I'm pretty sure live set is saved by MIDI MSB/LSB+PC. So seems those would invalidate too. Any confirmation of this behavior?

Can anyone confirm that the current Live sets are saved w/ the new 1.6 update ?
Thx 🙂

I just upgraded to 1.6 (from 1.51), restored my presets from backup, and the program/MSB/LSB are all the same as before.

Hi
Here is MSB LSB PC for 1.5 and 1.6
You can see the new performances are insert (search by name the new perfs).
So the following performances have different program change for the same name.

Sorry, here is a link with the 2 files
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_gZueHzXLovRnROX09ycTA0V00

Thx 🙂

So pointers (that is live set, patch change in a DAW, etc) from MSB LSB PC : 063 066 120 to 063 079 115 are to be revised.
No problem for preset live set because the maj have already modified these pointers.
No problem also, of course, for pointers to User or Libs banks.
(For individual part change inside a performance substract 64 from LSB)

I guess if you're going to use Bank+PC references in your Live Set/DAW - then the new advice to prevent this sort of thing from happening would be never to point to presets. If you're going to point to something - even if you want a preset - just make a user copy of the preset (with no user modifications) and point to that user content instead. This would keep your DAW and Live Set happy even through the worst mangling of preset MSB/LSB+PC locations.

This is a general problem of dependencies (devil for programmers).
Montage make good job in this direction, because parts of a performance are inside the performance (no pointers).
Same for User/Libs motion Sequence, which are copied in the performance (no pointers).
However, there may be dependencies to user/libs micro tuning, user/libs curves, user/libs arpeggios and user/libs waveforms.
For this last case (waveforms) it is difficult to supress dependencies due to Memory limiits.

(In about a month, I give here a new version of my soft 'MontagePerformanceDump' with tools for analysing and reporting all these dependencies.
Cross ref of use of all wavs and arps, etc. I have already include new performances and effects presets of V1.6. There was also tool for browsing and reporting .X7 files)

Waveforms haven't been added to - so there's not really an issue here. Certainly if new waveforms are added (if that's possible in the architecture) then the numbering should stay static and just add to the end. This is how everything should work. Keep legacy static and add. This means you have to start with margin in your index to add more content.

I'm sure there's a good reason the deck was shuffled a bit. This certainly underscores the previous warning about performance maps in Cubase and how they will invalidate when you add your own content -- or if firmware decides to swizzle.

Not that tough to write a conversion utility to straighten out the X7? side. Haven't looked at Cubase files nor do I use Cubase like this -- maybe some 3rd party support can help there too. Suggestion to always go user performance masks this issue as well (no need for conversion).

After testing:
Version of .X7? file is 4.03 in V1.6 (4.02 in 1.51)
So Montage is aware of old backup version and he make convesion of pointers in live set if they need.
(And I suppose for favorite perfomances concerned also)
So there are no problems for live set (and no need for writing conversion utility)
The only problem is patch change in DAW.

Exactly, Thanks Jean for the files with performances with different program change for the same name.
Really usefull for me because I work a lot with Cubase where I make the patch/programchanges.

With Cubase I can work a lot faster, afterwards I make a midifile of the cubasesong witch I load into the montage.

It would be very nice when they have chosen teh MSB/LSB/prog.chance numbers for a sound that this sound always keep that number

It would be very nice when they have chosen teh MSB/LSB/prog.chance numbers for a sound that this sound always keep that number

Agreed. But as you have noticed they have opted to insert data into the list. And as you've noticed this causes havoc with any homemade Patch Lists.

Jean wrote:

Hi
Here is MSB LSB PC for 1.5 and 1.6
You can see the new performances are insert (search by name the new perfs).
So the following performances have different program change for the same name.

V2.0 is comming,.....
Does anyone know if there will be differtent prgram changes again? Jean????