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
"Full console workflow emulation" DAWs official control surfaces (or lack there of) Control Surfaces
Old 13th February 2018
  #1
Gear Nut
 

Thread Starter
"Full console workflow emulation" DAWs official control surfaces (or lack there of)

So there are two major daws that do "full console workflow emulation."

1. Reason
2. Mixbus (32c)

Why do none of these companies produce small control surfaces?
Both have pretty much Softube's Console 1 build in. Why waste your opportunity?
Both of them are claiming that you are working "like you used to." By what? Clicking the mouse?
Is the market for hardware controllers really that low?

I know that Harrison has been "looking into it" for years now every time the request comes and I also know that Russell Cottier is working on a surface. But that will most likely be a build it yourself kit and not something Harrison official.

And for Reason, no. Nektar does not offer "pro console workflows."
Having a few knobs in a row and having to switch to the next section you want to use does not equal console like workflows. A MCU (or similar) would be a much better option.

I really like both software. But man does that put me on edge sometimes.
Going of to take my chill pills now!

/rant
Old 13th February 2018
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobinL View Post
Is the market for hardware controllers really that low?
The companies would have to design, build, market, sell and support the controller, and that's probably not cheap at all. So, with the desired profit on top of that I'm pretty sure the price will be high enough that the users of those specific DAWs aren't interested.
Old 13th February 2018
  #3
Gear Addict
MixBus works very well with the Behringer X-Touch. The list of "supported" control surfaces is pretty long. Hard to compete in the low-end hardware market. They would probably rather sell you a Harrison mixer instead ;-)
Old 14th February 2018
  #4
Gear Nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by facej View Post
MixBus works very well with the Behringer X-Touch. The list of "supported" control surfaces is pretty long. Hard to compete in the low-end hardware market. They would probably rather sell you a Harrison mixer instead ;-)
But that isn't the point.
You still have to map out, go through menus and switching what you want the knobs to do unlike what Softube did which is one full channel strip on a surface as I stated in my original comment.
The only button that is required is selecting the channel you want to change.
Old 14th February 2018
  #5
Gear Addict
 
Wizzomixer's Avatar
Trouble is, the S1 is just a channel strip. I use an original Mackie HUI that was made for Pro Tools, which has dedicated buttons for most of the functions and shortcuts. When it came out in 1997 it cost £3300, about £7000 today. Avids S3 controller is around £4400, a Dock and Ipad around £1600. These typical prices means that the market is small, so for most DAW makers it would probably not be viable to make their own controllers.
Old 14th February 2018
  #6
Gear Nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizzomixer View Post
Trouble is, the S1 is just a channel strip. I use an original Mackie HUI that was made for Pro Tools, which has dedicated buttons for most of the functions and shortcuts. When it came out in 1997 it cost £3300, about £7000 today. Avids S3 controller is around £4400, a Dock and Ipad around £1600. These typical prices means that the market is small, so for most DAW makers it would probably not be viable to make their own controllers.
But I would like actually just one channelstrip. Have it switch by fader touch and/or select button and I would be set. Still much quicker than menu diving as said earlier.
If you go so far to have a console workflow in the software, I wish they would go as far with hardware. I guess it's nice for people with a touch screen. :/

Mackie did have a third extension for the MCU with just knobs and screens which I guess didn't sell too well either. That would be perfect for my current needs.
Old 14th February 2018
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobinL View Post
But I would like actually just one channelstrip. Have it switch by fader touch and/or select button and I would be set. Still much quicker than menu diving as said earlier.
If you go so far to have a console workflow in the software, I wish they would go as far with hardware. I guess it's nice for people with a touch screen. :/
There's just not enough money in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobinL View Post
Mackie did have a third extension for the MCU with just knobs and screens which I guess didn't sell too well either. That would be perfect for my current needs.
If you can live without the LCD screens, how about the Behringer BCR2000?
Old 14th February 2018
  #8
Here for the gear
 

I use a Icon Qcon Pro X with Mixbus 32C and it works pretty well. I would definitely be better if they created a control surface that had everything placed in the same locations as they are on screen.

There was a big debate of the Mixbus forum a while back about hardware control surfaces vs having better touchscreen implementation. I think that's part of the problem. Everyone would like to avoid mousing around but the physical knob people general think using a touchcreen is stupid and the touchscreen people question why you would bother buying physical hardware when you could just do it with a touchscreen. If I were Harrison I would definitely question whether enough control surfaces could be sold to make it worth developing.

Personally I much prefer moving real knobs and faders for most things.
Old 14th February 2018
  #9
Lives for gear
 

There's like one thread like this on new control surfaces about every 12-18 months or so. It's actually interesting to read them, because "everyone" agrees there's this "big" market, and "everyone" agrees that "everyone" agrees on what's needed, until about the 10th post when things start diverging. Some want a traditional mixer layout, some want a center control/focus section, some want both.... some want 16 channels minimum, others want a modular system, some want four....

In addition there are always at least a few people that say it'd be so easy to just take expensive controller X and make it cheaper, and they then proceed to list all it needs to still have which is like 90% of the cost of materials and complexity, and then they end by demanding about 15-30% of the price.

I think the generic controllers unfortunately are the way to go.
Old 20th February 2018
  #10
Lives for gear
 
3rd Degree's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
There's like one thread like this on new control surfaces about every 12-18 months or so. It's actually interesting to read them, because "everyone" agrees there's this "big" market, and "everyone" agrees that "everyone" agrees on what's needed, until about the 10th post when things start diverging. Some want a traditional mixer layout, some want a center control/focus section, some want both.... some want 16 channels minimum, others want a modular system, some want four....

In addition there are always at least a few people that say it'd be so easy to just take expensive controller X and make it cheaper, and they then proceed to list all it needs to still have which is like 90% of the cost of materials and complexity, and then they end by demanding about 15-30% of the price.

I think the generic controllers unfortunately are the way to go.
I agree. Outside of the Balance interface, Propellerhead has pretty much stayed out of the hardware market. At one point, I recall they had overlays for what I recall was an M-Audio controller (it looked like they synth/sampler but wasn't modeled out to them) and nobody cared. A few companies tried to make controllers but none were deep enough. Everyone complained. It's just a hard market.

I use Reason extensively and would purchase a virtual mixer for it but if it is simply 360 rotary knobs and non motorized faders, that isn't enough.

I could probably deal with rotary knobs but would prefer something automated instead. I would need automated faders. Just going into Reason, I count 27 knobs, 38 buttons, and one fader per channel. That doesn't include the master section and I may be off on my numbers.

For the quality to be good enough to make me use it, I am just going to guess it would be a $300-500 controller minimum for one channel. It could be double that. Add the master section, I would guess double that. I wouldn't need a full console, that alone would do it but I personally wouldn't likely spend that money. For a real console emulation, I would want 24 channels probably. For it to work as I wanted, it would likely cost the same as a real console that has the same features (think SSL or even some of the DigiDesign stuff from way back).

Just looking online, the C|24 which looks to be the Avid version of the Control 24 looks to be about $10k. I don't think people are going to be spending that on Reason. With PT, it kind of makes sense, I never though it was worth the money and most people who wanted that control still were using Mackie to save money, even if they had an HD3 setup at the time.

I get the premise but this wouldn't be a good controller for cheap. It would be the same as generic or worse.
Old 20th February 2018
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Yeah.

The only thing I can say is that people that are interested in tactile control and are frustrated with what's available versus price should take a close look at their workflows. A lot of times there are compromises one can make that can make cheaper controllers worth while, it's just that it takes some time getting used to a partially new workflow / setup.

I for example always trigger playback/stop with the computer keyboard, and I also use it for other functions (for example 'undo', zoom levels etc). So for me having a keyboard nearby is necessary. And so since I use it for transport a controller like the Avid Artist lacking transport controls that are convenient doesn't actually bother me. I also always EQ using the trackball. So again having one pot for panning only doesn't bother me. And since I'm in post production most of what I do (TV) actually doesn't require any elaborate panning either (though I know music is different).

So in other words; if I was offered an Avid s6, fully decked out, for the same price as an Avid Artist Mix then I'd take the more expensive unit, because I can do more with it. But just because I can't actually afford it in real life doesn't mean I can't get something meaningful out of the much cheaper and much less flexible Artist Mix.

Heck, at home I use the Presonus Faderport, and pretty much the only thing I use is the fader and like four buttons. Not much more. But it's well worth it because of my workflow....
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