Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

MPE and MIDI note per channel support

The new MPE MIDI controllers from Roger Linn (Linnstrument) and Roli would be great if tied to a synth like the DeepMind. The DM12 has a lot of expressive possibilities with so many modulation destinations. It needs to support the new controllers that are capable of delivering that expressiveness. Actually, Behringer should get into the MPE controller market themselves.

There are very few hardware synths out there that support MPE right now.

http://www.rogerlinndesign.com/implementing-mpe.html

I would also like to see this in your upcoming Oberheim clone.
MichaelAllen Contributor - Level 2 2017-10-18

2017-10-18

MPE and MIDI note per channel support

The new MPE MIDI controllers from Roger Linn (Linnstrument) and Roli would be great if tied to a synth like the DeepMind. The DM12 has a lot of expressive possibilities with so many modulation destinations. It needs to support the new controllers that are capable of delivering that expressiveness. Actually, Behringer should get into the MPE controller market themselves.

There are very few hardware synths out there that support MPE right now.

http://www.rogerlinndesign.com/implementing-mpe.html

I would also like to see this in your upcoming Oberheim clone.

  • 0 Kudos
  • 9 Replies
  • Reply
Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

I would love to control the deepmind 12 with my haken continuum , for that to happen though, I would need pitch bend to extend to + / - 48 semitones for a half size////Smiley Very Happy
Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

Can we get responses to our inquiries please?
Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

Yeah. Really disappointing.
I gave up posting here.
Highlighted
Volunteer Moderator

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

As written elsewhere all product feature requests and issues are being read by/forwarded to the respective developers, but there is no guarantee of any official developer feedback as they are really super busy.

When it comes to feature requests it is also important to share a use case and why a specific feature is important for a vast majority of users and to what extent a certain implementation should be considered.

E.g. MPE support is a highly broad request so given the high number of controllable parameters in the DM it is almost impossible to mpe-enable all of those parameters. In such a case it is highly important to show what parameters should be considered for future updates and why they are important for a majority of users.

Please keep posting your requests and concerns here. This is the place where we best can track things like this. This is next to impossible to do in e.g. gearslutz where the SNR is way too high.

If you for some specific reason require official feedback to a question, then the absolute best thing is to create a support ticket with Care support and they will try their best to take care of you.

All the best,
/--robert
Robert Lofgren | Did you find my post helpful? Give kudos and/or mark it as a solution!
Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

In response to your statement ...

MPE support is a highly broad request so given the high number of controllable parameters in the DM it is almost impossible to mpe-enable all of those parameters


There is just a small list of per-note messages that are separated out, listed below in bold.

The main question regarding MPE is the independence of each voice that sounds, which is related to the internal architecture of the synth and is something we don't know (but Behringer does). Does each voice have a separate VCA, filter, etc? How much of the per-note signal path is independent from another note and how much is shared?

An answer to this question would be great, at least then we would know whether MPE is even feasible. (The manual talks about the architecture of the synth but not on a per-note level.)

Meanwhile, Oberheims were set up with completely independent voices, each voice was a separate hardware card, and even if it's too late for the DM12, it may not be too late for the Oberheim clones being designed, and other future Behringer synths. MPE is easily implemented if voices are already independent. It just becomes a routing issue. But development of this sort requires an early design decision, which makes lack of ACKs on this forum frustrating. Time keeps ticking by.

As far as wide use, Roli is selling a lot of MPE keyboards and Roger Linn is selling a lot of Linnstruments. There are very few hardware synths that support MPE and a very feature-rich synth like the DM12 would be great. The expressiveness it adds is truly phenomenal.

From Roger Linn's site:

If you are a developer of MIDI sound generators and would like to add MPE (Multidimensional Polyphonic Expression) compatibility, this page will give you some help. MPE is pretty straightforward:

Each note's messages are sent on a unique MIDI channel, rotating through a contiguous block of "Per-Note" channels. The per-note messages sent over each channel are limited to Note On, Note Off, Channel Pressure (for finger pressure), Pitch Bend (for x-axis movement) and CC74 (for Y-axis movement).

Messages that apply to all voices (such as Sustain Pedal (CC64), Volume (CC7), Program Change, etc.) are sent over a separate "Master" channel. An alternative implementation is to use no Master channel and to send these common messages over all of the Per-Note channels, in which case the receiver will recognize all messages other than the 5 per-note messages as common to all voices, regardless of the channel over which it is received.

So the main work is:
1) routing each incoming Per-Note channel to its own voice, listening only for the above 5 per-note messages, and
2) routing all other received messages, regardless of channel, to all voices.
Highlighted
Volunteer Moderator

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

I’ve asked the question and they are well aware of MPE and are looking into it. But unfortunately, it’s highly unlikely that they’ll ever implement MPE or similar features for the DM-series as it’s a massive undertaking & rework.
Robert Lofgren | Did you find my post helpful? Give kudos and/or mark it as a solution!
Highlighted
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

Hi Robert,
thanks for the reply.

>issues are being read by/forwarded to the respective ...

So can you explain why features that were requested long time ago by many users still are not implemented: e.g. shortcut to bypass FX, enter Midi notes in Ctrl-sequencer etc ?
Feature requests seem to be implemented in a sporadic kind of way.

It seems kind of useless to post anything here, either issues, which don't get answerd, or feature requests.

So, for me, I'm done here, sorry.

Best regards,
Stephan
Highlighted
Triber Moderator

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

Stephan Kümpel;141678 wrote:

>issues are being read by/forwarded to the respective ...

So can you explain why features that were requested long time ago by many users still are not implemented: e.g. shortcut to bypass FX, enter Midi notes in Ctrl-sequencer etc ?
Feature requests seem to be implemented in a sporadic kind of way.

It seems kind of useless to post anything here, either issues, which don't get answerd, or feature requests.

So, for me, I'm done here, sorry.

Best regards,
Stephan


Hi Stephan,

We thank you and everyone else for taking the time to post your product suggestions here in the forum and sharing them with us. While we may not always able to respond to every single feature request or reported issue posted, we do take user requests seriously. Our developers have been doing their best to provide regular updates in order to squash bugs and add even more functionality to these robust synths for the past year. I Myself and plenty of others agree that the developers have been doing very well in regards to providing updates. By my count there have been 5-updates in the last year alone, all of which have taken direct feedback from users, whether from here, other forums and social media to help make these improvements

That being said, not every request or suggestion might be able to be implemented. Feature requests need to be taken into consideration to see what can be done in future firmware/ hardware improvements. I'd also add that just because a particular suggestion hasn't been implemented doesn't mean it was ignored or dismissed, or that it will never come. Our engineering teams are having to prioritize their work load to handle these in addition to working on new products that are coming down the pipeline.

We appreciate that fact that so many of you out there have taken great interest in the DeepMind 12 products and to want to see improvements made to make them even better. The most recent firmware(1.1.2)/app(1.1.4) updates that were released last week are further proof of this and I expect more improvements will continue to be released down the line as well. As Robert mentioned already our development teams are aware of MPE support and are looking into it, but it sounds likely that this won't happen with the DeepMind synth products anytime soon. (if at all) We are however still taking suggestions and working to fix what gets reported here the best we can.

Thank you all for your understanding, and please don't hesitate to contact me directly here in the forum if there's anything I can do to assist you.
Michael Lapke
Contributor - Level 2

Re: MPE and MIDI note per channel support

Michael Lapke;141899 wrote:
As Robert mentioned already our development teams are aware of MPE support and are looking into it, but it sounds likely that this won't happen with the DeepMind synth products anytime soon. (if at all) We are however still taking suggestions and working to fix what gets reported here the best we can.


Would updating the OS to accommodate polyphonic after-touch be a good compromise? ATM the only polyphonic modulation destination is velocity. Having polyAT would give third party developers a chance to produce per-note tuning interfaces. Guitar mode, alternate tunings, per-note pitchbend, etc.
(I'm not talking about local-keyboard polyAT, as this is obviously not possible)
Individual midi channel per-note would achieve a greater goal, but is presumably a more taxing retrofit.

Thanks,
Colin