Bandlab, when did they do this???

Under my radar as is most of life, but just discovered something late to the party and don't know when or where it happened.
 
My biggest gripe about Sonar was the lack of being able to chain vsti synths. I needed that function for the fat sounds to mask lack of content as a mediocre keyboard player. Hoping Sonar would evolve like Reaper in this function.
I was one of the most vocal irritants and pissed many of you off over the years demanding a fix to bring Sonar out of the stone age.
 
Request fell on deaf ears from the devs. They obviously didn't give a fork. Apologists fired back at me saying it's easy. Quit griping, just create a template with many tracks to cover the shortfall.
Cool but too many steps to replicate what is possible otherwise on a single track. Look at what Studio One has achieved at the cutting edge.
 
To the point, fired up an old version of Bandlab, and the damned thing now chains vsti synths. Still not as elegant as Reaper in terms of individual volume controls of a synth, but has the forced midi thru function (in case a synth blocks data downstream).
Not Studio One level which currently I consider the Holy Grail of the native modular environment. However a major advancement I missed in the change log. Levels the playing field between Reaper, and Bandlab with now only a slight disadvantage under Reaper.
 
Have no idea when Bandlab added this, and hate to thing I had been blubbering about not having a basic function that was already put in Sonar before Bandlab took over. Happy camper even if a bit late in the game.
 
John
 
 

I had no idea either.  How exactly does this work?

I wonder if the downside to doing that in a single chain might be that it would be limited to one CPU thread/core.
 
Plus the accumulated latency as your PC processed the signal chain in serial fashion from input to output, compared to running parallel tracks, synths, and effects on parallel threads/cores.

Abacab,
Fortunately haven't noticed any appreciable latency issues running series connections either in Reaper or in Bandlab although I see your point and the chains have to be set to accept a midi thru or workaround from one to the next. Bandlab does this by having the input echo checked for each synth. Reaper gets around a blocked midi thru by (on the synth's individual rack) "2 out" (or however many, right click the tab) > Midi Output > Merges with Midi Bus. This creates a limited parallel routing delivering the midi input to each synth that would otherwise stall the chain if one synth doesn't have a built in thru function.
 
Azslow, got to check this out on Reaper and may unfortunately have to read the manual if I understand what you are getting at. My use has been to simply drop one synth after another in a series chain so all work. Limitation in doing it this way is no pan control for the individual synth and any effect placed anywhere in the chain processes any synth before it, so you couldn't for instance load 3 synths and have 3 different delays in line for the individual synth. You seem to be saying that you can set up multiple true parallel routings in Reaper. This would be dynamite. You've got me on a mission to figure this out.
I was quite surprised when I fired up Bandlab for some reason and found that at minimum, the series chain now works. I'll get a step by step guide to how I did this in case I magically blundered into something that is not supposed to work.
Thanks guys,
John

JohnKenn
Well guys...
 
I really forked this one up good. (Sorry again) Looks like Bandlab or Sonar cannot chain synths. 

Stick a fork in it, it's done?

azslow3
Hm... I am puzzled how you have managed to make it work.
It is long time possible to technically insert several Synths as "effects" into single track FX bin. The feature was added to simplify MIDI routing to audio effects like guitar amps, since only "synth" has MIDI input routing ability.
But the problems are with routing MIDI input and getting the sound from everything except the last synth in the chain. At least for me, the situation is still the same (not working) in Bandlab.
 
REAPER supports arbitrary routing, so one MIDI track can be routed to several synths. Here I do not understand where you see any limitation. In case someone wants several synths inside one track with separate processing for each (f.e. to use the track as a "modular synth" template), there are up to 64 channels in each track and so up to 32 stereo pairs for absolutely independent processing. For independent MIDI processing there are 16 MIDI buses (16 channels each) and configurable MIDI behavior for each FX/Synth in the chain.
I am not sure about Studio One, but Bandlab with its single MIDI bus and fixed (1-2) channels per track is not even close to that.

You pretty much hit every item I was thinking when I read the original post. Putting things on different channels within a single track in REAPER really opens up the possibilities. I've only a few times had three or so different sets of stereo pipes running within a single track in REAPER, but it amazes me every time I set up one of those complex routings that I would have never thought possible in any DAW.
 

You can use Akai VIP on a single DAW track as a instrument plugin with up to 8 synths in a multi patch.
 
There are up to 4 insert FX and 4 sends internally on each synth slot.  There are also 4 internal busses with 4 FX slots each, plus a master bus with 4 FX slots before you output to the DAW.  Then you have 8 stereo multi audio outputs back to the DAW.
 
So you can do all that on one track of MIDI input, with from 1 - 8 tracks of stereo audio output.  Each of the 8 instruments can be assigned to a unique MIDI channel 1-16, or omni, as desired.  So splits or layers are both possible in a VIP multi patch.
 
The only real limitation with VIP is that it has no audio input, so you cannot use it just as an FX rack.  But it makes a great synth rack, which it what it was designed for!

Still trying to figure out how to pull this off in Reaper although has been said here it can be done. Just over my head at this point.
 
Studio One has the capacity native and easy to get to. I've used chainers in the likes of Sonar without much trouble or added CPU drag, latency. Usually fell back on Energy XT though they haven't updated the vst/vsti plug in many years.
 
Some otherwise good chainers like P&M, Bidule etc don't have bridges so you can't mix or match 32 and 64 plugs. Appreciate the leads on chaining software and approaches you all have advised. I had bypassed the ImageLine host because it looked like it was only for FruityLoops users. Maybe gave up too soon.
 
Still feel like an idiot for getting this thread off the ground on a false premise. Looked good at the time on a defective laptop screen and thought I'd struck gold. Oh well, a couple more beers will numb the grief.
 
John
 

Thanks Glenbo,
 
I'm trying to get the flexibility of the Studio One approach in Reaper. I'm not surprised that it is reported that this can be done under the hood.
I've used the simple (or apparent) method of adding synths in a chain on a single track which fills most needs but falls short in some areas. Inserting a third party chainer can solve the issues so it's more my OCD fixation on having the task done inside the DAW without outside help.
 
My problem with the obvious chaining behavior in Reaper is that the merge input midi bus function creates a wrapper for a pseudo parallel routing dealing only with initial input issues. It's function to take the input and route around a synth that has no midi thru capability and would thus block midi notes to the next synth in the series chain. Thus both synths are receiving midi input but are still ranked in a series chain. Works great for getting all synths in a chain to sound.
 
A disadvantage to total freedom in routing would be for instance if you had synth A and synth B with no midi thru, and adjusted by merging the midi input as if both synths were first in the chain. Then you wanted to apply a reverb to synth B only. Can't do it because the synths are still in a series chain even if receiving parallel input. Reverb will process everything upstream equally. Inability to apply panning to an individual synth is another problem.
 
Studio One as an example, or a flexible chainer can send the signal thru truly independent parallel routes so that you can set up an independent processing for each synth without affecting another synth.
 
Short instruction or example of the workflow from better minds on how to do this without involving multiple tracks would be appreciated.
 
John

Glenbo,
Got to study and see if I can apply. Respect the time and your effort to get me a basic roadmap.
John