Mixing Midi Channels?

[MrMeeseeks]

Might seem like a dumb question but if I add a few midi out devices, how can I control the tracks midi volume in Reason?
In Cubase you get midi volume sliders in the mixer alongside the audio ones, so in reason how do you peeps do the same?

Edit, ok just found I can assign 7 in the cc bit on the external midi device, is that the only way though?

[PhillipOrdonez]

Midi volume? Do you mean velocity?

[MrMeeseeks]

Midi volume? Do you mean velocity?

Hi, sorry no, I mean mixing the volume of a midi track up and down same as an audio track, sort of feels like the mixer should have channels for midi tracks volume sliders as well as audio but then maybe thats just me.

Have a workaround using the cc controller knob on the external midi devices to send cc 7 volume but just feels clunky.

[selig]

Not sure what you’re trying to do. I find setting the output level of MIDI devices to not be something I’m changing once set. This is because it can adversely affect downstream processing such as compression or saturation etc. I may be a bit of a control freak in this respect, but I find it easer to work with known levels from the start of the signal path right up to the channel fader, then do all my actual balancing at the fader level if that makes sense.

[Arrant]

I think he's talking about MIDI CC 7, which is reserved for channel volume if I remember correctly. All sequencers had faders for this per channel back in the day.

[visheshl]

Midi tracks don't have volume, they have midi notes and velocity...the midi then goes into and plays an instrument device like a Synth or a drum machine, which could be an internal Synth or a vst etc. Then you control that instrument's volume. That volume should be available on that instrument's track. If you're sending midi to a hardware Synth etc, then you control the volume from the Synth itself or a mixer/audio interface etc.

[NostraDAWmus]

Midi tracks don't have volume, they have midi notes and velocity...

Read the MIDI specs.

MIDI CC#11 = expression
MIDI CC#7 = volume (MIDI channel)

It´s possible to realize complete mixes in MIDI environment.

P.

[selig]

Midi tracks don't have volume, they have midi notes and velocity...

Read the MIDI specs.

MIDI CC#11 = expression
MIDI CC#7 = volume (MIDI channel)

It´s possible to realize complete mixes in MIDI environment.

P.

To be clear, you DO need an audio environment before you can actually HEAR the MIDI instruments, so there's that.
And if you want to hear more than one MIDI device, you'll need some sort of audio mixer as well.
But I get your point, and it's the same as saying you can realize complete mixes using the volume knobs on the front panel of hardware synths.

The "issue" is that if you automate the level at the source, and then add any non-linear processing such as dynamics or saturation etc. you'll get different (less predictable) results than if you follow the traditional path and automate level at the fader (the opposite end of the signal path).

So I would file MIDI volume mixing as "possible" but not "practical" IMO.

[NostraDAWmus]

To be clear, you DO need an audio environment before you can actually HEAR the MIDI instruments, so there's that.
And if you want to hear more than one MIDI device, you'll need some sort of audio mixer as well.
But I get your point, and it's the same as saying you can realize complete mixes using the volume knobs on the front panel of hardware synths.

The "issue" is that if you automate the level at the source, and then add any non-linear processing such as dynamics or saturation etc. you'll get different (less predictable) results than if you follow the traditional path and automate level at the fader (the opposite end of the signal path).

So I would file MIDI volume mixing as "possible" but not "practical" IMO.

You´re possibly too young,- but we did it in the past when MIDI studios were hip and tracks on reel-to-reel MTRs were limited.
HD recording was non existing or in it´s childshoes,- think ADAP or Digidesign Soundtools.
Early computers were too slow for that and RAM was insanely expensive.

I remember productions (!!! by major record companies released ones) where only vocals, drums and guitars were printed to tape and all the MIDI keyboards, modules and add. drum machines ran realtime into the mix,- being triggered by Emagic Notator SL running on ATARI Mega STe and in sync w/MTR via SMPTE.

There were also not enough channels w/ EQ and s##t on the 8bus analog console,- so there were line mixers for keys and MIDI modules and MIDI controllable, user-programmable AKAI MEQ7 7band EQs, MB76 audio routing matrix switchers, MIDI matrix switchers, mergers and multiFX processors, all being controlled in realtime via MIDI program change commands.
The line mixer levels were set to a fixed position for keys and MIDI modules and all the volume changes were done via MIDI.
There wre gates and downward expanders to keep all as quiet as possible.
It worked !

And on tour,- the same.
Large keyboardrigs w/ cascaded line mixers, together w/ all FX units in big racks,- all MIDI controlled by MIDI processor matrix switchers.
It worked well too.

I don´t say I wanna record that way today again, but it´s the example for MIDI can do it,.- and when you grew up w/ it and it worked, you don´t wanna miss it.
MIDI is one of the most flexible arranger tools existing and not being obsolete at all, especially not because MIDI-2 is in progress as well.

Today, when using software, my intention is often re-building hardware rigs in software.
I also use S|C SCope by that reason, there are racks and cables too,- and there´s Plogue Bidule p.ex..

But Reason is a good candidate,- there are racks, cables and some great quality FX and instruments avilable ...
I use Reason since v3.
But it was never great for live usage because the instrument devices lack response to MIDI program change and MIDI bank change commands.
I also hope(d) for the Reason Rack Plugin to be MIDI multitimbral.

B.tw.,- does Reason recordand playback MIDI sysex flawlessly ?

It´s sad, full MIDI implementation is ignored for Reason devices and RRP.



P.

[selig]

To be clear, you DO need an audio environment before you can actually HEAR the MIDI instruments, so there's that.
And if you want to hear more than one MIDI device, you'll need some sort of audio mixer as well.
But I get your point, and it's the same as saying you can realize complete mixes using the volume knobs on the front panel of hardware synths.

The "issue" is that if you automate the level at the source, and then add any non-linear processing such as dynamics or saturation etc. you'll get different (less predictable) results than if you follow the traditional path and automate level at the fader (the opposite end of the signal path).

So I would file MIDI volume mixing as "possible" but not "practical" IMO.

You´re possibly too young,- but we did it in the past when MIDI studios were hip and tracks on reel-to-reel MTRs were limited.
HD recording was non existing or in it´s childshoes,- think ADAP or Digidesign Soundtools.
Early computers were too slow for that and RAM was insanely expensive.

Let me stop you right there and introduce myself as a guy who (as far as I’m aware) released the first all MIDI and all digital record for a major label (MCA/Master Series) in 1986. All my MIDI gear had to be run into a mixer to be heard, and so that’s where I did my mixing. I extensively used MIDI to control two PCM-70s doing things like grabbing a “freeze” on one reverb, then fading it up while the other was being loaded, fading it back down then fading up the second PCM-70 - and repeat. But the actual mixing was not done with MIDI, fwiw. MIDI also handled all my program changes and patch loading, not to mention using it to edit the synths on the computer.
This was long before ADAT or Sound Tools, but I later spent plenty of time with those formats as well…
All to say, I WISH I as too young to know about all that crap, but I do (at least for as long as my memory holds out).

[BananaSkins]

Let me stop you right there and introduce myself as a guy who (as far as I’m aware) released the first all MIDI and all digital record for a major label (MCA/Master Series) in 1986. All my MIDI gear had to be run into a mixer to be heard, and so that’s where I did my mixing. I extensively used MIDI to control two PCM-70s doing things like grabbing a “freeze” on one reverb, then fading it up while the other was being loaded, fading it back down then fading up the second PCM-70 - and repeat. But the actual mixing was not done with MIDI, fwiw. MIDI also handled all my program changes and patch loading, not to mention using it to edit the synths on the computer.
This was long before ADAT or Sound Tools, but I later spent plenty of time with those formats as well…
All to say, I WISH I as too young to know about all that crap, but I do (at least for as long as my memory holds out).

Best read of the day...

[NostraDAWmus]

Let me stop you right there ...

No !
We´ve got our wires crossed.

I never said you need no mixers nor did I talk about doin´ a complete mix via MIDI.

I only replied to that post,-
viewtopic.php?p=585407#p585407

and especially to that line:
"Midi tracks don't have volume, they have midi notes and velocity..."

It´s not true MIDI tracks "don´t have volume"

And I said ADAP,- not ADAT !
ADAP was a early HDD recording system using ATARI as a host computer.

All only examples how we dealt w/ lack of ressources in the past, which was only possible with MIDI.

I´m pro and make a livin´ w/ music since about 1976 b.t.w. ...

Anyway, it is like it is,-
Reason is backward when it comes to MIDI and MIDI is a very important tool,- period.
Otherwise companies like these (and many other) wouldn´t exist,-
https://www.doremidi.cn/h-nd-16.html?fromColId=106
https://www.iconnectivity.com/

Or why do you think MIDI over LAN is still interesting today ?
Just because of "notes" and "velocity" ?



P.

[NostraDAWmus]

Best read of the day...

We liked to entertain you !



P.