[what would your perfect control surface look like and do?]

Sorry. forgot. I would also like a control surface specifically for the tasks that you do while tracking 

live performances such as in a live room or isolation booth.

as again the type of plugins and controls you use doing this job will often be different to that when doing other things.

for example. when tracking you may want just a little amount of processing and estimated effects

but not all the bells and whistles that you may need when mix engineering

also for live performance, you will have much of the effects and processing jobs done

and will not always need that much control over many of the plug ins that you use during tracking or mix engineering

so sure, different console for each would make more sense 

but perhaps not that easy to design as each individual has different preferences

but also due to the limitations of what protocols are available

[what would your perfect control surface look like and do?]

Ideally ii prefer to use control surfaces to control the many features in DAW

 

perhaps one for composing / sound design, that has controls for my favorite synths / samplers / virtual instruments

another for mix engineering, using absolute rotary encoders that use LED rings for visual reference

and another for live performance (as i can't afford some of the classic synths / organs etc.

 

I would like the option to be able to control all my favorite plugins which i generally use while mix engineer 

perhaps another one that i can use for mastering

if all is done inside the box that is

 

That would be my ideal studio 

control surfaces that i use every time, so i get used to how they look, how they feel and each element that is used to control

 

 

 

[what would your perfect control surface look like and do?]

Hello

i thought i would start a speculative forum post that asked people their opinion with regards to what

their ultimate control surface look like, fetuare and do.

 

This can be used by other contemporary control surface designers to get other people's perspective

please feel free to answer thank you

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

On 21/06/2019 at 10:05 PM, Zam said:

Hello

MCU is just a remote, standard protocol use a single encoder row with flip button to assign them to DAW function

The aux(send) count is dependant of DAW.

What I mean is that the protocol (at DAW side) can't handle more than 8 encoder at a time, if you put more you won't gain in direct function in hand as you have to send flip command to access DAW function and this will deactivate encoder that are not assigned to the actual selected function

Maybe with NG you can add conditional and script that automatically flip (it's a midi note) according to your dedicated row (let say "send one" encoder row) where any move of any encoder in this row engage the whole row (8 encoder)

But what will happen if you move two encoder in two different row at the same time...probably lag and overflow as you'll send continuous flip function...

Best

Zam

 

Quote

Hello again. Thinking again on this task. I wonder if anyone had tried by creating a midibox that has the normal amount of rotary encoders, i.e. 8. one per channel.

Then increasing one row at a time. And using methods of multiplexing combined with code. to send the info to the DAW, and at the same time receiving.

Or perhaps one midibox to send data to the in and a separate one to receive on the same board.

Still i am on the early stages of learning. I note however that the Novation Launch control xl with a DAW other than Ableton live (which it is designed to work out of the box with).

 

Quote

 

 

 

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

Hi Zan. Thanks for the info.

I was wondering however if one could get around these problems by not using LCDs

but using LED Rings for absolute encoders instead to give visual feedback

and keep it in update mode? or does the update only happen with a specific action?

and using motorised faders?

Thanks for help otherwise

I also see that SSL manufacture a nice small control surface, although fairly expensive 

(but not really when compared to other SSL hardware...., which is getting a great deal cheaper as time goes on)

Still out my budget.... 

and although well designed, still not exactly what i want...

https://www.solidstatelogic.com/studio/nucleus2

 

 

 

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

Also, just one observation with regards to rotary encoders

no matter how many you have on a control surface

a single human can usually only rotate two at the most skilfully any one time

with faders being more easy to move in numbers

due to the speed of the clock that embedded systems run at

even if several were to be moved and there is some lag

the lag often isn't that perceivable 

although please note i am not experienced with MIDIbox 

so I can not say from experience 

 

 

 

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

https://novationmusic.com/launch/launch-control-xl

Novation Launch Control XL, another good example of a generic controller of this type.

Although which appears to be more integrated than the Akai.

Interestingly enough, on Novation's site, i read that the Novation Launch Control XL uses Focusrite HUI protocol

which is used by a analogue/hybrid mixing design and control surface in one compact console

looks very useful, their HUI is likely a closed format like the Avid protocol that goes with their control surfaces.

 

 

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

Hello Zam

thanks for your reply and sure i understand. I wonder if the speed of the transmission is quick enough so that the lag isn't that perceivable? and so that it isn't too glitchy.

I see that there are a few people who have made Midibox's over the years that emulate mixing consoles. perhaps some of them have more than one Aux per channel.

 

I was thinking that if the aux's on each channel, were given different midi channels, then this would cause less problems?

 

I see there are one or two generic control surfaces (or mixers with built in DAW control) on the market that incorporates a number of Potentiometers 

into their design, some which allow more than one encoder per channel.

the Akai Midimix is one example. Which is great. although appears to be designed to be used primarily with Ableton Live.

Not sure if it can be used in the same way with other DAWs.

https://www.akaipro.com/midimix

 

[MIDIbox with banks of faders, M S buttons, 5 x Aux sends and 1 pan]

Hello 

Just a quick question. as mentioned before. I am new to MidiBox

I have read up a bit on what can be done with the Mackie Control Protocol and read that up to 8 aux sends can be controlled via a MCU compatible control surface.

If this is so, is it possible to make a control surface that has a fader per channel, buttons for solo / mute etc., a pan rotary encoder, and 5 aux sends per channel.

So as to allow control of all these features per track without the need to remap to assign?

Thanks for any help

[MIDI Implemtation for EUCON]

Hello. Thorsten

Sure, i understand entirely.

I suggested this particular solution for people who may be frustrated with the limitations of the Mackie Control protocol.

Although to be honest, i may not have a full understanding of what can be done using the Mackie Control etc.

I also understand the legal implications, although you may understand that i have less respect now for big global corps

haven had a number of innovative designs concepts stolen from me a number of years ago, after i contacted several pro audio

companies  with a ground breaking idea, for the exchange of a few bits of equipment to start up a small charity based recording studio 

But alas, all the companies knocked back the idea, but then 1 year later, all of them and more had designs based on my concept

but what was even more ironic, is that they missed out a few really important elements to the design which i didn't tell them about

so they released designs that weren't as good as they could be. Still, a number of the mixers based on my concept that they stole

won big design awards. and i didn't even get even a mention. That's how these people work. nothing is below them. 

So. me having to rev eng one of their badly designed devices so i can build my own well designed device

is what i am resulted to

But never mind, this is the way of the world and even more so in the entertainment industry. 

sure. no problem. i will not publish any copy write work that i do not have the permission to use

even if half the industry has plagiarized my ideas.... but that's their transgressions

I guess that is generally what happens to innovative people, i.e. Joe Meek etc.

but nevermind. live long be happy.

Thanks for your platform. You are very kind to give this to people.!

 

 

 

[MIDI Implemtation for EUCON]

hello

thanks for your advice, although, to be honest mate. i am not talking here about manufacturing but simply making a hobbyist control surface

that uses their protocol. From a MIDIbox mindset, i see EUCON as having massive potential.

I also realise that other people out there may also see the potential when its pointed out, and there are people in this world who do things

only for personal gain, and do not want anyone else to gain. Not saying that you are such a person, but there are people who do.

 

Anyway i could see that developing a control surface that mimicked the other manufacturers control surfaces wouldn't be that hard to create

especially as Cubase now has this Remote Control Editor feature which allows any control surface that is compatible to e mapped to practically any parameter 

in cubase.

 

So all a person need to do is get hold of one or more of the official control surfaces (Which includes Avid's Artist Series) and

simply sniff the midi data from the devices and then program their own device to send the same data,

As the drivers are given with the original devices, you don't even have to write software to run on PC
as long as your hard ware device outputs data that is the same in nature as the compatible desks

 

I highly doubt that Avid or any one else will investigate or prosecute a hobbyist who make 1 single control surface that uses their driver

as it would likely be bad for PR but also not be particularly cost effective. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cubase Quick Control Plugins controller]

Would the following do the job?

CORE_STM32 Module

AINSER64 (is this all i need or do i need an DIN and/or DOUT module?, as I plan to use absolute rotary encoders)

MIDI_IO Module? (or can i rely on the built in USB on the STM32F4DISCOVERY) or do i need a USB GM5 Module?

LCD Infos (just for added effect prior to using LED Rings)

Thanks

 

 

 

 

 

[Cubase Quick Control Plugins controller]

Hello

I was wondering if someone could help me with some basic advice with regards to what MIDI box modules I am going to need to get for my first learning experiment into the MIDIbox universe.

For my first experiment i would like to make a controller that can be used to control a specific plug in which i use in Cubase.

Lets say for example. a tape delay emulation plugin. Which i am fond of. For example. say the UAD EP 34

UAD EP 34

Which uses 6 rotary encoders (perhaps with LED rings), 1 x Fader and 6 toggle switches. Although i understand that Cubase only allows max 8 using Quick Control mapping of generic hardware to plug ins. I do not think that any more than 8 physical controllers can be mapped to plug ins used on inserts if the control surface is using the Mackie control surface protocol / driver. However perhaps i am wrong, as i am not an expert in this area. And you guys will likely know more about this.

Just to clarify, i was wondering 
which modules i will need to use to make a basic control surface to control the bellow plug in. I was also wondering if it is possible to connect an Ethernet output, which may be used at a later date when i can work out how to use the EUCON. Thanks

I will firstly need a core module.

What others modules do you recommend i need.

Do i need a MIDI module for MIDI I/O or can this be done by the built in USB 

I guess i need Analogue module as well?

If i were to employ LCD rings, would i also need a special module for this? Although my first experiment with MDIbox, i will likely not use LED rings,

so as to keep it simple, rather than make my own life hard

thanks for any help

 

[ST Electronics Nucleo 144 boards]

https://www.st.com/en/evaluation-tools/stm32-nucleo-boards.html

 

[ST Electronics Nucleo 144 boards]

Hey, I was wondering if any one considered using the ST Electronics own Nucleo 144 boards

for MIDI Box projects, as these also usually feature STM32 MCU's but also include a range of boards that

are equally cheap as the STM32F407G-DISC1 but which offer extra features with regards to input output

Just out of interest

thanks

[MIDI Implemtation for EUCON]

Hello

I was wondering if anyone had any information on the MIDI implementation for the EUCON protocol that is now used to connect

several types of control surfaces to Cubase 10, Logic 10, Nuendo and Protools 2019.5

 

I think these control surfaces uses Ethernet interface, which is different to the standards used by MIDIBOX

but can be used alongside Mackie Control and generic control surfaces.

So think of the possibilities, although in all fairness, i do not know if any one has been able to turn their hand to getting their MIDI box to control all the parameters in 

all the different plug ins at the same tume. so please forgive me for my ignorance.

 

I would imagine that there would be little info on this protocol, as the manufacturers would likely want to keep this a closed platform

http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/compatibility/EuControl-Compatibility

 

However, if someone already had a EUCON compatible control surface, I can't see why someone cant' rev engineer using basic mici sniffer apps

or even MATLAB Audio Toolbox?

apart from the obvious legal restrictions... but hobbyists.. may bend the rules a little for personal use?

 

[Controlling plugins in Cubase]

Hello,

Now i am a born again Cubase virgin, not haven used Cubase for 20 years. Started using Cubase 10 recently

and noticed that there are some really useful features that may or may not be useful to people who make MIDIbox control surfaces

to control DAW's.

 

Firstly, i noticed that Steinberg include features to "easily" assign 8 x physical tactile control (outputting MIDI CC messages) to various features in Cubase 

which include quiet a large array of plug ins parameters. This feature is called "Quick Control".

This, however limits you to only 8 controllers per track and 8 controllers globally.

 

Where i thought this was great and very useful, I also thought that it was very limiting. As some plug ins, or should i say quite a lot of plug ins, have more than 8 x things that need to be controlled. And in fact, if you are a pro working on a mix down, it isn't uncommon for you to want to control more than just one plug in per track.

Perhaps the same plug ins on each track but which still means that you need more than 8 controllers per track.

 

I did notice there is another feature that is used with Quick Control, that can also be used with some high-er end control surfaces, which I believe works outside the Quick Control

driver / feature.

 

This feature is called their remote control editor, and can be used up to 8 controls with Quick Controls

but outside quick controls, can be used with control surfaces that use one of the following select platforms:

Yamaha NUACE

Euphonix System 5 - MC

Avid Artists Series

WK Audio ID

 This feature has the potential to unlock a large amount of parameters in Cubase, so that potentially you can design the most interesting and useful

control surfaces ever.

Although, i am not a programmer or MIDI box expert, so not sure how easy it would be to work out how to rev eng their protocols or drivers

so that you can then use it to expand the amount of features and parameters you can control with your own control surfaces.

Anyone understand how this drivers for the control surfaces that are compatible with remote control editor works?

 

[daisy chain USB Midibox control surfaces]

Hello again

Thanks to everyone for their help on my question

and sure, i guess you guys are likely right with regards to 4 x Mackie control units to be used.

I am new to cubase 10  and MIDI box / electronics beginner so just getting my head around it all.

Used to use DAWs for long time, but previous versions and had a few years out. and things have changed.

haven't used Cubase since 2000... lol. so a little learning needed.

thanks again

appreciate the help

 

[daisy chain USB Midibox control surfaces]

Hello

I was wondering if any one could help

does anyone know if it is feasible to be able to daisy chain more than one Midibox control surface together

also

if someone was to create more than one control surface, each being different in design

and then plugged each of these in independently via USB

if the host DAW is cubase, and only allows one type of mackie Hui to be mapped inside cubase

does this mean that each Midibox will behave the same?