I have a Muse Receptor, as well as TOTL keyboards. I am 69 and just so so with tech matters. I had envisioned replacing my keyboards with a machine that could never be obsolete. I am not stupid, but very uninformed. I never envisioned hauling a pc around with my Receptor. I thought after three years, it would be able to host a sequencer, at least. I saw styles were out unless I used Live Styler or such on a pc. I have fine libraries of samples that I cannot modulate properly for my use.

In short, I can use B4 from NI, and that's it. I gave up.

Hi Bernie
The Receptor is basically a VSTi player, not a controller, therefore controls and applications are minimal because once set-up to your requirements via computer, you just plug it in and control it with your controller. (Think of it along the lines of the Ketron SD2)
To use VSTi as you want (No separate computer) then you only have 3 options, Neko, Lionstracs or Wersi.
The Wersi is the easiest to set-up and use, however the Lionstracs is more flexible, but you do need a reasonable amount of knowledge to set things up as you want. (Basically you have a choice of ease of use or flexibility with a fair amount of work involved)
The Neko is a completely different animal, as it is just a blank keyboard with a computer built in, so you have set everything up from scratch. (However this does mean you can really make it your own)
If your prepared to get down and dirty however, then the Receptor is a cracking VSTi player.
Regards

Bill

well..let me try to explain again how our Linux OS 4.0 is working under the hardware system.
The first step here is to understand the new way how to run multiple ASIO host instead to run VSTi in one host, like the most windows OS system.
How you already know, the Linux with Jack connection Kit, is able to running up unlimited ASIO stand alone application and also IF you want, to run UP VSTi plugins by the FST
( FST is one linux application that open the VSTi interface, create automatically the audio ports and midi ports)
In this way you dont need to use one VstHost server.
here the example: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/images/komplete/jackasio.jpeg
This are all basic Linux features that normally must be running manually by the Terminal/Console. ( not simple if you are not a linux developer...)
One example konsole command for open one asio host.
Open a terminal and you get: root@mediastation:/home/mediastation#
now you type:
wine /home/mediastation/VST Plugins/NI/B4II/B4II.exe , then press enter, the Organ B4II ASIO host interface will running up by the wine/windows emulator.

On the mediastation/groove products we have embedded this all terminal command on 10 available ASIO patch button.
So, when you press for example the ASIO Patch 3, automatically we running the Terminal script for loading the desidered .exe file with Wine.
The script will also create the all audio and midi connection routing on the Jack system.
Of course under the ASIO Patch editor you must first setup wich file.exe to run up: http://www.lionstracs.com/demo/MSgui/asiopatchdemo.jpg

BUT, before running one asio patch, the ASIO host stand alone application must be first installed and setup the audio-midi ports, here one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myN6DlvKcc8

At the end: IF you will have ready on the 10 ASIO patch button/keys, you have first to setup 10 ASIO host.
Each ASIO host must be setting the midi port number as same as the ASIO Patch number.
When you have made this first basic setups, then the OS 4.0 will run all automatically by pressing one key patch.
Already out of the box are installed/setups some multiple asio host and you are also able to ADD more new ASIO/VST stuff.
Untill you don't have understand this new concept, you will be never able to make working a new asio /vst host.
Other this basic feature, on OS 4.0 we have 8 basic slider midi CC controller and when you press the key MIXER, you get another 36 sliders midi controllers: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/images/2008/MS/midicontroller.jpg


On Wersi is totally different, they have 4 VSTi Slot available, where you can choose from the list the desidered VSTi and play it, but I dont know how much sliders midi CC controller they offer for the realtime control.

On Openlabs is totally again diffferent.
How told Abacus, this is only a PC system asembled in one Keyboard case + some standard midi controllers.
You can run the Reaper and then mapping the midi controlles available, but you still remain ONLY on the Reaper DAW application
When you use the Forte for manage the sounds, the Reaper can not control play together..only one app at once.
All the setups there you must make manually..they dont offer any embedded software like the Wersi or Lionstracs.

Years ago I used to work for a company that built high end Kit Cars (Quantum Sports Cars - google them). These cars were built better than TVR, they were fast, strong, comfortable, safe and the convertible was sooo much fun!. However they only ever attracted 'alternative' buyers. In the end the company folded.

The main problem with a keyboard running an OS such as Linux or Windows (the latter should never be used for live music in my oppinion) is the customers perception based on ignorance, just like the cars we were building in the 90s.

Another company that used Linux is DLQ who make the most authentic clone of a vintage Hammond I have ever played. However it took a while to boot up, and it was not taken seriously by the competition who would make false claims regarding reliability - using peoples ignorance of linux based PC against the KeyB.

Now they have moved to a dedicated computer its a completely different story. And the KeyB is now a serious contender and selling incredibly well.

I don't think any PC based system running plug-ins will ever be as succesfull simply due to lack of understanding.

Educating the buying public is not an easy task!

Hi Bachus,
I thoroughly enjoyed the couple of years or so, I spent on my softsynth/software arranger setup,but, in the end it was the lack of being able to share that made me start to lose interest.
I feel that there needs to be a common soundsource for "style parts" that anybody can use. Not much point in creating or editing styles , that one is willing to share, if they then need to be re-edited by whoever wants to use them. You can't play an xg drum mapped style on a gm drumkit without editing, requires more than a tweak.
The software arranger wasn't the problem, either OMB or Livestyler work ok & the same styles work in either, it's the soundsource for the Style Tracks that causes hassles.
Quite a few of us gave it a go, but one by one we dropped out. I used Soundfonts, they were inexpensive or even free. What I liked about them, was, they could be edited.
Didn't like the piano in a particular soundfont back, I could replace it with another from a different soundfont.
To quote Ian, a Frankensound in this case , not a Frankenstyle.
Interesting to chat about it again.

best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bachus:
[B]

Software arrangers tough have the same problems as Lionstracs, all setups are so diverse that there is no real usergroups sharing their stuff..(Ask Rikki BEars).. You spend a lot of time creating styles and then there is noboddy to share stuff with, which also leaves out the option to use the great stuff others have created. Sharing these things for me is very important. I liek to create my ownstuff but since i dont have infinite time for this hobby i also really need a lot of stuff that works straight out of the box.

I can say only VST's are good thing. Also if you use LIVESTYLER it is great.


What ever you will use you can fast change between style and you can play what ever you want.

Exchange is possible. setup need to be done in same way.
You can have severaly keyboards (VSTs) on one system. Here you are limited only with RAM, CPU) HD are so big that is not a problme there anymore only possible problem is piping between SATA HD and motherboard.

So guys I'm for VSTs on arranger.

Enjoy whatever you play.

Rikki, I think you should just give up and go to a software based arranger. I have been using mine for years and need some company....it is so lonely, Oh well!!!

Hi Frank,
I know, we all deserted you.
I've still got all my soundfonts & software, ready to be reinstated. Unfortunately , currently I don't own a decent computer, my netbook I doubt is capable, & my old laptop & desktop are a bit too dodgy to waste the time loading everything back in, but they're too good to throw out. Can't convince hubby I need a 4th pc. haahaa

Bought a secondhand v machine recently, just have to try & work out how to get it back to factory standard. I'm hoping to maybe run soundfonts thru it, if I can work the darn thing out haahaa. Actually bought it as a vsti add on for my korg, but if it runs fonts, I could get back to my old Clavinova/Soundfont/Arranger setup.

Must admit I haven't checked softhsynths out & what's available in a couple of years or so.
We did have totally different goals though,
you are trying to build the best arranger you can, with really top quality soundsources,etc ,
I on the other hand was trying to put together a very inexpensive setup using soundfonts ( free & commercial), a setup that was very affordable, but could be built on if required.

Great to hear from you again Frank.

best wishes
Rikki

The way I see it, the IDEA of the VSTi arranger is a good one. The problem comes at the front end, in the human interface, in the degree of complexity the system forces you into, rather than the basic idea of it all.

What is needed, IMO, is someone to do ALL the integration for you, to reduce your involvement in the complex technology and integration to the point that it is no more complex (or at least, only a little more complexity) than a current 'closed' arranger. Proponents of the open system often dismiss these as old school relics, but what they ALWAYS ignore is the prodigious effort at the manufacturers to do ALL the tasks you are now going to have to do for yourself. Balancing ALL the sounds, so you can select them without worrying about volume, tone, EQ, power, modulation routing, effects routing and the other myriad things you are going to HAVE to do entirely by yourself. Don't dismiss the sheer skill of these people so lightly. And don't dismiss the need to create styles FOR the sounds. Performance and sound are intrinsically linked... look at how poor most translations are. Ever wonder WHY?

In all my experience of VSTi's, I have yet to find ONE with the polish of a closed arranger or WS's soundset. They ALL have glaring jumps in volume, samples that sound unconnected to the rest, and what I can describe as a 'cobbled-together' approach. Which, given that most of the ARE, is hardly surprising. The Big3 spend a FORTUNE developing these sample sets, squeezing every last kb of ROM into something integrated and coherent. There is FAR less effort in the VSTi world to do this. For a reason...

Few VSTi's are DESIGNED to be the basis of a live instrument, and even fewer (none, really) are designed for the needs of the arranger player. We have a unique set of needs. We don't set every last thing up in advance. Quite a few, to be honest, still prefer to set up one panel registration, then call up their styles and sounds on the fly. This puts ENORMOUS emphasis on how well balanced that sound set is. WS users don't need this. Listen for yourself. Most WS soundsets don't have anywhere NEAR the smoothness of voice substitution that an arranger has. One Rhodes will be quite louder than another. One string sound can be several db quieter than another. You are expected, in WS live operation, to set all this up and balance them for yourself IN ADVANCE.

That's the primary difference, IMO. You can get quite close to a passable 'arranger' experience from a modern, Karma or loop/arp WS as long as you spend an eternity setting it all up. But that AIN'T what most arranger players either want OR need.

So, all in all, I think there's nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept of the soft arranger. But a complete disjunction in HOW that concept is implemented. Wersi came the closest, IMO, in integrating the VSTi into the arranger, but even they failed to do the work in making the VSTi's as balanced. IMO, what is needed is a licensing arrangement with some of the major VSTi soundset companies, Colossus, things like that, they should be balanced by the SAME skilled people that do the ROM sets, and THEN sold to us (at a nice profit!) already set up for us. Essentially, we don't deal with the geek stuff at all. We concentrate on doing what we already do.

Just make music...

If I WANTED to put the amount of work into making music that a soft arranger FORCES you to do, I would use a TOTL WS, and sound amazing. What I want to do is put in virtually NO effort, and sound NEARLY as amazing. And, I'm sorry, but I believe I represent the majority (the vast majority!) of arranger players worldwide. This choice, to use WS's with samplers, arpeggiators and great sounds, albeit at a cost of much advance preparation, and the arranger way, that sounds MAYBE a hair less good but is very easy to do, has ALREADY been made by all of us, quite some time ago. We aren't going to change our minds now and go BACK to the complexity and advance work that WS's make you do, to get sounds that are, in all fairness, sometimes little better than what we already have (my G70 piano is on many radio played tracks and no-one has said I need to use a VSTi!), and are terribly balanced OOTB.

BUT.... if someone wakes up and does the work for us, and gives us an arranger experience using VSTi's that doesn't radically change our workload or workflow, the world will beat a path to his door.

With me at the front...

Hi Diki
Don’t know where you have been for the last few years, but virtually all VSTi makers have either bought out completely new, or have adapted existing engines specifically for live on stage play. (The days of only being suitable for the studio are long gone)

Everyone:

Sound Balance:
Between individual VSTi, then yes there can be imbalances (Usually because they are designed by different sound teams) which is why all hosts give you individual control of each VSTi for volume, EQ, Reverb etc., and once setup (They are saved with the VST configuration) is not a problem.
Will they be as balanced as hardware arrangers?
Yes and No, as each person has their own idea of how they should be balanced, (Apart from the Korg, I find I have to alter the balances of a lot of the other OOTB hardware arrangers to get them anywhere near to what I want)

VSTi Arrangers:
Unfortunately with the demise of most of the high quality GM sound sets (Which dictate a specific balance) then style integration does become a touch more difficult. (Colossus was probably the highest quality with a quality that left the best sounds on hardware arrangers for dead (Fortunately it has been included with Goliath, but it is expensive)

Manufacture integration:
Your correct Wersi was continually working towards VSTi integration (Difficult with limited resources) as witnessed by B4 and VB3, which while you paid extra over the standalone instrument they did become one with the instrument, with no work needed by the user. (Hopefully Wersi will get themselves sorted and continue along these lines adding other VSTi)

Currently only 2 software based instruments are set up OOTB like Hardware boards and these are the Wersi Pegasus Wing keyboard and Apollo Organ. (A first for Wersi as they have never before in their entire 40 year history made an OOTB instrument, always believing that users who are prepared to spend this type of money would not be beginners, but those that want to do their own thing)

Is a software arranger for you?
There are plenty of free and trial software as well as reasonably priced soundcards and controllers out there, so you don’t need a large expenditure to try it out, but if you do go the pure software route then while there is a steep learning curve, it gives you a satisfaction (It’s all you and not somebody else’s work) that a hardware board just cannot provide IMO)

Me:
I have been using software based sound systems since the late 90s, and around 2003 moved over to Wersi OAS (Which got rid of all the cables and boxes, and allowed it into the lounge) and can categorically say that “for me”, there is no hardware board that comes anywhere close .

Is it for everybody?
No, so always try before committing yourself.

BFN

Bill