Can gp duplicate a pad that , for example in a roland synth a patch is 4 partials, which can be tuned to a 1, 5, 9, 2, thus hitting one note becomes the whole pad, while arp is on to sustain it
Scripting is your friend.
nerds!,
Not sure if I understood it right, but sounds to me that this can also be done by several MIDI In Blocks with different transpose settings. Or with a chorder plugin like piz midiChords:
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?id=1642
But besides that, like paul said, any reason to learn scripting is a good reason 
Thanks, any piano teq users ?, sounds ok, low cpu in comparison with keyscape , but not as realistic ?
I’ve got about 15 piano libraries for KONTAKT. I really like Vintage D by Best Service, the Ravenscroft 275, the Fazioli by Imperfect Samples, the Session Keys Grand Y and of course Keyscape.
Reasonable prices too, piano teq s up there , dsp instead of sample based?
Pianoteq is my goto for acoustic piano. It used to be just “good” but they did something in 6.1 that made it astonishingly better. I also have their Hohner extension for the “clav” which is also terrific.
dsp instead of sample based?
Actually everything related to audio on the computer is “dsp”. I think you meant “physical model”
Yes!, rompers are cpu pigs, pteq was touted to spare that, …, BTW, if a song list in gp has 6 songs, should predictive loading be ‘6’ also ?, …, or does how many not effect cpu ?
Actually generally quite the opposite. If all you have to do is play a precalculated wave file, then you’re going to be very light weight from a CPU perspective as opposed to physical modeling where you actually have to calculate what the wave should look like in real time. The real trade off is with sampling you have to use a lot of RAM and disk space to hold the samples.
Having said that, when samplers start doing all sorts of cpu intensive effects processing such as convolution reverb, then you end up with the worst of both worlds, lots of cpu and lots of ram.
My real issue is just having to manage all those samples,particularly with multiple machines and samples installed in different places, a real PITA
As for predictive loading, it totally depends on your needs but if you have a total of six rackspaces and you have predictive loading set to 6, then everything is loaded anyway.
Will midi 2.0 change anything ?, some engineers say osc is nerdy and midi ci is the future?, (off topic(
I am using pianoteq a lot and I like the playability.
You can tweak everything so it really sits in the band.
Are you talking about cpu, ram, samples etc or are you talking about midi?
People have been talking about MIDI 2 ever since MIDI showed up. Nobody even knows what it is!
Looks like your up on it
Oh can’t get enough of it 
judging by my YT channel https://www.youtube.com/c/AntónioMachadokk seems its most used…
[quote=“Wired, post:5, topic:1220”]
not as realistic ?
[/quote] Everyday I prefer physical modelling to samples, but depends on end use of corse.
So what your saying is physical modeling is no better, ? Cpu , Ram wise? than romplers?
But keyman, I think Dhj is saying both are hard on cpu,
If you’re just playing back audio samples, that’s generally very light on CPU. However, if you’re doing extra processing that is itself computationally intensive (and convolution reverb is an example of something that’s very computationally intensive) then you end up using lots of CPU (for the reverb) and lots of RAM (for the samples). For example, if you baked the reverb processing into the actual samples, then you’d end up with just playback, which is very cheap.
As for physical modelling, it totally depends on what you’re modelling and how it’s being modeled. Pianoteq itself does not seem to be extremely CPU intensive.