Tutorials

[Erufailon]

At the moment it's not possible to specify the instance of the same vsti (thus I'll keep using midi-outs -also for x64 support-).
The flag is something you need to set. You can set any flag then use the if-flag. I don't use them, but I suppose they could be used to set a simple name for more complex conditions, or to kinda set an overarching (if that's a word) property, or something like that.

[kbaccki]

In Overture, you select an (XML) preset directly on the track which pulls all the relevant rules keyswitches etc. into the context of the stave, regardless of what VSTi is loaded. In Notion it seems the plugin ID is what gets recognised. Hopefully some method might be added whereby custom rules can be accessed inside Notion on a per-stave basis.

Been playing with the Notion demo for several days. Nice software, and seems pretty stable. T

However, the mapping of rules to VSTi/instrument patches needs to be much more flexible, along the lines of what I highlighted above from fandango. Being able to write and load custom rules on per-score basis is a really nice feature, but the way the rules are mapped currently down to the instrument level is not flexible for the myriad libraries out there... if you're using library A under Kontakt then you can write a custom rule set for library A, or if you're using libary B under Kontakt you can write a custom rule set for library B... but you can't have a custom rule set for A & B at the same time (e.g., running LASS + Kirk Hunter + whatever).

I think the simple approach would be rather than load monolithic rule sets that apply to the whole score, to have rules sets be managed and mapped at the instrument/staff level. Perhaps also have some sort of hierachical rule loading to bring in common rules and defs (e.g., dynamic maps that apply to a whole library, etc.).

For example, I could imagine having a library of prules files covering all of your libraries:

GPO4_common.prules
GPO4_Horn_Plr1.prules
GPO4_SAM_Horn_Sec.prules
...
LASS_Solo_Violin.prules
...
Gofriller_Cello.prules
...
Wallander_Bb_Clarinet.prules
...
etc.

Then when you add an instrument staff to a score, you do your instrument/channel mapping business, and seperately assign the appropriate rule set from your rule library. No crazy backwards "instrument ID" mapping business, which, as was mentioned, is limited to the specific products that Notion chooses to map (the instrument IDs are some internal thing).

Along a similar vein, you could instead or additionally have multi-instrument rule sets defined within single prules files, but rather than automapping through the internal instrument IDs allow the user to select the instrument rule set by name. So, you might have GPO4.prules, LASS.prules, etc. like you kinda do now, but when you add a staff you could get the option to explicitly choose a top-level rule set, then a specific instrument within that rule set ... e.g., GPO4 > Brass > SAM Horn Sec.... and while you're giving the user the option to select a specific library/instrument rule set for the new staff, show them a list of currently loaded VSTi instances to map the staff to rather than go through the SHIFT+I business seperately.

You could continue to support the backward mappings from instrument IDs for specific products, but personally I think giving the user the ability to explicitly manage VSTi instances and map staff/instrument rules per staff would take the product to a new level. As an aside, I just created 20 instances of ARIA player in vsthost with no instrument patches loaded -- I was using 200+MB and the CPU usage by vsthost on this Athlon64 laptop went from 0% to 10%. And that's with no instruments loaded and nothing actually playing. So rather than 50 instances of ARIA or whatever, you're much better off with loading more instruments into fewer instances (probably true for most VSTi, especially things like Kontakt)... But to do that and still get the power of the NOTION rule mappings you need a way to explicitly assign library-/instrument-specific rules to staves independently of plugin IDs and instrument ID magic cookies. The instrument rule defs could also contain defaults for things like transpose and clef, etc., so it could also extend the power of the "instrument template" concept considerably to any possible VSTi or sample library.

[labou]

Could there be another turtorial using Kontakt this time? I believe what most user wants is create prules for Kontakt instruments.
Also, is there any plan to put out a place for user to share prules?

Thanks.

[wcreed51]

Considering that Notion hasn’t answered questions or participated in any of the various threads on custom rules, I’m guessing that it’s not an area they currently want to put energy into. Perhaps there’s even some regret at opening up such a potential can of worms.

[Admin]

Considering that Notion hasn’t answered questions or participated in any of the various threads on custom rules, I’m guessing that it’s not an area they currently want to put energy into. Perhaps there’s even some regret at opening up such a potential can of worms.

I wouldn't say that we "regret opening up such a can of worms," but we're very very busy around here lately with testing new builds and new sounds so we haven't had as much time to keep up with the threads here.....

We're ecstatic that you all have taken the initiative to push forward with customizing the program for your needs and will be happy to help you with specific questions in the near future.

Sorry for the absence around here lately

-Kyle

[labou]

Hi Kyle,

This is understanble, however most user seems to want to have prules made for Kontakt instruments, so can you at least give us a little bit of info in that regard, like is it something you already tried doing? Is it something you are planning on releasing in the future?

Thanks.

[wcreed51]