You can use a very simple scriptlet to pass midi messages from Wiring view to widgets or GP System level.
This allows you to do further things from your midi control file, such as changing rackspaces/variations or songs/parts if your midi file player is in the global rackspace.
Nope — a trivial scriptlet attached to your MIDI File player will inject everything into the local GP port
You can then learn a message from MIDI File Player and control a widget with it
This opens up all sorts of automation possibilities.
Thanks rank13 and dhj for the “approach review” and the code sample. I’ll try it out.
As an aside, I dove into the scripting a little last night an it looks very capable. Took very little effort to script a PC to CC translator capable of doing a defined round robin of CCs based on repeated presses of a PC controller. That exercise did generate one question, once a scriptlet is compiled into a wire-able object, is that object reusable in another rack space or gig level project? Or does the code need to be cut-n-pasted and recompiled for each?
Scripts are context specific.
Many thanks for the detailed explanation. It’s pretty exciting for me to see the light at the end of the tunnel for the “how to play guitar, be on an expression pedal and switch amps and trigger a looper all at the same time without falling down” dilemma. GP has opened up all new possibilities.
Maybe you’ve seen these already, but a few example gig files that use scriptlets to automate things with a single footswitch:
I’m a MS guy that’s in the trial phase trying to decide if I’m going to make the switch. One of the issues I’ve run into relates to this topic. While I totally get why trying to rely on midi mapping via midi learn directly with the plugin isn’t the best approach, I’m wondering if there is a way to create those mappings through GP without having to build out a panel with widgets?
In MS, you can bypass adding screen controls by simply going to the assignments and mapping panel and adding them directly. This is a big plus when using a hardware controller like a Nord stage to control an organ plugin because there are already properly label knobs buttons and sliders for organ controls, so mapping them without using a screen control/widget saves a lot of time and screen real estate.
There is SO MUCH more you can do with widgets than just mapping one controller to one plugin parameter. Experiment a little and see that it really doesn’t take that much time or effort to set up a very functional rackspace.
So the answer is no?
In the newest release of GP 4.5, you can hide the widgets when you aren’t in edit mode. That will alleviate your concerns of screen real estate.
You simply go into Edit mode, drag the widgets you need into the panel(s), map your controller to each respective widget, and select Hide in the Widget Properties screen, under the General tab. This process is barely any more time consuming than what you’re doing in MS. You only have to do it once, so it really isn’t much of a consideration.
Ok, let me explain in a bit more detail what I’m trying to do.
Virtually every knob button and slider on a Nord Stage 3 sends midi. In MS, in a few minutes, I can add every one of them at the concert level without ever having to create a screen control. Once they are all in place and labeled (unmapped) I can connect those controls to whatever I want on a patch-by-patch basis in a matter of seconds with just a couple of mouse clicks.
Building a master panel of widgets containing all of the possible controls on the Nord isn’t feasible, so I’m trying to figure out how I might possible work around that.
Meh - I just created a new video where I demonstrate how I learned 9 knobs on my APRo in seven seconds
Save the panel or export the rackspace and reuse it for all your patches.
That’s certainly possible in Gig Performer, you can have (say) a 4U panel or multiple panels for all possible controls, but for what reason? My guess is that you don’t need all possible Nord’s controls for every song, you insert widgets that will be relevant for modifying your sound live.
You can then use additional features such as variations, group widgets (for example for a cross-fade effect), link local widgets to the Global ones, use the Rig Manager, use OSC with widgets…
why not ?
i disagree here and say : it is !
My own HW controller setup is WAY more busy for example.
but ok, i do not really deal with laptops. So i have no clue how things would look there.
i just had a quick look at the actual Nord stage:
the “to me” most feasable way would be to split the nords front panel into two panels on GP.
these could both be 2U high (with a big screen at hand) , or 3U.
2U would turn out dense, but could be what i´d do. BUT: i have sayed big screen, lol.
On a laptop, better 3U, at least.
having the widget system in place, forces the folks who want to deal with busy frontpanels,
to create specific workflows, in sake to allways have a good and quick overview.
if i had the nord as my controller, would i probably allways use a full mirror of all its HW controls, as my widget template, and just map from there what i need.
then from there: would i add “NO” batches to any control that is NOT mapped.
respectivly i had the NO batches as part of my panel template allready inclouded.
another very feasable way would be:
load such “mirror panels” into every gig, every Rack. (can use template gigs when starting fresh)
Then, use “your” (sayed, dual-) "mirror panel just as a widget copy&paste playground.
Create empty front racks ( same size !), and just copy&paste the widgets you want to use, into your fresh and empty front racks.
—> these are pasted in fact into the same location on the other (to paste to) panel.
there are several types of workflows that can work out best.
the: load full mirror panels, but then: only copy & paste the wdigets actually needed - into same location on a fresh panel- and keep these copyed widgets also there at these locations, in sake of a good overlookability/readability of what “is there”, is a doable way to work in my opinion vs. using a nord Stage.
personally, i do NOT create nice panels !
my focus is on: the panel must support me as quick as possible, in understanding, which hardware control is doing what !!!
having 8 nicely lined up widget controls, would not tell me, which HW controls are actually mapped to them.
but these things differ based on our different setups.
some folks just have 8 faders and 8 knobs on their controller, which creates a completly different ground situation.
yes, the aspect of beeing timeconsuming remains. at least for me it does.
Can´t wash it off the table.
personally, i´m nevertheless VERY thankful that the widget system is in place !
in place AS IS .
it is so so powerful !
it opens up so many doors.
“you” might not need the functionality now, but “might” dig it later.
felt same as you in my first days with GP 
I appreciate the video. It’s still not quite what I’m wanting, but it’s enough to get me going to see if I can work something out. Thanks.
Well, GP is not MS 
Trying to make GP be like MS will not really work very well, the paradigm is different.
But one of the features of rackspaces in GP is that you see specifically and only what you actually need for a particular song. So, for example, if you have a song and the only real time control you need for that song is the cutoff filter of a synth plugin, you don’t need a “master panel” representing all the controls of your keyboard, you just need a single widget in the panel so you map just that to the desired control of your keyboard.
For me there is a main difference between GP and MS:
The workflow in MS is like working with a virtual mixing desk.
The workflow in GP is like working with a modular synthesizer, therefore you have a much greater flexibility.
To that particular difference, we don’t think that musicians should have to be mix engineers and have to deal with buses, aux channels and so forth.
Just connect your stuff together and you can see exactly what will happen. And that process got even faster with the new ability to insert blocks between other blocks.
It also turns out that there are certain kinds of things that are easier to do with a visual approach. See this blog article
An another question re using widgets or not. If was to say make a set of widgets in a rack that control everything in Arturias Hammond.
If i then want to use the Hammond rack ive created in a song, can i simply import it into the song, and still have control of everything ive mapped with the widgets?
In a song part you always reference to a Rackspace variation.