The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Considering a Touchscreen System?
Old 14th August 2015
  #1
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Considering a Touchscreen System?

THE SOFTWARE

The only software-only solution out there that provides an excellent solution for turning a DAW into a "mixing console" is DTouch, from Devil Technologies. DTouch is similar to the software portion of the Slate Raven, and it has support for Windows and OSX, and two DAWS so far -- Pro Tools and Cubase.

Of course, because it is software only, you'll need some hardware... read on.

THE SCREEN

I went with a 42" Insignia LED/LCD TV from Best Buy, because I wanted something rather large, but not too expensive. The 42" was chosen over a 40" because Best Buy offers a 5-year "in-home" service agreement on TV's 42" or larger. NOTE: My research found that Insignia is made LG.

There are TV's out there in the 24" - 55" size that are 1080p. But, please keep in mind that while most computer uses of a screen seem to be better with a higher resolution, with a touch system, that is not the case -- because your "cursor" is your fingers, and you cannot scale the size of your fingers. Plain `ol physics, there.

I chose to use my touchscreen mounted at a 25 degree angle, so my secondary screen was not too high, yet the angle of the touchscreen was not too shallow. You could try anywhere between 15 and 45 degrees (the Slate Raven is at 40 degrees).
NOTE: Someone recently asked me about a general issue with touchscreen use called 'gorilla arm syndrome' -- I do not experience issues with my arms, anymore than I would with a real console. Note the pic in my posts (the one to the left). Years ago, I experienced "gorilla arm" issues while using an old CAD system with a lightpen... but that was because the screen surface was vertical. So, don't use a touchscreen that way (like some people seem to first assume)... use it more horizontal, like a mixing console.
For test purposes, I used some stiff foam pieces underneath the monitor to prop it up at various angles, on a flat table surface. Once you are happy with the angle, you could build a simple frame from wood to prop it up in place.

THE TOUCHFRAME

I had collected some info for another GS'er a few months back, about the dealer in China, who can sell PQ Labs G4S and Zaagtech XSlim frames, and a US dealer.

I have a Zaagtech XSlim v5, and the V6 is supposed to be faster (there might even be a newer model now).

DTouch officially supports the PQ Labs G4S, so that is what I recommend going with now. Although I have been happy with my Zaagtech XSlim V5, and you can save some money with the Zaagtech XSlim, it is not officially supported for DTouch.

U.S.:
Peau Productions
PQ Labs G4S, 40", including 3mm tempered glass, starts at $631 (several months ago):
http://peauproductions.com/store/ind...roducts_id=517

China:

Pricing PQ Labs G4S 40" Overlay IR Frame(you will have to ask for a current quote):
  • Basic version is 6 points touch, and 40" 6 points we can give you $513
  • Standard version is 12 points touch, we can give you 40" 12 points of $581
  • Plus version is 32 points touch, we can give you 40" 32 points of $705
NOTE: I would not get hung up on getting too many touch points -- you only have so many fingers. Also, more touch points can slow down response. I would suggest going with 6, or 12 at the most.
Shipping cost is $60 to USA without glass for 40" size -- using a heavy duty cardboard shipping tube.

NOTE: Get the tempered glass for the frame made at a local glass shop. You can get the edge polished, too -- ask you local shop what they offer.

They will allows PayPal payment, but they ask you to cover the PayPal fee. They will also do Western Union. Ask what your options are.

Here are links to the G4S drawings:
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-55''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-55''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-46''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-42''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-40''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-55''SAssembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-32''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-27''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-24''Assembly.pdf
http://www.defi-tech.com/G4S-21.5''Assembly.pdf
Company/Sales Info:
DEFI TECH LTD.
Vanessa
Tel: +86 (0)158 0517 2700 (China),
Skype: vanessalovejob
E-mail: [email protected]
[email protected]
Alibaba Showroom: Nanjing Defi Software Technology Co., Ltd. - Computer & Networking,Industry & Business
Official Website: Interactive Floor | Floor Technology | Surface Technologies | Interactive Projector | Interactive Floor | Interactive Wall | Interactive Tables
NOTE: I have been very happy with the way Vanessa and her sales/support crew have helped me, but because of possible language barrier issues -- to help avoid confusion and frustration:
  • Be very succinct in your communications.
  • Use numbered bullets for your questions.
  • Ask for each of the numbered points to be addressed

Last edited by brucerothwell; 14th August 2015 at 05:36 PM.. Reason: Forgot some points.
Old 17th August 2015
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Hi Bruce. Thanks a lot for taking the time to post this! You've helped me out a lot already, which got me off on my own research path.

There are a few points that I feel deserve reiteration, as a misunderstanding could lead you up the wrong path:

- More touch points is not better for a single user application. If you want more than one person to be able to freely interact with a touch screen at the same time, this is when more points becomes necessary. When you're the only pilot flying the plane, aside from the odd occasion where you may try to bring 8 faders down at the same time, you're probably not likely to need more than 6 points. In all honestly, 2 or 3 points would cover 99% of single pilot applications.

- Listen to and accept the reverse logic that applies to Touch screens - LOW DPI/PPI is good, high is bad. If you want to work with your DAW with your fingers, don't think of the screen like a TV or a Monitor; think of it as an interactive two dimensional console. Ideally, you'd want the moving sections of your virtual console to be similar in size to a real console - to suit the ergonomics of physical interaction.

If this is the first time you've even thought of using a touch screen to control your DAW, then it is worth mentioning that you should no longer think of your DAW in the same way. All of its functions will be the same, of course, but it's the way that you access and execute them that will differ. Watch the overview video DT did for Protools. You will see what I mean.


Thanks again, Bruce.

Cheers
Old 17th August 2015
  #3
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zigziglar View Post
- More touch points is not better for a single user application. If you want more than one person to be able to freely interact with a touch screen at the same time, this is when more points becomes necessary. When you're the only pilot flying the plane, aside from the odd occasion where you may try to bring 8 faders down at the same time, you're probably not likely to need more than 6 points. In all honestly, 2 or 3 points would cover 99% of single pilot applications.

- Listen to and accept the reverse logic that applies to Touch screens - LOW DPI/PPI is good, high is bad. If you want to work with your DAW with your fingers, don't think of the screen like a TV or a Monitor; think of it as an interactive two dimensional console. Ideally, you'd want the moving sections of your virtual console to be similar in size to a real console - to suit the ergonomics of physical interaction.
Two very good points.

I certainly meant to include the first one in my post, but forgot, it seems. I am using a 4-point touch overlay frame, and am happy with it. It seems that one might think more points are better, but in all practicality, a person take into account how many faders they truly will be trying to control at once.

And, the resolution of the monitor really is crucial that it not be too fine -- keep the objects as big as possible.
Old 17th August 2015
  #4
Gear Head
 

Cheaper solution if you own an ipad

If you own an ipad there's this app called Duet which essentially lets you use your ipad as a second screen monitor. Hope this helps.
Old 17th August 2015
  #5
Lives for gear
Hi,

sitting close to a 42" monitor which is running at 1080p - is actually terrible. You are effectively quadrupling the pixel size compared to how the image would look on a regular 22" monitor - pretty much cutting the image quality in half.

I beta tested Dtouch for cubase using a 24inch touch screen monitor and I had absolutely no issues with fat fingers / touching small buttons etc. So, while I'm not recommending using a monitor that small, it goes to show that it might be unnecessary to stretch the image out to 4 times as large.

The whole point of large monitors is for extra screen real estate without having to shrink anything. If software needs to have large buttons for touch screen use - the developer needs to draw large buttons, you shouldn't be lowering your resolution to make these buttons larger.

I think that 4K resolution is perfect for a 42inch screen sitting up close. Any less is a strain on the eyes trying to read text at such low res
Old 17th August 2015
  #6
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonebytim View Post
The whole point of large monitors is for extra screen real estate without having to shrink anything. If software needs to have large buttons for touch screen use - the developer needs to draw large buttons, you shouldn't be lowering your resolution to make these buttons larger.
Well, not completely -- there is value in large monitors for other reasons.

But for me, looking at a 42" screen at a 25 degree angle looks fine -- I'd rather have the objects larger than small -- but I also have large fingers.

When we see the DAW developers redesign (or offer a touchscreen version of) their interface, then a higher resolution monitor would be great.

Perhaps software developers need to start developing GUI's similar to how web developers have been doing -- a "responsive" GUI!!

Last edited by brucerothwell; 17th August 2015 at 09:51 PM.. Reason: spelling
Old 17th August 2015
  #7
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Well, not completely -- there is value in large monitors for other reasons.

But for me, looking at a 42" screen at a 25 degree angle looks fine -- I'd rather have the objects larger than small -- but I also have large fingers.

When we see the DAW developers redesign (or offer a touchscreen version of) their interface, then a higher resolution monitor would be great.

Perhaps software developers need to start developing GUI's similar to how web developers have been doing -- a "responsive" GUI!!
Don't get me wrong, I really like Dtouch - it's as good as the Raven software, and the fact that it's not tied to buying a particularly expensive monitor makes it the best solution on the market.

Having said that though (and this you may agree with as it covers the limitations you mentioned in your comment), I would have much preferred if Dtouch had been built in its own window rather than being an 'overlay' over the top of the DAW's mixer window. Not only would this have helped to avoid bugs during the 'alignment' process - but it would have allowed for a much better GUI that doesn't have to sit within the limitations of the DAW's GUI. I believe this would have been possible by having the application send commands to the DAW in the same way that an external hardware controller would (which I think is what DTouch currently does anyway).
Old 17th August 2015
  #8
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonebytim View Post
Don't get me wrong, I really like Dtouch - it's as good as the Raven software, and the fact that it's not tied to buying a particularly expensive monitor makes it the best solution on the market.

Having said that though (and this you may agree with as it covers the limitations you mentioned in your comment), I would have much preferred if Dtouch had been built in its own window rather than being an 'overlay' over the top of the DAW's mixer window. Not only would this have helped to avoid bugs during the 'alignment' process - but it would have allowed for a much better GUI that doesn't have to sit within the limitations of the DAW's GUI. I believe this would have been possible by having the application send commands to the DAW in the same way that an external hardware controller would (which I think is what DTouch currently does anyway).
Not sure if you are aware, but as far as I know, the alignment is now automatic -- at least that is what I see on OSX.

I see what you mean by having a completely separate window for DTouch that does not need to be an "overlay". It might make things faster (wouldn't require re-syncing... but would require a lot more programming, I suspect -- as DTouch does not affect the entire interface -- instead, it is really the faders, mutes/solos. pans, and the added functions along the bottom.

So, if you had a touchscreen system, that was it's own window, what functionality from the DAW would you want it to entail?
Old 17th August 2015
  #9
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Not sure if you are aware, but as far as I know, the alignment is now automatic -- at least that is what I see on OSX.

I see what you mean by having a completely separate window for DTouch that does not need to be an "overlay". It might make things faster (wouldn't require re-syncing... but would require a lot more programming, I suspect -- as DTouch does not affect the entire interface -- instead, it is really the faders, mutes/solos. pans, and the added functions along the bottom.

So, if you had a touchscreen system, that was it's own window, what functionality from the DAW would you want it to entail?
No extra functionality (Dtouch already gives you access to everything). I'm just talking about a better user interface.
Old 18th August 2015
  #10
Lives for gear
 
s_sibs's Avatar
 

I just got and Acer 27" touchscreen, updated to Cubase Pro 8 and DTouch. After some DTouch install issues, I'm happy to say is all running well now.

My initial thoughts are that the DTouch works well. Since its a 1.013 version, I'm sure there will be updates to fix some of the graphics glitches and improved functionality.

I'm liking the setup and viewing angle. It will take getting used to though. I need to train myself to not reach for the mouse when I can touch the screen instead.
Attached Thumbnails
Considering a Touchscreen System?-img_20150815_145437.jpg  

Last edited by s_sibs; 18th August 2015 at 02:15 AM..
Old 18th August 2015
  #11
Lives for gear
 

What did you use to give it that angle?
Old 18th August 2015
  #12
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by s_sibs View Post
It will take getting used to though. I need to train myself to not reach for the mouse when I can touch the screen instead.
That is the hardest part
Old 18th August 2015
  #13
Lives for gear
 
s_sibs's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin McCabe View Post
What did you use to give it that angle?
If you're asking me, then the answer is...I used the stand that comes with the monitor. It can stand at a 30-80 degree angle.
Old 18th August 2015
  #14
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonebytim View Post
Having said that though (and this you may agree with as it covers the limitations you mentioned in your comment), I would have much preferred if Dtouch had been built in its own window rather than being an 'overlay' over the top of the DAW's mixer window.
I don't agree with this at all, although I may understand why you would say that.
Here's my take on the whole DAW control issue:
The whole concept of a hardware DAW controller is a battle you can't win since the nature of software is dynamic and the nature of hardware is static.
Immagine a situation where you are in a board meeting but everyone except you is not physically there but represented by a robot in stead. Each robot has a the same body, nose, eyes and ears, they differ only in colour.
Now you are left with the exhausting task of trying to mentally map which colour is Jim, Frank, Lucy, Jacques, Zakariyya, Chi-Chi, Alessandro, Lee and that Basque one who's name keeps escaping except that it has an X or two in it.
A ridiculously clumsy situation right? A royal waste of everyone's time even?
Well this is exactly what we've been asked to do on hardware controllers and we've had to pay dearly for it. Sure, they put some tiny name tags on the robots, but there's not enough robots for each board member, so now the name tags start changing on the robots when another board member wants to chime in.
I'm getting a migraine just thinking about it and I don't get migraines..
Of course you can get used to it, but the real question is: should we?
I say, what with it being 2015 and all, is: hell no.


Now this costly mess is finally solved by being able to touch the software directly, Eliminating the huge investment of time required to train oneself to control the environment you've mentally mapped (the DAW and plugin GUI) from another bland and generic environment which you'll have to try and mentally map again.
I, for one, am not prepared to invest any more time and money into it, as I'm convinced it's ultimately futile and simply a flawed and outdated concept.

Touching the DAW directly is exactly the revolution required to finally accept that we're working with software that has taken the simple functions of the recording studio and took it to a whole new level.
I believe clinging on to physical controllers of outdated interfaces have been holding us back.
We need to start interfacing with a DAW in ways that make sense for interfacing with a software environment, in stead of forcing it into something it's not.
(insert funny image of DAW being forced on stage at a child beauty pageant by its users from the side-stage)

Now I understand that it seems a bit clumsy to have to overlay a software on the DAW to get it to understand multitouch but it is a temporary measure to be sure.
The DAWs are caching up.
To create a different interface on the multitouch controller from the DAW, however, to me seems a step back to hardware controller land, for which I value my time entirely too much. I won't do it, I won't have any of it.
A remote controller app on an iPad, fine, but on a screen large enough to display the whole DAW? No way.

/rant
Old 18th August 2015
  #15
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
I don't agree with this at all, although I may understand why you would say that.
Here's my take on the whole DAW control issue:
The whole concept of a hardware DAW controller is a battle you can't win since the nature of software is dynamic and the nature of hardware is static.
Immagine a situation where you are in a board meeting but everyone except you is not physically there but represented by a robot in stead. Each robot has a the same body, nose, eyes and ears, they differ only in colour.
Now you are left with the exhausting task of trying to mentally map which colour is Jim, Frank, Lucy, Jacques, Zakariyya, Chi-Chi, Alessandro, Lee and that Basque one who's name keeps escaping except that it has an X or two in it.
A ridiculously clumsy situation right? A royal waste of everyone's time even?
Well this is exactly what we've been asked to do on hardware controllers and we've had to pay dearly for it. Sure, they put some tiny name tags on the robots, but there's not enough robots for each board member, so now the name tags start changing on the robots when another board member wants to chime in.
I'm getting a migraine just thinking about it and I don't get migraines..
Of course you can get used to it, but the real question is: should we?
I say, what with it being 2015 and all, is: hell no.


Now this costly mess is finally solved by being able to touch the software directly, Eliminating the huge investment of time required to train oneself to control the environment you've mentally mapped (the DAW and plugin GUI) from another bland and generic environment which you'll have to try and mentally map again.
I, for one, am not prepared to invest any more time and money into it, as I'm convinced it's ultimately futile and simply a flawed and outdated concept.

Touching the DAW directly is exactly the revolution required to finally accept that we're working with software that has taken the simple functions of the recording studio and took it to a whole new level.
I believe clinging on to physical controllers of outdated interfaces have been holding us back.
We need to start interfacing with a DAW in ways that make sense for interfacing with a software environment, in stead of forcing it into something it's not.
(insert funny image of DAW being forced on stage at a child beauty pageant by its users from the side-stage)

Now I understand that it seems a bit clumsy to have to overlay a software on the DAW to get it to understand multitouch but it is a temporary measure to be sure.
The DAWs are caching up.
To create a different interface on the multitouch controller from the DAW, however, to me seems a step back to hardware controller land, for which I value my time entirely too much. I won't do it, I won't have any of it.
A remote controller app on an iPad, fine, but on a screen large enough to display the whole DAW? No way.

/rant
Hey - I totally agree with everything you just said!

Although, I'm not suggesting that we should try and emulate a hardware controller at all.

I'm simply suggesting that when it comes to workflow , there are flaws in the design of Cubase's 'mixer window' that actually become more tedious when using a touch screen. This results in me reaching straight back for the mouse. Having the touch control surface be its own window (replacing the DAW's mixer window) would allow for a completely new design which addresses these issues.

The workflow issues I am referring to are common to both DAW software and the new generation of live digital mixing consoles. In order to save on limited space - many features are hidden inside menus and on seperate windows / pages. The ability to use a large, high resolution touch screen brings with it the possibility of a lot more screen real estate. The reason that I prefer to use Analogue mixing consoles is that I have so much more in front of me rather than having to be constantly opening and closing windows with my finger tip. Ever notice that the keyboard on your smart phone does try and fit as many of the most common keys, and places them in the most ergonomic positions - it's faster, and less tedious to use.
Old 18th August 2015
  #16
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Yeah, but it's a transitory thing.
DAWs will adapt their GUIs for multitouch.

Yes it's nice to have everything laid out in front of you, but it can also get messy.
When doing bookkeeping if you could have a key command to find that paper receipt and place it in the folder, you would use that.
A key command for that stack at the edge of the table to come to where you're sitting without getting up would be handy too.
There's things that are handy about the old ways and there's things that are handy about the new ways.
The trick is to get organised and do as much work possible with as little effort possible.
I went from two displays to one when I had to start working on both a desktop and a laptop.
Getting my show hide markers and window configurations organised is one of the best things that ever happened to me, engineering wise.
IF you're organised and in control of your software, You can get everything you want to see in front of you on one screen effortlessly, 95% precent of the time.
There are times where it's handy to have a second screen and when I get my Touch Screen I'll keep my 23" LCD just for that purpose.

However, I working with track show/hide markers combined with window configurations much more powerful that when I just put my edit screen on one diplay and the mix on the other.

I'm sure there's ways to do so on Cubase.

Opening and closing things with your fingertips is exactly what we do in the physical realm.
I guess the trick is to make it mentally easy to know where everything is.

But I'm not at all in the know about the state of Cubase, so I can understand that if you hate their mix window you would prefer to have a touchscreen interface for that that's different and, more importantly, better!
Maybe Dtouch could add a customisable dedicated mixer view that is not an overlay but just built from the ground up.
Just for the users, like you, who think the your DAW mixer could be improved.

Last edited by ~ufo~; 18th August 2015 at 01:31 PM..
Old 18th August 2015
  #17
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Maybe Dtouch could add a customisable dedicated mixer view that is not an overlay but just built from the ground up.
Just for the users, like you, who think the your DAW mixer could be improved.
Slate did that with Raven, for those times when you are mostly working with faders.

Remember, though... DT has already announced they are working on a hardware controller that sits in front of a 27" touchscreen and provides real faders, pans, mute and solos, I believe.

If I am not mistaken, it will be a lot of faders -- to match what is on screen.

That should be the ultimate combo for some folks!
Old 18th August 2015
  #18
Here for the gear
 
SILK PURSE's Avatar
 

I have tried the Slate but eventually gave up due to the syncing issues. Is the Dtouch syncing stable. Also the limitation of just one set of sends was too restrictive does the dtouch restrict the no of send slots? if these issues are solved in Dtouch i will buy.
Old 18th August 2015
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Will The Weirdo's Avatar
Has anyone used the new PQ Labs G5S 4K IR overlay? I was thinking this with a 4K LG might be in my future, 2016 might be the year of the DIY touchscreen.
Old 18th August 2015
  #20
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will The Weirdo View Post
Has anyone used the new PQ Labs G5S 4K IR overlay? I was thinking this with a 4K LG might be in my future, 2016 might be the year of the DIY touchscreen.
Be careful with the choice of resolution -- the higher the resolution, smaller the GUI objects can be -- which is fine if you are using a mouse cursor, which is scaleable... but you are talking of using your fingers, which are not scaleable.
Old 18th August 2015
  #21
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
I have tried the Slate but eventually gave up due to the syncing issues. Is the Dtouch syncing stable.
Not sure what you mean by "syncing stable", but DTouch does require resyncing on occasion -- say, if you hide tracks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
Also the limitation of just one set of sends was too restrictive does the dtouch restrict the no of send slots? if these issues are solved in Dtouch i will buy.
At 1920x1080, DTouch allows use of 2 sets of effects inserts, and 1 set of sends, or vice versa.

Basically, a total of 15 insert/send slots.

Now, perhaps there are options I am not aware of, and Silvano can chime in.
Old 18th August 2015
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Will The Weirdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Be careful with the choice of resolution -- the higher the resolution, smaller the GUI objects can be -- which is fine if you are using a mouse cursor, which is scaleable... but you are talking of using your fingers, which are not scaleable.
Thanks for the warning Bruce, I was looking at the 55 inch LG 4K with the 55 inch G5S 4K 6 touch overlay, for Studio One v3, which is already touch designed. I would be using a GTX 970 or 980 at 60hz in HDMI 2.0.

In you opinion, do you think this will work well as a large touch setup?
Old 18th August 2015
  #23
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will The Weirdo View Post
Thanks for the warning Bruce, I was looking at the 55 inch LG 4K with the 55 inch G5S 4K 6 touch overlay, for Studio One v3, which is already touch designed. I would be using a GTX 970 or 980 at 60hz in HDMI 2.0.

In you opinion, do you think this will work well as a large touch setup?
I would say there is a strong possibility it should work fine, being on a 55" display.

I would be curious to know how well Studio One v3 works for touch. Any idea if it is "multitouch" capable?
Old 18th August 2015
  #24
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
I would be curious to know how well Studio One v3 works for touch. Any idea if it is "multitouch" capable?
AFAIK it is to some extent.
Old 18th August 2015
  #25
Lives for gear
 
Will The Weirdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
I would say there is a strong possibility it should work fine, being on a 55" display.

I would be curious to know how well Studio One v3 works for touch. Any idea if it is "multitouch" capable?
Yes, Studio One v3 is multitouch capable. The Presonus redesign of S1 v3 was for touch screen future.
Old 18th August 2015
  #26
Here for the gear
 
SILK PURSE's Avatar
 

Ah. Yes Bruce I was referring to the mixer going all askew when you try to do anything slightly ambitious. When working with clients you can't be re syncing all the time. The slate would lose sync very easily.
15 slots on a 27 inch??? Yes?? That would be better than slate MTI. Can you turn off the d touch software and still have touch in OS X . Thats what I ended up doing with Slate as having single touch With a stable mixer was better than multi with a goofy mixer.
I too would be interested in anyone's touch experience with studio one being the first DAW to go touch native. Could make me switch.
Old 18th August 2015
  #27
Lives for gear
 
clonewar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will The Weirdo View Post
Has anyone used the new PQ Labs G5S 4K IR overlay? I was thinking this with a 4K LG might be in my future, 2016 might be the year of the DIY touchscreen.
I'm using a 46" PQ Labs G5S 4K overlay with a 1080p 46" Samsung screen (with DTouch for Cubase). The 4K version of the G5S doesn't correspond to the screen resolution, it has to do with the smallest touch point it can recognize, so you can use a fine point stylus with it if you want to.

For me the point of having the bigger screen is to have everything much larger for easy touch, so I wasn't interested in a 4K screen at this time, but it would be really impressive looking!
Old 18th August 2015
  #28
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
Ah. Yes Bruce I was referring to the mixer going all askew when you try to do anything slightly ambitious. When working with clients you can't be re syncing all the time. The slate would lose sync very easily.
15 slots on a 27 inch??? Yes?? That would be better than slate MTI. Can you turn off the d touch software and still have touch in OS X . Thats what I ended up doing with Slate as having single touch With a stable mixer was better than multi with a goofy mixer.
I too would be interested in anyone's touch experience with studio one being the first DAW to go touch native. Could make me switch.
Sorry to hear that you've not had a particularly good experience with the Slate Raven MTi. I'm not sure why you experienced those issues because I've had mine for nearly 2 years and it's been working flawlessly. So much so that I have an MTX 2 arriving next month.

I only calibrate once a month after 8-10 hours of use per day.

Having 10 inserts or 10 sends isn't an issue for me as I just use a batch command button to switch between them.

Good luck with your quest on finding a touch screen controller that works for you.
Old 18th August 2015
  #29
Lives for gear
 
clonewar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will The Weirdo View Post
Yes, Studio One v3 is multitouch capable. The Presonus redesign of S1 v3 was for touch screen future.
I've been trying the S1 V3 demo with my 46" touchscreen, running on my Mac. It definitely has potential, but IMO using DTouch with Cubase is a much better experience. The faders in S1 don't work as smoothly with touch control, scrolling the mixer can be a pain (it'll stop when you don't want it to stop, and other times keep scrolling when you want it to stop), bypassing plugins on the mixer GUI is very hit or miss, the track listing doesn't respond to touch (which is a REAL bummer for the way I like to work).

Ultimately, I think at some point a DAW will be written from the ground up (or at least have a full touch GUI option), S1 and Sonar are partially there. For now, my experience is that the DTouch and Raven software are the best of both worlds. The DTouch interface is made for touch and multi-touch, while you still get to interact directly with the parts of Cubase and PT that respond well to touch, as well as directly interacting with plugin GUIs (which IMO is the best part of using a large touchscreen).
Old 18th August 2015
  #30
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
Ah. Yes Bruce I was referring to the mixer going all askew when you try to do anything slightly ambitious. When working with clients you can't be re syncing all the time. The slate would lose sync very easily.
The main time I experience a resync is when I hide/show tracks -- sometimes I use memory locations to hide/show groups of tracks, and when I want to change to a new group of tracks, it requests a resync. But, that is only needed for really large projects. Mind you, not all resyncs are really required, so you can just ignore the flashing red resync light.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
15 slots on a 27 inch??? Yes?? That would be better than slate MTI.
I cannot be sure how many faders will be included, but this is what Silvano said in a previous post, back in May 2015:

...it is the advantage of the perfect alignment of the faders with the touchmonitor. Everything is already there, in its most shining form: touchscreen, toolbars, high-res meters, inserts/sends racks, tracks name, color coding, smart soft-buttons, Plu-Ins GUI and the DAW (PT or Cubase) itself.

I don't want to say that there will be faders only. Some "smart" rotaries too, some smart buttons, but we want to keep the price decent and with good quality components (including faders).

Everything in an aesthetically beautiful package.


If I am not mistaken, the DTouch interface shows up 22 faders at a time, regardless the size of the monitor -- but I believe Silvano mentioned the faderpack will be aimed at the 27" touchscreen market.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SILK PURSE View Post
Can you turn off the d touch software and still have touch in OS X . Thats what I ended up doing with Slate as having single touch With a stable mixer was better than multi with a goofy mixer.
I too would be interested in anyone's touch experience with studio one being the first DAW to go touch native. Could make me switch.
Yes, you should be able to do single-touch just using the driver that comes with your overlay frame (at least, I know the driver from PQ Labs and from Zaagtech work, with OSX & with Windows 7/8.)

Last edited by brucerothwell; 20th August 2015 at 04:04 PM.. Reason: Changed the word "markers" to the correct term "memory locations"
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump