Push backs and other thoughts

The first pushback I have heard from even gigging musicians against even trying Gig Performer offstage is “it’s too complicated.” It’s not as easy to use as plugging in a pedal. It’s also not utterly constrained by that pedal, but I digress. Especially if seconds to tone the first time you use it is your only criteria.

But if you have a half a dozen or more VSTs configured for a specific result and you can smoothly fade to that result from one of the others you have prepared even in the middle of a song, then the criteria ought to be expanded. Never mind all the other features and the mind bending ones coming in v5. You can get to those.

The second pushback is “it’s too hard to understand.” It isn’t. What ‘it is,’ is impossible to understand if you haven’t tried yet, therefore refuse.

The third is “it’s too expensive.” Compared to what? An infinitude of custom digital instruments you craft yourself, in minutes or even seconds, any of which you can summon with a single MIDI controller gesture, or a pedal press? I think anyone who thinks Gig Performer is “too expensive” does not understand what it delivers.

And that leads to the final and determining objection; learning curve, They DO NOT want to invest the time and effort to learn. Anything, At all. Not even a little. Because it’s too hard and too expensive.

That’s the opposite of the correct thought process because it enforces the limitations you have without Gig Performer,

Bizarrely these are very often people who make a pretty big deal about having a philosophy of freedom in general.

The correct thought process is asking the question “what do I want to end up able to do” and then answering it by dragging and dropping and clicking a few menu items here and there once in a while. Then you save it and use it as desired. That’s the correct thought process because it allows you to achieve your use case.


It does cost as much as a fancy new pedal. It also gives you, for example, meta-presets with a noise floor that picks its teeth mockingly with the fancy new boutique pedal. Even from a modest audio interface. Take your pick.

It crushes the features of all pedals with the heartlessness reserved for the initial explosion of a supernova. Oh and it runs all arbitrary VSTs too. Sequencers. MIDI files and backing tracks. Whatever you need. Read the spec sheet. Not in the spec sheet fine use the GPScript. Still no go? SDK for C# have at it. But you still don’t want to try it? Want to use free software or something? Best of luck with that. I hope nothing crashes.

I’ve literally run thousands and thousands of hours of synths, samplers, effects… you name it. Some VSTs crash that’s true, and some of them can take Gig Performer with them. That isn’t Gig Perfomer’s fault.

There’s a thing called value. If you want to max out the value in this endeavour of human ingenuity, I think Gig Performer is the way you do it. And that opinion is formed by my couple of years now of really doing crazy, arguably stupid things with it. It doesn’t care.


I think this deserves a dedicated thread. :slight_smile:

[1] it’s too complicated.

I think this was just ‘fear from unknown’. So instead of admitting that, they simply disregard a highly intuitive solution as ‘complicated’. But it is ridiculous to say that especially with all the documentation, tutorials, YouTube videos, etc.

[2] “it’s too hard to understand.”

I think this is a lousy excuse for not having any will to either try or learn something new. Funny enough, we’ve seen older musicians coming from hardware to Gig Performer and enjoying it a lot. Step by step.

[3] "it’s too expensive.”

I think that guys who claim that have a vague thought of VST hosts and what they might do. “Chain some plugins”, “Host a plugin”, and that’s about it. So instead of doing a little research on the website about features and benefits, they immediately say ‘expensive’.

[4] learning curve

I don’t understand this one – did they actually download a trial version and played with it? Or simply assume it would be a ‘learning curve’. Maybe they expected Gig Performer to be a DAW?

While I understand that there are music makers who look at their gigs as a job and “office”, I think that a true artist must have this feeling of ‘creation’. That ‘something’ is simply in their blood. That urge to try to bring life to something new and lovely, that inner child that wants to play and discover new realms.

So… Meet Gig Performer! :slight_smile:

There’s a thing called value. If you want to max out the value in this endeavour of human ingenuity, I think Gig Performer is the way you do it. And that opinion is formed by my couple of years now of really doing crazy, arguably stupid things with it. It doesn’t care.



And get off my lawn you kids.


I have updated my last post.

I think it’s far simpler than this. The only question that ever mattered to me was “Does it solve a problem better than the other options?” The answer is completely subjective but if the answer is ‘yes’ and you can afford it, then buy it and get on with it.

We should write a

Gig Performer Myths

blog article!

1 Like

Are there any other concerns if you recommended Gig Performer to someone? (Thank you on that)

I think some people have vague concerns (which aren’t actually related to Gig Performer) about it “not working” or “having trouble” using Gig Performer under Windows. In my own experience this is a completely invalid concern but it’s a suspicion I think some people might hold onto from concerns many years in the past.

This concern I suspect comes from the underlying reality that Apple maintains all conceivable control over all their hardware (and most driver issues) and Windows is just a different planet from that standpoint. But at the same time, I think maybe a bit of qualitative analysis of your support requests will show that despite the OS most often the problem ends up caused by operator error of some sort.

Also there has to be a ratio of GP users who report no issues, and that’s an indicator too.

There’s also the reality of VSTs and even MIDI devices that have, um, unexpected behavior compared to most other MIDI devices, either set by a maverick-ish developer or set and forgot at some point long in the past by the owner of said device - which dovetails with the accidental confluence of conditions that can sometimes be causal.

For the most part, people who have everything running rarely report anything so for the most part, the only time you see reports are when people are having problems.

That gives a very skewed perspective that doesn’t really match reality.


In other words the vast majority of the time (way high percentage) everything just works. Nobody ever reports “everything always works fine” though.

Because they’re busy USING Gig Performer however they do.

Nobody ever sends reports anywhere either about how well their light switches work in their home!

1 Like

I have already gotten one other local keyboard player to ‘drink the Koolaid’ of Gig Performer and I think there is a big opportunity to expand that footprint!


You will always hear more complaints than positive feedback on anything in this world. The squeaky wheel gets the oil. That being said, there are so many different ways that musicians use GP that may speak to them better than other methods.

I would challenge any GP user to start thinking in terms of “What is the problem I’m trying to solve?” VS THIS IS MY PROBLEM AND MY SOLUTION. I know this from experience going back to GP 2.x.

1 Like

At some point I need to write a blog article about applying “top down” vs “bottom up” methodology to Gig Performer.

Although one can clearly do almost anything one wants, I think it’s far easy to develop a gig file top down rather than “pre-building” a bunch of infrastructure and then trying to apply the same infrastructure to every song.


With the experience, I noticed that I am always rebuilding almost the same construction for each song again and again. So I built a template with 16 Chameleons that I use as placeholders. Now, I almost only replace the Chameleon plugins by the plugins I need. I don’t want to come into the details here, but this makes my Rackspaces design much quicker. Also as my panels are very similar each other, I don’t need to think much when I need to change something while playing, everything is always at the same place. In the community forum I observed a few users taking weeks or months building an overcomplicated template even before starting to play with GP. I don’t think this is the best way to use GP and not my approach. My template is clearly not designed to meet every possible need, just the ones I’ve found over time to be mine in the vast majority of cases. And of course, I wouldn’t be happy to use someone else’s template, which wouldn’t necessarily meet my needs and would be somewhat equivalent to using a hardware synthesizer workstation. With GP I am free to do what I need.


This is a really great discussion topic because I think just anecdotally to me, most of the entries in this forum are from people having some sort of difficulty, usually (but not always) at the start of their own learning curve with GP.

+1 David for ‘GP Dev Reveals Leveled-up Rackspace design lessons’…. article.

I feel like I’m ready after a couple of years now of opening a blank gig and starting from scratch to audit myself and confront what bad habits I’ve ingrained. Seems like… playing scales…

Anyone who has ever had to start wearing glasses for the first time in their life and never has had to before, knows how humbling that feels, but that outcome is still the best thing for it.


To use the Force, something do you must :slight_smile:


New gig file open again must you.