Simple Midi Audio Routing Issue

This should be an easy one for the folks here.

Let’s say I have a plugin (Arturia DXV) with a sound (ie, patch or preset) I want (it’s the metallic synth sound for Money for Nothing).

I use it on the lower octaves and (I am advised, so let’s assume) the same sound is used for upper octave chords.

But, to my ears, I need the lower octave part to be relatively louder than the upper octave chords.

So, a simple way I could handle this is just duplicate the DX5 (with the same “sound”) and route the two DXV instances to different audio channels. Then I can control there relative volumes.

I just wanted to explore of there was a more “elegant” way to do this with two outputs from the same DXV. (If it requires getting into the weeds if the DXV, I’d just use my “inelegant” method. I don’t think I am running into a cpu issue or ram conservation issue).

Just wanted to check if I am missing something obvious.



Why is this not elegant?

It is. I just was considering if the “easy way” I envision is the optimal way; if there is a way I could split the single DX5 output. (I am guessing I could, but that would requiring learning that particular synth.),

Basically I was just “double checking” if I was missing something.

But the way I was planning is perfectly fine. It accomplishes what I need.


If the sounds were perfect sin waves you could use any number of different EQ’s to boost or cut above or below whatever frequency you wanted. But you’re not using sin waves, so boosting or cutting the highs or lows is going to change the character of your lower range notes.

If it’s a velocity sensitive synth you could manipulate the note velocities to change the volume, but there’s a pretty good chance that’s also going to change the tone or envelope of the notes.

Personally, I think running two separate instances of the plugin is the elegant, easy, intuitive, and probably optimal way. So congratulations, the first thing that popped into your head is the right thing. Never question your instincts again.


Hah! Thanks, Vindes, for your (stern) fatherly advice! :wink: