Editing MIDI files

Myself, I'd much prefer that Modartt stick with what they know best and optimize it for its purpose. There are so many powerful DAW's and stand-alone MIDI editors that this sort of functionality is simply not needed. For my money, Reaper would do all that you ask for and then some for minimal (but worthwhile cost). Of course I respect you and your right to your opinion, but again, I'd rather not distract Modartt from upgrading and expanding the abilities of its current product.

Most might argue the DAW is the domain for this (I've been leaning that way mostly - maybe even posted like fubarable and skip did here something like "really rather time is focused on piano models") but that still being true, I'm actually also friendly to some feature creep which I think makes certain sense both for us users and to Modartt, even if just commercially (more happy users = mores sales =  more teams = more pianos over time etc.). Seems reasonable as a goal.

It's probably part of the routine to take time between pianos to evaluate the rest of the supporting infrastructure, code etc. Always going to be things to update, let alone add - so I'm certainly more fond of keeping to pianos as priority - but some time will always be spent on other items.

If Modartt do schedule a midi re-jig (only they will know what needs doing in the end) I'd just suggest from these, my dream list:

1.
Selections ('remove selection' CTRL to multi select & alter velo of selections)

2.
Velocity (overall up/down by % with some detail for selection and/or selected notes)

3.
Loop and copy/paste file or selection (make practice, composing & 'by ear' learning easier etc.)

4.
Quantize file or selections (very basic snap 4/8/16/32 maybe)

5.
Humanize file or selections (swing, rand)

Maybe they're obvious, like selections being a really globally helpful construct but maybe the least obvious might be velocity.

I'd actually rather like a tool for handling midi velocity because it's arguably the most obvious problem with midi in or outside of Pianoteq (well, as I see it - maybe others differ). Example: "If only I could just change that one note or segment this would be complete". In Pianoteq, I might just play it through again.. "If only that one.." do loop until "Ah" or "Why don't we d' do it in the DAW?".

Example Problem:

Load midi file - it's velocity may be bombastic (even just a section or a few notes).

Current Fix:

Change velocity curve softer or higher and maybe also dynamic slider - works for playback inside Pianoteq of whole piece but does not address small groupings (selections) of notes, nor does it allow to export the 'new' experience - the velocity curve doesn't implement any midi data to tell the DAW about new velocities (maybe I've missed something here - happy to learn otherwise) etc.

Post Feature Implementation Fix:

Apply a newly implemented magical slider (and/or number entry) to raise or lower the velocity across the entire midi file and/or better, to address note by note, selections of the midi file. This way that data will be able to save along with the new saved out midi file.

Result:

Maybe this would benefit a lot of users and new users who might fall in love with this, and take to composing or creating playable midi files more from inside Pianoteq in stand-alone mode. Seems to be a lot of Pianoteq users who would rather do without loading up a DAW !where possible! - I've been one of these, so I guess I understand first hand (for me, it's work-flow simplification at its heart).

Commercial motive if req:

Another must-have tool for building greater value into Pro, hasten upgrade path.

I do think there are always valid reasons to take some amount of time from piano modelling to bring new and definitively useful and commercially viable features to users without killing off the definitive advantages which make Pianoteq a one-in-a-million valuable tool for us all. Modartt have done this so well over time, I'm more confident than ever that whatever is added will be solid, sane and elegant, unlike myself - (Oof, ouch! Babality!)

There's feature creep, and feature creep...  I'm in favour of adding features other "working on the core piano models" to add more experimental sound design possibilities etc, although I can understand there is a risk of feature creep there.

This, though... is *way out there*.  The more features are added in this regard, the more apparent it'll be how many more would be needed... the complexity would quite simply explode, and for absolutely no good reason IMO.

Just find a sequencer that works for you... seriously...

If you're on Windows, Sonar is now free as in beer.  If you're on macOS, there's Garage Band.  If you're on Linux... well then you can do your own research...

Isn't Tracktion free as well now, or some version of it?

Reaper is a very solid choice.

Wait, wait, wait...I was not advocating for Pianoteq to include a full-blown DAW, not at all. Just some very basic MIDI editing. I am an improviser and (modest)composer.
If a take is not close to my satisfaction, I just discard it. My goal is just to correct a few blemishes on an otherwise great take. I understand everybody has their own applications, workflow, etc. Heck, if Pianoteq was STRICTLY a modelization program, they would not even include a recorder. However, I am glad it's in there! Thanks for the Reaper suggestion, I'll check it out

Very well said aWc,

it's good to imagine we can finish a great take inside Pianoteq itself.  This seems like a gold-standard kind of goal IMO. Given the existing tools are nearly there, worth a second thought, or third in all seriousness.

For many a DAW or ten is easy to choose and work with, each for specific reasons - or just a well worn path, but for many, it's just not going to be worth the attempt - there are barriers, learning curves and maybe even expenses, bugs and glitches, disappointments etc. to entering that picture with serious intent to touch up an otherwise great take.  Having problems doing this can have deflating impacts on brilliant humans who for just being born a certain year, prefer not to deal with that extra stuff (that's a plain consumer demand in every industry).  Consider how much of a learning curve sits before someone intending to become a top tier pianist - fast forward the lifetime of that effort to those ends - now tell that person they, at the age of 75 can just get with it and learn how to edit in a DAW.

I feel a quick "No" which I have said in the past, missed a lot of heart and soul, considering more about that in more recent years - seeing so much this problem more recently around me, and understanding, that's where I'm heading probably sooner than I'd like also. We all end up with that consumer profile [This oft' used headstone sums it: "Remember me as you pass by, as you are now, so once was I. As I am now, so you shall be, prepare yourself to follow me"] - cue spooky soundscape. In the wash, marketing should service entire life cycles, not just the new entrants and the hip, as important as that is of course.

Some will want to finish one piece per week, others 20+ per day etc. In any case, being able to knock this on the head, and out of the park, all from inside Pianoteq would be super helpful to all, not just those not wanting the DAW load, and also a super acceleration (not to mention probably too much, extra sales and other supporting marketing reasons).

So, really, advocating for tying up some usefulness already built in, to the point where learning another app is not necessary if not wanted (esp. for perhaps the most deserving of this, the target market identified above).  That's really not a bad thing to want at all, esp. in terms of not just work-flow but inspiration uninterrupted.  This might not bother some composers but there's a real art to the flow of playthrough or in some processes in composing - some stillness and non distracting pointy-clickety junk can go a long way.

So tools which allow us to continue in our 'flow' as musicians, is similar to work practices for coders ("Don't interrupt the programmers! it takes them 15 minutes to get back in the zone and that costs us money"). That's not airy-faery, it's hard reality.  Things helping with this are not to be underestimated (esp. those of us used to physical instruments in real time from early days, rather than maybe having started out with app interfaces and working with programs and loops within an almost exclusively digital tool-set)

xinaes, cheers!

Aha, why I'm glad to say, the answer is right under our noses, Pianteq

I think that's the crux - the answer is attractive to some and abhorrent or 'meh' to others.

Given that it's less likely for Modartt to remove the extant midi tools, it's therefore by dint of plain reality, more likely that the existing tools will at some point be upgraded in some even minor way.

We each see Pianoteq as a certain thing but even after years, I'm finding new depths - so whilst aware of the dangers of complexity, there's also the more obvious allure of finishing already useful tool set.

The sense to me, is that this is obvious to me now, after arriving over some years, more like a new spice in the soup, rather than as an abrupt singular realisation.

Really hope makes sense for those mining into the topic.

Hi aWc,

I've been using Notion for notation (rarely) preferring to work direct with midi on PC (piano roll in various DAWs like Ableton, Studio One and others, each with different reason).

Trying out Reaper now - first glance - the notation tools looking light, fast and maybe quicker to work with than Notion. Didn't expect so many niceties TBH.

Time will tell if I'll keep using it - but so far, I like my first notation effort and would say you might not be missing out on much from others software like Notion.

Maybe for more instruments (orchestras etc) another package might be better - haven't ever attempted that level of detail (outside of my own way of working tracks via midi/piano roll style in DAWs like Ableton).

One thing I instantly liked, placing and simultaneously drawing note length is way faster than my version of Notion where I have to do more traditional things like choose note length, then click to add it, then have to further add my own rests etc. That's fine and just like on paper, but way slower than Reaper's tools (but my version of Notion is maybe a few years old now to be fair - but I don't know how the current version of Notion works - I actually chose not to upgrade because wasn't massively happy with it).

Nice to have some of that kind of note placement automated in Reaper - probably one of the best input methods I've experienced (recalling some nice yet sometimes simple tools back to the '90s) to be sure, even if a little more clean-up editing might be needed - but like that it auto-adds beaming which seems appropriate too. OK, impressed really.

After this, would definitely say give some time over to working with Reaper. I can't see a reason not to at first.

Thanks for asking about it - might make me into another fan of Reaper and it might be a keeper - there are things which rhyme with Pianoteq too (good engineering, light, quick etc).

You're most welcome aWc.

Just realised I forgot to mention the pedal input in Reaper too BTW - it's so quick, no fuss, drag for length. In other programs it's hit-miss to say the least. All the best!

i've found MidiEditor to be very helpful and easy to use.  much lower learning curve than a full DAW.  i'm using it on linux.

https://www.midieditor.org/