No. The flexibility means it will be more difficult to program.

If too tedious, you could use MIDI SysEx commands to batch set the pitch-bend ranges for each Part in a single operation. On the PC I would use Python or Ctrlr (ctrlr.org) to generate a quick "script" to accomplish this. That's not perhaps accessible to all - but does fall in-line with the historical role and responsibility of synth players.

Something between would be to use an editor such as the JM tools. It has provisions to "cut and paste" within the Performance editor and may be easier to deal with than the instrument itself. I cannot speak to exactly how much easier the tools would make this since I do not own JM tools.

Does this mean that if I made a Performance of an Ambient Pad and would like to dive the whole pad down 1 octave with the pitchbend wheel (-12) there's no way (or setting/menu) to do this on the MODX? Do I really have to set all the 5 Parts one by one to -12?

As you may know, Pitch Bend (En) is a Channel Message (along with Note On/Off (9n), Control Change (Bn), Program Change (Cn), and Channel Aftertouch (Dn) these are always addressed on the Channel in question. When you run into a system where multiple Channels are simultaneously in play, you are bound to run into this issue. (Global PB? I’m wondering how that would ignore the Drum Kit Part)

Each Part of the MODX Performance has its own PB Range setting. That is one of the things you have to deal with when extending real-time control across multiple Channels simultaneously.

The issue comes up when programming. If you are building a Multi Part instrument ‘from scratch’ you quickly learn the following skill: say your building a multiple Part acoustic piano where you intend to use more than the 8 Elements afforded by a single Part. You quickly learn to program the very first Element’s Amplitude EG and Filter EG settings, routing the Element through the Insertion Effect blocks, set PB Range, and other basic things all will share etc., etc., getting the Element to behave in the general fashion of the acoustic piano’s response. Instead of doing this same programming for each of the next dozen and a half Elements, (which would get tedious) you learn to duplicate all that work by COPYING the Element… then changing those things that make this Element unique, like the source Oscillator (Waveform). ((When editing an Element, hold [SHIFT] + [EDIT] = COPY/EXCHANGE))

It is much easier to build up like this. However, if you are editing someone else’s already completed work, then you really can’t complain about tweaking their finished piece (well you can, but understand, why). You simply have to marvel at how much detail they have put into the work. Things like the PB Range are likely to have been copied from the very first Part’s programming and was duplicated when that programming was copied to the next slot.

If you are editing a Performance that has 15 or 22 Elements across several Parts… you certainly will run into settings that must be dealt with at the individual Part level of the architecture. Each Part has its own PB Range, it’s own relationship with Velocity, it’s own set of Filters and Envelopes, etc., and while many of these can be dealt with in a group (that group exist in sections with 8 Elements).

This is a situation brought about to maintain compatibility with the previous decade and a half of the Motif-series (which had VOICES that maxed out at 8 Elements per). The advantage of the new architecture is the playable instrument can now be constructed from a greater number of components.

In the not-for-user-programming engines found in the Tyros/Genos series, the Super Articulation and Super Articulation 2 Voices are constructed from as many Elements as the programmer desires and can make legitimate use of… this is why you find these SA/SA2 sounds with tons of Articulation samples that can be recalled on demand (not just by pressing a Switch, but by how you play and trigger the keys).

Far, far, far too complicated a system to allow the end-user access to, these SA/SA2 sounds represent a “next-level” experience when performing — however, if you find working with just a few Elements tedious, then you’ll understand why this level of programming is shut off from the end user (at least in this time period in synth history).

For example, on a Super Articulation 2 Tenor Sax, when you play legato and play two single notes a certain interval distance apart, the Genos reaches for and plays a gliss that includes the notes in between (according to the chord in play), as you play around with this you start to realize that there are a ton of different Elements awaiting your fingers to recall. Playing a repeated note on an SA/SA2 Voice does not necessarily recall the exact same sampled Element over and over… there are algorithms in play that can alter recalled Element in an ‘organic’ way (cycle), so that you aren’t hearing an exact duplicate on repeated hits.

You get a glimpse of some of these types of things in the MONTAGE/MODX engines… but much of the real complex stuff remains out of user programmability (for good reason)… one such glimpse found in the MONTAGE/MODX is the Element morphing that goes on in the “Swell’ programming found in the orchestral brass sounds. Brilliant!

Typically, with samples, in order to trigger a brass tone with different harmonic content, you need to retrigger the key. A mellow brass tone when played softly and then an increase in harmonic chaos as you trigger the key harder — accomplished by velocity switching to a different sample.

But with the Element “morphing”, it allows you to layer four or five brass ensemble samples, each with a differing amount of harmonic chaos… from mellow to raucous! They all are triggered when you send Note-Ons, but which ones are sounding is determined by controlling Element Output Level via the Super Knob (that is, by Super Knob position)
This rather simple solution, means you can now control *when* and *how* the Brass Ensembles ‘swell’.

How this goes unnoticed is we have gotten so used to playing Brass Ensemble Swells that were completely recorded (which means you have no control over how fast the swell takes place, you kind of just make it work by following it) or you can play the most chaotic Elements through a Filter designed to allow more high frequency content out via a continuous controller. But trust me, it does NOT feel or sound the same. With the Filter-reveal you don’t really fool the ear/brain. Your ear/brain knows better…

If you shout and you record it as a sample, no amount of filtering or playing softly changes the fact that you shouted, your ear/brain will identify it as a shout played softly, or with less highs, but it is not a whisper… it is never a whisper, see what I mean.

A crash cymbal played hard is completely different in timbre from one hit softly — and our ear/brain is not fooled by simply changing the velocity, volume and filtering. You will always know that the cymbal was struck hard!!!

So it is with the Brass Ensemble Swells, you find that playing lightly you are playing the very rounded tones of mellow brass, but as you move the FC7 (Super Knob) towards toe-down position you are fading out the mellow tones as you fade in the more raucous tones… there are four or five crossfades in the Trumpet Swells, French Horn Swells, and Trombone Swells. You can accomplish the harmonic content change during a held chord!

Spend fifteen or twenty minutes playing all of the Orchestral Brass Swells using the FC7 to articulate the harmonic content change. Get your best “John Williams” going… the thing about have greater amounts of control, it comes with the responsibility of having to program it. Like in modular systems, when you add a component, you expect to have to program it (that’s why you got it).

One of them is how to change the pitchbend wheel range for the 'whole' Performance. I already did find out how to change a part individually but some Performances have a lot parts and there must be a way to change them all at once.
Anyone out there who knows the trick to do this?

No

So yes, this means you need to change each Part that needs pitch range adjustments.

As I said before - software may help to facilitate more easily automating this process for you. Still, the software makes use of no Performance-wide pitch bend parameter because it simply does not exist.

There are lots of cases where the instrument had to decide between ease of programming and flexibility. The more flexible - the more difficult it is to program. The GUI could have a bunch of "job" options to allow for "globally" assigning parameters - but this in itself increases complexity. I think your best bet is to purchase the right to ask a developer to add features to help you automate these "tedious" tasks. What I mean is that even if software like JM tools does not support this particular action (change all pitch bends at once in all Parts) - when you purchase a license you also buy some influence in the features of the software.

You can always add a suggestion to Ideascale like "Press [SHIFT] while touching a parameter should set parameter the same in all Parts" or otherwise allow for batch programming. If you think this sort of on-instrument batch programming feature is beneficial.

Thx for the explaining and the great tips!