The blurb you quoted also mentions "layered" which would not have Parts utilizing different piano key ranges. They'd overlap. And I think "same pitch" is before any additional offsets like note shift for example. So depending on your settings, the same note (piano key) may produce different pitches but otherwise track each other.

The blurb you quoted also mentions "layered" which would not have Parts utilizing different piano key ranges.

This compound portamento is a new area for me so I'm not sure I understand what you said.

Are you saying that 'same pitch' refers to ensuring that two different parts that occupy the same note range use the same 'last note played' value when applying portamento?

If so that would make sense since those layered parts would need to be in the same group. I haven't done any 'layer' yet.

What is your take on the element issue using notes outside the element range as part of the portamento slide? Do you see any issues or side effects of that? It just seems odd to me to take into account a note outside the range since you generally set ranges to EXCLUDE notes.

I'm just saying that "layered" is a context clue that what is being described is stacking multiple Parts on top of each other and all making noise with the same physical key (singular) pressed. When you start using Parts in splits, I believe you start straying from the description you quoted (no longer layered). And, I don't think there's anything wrong with splits and Portamento. Just that how that works is not detailed in this blurb.

This last note stuff isn't anything I generally concern myself with and there are Portamento modes that act differently with respect to what may have been the most recent (yet previous) note played. Therefore, I wasn't addressing anything about this in my previous response.

I haven't really internalized your concern or questions about the element ranges. I don't see a problem with "last note played" following the rules of your Part note limits while simultaneously elements sounding according to the element limits. If you wanted the limits to match up, you could restrict the Part note limits. There would be a rationale for either limiting or not based on how you wanted the Portamento to "act".

I haven't really internalized your concern or questions about the element ranges.

The issue is that portamento is taking into account notes that are NOT in the range of any of the elements for the part.

Here is an extreme example

1. INIT NORMAL (AWM2) - part note range is the entire keyboard.
2. define note range for element 1 as C1 - C1 which is just a single note
3. change the waveform for element 1 to 1296 which is a trumpet
4. enable element 2 and define its note range as C6 - C6 again a single note
5. there is no sound at all if you press any key(s) other than C1 and C6
6. Press C6 and you will hear a Portamento sweep of sounds.
7. now press C1 and the portamento sweep starts at C6 and continues through the keyboard down to C1.

Those notes between C1 and C6 are sounding even though they are not in the note range of either of the two elements. When sweeping up to C6 the piano waveform is playing for notes outside the range of element 2.

When sweeping down to C1 the trumpet sound is playing for notes in the middle of the keyboard outside the range of element 1.

I would expect that if you don't define an element for a particular note range it means you don't want tnose notes to sound. But that isn't the behaviour.

But I don't consider myself an expert musician so I am asking what an expert musician would expect. Would they want notes to sound that they did NOT program for?

I understand the scenarios, I was just saying I don't see a problem so I have some difficulty seeing it that way.

As mentioned, if you want to limit how far the target note stretches away from this note then limit the common note limits.

I don't see this as a bunch of notes between the target and "last note played" sounding. I see it as your target note being stretched out and aiming towards its rest value.

If you don't want that big of a stretch then close in the fence around a restricted range using common note limits.

As mentioned, if you want to limit how far the target note stretches away from this note then limit the common note limits.

The ELEMENT note limits are defined as only 1 note in my example. But the portamento stretches itself outside those limits if the last note played in the part was outside those limits.

I don't see this as a bunch of notes between the target and "last note played" sounding. I see it as your target note being stretched out and aiming towards its rest value.

Yes - but it is stretched out BEYOND the element note range.

If you don't want that big of a stretch then close in the fence around a restricted range using common note limits.

You don't seem to understand my last example. The fence IS closed in to ONLY ONE NOTE. You can't close it in any more than that.

1. You have one part
2. A Bass element at the low end
3. A flute at the high end
4. piano/other in the middle
5. you play a flute note
6. right after the flute note you play a bass note
7. the portamento for the bass note starts at the flute note all the way down to the bass note
8. the bass is sounding in the flute and piano range before it ever gets down to the bass range.

Do you REALLY want your bass to sound up in the flute range outside the element limits?

Yes - I understand you could do things the old way

1. define a separate BASS part with a note range on the low end
2. define a separate PIANO part with a note range in the middle
3. define a separate FLUTE part with a note range on the high end

For that 3 part scenario the portamento will respect the BASS range because it is a PART LEVEL range. But it won't respect it if it is an element level range.

Part of the presentation/introduction of the M series was how they took the 4 part CFX Concert performance and turned it into a 1 part performance with 18 elements.

The issue/question I'm trying to get across is that there are portamento implications when you do that because it will respect the old part note ranges but will NOT respect the new element note ranges.

Since you can define/use up to 128 elements in a single part people are going to be using note ranges at the element level to, effectively, try to do part separation. And I'm trying to show why there might be a problem doing that if portamento is involved.

I'm surprised you can't see the point I'm trying to make. It isn't about being able to do something a different way. It IS about showing that there can be problems if you do it the way I described.

I'm trying to demonstrate that there are now other considerations that you didn't have before.

The fence I mention is the (Part) common note limit. You don't have this limited, you have element note limits in play here. Those are two different note limits. If you want to stretch less, tighten up your common level note limits that show up in the standard home screen along side the velocity limits for the entire Part.

The fence I mention is the (Part) common note limit.

I'm not sure why you keep commenting on the part of my results that already show what you just said but haven't commented at all on the part I said could be an issue for some.

The very first part of the thread I already mentioned that Portamento respects the part limits. Reread my initial post and the 1st example I provided was to show that part limits are respected.

The rest of thethread is about it NOT respecting the element limits and the potential effects if you aren't aware of, or ignore that fact. And I gave an example of how that can come about if you try to use element note range as if they were part note ranges.

We can explore our knowledge to read your blog.