Replacement for MainStage?

Wow, I replied with an alternative a couple of hours ago and someone has removed my post. Apple mustn't like competition.

Hi

Use 32Lives from SoundRadix for those plugs that cannot be updated to 64 bit, or use Vienna Ensemble Pro.

CCT

Madddcow wrote:

Wow, I replied with an alternative a couple of hours ago and someone has removed my post. Apple mustn't like competition.

I too want to know what the alternative is.

Please post it up again, Madddcow.

Are you going to delete this post, too, APPLE?

JD321 wrote:

Madddcow wrote:

Wow, I replied with an alternative a couple of hours ago and someone has removed my post. Apple mustn't like competition.

I too want to know what the alternative is.

Please post it up again, Madddcow.

Are you going to delete this post, too, APPLE?

I wouldn't regard what I'm about to mention as substitutes for MainStage because MS is the only software for Mac with its particular focus. However, Ableton Live is far more resource-friendly compared to MainStage, plus it uses VST in addition to AU. I haven't kept up with the development of Live but it's probably compatible with 32-bit plugs.

When I first started out with a software-based gig-rig at the beginning of 2009, I used Live because MainStage had only just been released and was still in its "infant" stages...it was a worse resource hog than it currently is. However, MainStage and Live each have a different focus and later in 2009, I eventually moved to MS as my platform of choice...although I'm still flabbergasted about how resource-hungry it is. For the life of me I can't understand how an innovative and well-funded company like Apple can't streamline MainStage to be far more efficient.

I've haven't used Reaper very much but a lot of my peers swear by it as an alternative to MainStage. However, Reaper's focus is slightly different again and it's closer to Logic than MS. On the occasions I tried it, I found Reaper to use more system resources than MS (esp CPU) for my particular requirements and it was an easy call to stick with MS. However, I recommend trying Reaper as a possible alternative to MS because the dev is incredibly open and responsive to feedback, and Reaper is updated fairly frequently. I just had a quick look at the Reaper website and it apparently uses both VST and AU. As with Live, Reaper is probably compatible with 32-bit plugs but you'll have to look into this yourself.

Yours is an excellent post, for your taking the time to provide detailed feedback, explaining differences and the pros and cons of the different software. Since all of this is new to me, I find it daunting at times as I fumble along. Right now, I'm not at the point of worrying about resource limitations, because I don't (yet) rely on 3rd party VST's; the instrumental sounds and effects of the Apple solution(s) will for the most part, work for my purposes, I think. I'm trying to see if it's even possible to get to 'point B' from my newbie status 'point A', and in an efficient manner.

What I'm trying to do is, somehow, embed chord information in an accompaniment track; whether that track is a midi 'software instrument' or analog track (I think) doesn't much matter (at least, for now). Ideally, the chord changes in a song could/might correspond to marker positions in the song. I want to send that chord/chord change information to an external midi controller (e.g., a midi keyboard, or touch panel instrument). If the midi controller can interpret a chord change in a song, then new chords could be automatically played, regardless of the midi key pad note being triggered, and be updated automatically as the song progresses. Alternatively, maybe the computer software (MainStage or alternative?) could take the same midi chord notes being sent to it over and over, but change (transpose) them to the actual chord demanded of the song at that point in time. Yes, this in essence, would be an even more dumbed down 'instrument' than the current 'smart keyboard' touch instrument that limits all notes being triggered to a particular scale.

Is there software out there that will do what I just described above (if MainStage won't)?

We're getting off-topic (for the benefit of future readers) but it's possible to program chord information for songs although it's not always an easy task, especially if the songs change key or use chords that are very foreign to the primary key. As a basic example, you can configure chord plugins that will play an Am7 (chord ii in G maj) if you play an A on your MIDI controller (instead of A7 as chord V in D maj) but what I think you're asking is significantly more tricky. If I understand you correctly, you're looking for an option like a chord AI (artificial intelligence) which analyzes the MIDI data and automatically plays/transposes an appropriate chord. The MIDI data may have specific chord info embedded (which can then be played/transposed by the chord AI), or the chord AI analyzes the melodic/harmonic structure of the track/s being played and then plays/transposes an appropriate chord. Is my understanding of your request correct?

You are sort of understanding what I want to do, but it is much simpler than that. I'm not requiring Logic (or MainStage) to analyze the chord structure being played real-time (although, evidently that capability in Logic has already existed, but was taken away 😮, see this thread Is there any way to embed chord information in a song? ).

Instead, I just want a previously embedded chord instruction, possibly embedded in the global marker track; MainStage would then transpose the midi notes being played to match the current chord being called for.

I will go ahead and try and explain what I want to do in more detail. It, in effect, will provide a very simple 'dumbed-down' instrument that anyone can play. It will be mind-blowing. Apple could already easily implement this, based on what I have seen so far. They will probably do so in the future (and try to make money off of it), or they realize that it will be too easy for people to play music, and it will in effect, kill the desire of the next generation wanting to tweak and fumble through their complicated software, and so they will hesitate to release it.

Possibly you have tried the Touch Instruments Chord Strips on the iPad, to understand what I'm referring to.

When I first experienced these chord strips, it was shocking. I now possessed in my hands the ability to 'play' a 'piano' in a manner that sounded like what would have previously taken hundreds to thousands of hours of training skill. It didn't sound 'mechanized'. When listened through headphones (or decent PA speaker amplification) it sounds like someone actually playing the piano. And it came for practically 'free' in GarageBand for IOS.

However, in trying to use this as an instrument in a Live setting, one immediately runs into a problem. There are only eight chord strips, pertaining to the song's Key signature, available at any one time. Most songs use more than eight chords, when all the variations of a particular chord (e.g., Gmaj, Gmaj7, Gsus2, etc.) are included. The chord strips can be customized. But that takes too long to carry-out while playing Live.

It seems simple enough for Apple to implement the means by which these chord strips could change, on-the-fly, based upon an 'instruction' given to the program. Now if the software could change these chord strips on-the-fly with a human instruction (pushing a button), then they should also be able to change on-the-fly per reading a chord progression 'notation' previously embedded in the song.

If that is possible, then the next step, would follow: if the chord strips can change on-the-fly, automatically, then why would we need more than one chord-strip, and why should the human have to worry about making sure he is playing the right strip? Just display only one chord strip, which the human plays over and over. The midi notes being played by that chord strip would change automatically (be transposed, if you will) to the proper chord notes corresponding to the particular chord the song is calling out for at the position in the song. Voila!: the every-man's, dumbed-downed instrument that, nonetheless, sounds like someone is playing in perfect tune, complicated multi note chords, with chord inversions chosen at will (just like on the current chord strips), with articulation (as touch velocity is already interpreted on the current touch chord strips) without note errancy!

While one is 'strumming' and 'plunking' this new global, generic chord strip 'touch instrument' described above, that always plays the correct chord, but in a manner (whether two-finger, single finger, bass notes include or not, loud or soft, etc.) chosen on-the-fly by the musician (to give it that Live-playing, human-feel), the musician could be using his other hand (or pedals) to occasionally throw-in arpeggiation, or flim-flamming of the chords being played, to add further Live-playing variation! (And of course, the other hand could be occasionally pushing buttons that cue-up song position, etc.).

I have both MainStage and Ableton... and I have NO IDEA how Ableton could ever count as a replacement for MS. It's an amazing program, don't get me wrong, but the two are so vastly different, one could never act as a substitute for another. Ableton is like an instrument, in itself. Its focus is creating and triggering loops, and being "played". MainStage is basically a traditional workstation in software form. Case in point: I'm a gigging rock keyboardist, my band plays 5 hours every night, I have a good 120 patches (one for each song) loaded into MS, complete with some helpful chord charts and midi regions. We don't use a setlist, so I have to switch at the drop of a hat. From what I've seen, each "song" in Ableton would be a different file, loaded individually, usually a good 5-20 seconds... that's long enough to clean a dance floor.

The reality is that Ableton can probably do most of what MS can do and a lot more, but the problem is, since it's focus is broader, it's definitely not as fast and feature-rich for the specific area that MS can do. Unfortunately, the number of EDM DJs to live keyboards out there seems to be about 4:1, so live hosts aren't exactly a hot market item right now. Most keyboardists drop $3000 on a hardware workstation that's about 1/10th the power of their $1000 laptop, which is why I got smart and went with MS.

Now... if I ever went back to Windows, which I have considered on occasion, it looks like I'm screwed, because there's no programs like MS that I can find for a PC.

shattre wrote:

I have both MainStage and Ableton... and I have NO IDEA how Ableton could ever count as a replacement for MS. It's an amazing program, don't get me wrong, but the two are so vastly different, one could never act as a substitute for another. Ableton is like an instrument, in itself. Its focus is creating and triggering loops, and being "played". MainStage is basically a traditional workstation in software form. Case in point: I'm a gigging rock keyboardist, my band plays 5 hours every night, I have a good 120 patches (one for each song) loaded into MS, complete with some helpful chord charts and midi regions. We don't use a setlist, so I have to switch at the drop of a hat. From what I've seen, each "song" in Ableton would be a different file, loaded individually, usually a good 5-20 seconds... that's long enough to clean a dance floor.

You obviously haven't used Ableton. It can definitely be used as a substitute for MS in terms of live performance software but where it falls down as an ideal substitute is that it lacks the configurable GUI. You're correct in saying that Ableton's focus is creating and triggering loops but it can easily do a lot more than that. I initially used Ableton years ago because the early iterations of MS v.1.x were terrible with high latency and high resource usage whereas Ableton has always been far superior in those areas. In fact, MS is still best-used with whatever the most recent MacBook Pro 15" models are due to its resource-intensiveness. Running MS on a 13" machine is just asking for trouble with high CPU usage, high latency and audio issues whereas you could easily run Ableton on the same machine without those problems. MainStage is simply not very efficient.

Also, you can configure song patches in Ableton just as you can in MS i.e. you certainly don't need to load a separate file for each song....that's crazy.

Regardless, I still think MS is one of the best options for many musicians, provided it's run on a machine that's powerful enough for anything you want to do.