Hi! So basically, if I have single instruments that I use in several songs, the only way to share them (without having to reload them at each song change) is to create various racks (linked rack), each rack with only one instrument (e.g. piano rack, hammond rack, choir rack, harpsichord rack, etc.), as I do normally, or is there a method of sharing even for the single plugin (object) without enclosing it in a rack?
If you are using a rack with a single instrument, you just drop the rack into any song. Always preload your set list. Once you do this, the rack is loaded during preload. The beauty of this is, the rack is already loaded, and is available throughout the whole setlist (wherever you placed it). It never has to be reloaded again through the set list. Almost all my instruments are in racks. There are many things you can do with a rack that is not available to a single plugin at song level. For example, I have a Hammond plug in a rack that has multiple presets within rack states. That rack is loaded during preload, and is immediately available in any song using the rack. I can change presets as states within the rack during the song. No reload, and immediate. Racks have completely changed the way I perform. I wouldn’t ever go back to single plug at song level.
Thanks for your feedback, although that’s what I do since years too I was just wondering if there’s an optional method without using racks, e.g. “check” a plugin/object to lock it when changing the song, in case the next song uses the same plugin…
I hope something like this could be considered by @brad otherwise for each plugin I’ve to create a rack and keeping work basically with racks instead of single plugins…
In other words, you are wanting to continue the plugin during song change? There have been several discussions about it in other threads…just do a search within the forum. From what I remember, it was suggested to combine two songs into one, which would be fairly easy.
Thanks, that’s what I do as well when needed and possible. Basically, I knew that it’s not possible so far, just “shaking” again this idea up and hoping for the (near) future… @brad