Subject:Midi import?

Posted by: waynegee

Date:10/10/2002 1:55:24 AM

If I export a MIDI file with all of the channels/tracks separated(Midi Format 1 from SONAR, SX, Nuendo, Logic, Fruity, Reason, whatever)...when I open it in ACID, ACID mashes them all back together again...instead of creating a track for eack "track", it's one big globule. Puh-leeze. ACID don't even have a command or routine where I can "dissolve part" or "split notes to track". Now, you know that ain't gonna work, SoFo...what is the deal? Gotta fix this in 4.0b, boys...c'mon now...quit being so short-sighted.

You guys seem to think if you actually add features that are complete, professional and robust, you seem almost afraid that someone will say you're trying to be SONAR or Cubase or whatever. So you hold on to your "loop-ness" at the sake of all the other "features" you "kinda" add. I mean, hell...the fact that I can't create a "pool" of MIDI inputs/outputs in Preferences and them choose which one I wan't to use(per track) at any given time is one thing...but this is too much.

Anyway, is there a workaround for this...this is a BIG deal for me...a deal-breaker, you might say. Yeah, I can split 'em myself but some of these MIDI files are pretty note-y, especially the orchestrated ones and I don't always have time to go and split them...I expect my "pro" software to handle it.

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: jtuffen

Date:10/10/2002 5:58:00 AM

I guess that this is a side-effect of the way MIDI files are imported; i.e. into a track. I suppose that logically, a MIDI import function at the 'song' level is what's required...?

A (horrible) workaround would be to import the same MIDI file to a number of tracks, and then mute MIDI channels within each track as appropriate?

john..

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: pwppch

Date:10/10/2002 8:41:54 AM

If I understand you correctly, you want ACID to take a type 1 MIDI file and create multiple ACID MIDI tracks for that file.

ACID does not work with media this way. ACID "paints" a file on ACID MIDI tracks. It does not work like a traditional sequencer. You can access the tracks of a type 1 MIDI file from the MIDI editors - General/Piano Roll/List Editor.

We open Standard MIDI Files as follows:

Type 0 files: We create one "track" for each MIDI Channel. A type 0 file one big file of all MIDI data combined. We chose to expand it so that you can work on a channel basis.

Type 1 Files: We import the file as written. If the file has 30 tracks, then that is how we open it.

Again, the paradigm for ACID is that you paint with a file to ACID tracks. We paint the entire MIDI file on the ACID time line, just like we paint audio.

Peter

Subject:RE: Midi import?...why oh why oh why oh why?

Reply by: waynegee

Date:10/10/2002 3:11:46 PM

Geez, dood...why bother with MIDI at all? You guys are not comitted to it, have no intention on giving us tools that pros can use or competing with other tools on any level...so now I wonder: Why don't cha just leave ACID as ACID? If you're not gonna make it as a kick-ass tool, by ALL means don't make it a piss-poor one. You guys keep saying "Acid is not supposed to be an all-in-one solution"...well, it sure seems like you are doing your best to keep it that way. A self-fulfilling prophesy, you might say. If all ACID is gonna be good for is looping and I can loop elsewhere, I guess the question is why would I continue to compromise and use ACID? Cuz' really your "unstated" rational for is "compromise your workflow...do it OUR way or the established way". DOn't misunderstand me...ACID is kick-ass (for looping) but I can't for the life of me figure out why if you're gonna tackle other tools (such as MIDI, piano-rolls, etc.), why you would half-ass them? Someone called it "Sonar-lite"...it ain't even that cool. Loops good, tho. I don't get it and I'm tired of fighting, rationalizing to clients/peers(and myself) and compromising my workflow. Don't know anymore.

Very bummedly yours,
WG

Subject:RE: Midi import?...why oh why oh why oh why?

Reply by: pwppch

Date:10/10/2002 3:35:03 PM

You want a MIDI sequencer. ACID is not a MIDI sequencer. It is a different paradigm than what you are use to. You have to use ACID the way it was designed, instead of trying to make it work like a traditional sequencer.

Each MIDI track is a (or can be) a full MIDI sequence. If you try to move away from this model, you will be frustrated as ACID is just not designed with the approach you wish to use.

I don't know how else I can explain it.

Peter

Subject:RE: Midi import?...The rant.

Reply by: waynegee

Date:10/11/2002 12:09:49 AM

Well then, don't create a paradigm that doesn't make sense and is not thought-out and half-ass implemented(IMHO)...just pass, bro. Why try to create a new paradigm that only kinda works when we have one that works great, I guess is my question. I can dig trying to create a better wheel but not one that's triangular one side and round on the other.

I'm with Maruuk here, your time could have been better spent implementing Rewire perfectly than the (mostly) unwanted, unusable MIDI setup you gave us. I really hate to be ragging on you guys but your stance on this is not cool and it's not honest. If I'm going to stand behind your company and wave the flag, then I expect you to stand behind me, support me, give me tools I can use AND grow with. Not just give me any old thing you wanna throw at me and then tell me that it's good enough..."like it or piss off." I don't like it and maybe I will piss off. If you didn't make such kick-ass software I woulda pissed off long ago.

I wanna go forward with my tools...not take a step backwards and start using kludges. Now you gotta spend all this time debugging and releasing updates for some stuff you didn't care about in the first place when you could've either done it the easy way(Rewire, etc) or the hard way(real MIDI and editing tools). The reason you're having so many problems in this area is because you weren't committed to it, didn't want it, didn't believe in it.

I mean, if you were gonna let ACID be ACID why even bother taking all of the time, the R&D, the whole MSF-waterfall methodology trip if you weren't gonna do it right in the first place. If ACID isn't a MIDI sequencer then why have MIDI?

And no matter how you rationalize it, NO ONE "loves" the piano roll...if they do, then they have never used a "real" one(Opcode, Logic, DP, etc).

I don't get you. I don't get you at all. If you're not gonna do it the right way, dood, don't waste your time...or ours. ACID can be cool the way it is, a looper... but I guess before we(I) can except that I guess you have to accept it first. If I'm wrong then I apologize. I keep waiting for you to step up to the plate and hit a home run for the team but I guess we may be playing different games.

Subject:RE: Midi import?...The rant.

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:10/11/2002 5:47:37 AM

i think you may have heard that somewhere before peter !
but what do i know im just stupid
'whatever !' end quote

thanks wanynegee you put it better than i did but if aint a midi sequencer whys it got midi and poor midi at that why bother i think their praying for opt to bale them out

Subject:RE: Midi import?...The rant.

Reply by: pwppch

Date:10/11/2002 9:05:55 AM

How are we not being honest? What would you have me say? Do you want me to admit something that I don't agree with? That would be dishonest.

We chose a model that fits ACID. I don't know how much better I can explain this. I am not telling you to love it or leave it. I am just telling you the way it is right now. ACID has a model of dealing with media - Audio or MIDI - that is specific to its design and architecture. We remained consistent with the ACID model in how we interact with MIDI files.

I am not trying to convince you that we are right and you are wrong. All I am saying is that this is how it works today. What will happen in future revs of the app remains to be seen. We do hear the complaints you and others have. We are not ignoring you, but it would be dishonest and an out righ lie if I told you we were changing it right now.

I appreciate that you want the Piano Roll to have more functionality. I agree for the most part. There are things that I wish it could do as well. I have said that it will grow and improve. We know what our short commings are.

Whether it is right or wrong is subjective, and I am not going to argue that aspect with you. It is not a waste of time for us to persue the MIDI features in the future. Our products have never remained static. We set out to address the need to MIDI editing in ACID 4. We have both a workable model and a means to expand the product. While you may not consider this significant, we do. While you may not be able to see the potential now that ACID has a MIDI editing architecture, I do. I know what I can do now from a developers standpoint. There many things that I can do now that would address many of your requests.

Sure we could have chosen another path - ReWire if you'd like - but that would meet a smaller group of users and require a larger investment in third party tools for the average user. I know the technologies very well and know exactly how they could enhance ACID. It is about the logical progression for the largest user base of the product. When trying to please the larger group, it is inevitable that we can't satisfy the specific needs of every user.

We always get angry users that don't understand us when we make a new release or update. This will never change. Improvements are sometimes incremental. I believe we are on the right track - expanding the features and capabilities. While it would be great to meet every demand of every different type of user the first time, realistically this doesn't happen.

Peter

Subject:RE: Midi import?...The rant.

Reply by: TeeCee

Date:10/11/2002 11:07:38 AM

Well since opinions and wants are being voiced, and opinions are like ***holes, everyones got on and there's lot's around here, I'll voice my opinion.

I am grateful for the implementation of VSTi's in Acid 4.0. My remix work will benefit from it as it's easier for me to work in that piano roll and a DR-008 than it is in 8 consecutive tracks of one shots trying to add sound FX in to a project.

I am very grateful for the addition of FX automation. It will add a new dimension to my remix work, help to alleviate some of the "static" (as in non-changing) associated with typical loop based (and mp3.com) music.

I have no use for ReWire. If it was in Acid, it would make no difference to me. If that was all they had done for version 4.0, I would have passed.

I don't want Acid to be SONAR, I have SONAR XL 2.0 for that. If adding the full MIDI capabilities of SONAR into Acid changed how we had o deal with loops in Acid, I'd have to walk away from Acid. I use it because of it's paradigm.

If you want a sequencer, buy a sequencer. I'm betting that by about this time, Sonic Foundry will refund your money for the purchase of Acid 4.0 and you can move on to use the product that you want. Hell! Write your own program! Maybe they won't but maybe they will.

It was one thing when we had a lot of people here bitching about the crashes in Acid. It's another thing when we have people here bitching because they don't like how Acid works.

From what I gather, you guys want Acid to do something it doesn't. It sounds like Acid isn't gonna do it any time soon as one of the programmers is sitting here telling us that it isn't going to. Move on, please, so every thread doesn't turn into a SoFo bash.

TeeCee

Subject:RE: Midi import?...The rant.

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:10/11/2002 12:54:16 PM

tee cee acid i dont want acid to do anything that it doesnt do i like the looping,
the vsti is ok could be better , fx auto reasonable, but the midi is so so poor
and and my beef is that this is acids second pop at midi and it is to quote someone in the forum remidial
i wouldnt want to change the way acid works to incorporate midi
it already has it, i just think with a little more application and thought and yes maybe time and a little beta testing that may have even been good if not very good!
its not

Subject:You talkin' to me?

Reply by: waynegee

Date:10/11/2002 2:20:49 PM

I hope you are not addressing me in your post, TeeCee...I'm not bashing SoFo at all but I AM questioning their development, R&D and implementation decisions. ACID works great in the tiny area that it has cornered...nothing can touch it. But it seems to me that when SoFo try to branch out past the sweet spot, they either miss the boat or can't get the paddle in the water. I'm glad it works for you but I have many different clients, with different needs and if I'm going to meet each different scenario that comes my way then I need tools that are flexible, intuitive and stable. Since I've plopped down hundreds of dollars building my studio around SoFo gear, you bet your sweet bippy I'm gonna kick and scream and bash(if I have to) to make sure my needs are met. Yes I could switch but SoFo is so close, we shouldn't even be having this conversation.

So maybe you should read my posts again and REALLY think about what was said...don't react to the vernacular...think about what was said.

Basically, this thread was about midi importing, and yes, a "professional" tool should be able to perform this function. Dig?

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: oddboy

Date:10/11/2002 9:31:30 PM

A type of 0 means that the file contains one single track containing midi data on possibly all 16 midi channels. If your sequencer sorts/stores all of its midi data in one single block of memory with the data in the order that it's "played", then it should read/write this type.

A type of 1 means that the file contains one or more simultaneous (ie, all start from an assumed time of 0) tracks, perhaps each on a single midi channel. Together, all of these tracks are considered one sequence or pattern. If your sequencer separates its midi data (i.e. tracks) into different blocks of memory but plays them back simultaneously (ie, as one "pattern"), it will read/write this type.

A type of 2 means that the file contains one or more sequentially independant single-track patterns. If your sequencer separates its midi data into different blocks of memory, but plays only one block at a time (ie, each block is considered a different "excerpt" or "song"), then it will read/write this type.


Help I dont understand this...

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: Iacobus

Date:10/11/2002 10:33:06 PM

Type 0 MIDI tracks have just one track. (Not as common.)

Type 1 MIDI tracks have multiple tracks. (Most common.)

If I remember right, Type 2 MIDI tracks contain separate tempo and time signature info for each track. (I believe this is rarely seen.)

You might want to load some different types of MIDI tracks and study them if you want to research more. Nothing beats "learning by doing".

HTH,
Iacobus

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: dkistner

Date:10/12/2002 6:38:56 AM

I output Midi 1 from my scoring program. I wrote the developer to ask if they could add a midi export feature that would break out the staves (channels) into separate tracks. The developer said "that's easy enough to do, but doesn't the program you import the midi file into do this automatically?" Like this is a basic, expectable feature for anything that imports midi.

I don't understand how outputting to Midi 0 would retain the stave/channel structure and import into Acid as separate tracks, but I'll try it.

I'm with waynegee, though, that having to manually save out the separate tracks is a drag...and also makes for errors if any further score-level editing has to be done. You're going to want a complete score at some point, so then you have to go back and reassemble all the tracks if you've made any changes.

I'd really love it if I could just import a midi file into Acid, then efficiently use Acid as my orchestrator/mixer and effects processor. I've tried the "copy the file for as many tracks as you need and mute out channels" trick, but I get major VSTi crashes when I try to do this. Nothing works but physically splitting up the midi file. Time- and moneywise, though, this sure beats handwriting scores and then paying musicians in a studio to play/record them. I am counting my blessings....

Subject:RE: Midi import?

Reply by: pwppch

Date:10/12/2002 12:55:45 PM

For a MIDI sequencer this import functionality would be expected. However, ACID is not a MIDI sequencer in the traditional model. It is a loop sequencer for MIDI and audio. Nothing more, nothing less.

The single MIDI track that ACID generates on import is the "media" that ACID plays.

You can edit each of the internal MIDI tracks from the ACID MIDI track properties.

The only benifit I can see would be the ability to route each track to different MIDI devices. This I can appreciate and is something we are considering for a future version.

There is also another problem you will encounter. ACID does not 'render' MID files collectively from all MIDI tracks in ACID. You can render per Track changes to new MID files, but this would not generate a new multi track MIDI sequence from all your ACID MIDI tracks.

ACID was designed with the model that an ACID MIDI Track is or can be an entire MIDI sequence. MIDI is orthoganal with how Audio works in ACID. This was what we set out to accomplish. We never had any intent on making ACID a MIDI sequencer, and there are no plans to provide this type of functionality. We will improve the editing tools. I could see an auto "split" of type 1 files. Problem is you will loose any conductor track information as ACID is the conductor of all its media regardless of how the media was authored. Perhaps a tempo map import from a type 1 file would prove useful.

The intent is to permit both the import of complete MIDI sequences - like importing or beat-mapping a pre mixed audio track - or to create and loop small MIDI sequences like you do with audio loops. This is by design. While I see what you want, I can't really agree that ACID needs to be able to do this as it was never the intent of ACID to work like this with MIDI.

No, this is not me telling anybody "too bad" or "tough luck." This is how ACID works and its specific model for dealing with media. It is just the wrong tool for the task you want to accomplish.

Peter