I use a touch screen monitor.

Pros: it's just faster and more intuitive
No matter which Hardware controller use select, you have to map parameters to the available rotary encoders. By the time you have mapped three or four plugins you will realize that you were not being consistent in the way these are mapped and this is going to get confusing. By the time you have mapped 40 of them, you realize that you were right! Even if your Hardware controller has scribble strips, it's just kludgy. Reading the tiny scribble strips takes time...and it seems like no matter how many hardware and coders you buy, you will find a few plugins that have just a few more parameters than you have encoders for.

With a touch screen monitor you just look at the parameter you want to change, Reach Out And Touch It. You can move multiple parameters at the same time (up to 10) which is more than the two you can adjust using physical rotary encoders.

Cons:
If you desire the tactile feedback at a hardware controller, this won't do it for you. You have to decide if this is a valid trade-off for your work flow.

YMMV. My opinion is just that.
But I did try a Behringer X touch, Tascam us 2400, PreSonus faderport 8, and Studio live 32s before deciding on dual touch-screen monitors as my favorite. But I will say that depending on where my hand is at the time I decide to modify something , I do flow between the studiolive 32 and the touchscreen.

For instance if I'm currently swiping across the mixer to scroll up or down the channels, why reach back down to the hardware controllers to make a minor change when you're right there on the screen already? Conversely if I'm currently moving lots of faders at the same time, I will probably just grab a hardware controller if I want to change the EQ... only because it's closer and consistently mapped.

I think what I'm just realizing now is that you will learn to flow quickly on whatever you have if you just give it some time. But if I was going to give advice to someone I would say that I really like physical faders best. And just about everything else it's easier on the touch screen

I've got a BCR2000 and while it's great in concept, i find them to be so unreliable - i've owned 3 and each has been in for repair as either the knobs stop working and/or the MIDI communication breaks.

Even on their good days each knob has a slightly different feel so they're a bit inconsistent too, as a live MIDI synth controller i really like them as i'm more heavy handed, but as a DAW companion not so much because i'm wanting to be more precise and accessing far more parameters.

To get the best out of the BCR's you want to go for fixed assignments, label it up with stickers or print a template - and then create a user device in S1 so that everything is in a consistent position and you develop muscle memory. Or else, they aren't a benefit.

Really, the question comes down to what you want to use the control surface for. Is this to control faders, sends and pans? Or maybe synth/fx parameters? Or is only EQ and compressor adjustments enough? (i.e. like a console 1 style controller).

I love control surfaces and configuring them - it's a hobby in itself, and can swallow you up trying to find the perfect setup.

However, watch any video tutorial and you'll see people sitting with lots and lots of hardware around them, but the only time you see a controller used is if they're demoing that product. I can't think of anyone i regularly watch who doesn't use mouse and keyboard to work efficiently - and these are all people who're churning out great music.

For me, if you want to go outside of fixed mappings and be more dynamic, the device needs a display so you know which parameters correspond to your controls, and so utilise either Mackie, Presonus style protocols or go via wrappers such as NI Komplete Kontrol. OR you make a nice remote interface that sits pinned to the screen in S1.

I've attached mine for the Komplete Kontrol S49Mk2 - where i have 4 pages of 8 rotaries, and modified the standard NI device files - i can use the joystick to go:-
Up - Inserts
Down - Instruments
Left/Right - Cycle through the plugins on each insert.
And the two top right buttons give me VST presets next/prev.

You can cover a lot of ground with that style of mapping on any controller if you're happy to leave the remote ui open (External devices window):-



So that's super quick for me, and the Komplete Kontrol keyboards (When in MIDI mode) will respond and feedback the value of it's focused parameter (0-127). So far, this has been one of my most efficient methods of mapping a control surface as the KK also have a built-in mixer page that integrates with S1 so you can get to faders/pans too.

I'm currently now trying to decipher the NI DAW mapping to see if i can get the actual parameters to appear on the display direct from S1, would be great if i can pull it off.

So, you see, control surfaces can lead you down strange paths lol - i sit to make music and instead i spend hours researching MIDI data, Javascript, xml and mappings. If you're anything like me, avoid them and buy a high quality mouse and keyboard haha.

Oh, one other suggestion is the Nektar Panorama P1 - i quite like their DAW integration, shame the faders aren't motorised but i believe they do offer soft pickup in Studio One. You get Nektar integration plus standard MIDI templates on them.

Great advice mikemanthei - thanks for your input. So are you using Studio One Remote on a tablet for your touchscreen? Or are you actually stretching across your desk to touch your monitor?

I think the tablet approach has some real merit. In my case, I am mostly recording my own stuff so being able to sit back from the desk, with a guitar in my lap, and adjust the parameters of a virtual amp and pedals make experimenting and getting sounds far more fast and fun than messing about with a mouse. Like many people, I would prefer physical knobs but with the way amp sim plugins operate, 10 amps each with their own virtual knobs to map, plus a couple dozen stomp pedals, you are gonna run out of knobs or get overwhelmed quickly.

I think the controller that intrigues me most at the moment is the Midi Fighter Twister. 16 endless push encoders, each with LED feedback. Apparently, each can be configured to operate as a second encoder when pushed, so you actually have 32 at your quick disposal. Then, with its 4 banks, it could actually function as 128 encoders if you want it to. Seems pretty flexible, I'd love to hear from anyone who's tried it.

Faderport 8/16 is still hard to beat. Has the deepest level of control over Studio One. Edits their own and third party plugins very well and can be set up to edit synth parameters. Soft take over is standard also.

What puts me off the faderports is how you have to do so much on the faders, i can't imagine adjusting cutoff or frequency adjustments on EQ with it.

However, it's one of the few controllers whereby you can bank through pages of plugin parameters, right? That's a pretty big deal and something that MCU has lacking in S1.

Yes banking through parameters is standard now. Plus the fact they can apply new features through firmware updates. Using sliders to adjust synth parameters is fine. (especially if you own a Roland JD800) ADSR settings are actually nice with faders. Filters no problem etc..

Its a well built and designed product and in a large mix becomes invaluable. Mouse operations decrease by a huge degree. You can even move events around on the timeline.

ATOM also has a surprising amount of control over Studio One. If you need drum pads that is. But if you don't ATOM SQ also offers a very high level of control over Studio One. Provides pad and keyboard functionality too.

All these have a reasonable level of control over other DAW's and fairly deep level of control over Ableton if you use it as well.

Yes, for controlling and automating the parameters of plugins it's great.

However, one issue I have with the Faderport 8 is that you can't control the parameters of the instrument itself. With the "Edit Plugins" option, all the parameters of the plugin are automatically mapped to the faders (fantastic). Does this option exist for the parameters of the instrument itself? For example, the dynamics and vibrato of a strings virtual instrument?

I've resorted to changing the Faderport to MIDI mode (hold the 2 shift buttons simultaneously), and from there you can map the faders to parameters yourself. However, this is not ideal, as when in MIDI mode, you lose all the other buttons (play / record / click / etc).

Have I missed something or does this option exist?

I don't own a faderport, but it just sounds like you haven't got the instruments focused for the controller maybe? At the top right of the instrument make sure you have the faderport selected and is yellow.

Also, i've noticed with some controllers the instruments aren't mapped, only the effects are - so you may need to create your own mappings once focused (If no parameters show). Very easy to do, if you've not already.

Thanks Leon. I'm afraid I can't see any such options in the instruments themselves. I'm using Logic Pro X, maybe that's the issue?

Yes, for the moment, I've resorted to changing the Faderport to MIDI mode and mapping the parameters to the faders myself. However, this does limit the use of the Faderport exclusively to the mapped sliders. All other button, knobs and sliders become redundant in this mode.

I imagine you will need to set the faderport to Mackie mode and set it up in logic as an MCU device. Not a clue how well it maps though as you don't have the v-pots like a regular Mackie MCU device - and they can be crucial for Mackie style commands.

I'm pretty sure that to achieve this would be to use the flip function within Mackie protocol so that faders become v-pots, and you would also need to familiarise yourself with what buttons on the faderport link to the original Mackie/MCU functions (i.e. you need the button which takes you into instrument mode).

Perhaps it's worth asking in the faderport section of the forum so you get better help than my guesswork?

What's wrong with the MIDI Fighter Twister firmware? I've been using one for a few years now and you'd have to pry that thing from my cold dead hands. At least...until something better comes along.

So the MFTwister isn't perfect but it's damn near. The labeling is the big issue IMO. Also, I can't figure out how to get Studio One to play nicely with the MFTwister in Endless Rotary Encoder Mode. Seems like S1 just doesn't dig the values the MFTwister transmits, but that's not the MFTwister's fault. The solution there is to use the encoders in CC mode. Problem solved!

So like I said, the only downside is the lack of parameter displays. So you have to develop a system and mentally keep track of it. For instance, knob 16 is always my mix knob. If I'm using compressors, knob 1 is always Threshold, knob 2 is always Ratio, knobs 3 and 4 are attack and release. If a compressor doesn't fit that model, that's ok, I either skip an assignment or make it work. Knobs 13 and 14 are always input and output gain. Build up consistent mappings and you don't have to think twice.

Now, I've mostly been using it in Reaper with an extension called CSI, and that takes control surface integration (what CSI stands for) to a whole other level. CSI allows multiple MIDI devices to function as a unified surface. It works with the MFTwister encoders, even can transmit different colors to the MFTwister buttons. Studio One has above average control surface functionality, but Reaper+CSI is several levels beyond it.

Funkybot wroteI can't figure out how to get Studio One to play nicely with the MFTwister in Endless Rotary Encoder Mode. Seems like S1 just doesn't dig the values the MFTwister transmits, but that's not the MFTwister's fault. The solution there is to use the encoders in CC mode. Problem solved!

There's several options in Studio One for the incoming data, but some of them you have to edit the control surface device files by hand. Is it relative MIDI CC that you struggle for S1 to repoond tot?

If so, in user devices config files you only need to make a change like:-

<Control name="Knob1" title="Control1" type="knob" options="receive nofeedback public">
to
<Control name="Knob1" title="Control1" type="relative" options="receive nofeedback public">

And that will set up the control surface in S1 for relative messages.

However, you're sometimes best to use 0-127 style mappings, as if you go into the external devices window (In the external panel in mixer console) you can put the MF device into MIDI Learn mode (Button at the top left of the window) and then when right clicking each knob on screen you have more options, where you can get S1 to send (transmit) the linked value to your controller. (Or you can do this in the userdevice config files too).

That way the controls will update on your MF as you swap between devices/presets etc. and when you move the knob it will be relative to the current value.

So like I said, the only downside is the lack of parameter displays. So you have to develop a system and mentally keep track of it. For instance, knob 16 is always my mix knob. If I'm using compressors, knob 1 is always Threshold, knob 2 is always Ratio, knobs 3 and 4 are attack and release. If a compressor doesn't fit that model, that's ok, I either skip an assignment or make it work. Knobs 13 and 14 are always input and output gain. Build up consistent mappings and you don't have to think twice.

Have you tried pinning the external device window so it remains open in view? I find that to be very helpful as you can resize the window so your parameters display in a 4x4 grid to match your device, and it shows you the current parameters so you can focus on that when tweaking controls.

AngusY wroteOr should I just buy a used BCR2000 and be done with it?

I have a few BCR's here and with that custom map. It's definitely one of the cheapest and most flexible experience I had.

What I don't like is the lack of parameter feedback (what controls what), since the 100+ parameters a BCR can hold are hard to memorize over all those plugs. Sure pinning the mapping window helps but costs a lot of valuable screen estate.

Since Studio One now also support pages (this way you can assign the same CC independent to multiple parameters of a VST) the amount of controls the BCR offers maybe is an overkill if you don't mind to bank back and forth a little. Benefit then is only a row of e.g. 8 controllers is shown in the mapping window.

I'm not very impressed by the build quality of the BCR. Yes they are cheap, but I have two here with encoders that act a bit unreliable and that's just frustrating when tweaking. I rather pay a little more and have sturdy controls. It's a shame because the BCR is a highly flexible device and really fun. The 14-bit resolution is just ace.

Overall I think you can make any MIDI capable device with endless encoders work for you in Studio One. Unfortunately there too little documentation at hand so it's process of trial and error and costs time.

niles wroteSince Studio One now also support pages (this way you can assign the same CC independent to multiple parameters of a VST) the amount of controls the BCR offers maybe is an overkill if you don't mind to bank back and forth a little. Benefit then is only a row of e.g. 8 controllers is shown in the mapping window.

Any idea how to use that system for generic controllers though? As far as i'm aware only the faderports can do it and i presume that's a part of additional coding via a javascript module or something.

It's something that really interests me, but not sure how to find any info on it as Presonus don't appear to publish any official guidelines to user devices.

leonseaman wrote

niles wroteSince Studio One now also support pages (this way you can assign the same CC independent to multiple parameters of a VST) the amount of controls the BCR offers maybe is an overkill if you don't mind to bank back and forth a little. Benefit then is only a row of e.g. 8 controllers is shown in the mapping window.

Any idea how to use that system for generic controllers though? As far as i'm aware only the faderports can do it and i presume that's a part of additional coding via a javascript module or something.

Just add 'pageable' to the options of the controls you want to be pageable.

Like:

Code: Select all

    <Control name="myControlName" title="myControlTitle" type="button" options="pageable">
      <MidiMessage status="Controller" channel="1" address="#1"/>

Banking can be done with:

Code: Select all

    <Global>
   <using device="Editor/Paging">
      <Toggle control="myPrevPageControl" param="prevPage"/>
      <Toggle control="myNextPageControl" param="nextPage"/>
   </using>            
    </Global>

Thanks a million for that! Can't wait to try this now.

Edit: Wait.. just realised who you are, you're the guy who done the BCR mapping with the 14 bit mapping, right? I used that for a long long time till my BCR's decided to fail. Add another dose of thanks for that.

I wonder how doable an MCU device would be now with page support for parameters.... hmmm.

Console 1 in MIDI mode works great as a generic DAW controller as well. You do lose the native OSD plugin mode but you can control the standard C1 VST plugins with it still.

There are actually quite a few Console 1 users who use it this way instead of in the native mode.

First off- thanks to everyone who has replied so far. I am pretty new to Midi controllers but I am learning a lot from this discussion and getting some great ideas. Only problem is I now have about 100 tabs on my browser open with controller reviews, Midi articles, and Youtube tutorials.

I think a tablet option has merit and I plan on trying it before choosing a controller, but like many of you I prefer the tactile control of knobs.

leonseaman wroteI've got a BCR2000 and while it's great in concept, i find them to be so unreliable - i've owned 3 and each has been in for repair as either the knobs stop working and/or the MIDI communication breaks.

Very helplful to know- and probably enough to convince me the BCR 2000 isn't for me. I actually bought one online last week but the seller flaked out on me which prompted me to start this thread.

leonseaman wrote Really, the question comes down to what you want to use the control surface for. Is this to control faders, sends and pans? Or maybe synth/fx parameters? Or is only EQ and compressor adjustments enough? (i.e. like a console 1 style controller)..... one other suggestion is the Nektar Panorama P1 - i quite like their DAW integration, shame the faders aren't motorised but i believe they do offer soft pickup in Studio One. You get Nektar integration plus standard MIDI templates on them.

At the end of the day, my goal is to find a workflow for plugins that allows me to quickly switch between plugins on a track and tweak various parameters without a mouse. I just don't find it musically inspiring to be clicking and scrolling with the mouse when I'm trying to play around and find great sounds. In other words, it's more important to me during the song creation stage than the mixing stage. That said, I can totally see the benefit of having physical controls during mixing so I suppose a controller that could do both would be ideal. Your suggestion of the Nektar Panorama P1 looks pretty great actually (T4 looks great for a keyboard version too). Nice compact form factor, usb class compliant, and display screen. Do you have any experience with it? Has there been confirmation from users that the "soft takeover" actually works? If so, I can't find it in the forums. Also, when you are tweaking a parameter, does the screen tell you which parameter it's assigned to? If so, that's a pretty fantastic looking feature set, and the company seems to be one of the few emphasizing integration with S1.

One thing I am trying to understand is the concept of "banks." The main reason I am pretty hung up on having a lot of encoders is for my amp sims, so I can have a bunch of stompboxes up and tweak the parameters on each one as I look for sounds. In this use case, I would quickly run out of encoders if I only had 8. For something like the Behringer X-Touch mini, it has only 8 encoders but two "banks." So does this mean that S1's Control Link will actually "see" this a 16 different encoders?

A similar option to the X touch mini- probably better - is the Kenton Killamix Mini. For that one, it has 9 encoders, plus a joystick. According to their website "A single press of one of the 9 encoder knobs will select any MIDI channel from 1 to 9, (or pressing two knobs selects channels 10-16) LEDs indicate which MIDI channel is currently active... With the 9 channels available at the push of a single knob, you effectively have 81 endless controllers and 81 buttons at your fingertips in a very compact unit. (or 144 at the push of two knobs together)." So does this mean that S1 Control Link would see this as 144 different encoders? Is this basically the same thing as "banks" ? Do the Nektar Panorama or the Komplete Control series have similar functionality to allow for mapping several dozen parameters within a single plugin, by having multiple banks or channels for the physical encoders?

(Separate question - what uses would you see for the Killamix joystick in S1? The website says "The self-centering joystick sends information on the currently selected MIDI channel. It can be set as either two controllers (19 & 20) with centre position value 64; as 4 controllers (19 to 22) with centre value as zero; or as 4 switches, sending value 127 at its extremes on controllers 19 to 22, depending on direction." )

leonseaman wrote For me, if you want to go outside of fixed mappings and be more dynamic, the device needs a display so you know which parameters correspond to your controls, and so utilise either Mackie, Presonus style protocols or go via wrappers such as NI Komplete Kontrol. OR you make a nice remote interface that sits pinned to the screen in S1.....

.... the Komplete Kontrol keyboards (When in MIDI mode) will respond and feedback the value of it's focused parameter (0-127). So far, this has been one of my most efficient methods of mapping a control surface as the KK also have a built-in mixer page that integrates with S1 so you can get to faders/pans too.

I'm currently now trying to decipher the NI DAW mapping to see if i can get the actual parameters to appear on the display direct from S1, would be great if i can pull it off.

So, you see, control surfaces can lead you down strange paths lol - i sit to make music and instead i spend hours researching MIDI data, Javascript, xml and mappings. If you're anything like me, avoid them and buy a high quality mouse and keyboard haha.

Doesn't having a remote interface that sits pinned to the screen in S1 take up tons of screen real estate? I have only a single monitor so I don't think that would work for me... even on something like the X-Touch Mini or Killamix Mini with only 8 or 9 encoders, I think with multiple banks the encoders displayed on screen would be more like several dozen, correct?

Your last comment is totally on point. I am new to Midi but a closet geek and could easily see myself spending hours trying to map things and make them work just out of curiosity. Actually sounds fun, although maybe not all that productive from a music-making standpoint...

Thanks again for your comments- extremely helpful to me and I'm sure others as well.