MIDI Learn offset & percentage / range / scale /

[chopstickkk]

Use the full 0-127 resolution of a MIDI fader to control a smaller section of a parameter

FR Here - http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=4127 - Please vote



In Reaper's MIDI learn section there is no way to scale the mapping of the MIDI from anything other than 0-127.

There should be...

- A 'Low' value between 0-127 (default being 0)
- A 'High' value between 0-127 (default being 127)

...left to the default values things behave as normal.

But if you set "Low 64" and "127 High" you can for example allow the full sweep of a mod wheel controller to send only values 64-127 to the parameter.

Or if you wanted to invert the control you would just enter "Low 127" and "High 0".

This behaviour has been available in Ableton for years...


Would anyone vote for this?

[Banned]

Originally Posted by chopstickkk

In Reaper's MIDI learn section there is no way to scale the mapping of the MIDI from anything other than 0-127.

There should be...

- A 'Low' value between 0-127 (default being 0)
- A 'High' value between 0-127 (default being 127)

...left to the default values things behave as normal.

But if you set "Low 64" and "127 High" you can for example allow the full sweep of a mod wheel controller to send only values 64-127 to the parameter.

Or if you wanted to invert the control you would just enter "Low 127" and "High 0".

This behaviour has been available in Ableton for years...


Would anyone vote for this?

Nice ideas, and not the first time they've been suggested.

But it should be even much more awesome before I can get enthusiastic about them.

For starters, it should allow 14 bit ranges to be used on the controller as well. I.e. "high = 0; low = 16383". To be clear, in fact, you wouldn't be *sending* values 64-127 to the parameter - the parameter values are scaled to a 0.0-1.0 range before they're sent to their destination, so arguable you should be able to set the upper/lower bounds on that scale as well. But if you realize that many parameters can also be shown in a human readable format on a more sensible scale (Hz for frequencies, dB for volume/gain, etc.), you'll probably prefer to use that scale to redefine the range.

Even so, I would still much prefer a more flexible system where you can (also) set up (more complex) remapping/rescaling preferences per plugin in a text file. Ideally, of course, you can combine the approaches: what you would put into the GUI would end up in the text file, and vice versa. Just look at the system REAPER uses for things like note names and such to get an idea of what I mean. You'd also be able to do simple stuff like this by adding one line per parameter number (for example, using an arbitrary made up syntax: "parameter 3 low 127 high 0 linear").

For one important example, to get ReaEQ frequencies to behave properly, you'd need to use something more complex than linear rescaling. For a scaling properly following MIDI notes, you'd need to work out some curve rescaling formula, or would need to be able to enter 128 values:

0.000771695
0.00081758
0.000866195
0.0009177
0.00097227
0.00103009
0.00109134
0.00115623
0.00122498
0.00129783
0.001375
0.00145676
0.00154338
0.00163516
0.00173239
0.00183541
0.00194454
0.00206017
0.00218268
0.00231247
0.00244997
0.00259565
0.00275
0.00291353
0.00308677
0.00327032
0.00346478
0.00367081
0.00388909
0.00412035
0.00436535
0.00462493
0.00489995
0.0051913
0.0055
0.00582705
0.00617355
0.00654065
0.00692955
0.0073416
0.00777815
0.0082407
0.0087307
0.00924985
0.0097999
0.0103826
0.011
0.0116541
0.0123471
0.0130813
0.0138591
0.0146833
0.0155564
0.0164814
0.0174614
0.0184997
0.0195998
0.0207653
0.022
0.0233082
0.0246942
0.0261625
0.0277182
0.0289165
0.0311127
0.0329628
0.0349228
0.0369994
0.0391995
0.0415304
0.044
0.0466164
0.0493883
0.052325
0.0554365
0.058733
0.0622255
0.0659255
0.0698455
0.073999
0.078399
0.083061
0.088
0.093233
0.0987765
0.10465
0.110873
0.117466
0.124451
0.131851
0.139692
0.147998
0.156798
0.166122
0.176
0.186466
0.197554
0.209301
0.221746
0.234932
0.248902
0.263702
0.279382
0.295996
0.313596
0.332244
0.352
0.372631
0.395106
0.418601
0.443492
0.469864
0.497803
0.527405
0.558765
0.59199
0.627195
0.704
0.74586
0.790215
0.8372
0.886985
0.939725
0.995605
1
1
1
1

(I can also show you the values for rescaling the frequencies in ReaDelay, those are even worse by default than ReaEQ).

And, since my own external remapping/rescaling system can already handle this sort of thing just fine, I would not use any less advanced system in REAPER. Sorry, but I won't settle for anything far inferior in terms of features, to achieve a marginally superior integration at best (in my book modularity is not a dirty word anyway).

But I'm on your side when it comes to asking for improvements in this regard, I hope that's clear.

[chopstickkk]

I understand your mission for completeness. I currently route my controllers through Pure Data for MIDI manipulation before it hits Reaper. But I think I'm trying to push more for a quick fix FR rather than a fully fledged MIDI mangler. Although I would like different transfer curves also.

0-127 were just examples but the idea would be a slider or entry box for both the upper bound and the lower bound.

Would you vote for something simple like this in the interim before Reaper gets a more fully equipped MIDI control?

[Banned]

Originally Posted by chopstickkk

I understand your mission for completeness. I currently route my controllers through Pure Data for MIDI manipulation before it hits Reaper. But I think I'm trying to push more for a quick fix FR rather than a fully fledged MIDI mangler. Although I would like different transfer curves also.

0-127 were just examples but the idea would be a slider or entry box for both the upper bound and the lower bound.

Would you vote for something simple like this in the interim before Reaper gets a more fully equipped MIDI control?

Of course I would, at least as long as it it's not detrimental to the developments in the greater perspective of things. Every little step counts! I am only slightly worried that any quick fix type of feature can (negatively) affect the direction and pace of future developments (path dependence is everywhere...).

And I'd still need my fully fledged MIDI mangler in Pure data as well. Nice to hear about other users of the REAPER / Pure data combination btw! Have you already played with REAPER's awesome OSC support in Pd? (I'm building a complete OSC <--> MIDI conversion patch with it atm).

[babiuk]

Hello, I recently got a nano kontrol by korg and playing with it. I found higly interesting the possibility of reducing the 0-127 default range.
I'll try to explain:
I use to mix with tracks well "gain-staged", I mean I usually don´t have to move the volume faders a lot of decibels, just a few of them, maybe 5 or 6 max. I find the korg controller's faders have not high resolution (excuse my english, I don´t know if this is the word...) so I have just a few steps between db's and I cannot acces to a full range of volume values on the fader.
If I could reduce my (for an example) volume fader's limits and get something like [fader down]=-5db and [fader up]=+5db it could be fantastic.
I think this way the resolution could be higher. But even if the resolution didn´t get increased the result would be nice because I'd have the freedom to move the fader of korg unit up and down keeping the volume range in the limits. Now when I move that little faders I cannot do a big movement, it goes faster to a lot of decibels below or over.

I mainly find useful for volume tasks, but anyway it could be nice to have this choice available.
So, do you know it´s possible to reduce this range?

I´m not an expert of reaper so it's maybe a dumb question...

Thanks anyway and saludos

[Banned]

If you can give me the MIDI channel and CC numbers that you'd like to use (and some time, as I have other things to do as well... ), and describe your ideal scaling somehow, I can probably make you a little example patch if you like.

(PS: you can perhaps close this thread as a double post, or we can continue discussing your particular case there?)

[babiuk]

Thanks for answering, I´ll close (if any of you can tell me how to do it) that other thread and we can follow this one.

About range, it´s not just a fixed range, maybe it could be different for different tasks. Anyway, for example, we can try to assign a reaper-track-volume-fader to a nano-fader and set it this way:

nano-fader full down = -5db of reaper-fader
nano-fader full up = +5db of reaper-fader

Now I have set nano-fader to MIDI Channel 1 CC 2.


Maybe once you show me how to do this I'd be able to repeat for other values.

Thanks in advance

[Banned]

Originally Posted by babiuk

Thanks for answering, I´ll close (if any of you can tell me how to do it) that other thread and we can follow this one.

About range, it´s not just a fixed range, maybe it could be different for different tasks.

Tell me about it. I'm trying to implement a system that should be able to automatically apply arbitrary rescaling algorithms to arbitrary individual (plugin) parameters.

Originally Posted by babiuk

Anyway, for example, we can try to assign a reaper-track-volume-fader to a nano-fader and set it this way:

nano-fader full down = -5db of reaper-fader
nano-fader full up = +5db of reaper-fader

Now I have set nano-fader to MIDI Channel 1 CC 2.


Maybe once you show me how to do this I'd be able to repeat for other values.

Thanks in advance

So, just to clarify, do you really want to have a controller that is *relative* to REAPER's track volume fader value? Or are you just trying to get a very precise range over a small decibel range? Remember, I asked to describe your *ideal* system, not some pragmatic compromise. Because, while I do think I could turn your example into a working patch, I think there are various better ways to solve your issue:

One possibility is to use a nonlinear scale, where e.g. you have 100 out of 127 MIDI CC# values on a (very) small part of the range, but still have a few values at the extreme ends to be able to get to minimum and maximum values. A breakpoint curve with two user configurable breakpoints could work quite well, for this example.

Another is to not rescale at all, but to simply use a higher resolution. If the controller supports some 'relative' control mode (i.e. 'endless' encoders), or supports 14 bit values using LSB/MSB value pairs, that's probably the best way.

Otherwise, we can set up two plain CC# controls, one for coarse, and another for fine control. That way you can move close to where you want to be with the MSB one, then adjust very accurately using the LSB one.

You could perhaps also use a MIDI pitch bender (many have a better range than 7 bits, but not all of them) to change the volume of the selected track using a higher resolution than plain CC#.

Just a few suggestions... let me hear your ideas.

[babiuk]

Thanks for answering, I can see I´m explaining myself in a very bad way, sorry...

Another is to not rescale at all, but to simply use a higher resolution. If the controller supports some 'relative' control mode (i.e. 'endless' encoders), or supports 14 bit values using LSB/MSB value pairs, that's probably the best way.

In first time I wanted to get a higher resolution for my korg nano kontrol, but I've found it´s impossible so I left this searching, anyway tell me if you know taht this unit can do it cos it would be much better.

I understand the other solutions you give me but I think that now my "ideal" system could be using the faders of the controller in a linear scale but fixing the top and bottom positions to +5db and -5db related to the values of the reaper volume faders (being able to change +/-5db to another range if I would need it).

I know this is using the whole lenght of fader just for a few values but, given that I cannnot acces to higher resolution, I find this task is OK for me. I don´t find useful for me to be able of match the reaper fader's behaviour to nanoknotrol's fader cos I use to be close to 0dbs and that way I´d have to move nano´s faders just milimeters. So what I´m wanting is just amplify this zone and move the nano faders centimeters

I got the korg nano kontrol unit hoping it could give more choices but I'm not so happy.

Another thing I found is the Korg Editor allows me to limit the nano´s faders in my desired way, it´s giving me what I want, but it doesn´t support the "soft Takeover" function which I find useful so I cannot use Korg Editor. I just can get soft takeover by adding a control from action list

[chopstickkk]

Babiuk - I'm writing up the original feature request of this topic (MIDI Learn range / scale) right now and this will perform exactly as you need it to.

If you vote and spread the word hopefully we'll get this implemented!

John.

[chopstickkk]

If you want to do something like this...



Please vote here!!!...

http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=4127

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by babiuk

Hello, I recently got a nano kontrol by korg and playing with it. I found higly interesting the possibility of reducing the 0-127 default range.

(Hey Babiuk for the meanwhile make sure to install the latest
version of Kontrol Editor for the Nano Kontrol. See the 'Downloads' tab on this page... http://www.korg.com/nanoseries install the latest driver then the actual Kontrol Editor software.)

[babiuk]

Thanks, chopstickkk, I have the latest version and Korg Editor allows me to limit 0-127 range, but it doesn´t allow to work the "soft takeover" feature so I can use it.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by chopstickkk

If you want to do something like this...



Please vote here!!!...

http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=4127

That would still not solve my problem with ReaEQ, ReaDelay, etc. It needs more than just a linear multiplication and offset to scale correctly to a musical scale.

Still, it would be useful for a lot of basic rescalings. But you haven't specified what you exactly want yet. Should it be the same for the same parameter in every instance of the plugin? Should similar parameters? Should it be on a per-project basis or stick around between sessions? Where in the (G)UI should one set it up, how would it look? Etc...

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by Banned

Where in the (G)UI should one set it up, how would it look?

Updated FR with user interface image. Just a simple upper and lower limit per MIDI learn assignment.

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by Banned

But you haven't specified what you exactly want yet. Should it be the same for the same parameter in every instance of the plugin? Should similar parameters? Should it be on a per-project basis or stick around between sessions? Where in the (G)UI should one set it up, how would it look? Etc...

I hope the above image makes it clear.

Ideally the values for the slider should be parameter sensitive i.e. if you choose to MIDI learn the 'attack' of a compressor you'll get values in milliseconds between say, 0 and 500. The 'feedback' of a delay will give you values in % between 0 and 100 etc. etc.

The values for the upper and lower value should be stored with each MIDI learn assignment so it should act, between projects sessions etc., just as MIDI learn assignments do now.

Banned, I understand your methods and I know that they would be much more comprehensive but basically I'm trying to keep this as simple as possible in the hope that it would be speeded through into a very near future release

[Banned]

Originally Posted by chopstickkk

I hope the above image makes it clear.

Ideally the values for the slider should be parameter sensitive i.e. if you choose to MIDI learn the 'attack' of a compressor you'll get values in milliseconds between say, 0 and 500. The 'feedback' of a delay will give you values in % between 0 and 100 etc. etc.

The values for the upper and lower value should be stored with each MIDI learn assignment so it should act, between projects sessions etc., just as MIDI learn assignments do now.

Banned, I understand your methods and I know that they would be much more comprehensive but basically I'm trying to keep this as simple as possible in the hope that it would be speeded through into a very near future release

If you want to stick to values of 0 to 127 for minimum/maximum, you are ignoring the fact that MIDI can have a bigger range (pitch bend, (N)RPN CC#s).

If you would see the 'scaled' parameter values (which only works on some cases, some will only show their actual internal range of 0.0-1.0), we're not talking about rescaling the modulation source (such as MIDI) any more, but about changing the range of the targeted parameter (e.g. it would be just the same with OSC control). So it seems to me that the FR confuses modulation source and target, and this FR should be rephrased in terms of rescaling the range of the target (parameter) of modulation, not the source. And such a feature would imho also need to be integrated with other features like envelopes, so it's not clear to me that the 'Learn' window is the best place for it. In fact, since we can get feedback using OSC but not (yet) for MIDI, it would arguably be the wrong place. If REAPER would rescale values received from a controller, but not rescale the values sent to it, it sounds like a half-assed idea that I would completely avoid using at all.

Btw, I understand your desire for a quick fix too, and I think in the end we probably want the same thing here. But my hope for the short term is just about the exact opposite of yours, I guess. We can quite easily implement this type of functionality ourselves as it is, and I've seen way too many half-assed implementations of concepts in REAPER that end up blocking progress towards superior implementations. I do not want any more half-assed features in REAPER implemented as fast as possible, sorry. But I'll be glad to continue our discussion in search of the ideal specs for a parameter rescaling feature, as I'm very interested in that.

[LX84]

How about additionally adding a custamizable "Step-Size"?

For example in ReaEQ parameter "Frequency" choose Step Size of e.g. "1 Hz" or "0.1 Hz", in Gain "0.2 dB", a.s.o.

And a switchable "Curve" could be useful too, e.g. Frequency might be nicer to control if it is a logarithmic scale, others might need negative logarithmics, etc... then the "Step Size" of course has to change correspondingly...
(is this what you mean by "envelopes"?)

and definitely I see Banned's point about rescaling the MIDI Source! If MIDI-Control-Feedback is going to be implemented at some point, the source cannot be changed in any way. so Rescaling must happen after interpreting the MIDI control changes.

[babiuk]

Hi, any news on this?

Do you think we´ll get something in next future?

[Banned]

Originally Posted by babiuk

Hi, any news on this?

Do you think we´ll get something in next future?

If you had only answered the question in post #6 you may already have had it.

So yes, if not in this future, then certainly in the next.

[chopstickkk]

Bumpstickkk

[chopstickkk]

I see somethin' wrongggggg,
Without this feature I lose my minddd...



Vote for R. - http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=4127

[chopstickkk]

Bump + Updated top post to contain this simpler video



Please vote - http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=4127

[bradleyfilms]

Just a couple of quick questions.
Apart from possibly having to set up a dummy parameter, how is this different from what parameter linking already does?
I take it these values would be mapped to the plugin in the midi-learn file.
What would happen if you used the same plugin in different projects (or even the same project) and wanted to use different ranges?
Steve

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by bradleyfilms

Just a couple of quick questions.
Apart from possibly having to set up a dummy parameter, how is this different from what parameter linking already does?

Currently linking via parameter modulation is the only workaround (and I do use it!) but apart from being cumbersome it comes at a price - http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=2061 - which affects all reaplugs not just parameter modulated but also automated. I use a lot of reaplugs!

I take it these values would be mapped to the plugin in the midi-learn file.
What would happen if you used the same plugin in different projects (or even the same project) and wanted to use different ranges?
Steve

The same that would happen at the moment under current MIDI learn circumstances. Which is a per parameter, per instance, per project binding but you can currently save FX defaults and FX/track templates to remember settings. i.e. no settings are carried over for any given parameter in any given effect unless saved as an FX default or template etc.

In terms of focussing parameters in a project, most people currently use these tickboxes in the MIDI learn window so that bindings act appropriately...


The current options work for me but would you like it differently?

[bradleyfilms]

Seems fair, voted, although I'd probably stick with parameter linking for its ease of use.
Steve

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by bradleyfilms

Seems fair, voted, although I'd probably stick with parameter linking for its ease of use.
Steve

This is also a promising one. Perhaps a merge of regular MIDI/OSC Learn and the parameter modulation page.

[bradleyfilms]

Voted there too.

[chopstickkk]

[mikemc]

Voted, I would also dearly love this feature!

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by mikemc

Voted, I would also dearly love this feature!

Thanks mikemc!

Only 102,384 votes till we hit our target!

[ivansc]

missed this one somehow - voted YES

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by ivansc

missed this one somehow - voted YES

Thanks! Any other takers?!

[chopstickkk]

B U M P

[nofish]

Missed this one until now.
Voted yes.

[chopstickkk]

Thanks nofish.

Any other takers?!

[LETO]

Yes, definitely yes.

What about the way FL Studio handles this?
- Basically it is a simple formula editor which converts the input value to some output.
This is quite an extreme example, but you also just choose "Input/2", or work with booleans to have multiple ranges such as "(Input>(3/5) and (Input<(4/5)))*(8/10)". The result is a switch that opens for 80% within a range between 3/5 and 4/5. Endless possibilities..

[mikemc]

Any idea if the devs have taken note of this? Is Reaper not alone in lacking this functionality in a major DAW?

[chopstickkk]

Originally Posted by mikemc

Any idea if the devs have taken note of this? Is Reaper not alone in lacking this functionality in a major DAW?

If any of the Devs want to chime in on this I'd be more than happy.

And more than that, surprised.

[Mister36]

+1

Main thing I miss from Ableton.