/keyboarderā¦ What I love about having individual Cantabile files per song is that I can have my split points customized to the ranges I need for the specific song - I mostly play without thinking about split points!
For those āornamentationā patches, you might actually experiment with my layering technique (and maybe one of @dave_dore 's utility racks) - sometimes it is easier to simply use a momentary footswitch to turn your āornamentation soundā on and your normal right-hand zone off and leave your playing hand where it is.
Reduces the amount of wild leaps across the keybed - always the potential for something to go horribly wrongā¦
I also do most of the vocals and find myself confused sometimes with so many songs. I have been trying to transition to a single keyboard, but really feel lost without the 2nd. My show notes, on song load, now show switches, pedal uses, and layering, along with song key ( my memory crutch) on first page for every song. I have been incorporating many of @Torsten ideas into my setup. It is rare for me to kick back and just be a keyboardist, or guitarist. Maybe an occasional instrumental would helpā¦do they even make those anymore? I was requested a Booker T song recently, and I played it with a huge smile on my face !
Thatās not a bad idea, especially using a momentary footswitch, so I donāt have to worry about physically fading something in/out. I just need to set up bindings to reroute from sound A to sound B and back again. Iām going to give it a go.
I think the reason I tend to have split zones for that, even just 5-6 keys somewhere at one end of the keyboard is historic, dating back to when I didnāt have the flexibility of Cantabile, and using a split was my only option.
On the other hand, the audience sometimes like to see something happening - thereās a certain charm with those keyboard players of old with 10 keyboards, diving between them, or stretching to play two distant keyboards. Crazy from a performance quality point of view, but fun to watch. So maybe if I reach up 2 octaves to play something, it might make someone in the audience think, āOhā¦he is doing something after all!ā
What throws me off while playing is not so much zones and splits, but using my pedals. I am playing a set this weekend with a lot of state changes and I find myself getting mixed up with using a sustain pedal with the right foot and a foot switch to change states with my left (which is definitely not my dominant foot).
Similar problem here - even more so since I play standing up: I need at least one solid foot to stand on
My solution for state changes is the friendly āred buttonā in the middle of my keyboard. Easy to hit between notes with whatever hand has less to doā¦ I only use a pedal to switch states when I play guitar.
My solution to this is to have an obvious āpiano styleā sustain pedal right under the keyboard, like a piano, and a Boss āfootswitchā style switch off to the side. The physical separation, and difference in pedal types means I never get mixed up. In fact I have another pedal and footswitch off to the other side for other stuff too. As long as theyāre physically separated, I find itās easy to avoid getting them muddled.
Since I play standing up also, and pressing two pedals simultaneously is a bit āunbalancingā, Iāve been working on adapting this age-old solution to my needs (or, er, ākneesāā¦):
