There is no longer a \"levels\" function in GigaStudio. However, you will notice that when you load an old GigaSampler performance that utilizes this feature that an instrument assigned to MIDI channel 10, level 2 (for example) will now show up on MIDI channel 10, *Port* 2. You will also see that MIDI ports 1 and 2 are \"linked\" (this is represented when the little green \"1\" and \"2\" lights are lit in the upper-left hand pane).
Any time the ports are \"linked\" this means that any and all MIDI messages destined for one port will be sent to the other port as well.
This has the highly undesireable effect of making GigaStudio into a 16 channel MIDI device whenever all four ports are linked. You can\'t link specific MIDI channels, only ports, so any time you link a port, you effectively remove up to 15 MIDI channels from action.
The \"Getting Started\" document makes no mention of this that I have found... so here we go again with Nemesys\' regular philosophy that it\'s easier to ignore 1000 support calls than it is to write a paragraph of documentation.
My experience with GigaStudio so far is that it is totally riddled with bugs and little gocha\'s like this one. I only hope Nemesys can survive this. Apparently they let their alligator mouth overload their hummingbird .
Thanks for your reply. This disturbs me greatly because I use this function often especially to make organ sounds you need to be able to stack samples. I have said it before but all I wanted was more voices of polyphony out of this , which I got, but the struggle I am encountering makes me want Gigasampler back which I have used successfully for a year.
I\'m intrigued by what appears to be your growing dissatisfaction with Nemesys/Gstudio. I haven\'t got my copy of Gigastudio yet (ordered direct) but you\'ve got me wondering just how bad the programme has turned out to be in terms of bugs. Am I going to be working fluidly with the new machine, or putting out fires every twenty minutes?
I guess the question where the rubber meets the road is this:
Is GigaStudio worth the trouble? My answer is an ambivalent \"yes.\"
If I simply had unlimited funds to work with, I\'d go with a roomful of hardware samplers. But I don\'t have unlimited funds, so I\'m stuck with GSt. (Not that putting together a real GSt setup is cheap... I have over $5000 sunk into it to date).
Yes, there are dozens of bugs in GSt, however none of them seem to stop the show for me just yet.
No, the performance isn\'t that much better than GigaSampler. But, there is the additional polyphony and the FX routing (which, BTW, is superb) which makes it worthwhile, IMO. (Another BTW: I don\'t see that any of my samples load \"five times as fast.\" I can pretty much go make coffee when loading an orchestral performance... and that includes growing and roasting the beans)
There\'s always a tradeoff in software between getting a product to market in a timely fashion and making it defect-free. I don\'t mean to rag on Nemesys for this problem. I\'m glad to have GSt as it is... but what it is, is really a Beta product, not a final version of any kind. Personally, I would never let a product out the door with this many obvious defects... but we in the Pro-Audio user community are used to dealing with a helluva lot of bugs. I think Nemesys knows this and was actually counting on it. The important fact is that GSt sounds GREAT.
I\'m somewhat amused when I think back to Joe of Nemesys\' post that GSt was \"finished\" and the programmers were \"celebrating.\" If those programmers worked for me, it would be a few months before the celebrating would begin. I don\'t get to psyched about celebrating what Jimmy Carter would call \"an incomplete success.\"