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
Why the lack of Hardware from Yamaha for Steinberg products? Control Surfaces
Old 30th January 2019
  #61
Lives for gear
 
greggybud's Avatar
I'm posting this link for any MCU protocol users who wish to enhance their DAW controller. Personally it looks very daunting, but perhaps it's worth the try?
YouTube
Old 4 weeks ago
  #62
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by greggybud View Post
I'm posting this link for any MCU protocol users who wish to enhance their DAW controller. Personally it looks very daunting, but perhaps it's worth the try?
YouTube
Really nice. I do hope someone in Steinberg/Yamaha see the video. Where do you get he MAX software? Still there is lot of things that can not be made without cubase is modernised regarding remote control functions. But this opens up what you can do with a MCU.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #63
Lives for gear
 
greggybud's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bace View Post
Really nice. I do hope someone in Steinberg/Yamaha see the video. Where do you get he MAX software? Still there is lot of things that can not be made without cubase is modernised regarding remote control functions. But this opens up what you can do with a MCU.
My instincts say Steinberg isn't interested. IMO there are several reasons.

So much work is needed in C10, even if you ignore attention to issues with the new features. Yamaha appears happy with Nuage and not developing a Nuage Jr. available for the masses. Would Steinberg really want to compete with the Behringers, Mackies, Qcons, and Faderports of this world? Twice, since C7 was publicly released, MCU was totally broken until patches were released in following weeks. The proportion of C10 units sold where users desire to utilize MCU is still relatively low. They abandoned CC 121's and before that they abandoned Houston so what does that say? And finally, if it was important to them, they would have already made alterations to such functions such as auto-bank switching which has been implemented in Logic.

Please understand all of the above is only my guesses, and I hope I'm wrong!

What he achieved is far too convoluted for myself. I believe he said MAX is available for free demo? He is very willing to help anyone if they have the desire so go for it if you wish. Maybe once a person does it, everything becomes increasingly easy, since over time you would have to most likely re-configure everything again. It just seems a bit daunting for myself.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #64
Lives for gear
 

Agree.

I think programming in MAX probably is a pretty straight forward thing once you get it. If you're not inclined to that type of thinking, I suppose that type of logic, then it might be hard getting over that 'hump' though.

I would personally be interested in setting it up to trigger specific layouts and navigation in very large projects. Doing VCA spill for example might be possible with some tweaking here.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #65
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Agree.

I think programming in MAX probably is a pretty straight forward thing once you get it. If you're not inclined to that type of thinking, I suppose that type of logic, then it might be hard getting over that 'hump' though.

I would personally be interested in setting it up to trigger specific layouts and navigation in very large projects. Doing VCA spill for example might be possible with some tweaking here.
There is a visibility function in Cubase called something like "Show tracks connected to currently selected track". This more or less gives you 'VCA Spill' already.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #66
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-S-Q View Post
There is a visibility function in Cubase called something like "Show tracks connected to currently selected track". This more or less gives you 'VCA Spill' already.
Yes, I had that set up as a key command earlier (haven't worked on Nuendo for a bit), but I was thinking specifically accessing the command via a control surface. Perhaps it's already available and I just missed it.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #67
Quote:
Originally Posted by greggybud View Post
They abandoned CC 121's
What?! Mine still works perfectly on Cubase 9.5. Have they broken it in 10?!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #68
Lives for gear
 
greggybud's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedberg View Post
What?! Mine still works perfectly on Cubase 9.5. Have they broken it in 10?!
No. Sorry. My bad! I'm thinking of CMC no longer made.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #69
Gear Maniac
 
dione's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedberg View Post
What?! Mine still works perfectly on Cubase 9.5. Have they broken it in 10?!
Mine works perfect on Cubase 10
Old 4 weeks ago
  #70
Gear Head
 
Ajavalon's Avatar
Yup,still have a perfectly functioning Houston on Cubase 10 after all these years,lost without it.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #71
Gear Maniac
 
Bramley's Avatar
 

Back in the late 90s/ early 2000 Steinberg commissioned Soundcraft UK to develop a controller. I have spoken with both the hardware and software guys who were at Soundcraft at the time , they say they came up with a what was a great affordable controller ( pre production drawing attached).

Steinberg dicked around with the design , renamed it, and we ended up with the Houston as we now know it... a GREAT controller for Cubendo, but the target of cruel jokes at the time (" Houston we have a problem") Truly , it was a terribly maligned product and for no good reason other than the unusual reworked look the Steinberg team forced upon Soundcraft AND the stupid name they chose.

IMO Steinberg's damaged pride ensured a short product life for Houston and discouraged any future controller development. If the device below had been released (with a less corny name ) it would likely have been a screaming success.
Attached Thumbnails
Why the lack of Hardware from Yamaha for Steinberg products?-steinberg-controller.jpg  
Old 4 weeks ago
  #72
Lives for gear
 
djwaxxy's Avatar
I still use my Houston controller It works fine with cubase 10.even though they dropped software support for it many years ago its still in all versions of cubase and automatically works with it.

It's a rock solid beast of a controller very well built and is logically set out.

I do wish they'd do a updated version though its pretty sad that cubase is one of the main draws but there's no official affordable controller available. Yes there's nuage but that is the price of a house what steinberg need too do is make a hardware product that's integrates all the best bits from the cmc range and maybe integrate one of there audio interfaces too.

But I don't think they will steinberg never seem interested in hardware sales and discontinue products at the drop of a hat.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #73
Gear Maniac
 
Bramley's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djwaxxy View Post
.

But I don't think they will steinberg never seem interested in hardware sales and discontinue products at the drop of a hat.
Especially if the hardware is the butt of cruel jokes !!

Having spoken to the Soundcraft guys they were quite disparaging about Steinberg's input into the physical design and eventual name of the unit .

The software guys sent me the tech manual (attached) and the proto-drawing.

Still a Houston user here.
Attached Files
File Type: doc Houston tech manual.doc (142.0 KB, 17 views)
Old 4 weeks ago
  #74
Lives for gear
 
djwaxxy's Avatar
I think alot off the people who critised it at the time of release never tried it or knew anyone who used it.
They just jumped on the band wagon to slag it off.

Also it was way ahead of its time back then people didn't really work in the box so couldn't really understand why they'd need such a device in there studio.

Plugins were very primative and most people preferred hardware too vsts becauae they sounded better. I had tons of hardware when Houston came out and I was intrested in it but it was confusing too understand what it actually did most magazines used the unimaginative headline '' Houston we have a problem '' 'thinking it was funny but it just played into the myth of it being unreliable and junk.. But it was the opposite it's rock solid I've had mackie controllers and the Houston is much better built I returned mine twice before I asked for a refund it was terrible.

I was very lucky concerning buying the Houston I got it when turnkey went bust they sold a ton of gear off mega cheap online I got Houston and neuendo 2 for £200!!!

I think the stigma killed off any chances it had and thats sad if more people actually used one they'd see how brilliant it actually was and way ahead of its time.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #75
Gear Maniac
 
Bramley's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djwaxxy View Post
I think alot off the people who critised it at the time of release never tried it or knew anyone who used it.
They just jumped on the band wagon to slag it off.

Also it was way ahead of its time back then people didn't really work in the box so couldn't really understand why they'd need such a device in there studio.

Plugins were very primative and most people preferred hardware too vsts becauae they sounded better. I had tons of hardware when Houston came out and I was intrested in it but it was confusing too understand what it actually did most magazines used the unimaginative headline '' Houston we have a problem '' 'thinking it was funny but it just played into the myth of it being unreliable and junk.. But it was the opposite it's rock solid I've had mackie controllers and the Houston is much better built I returned mine twice before I asked for a refund it was terrible.

I was very lucky concerning buying the Houston I got it when turnkey went bust they sold a ton of gear off mega cheap online I got Houston and neuendo 2 for £200!!!

I think the stigma killed off any chances it had and thats sad if more people actually used one they'd see how brilliant it actually was and way ahead of its time.
Spot on . .Probably the best Cubendo controller still.

I found the tech manual very helpful for running tests etc., on mine
Old 3 weeks ago
  #76
Lives for gear
 

It's a tiny market. We've had this discussion a number of times by now. As I mentioned earlier for some time we actually had controllers in a pretty wide range of prices;

- Around $1,000 the Euphonix/Avid Artist mix, and the Mackie controller(s)

- Around $5,000 the Avid s3 and the SSL controller

- Around $10,000 the Yamaha Nuage controller buckets

- Around $20,000(?) the Avid s6 controllers


I could be wrong about this, but the WK-audio controllers were like $7k/14k or so, depending on the model.

So we've actually been able to scale between "levels" for a long time, and that has only gotten better (despite losing WK-audio's controllers).

- Below 1k you can go as low as the Faderport 1 for single channel, or the "8" for eight channels. You can get a Behringer and add an extension and end up with 16 channels for around what the Presonus 16 costs I think, and that'll be less than two Artist mix controllers.

- 1k to 5k... Artist mix controllers to me seem to have better quality, and you can now get your higher quality-fix for 8, 16, 24 or I believe 32 channels by just buying multiple ones and connecting them. So we can cover the area between 1k and 5k.

- At 5k we get much better quality control with the s3, 16 faders.

- 5k-10k; Granted, a gap here between 5k and about 10k, but that's where we used to be able to buy 12 faders from WK-audio and expand, and apparently business weren't that great.



Ultimately I think we're back to the problem of the user base having options but just really wanting fairly custom personal solutions for way less than what's currently offered, so that companies have a hard time justifying research and development for new devices.

Just do a search and read some of the threads over the years... It's really illuminating...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #77
Lives for gear
 

Sooooo.....at 5 grand, what's the consensus for cubase 10.....s3 ....or nucleus?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #78
Lives for gear
 

My money is that the "consensus" for Cubase 10 is either "too much money" or s3 or Nuage, even though the latter is more money.
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