I'd be interested in how you are doing with this bundle?
Your experiences?
Pros and cons?
Thanks in advance!
Anyone using T2 with Mackie C4?
-
- KVRian
- 831 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
I have an MCU and C4 sitting on my desk at home. They both work very well, although I wouldn't personally choose the C4 if I were looking for something to do dance/electronic style tweaking, it works great as a patch programming and editing interface.
The only problem I've spotted when using the C4 (not true of teh MCU) with Tracktion is that sometimes when changing edits the C4 will lock quit repsonding to Tracktion. Repowering the C4 will clear things.
They look damn cool too!
The only problem I've spotted when using the C4 (not true of teh MCU) with Tracktion is that sometimes when changing edits the C4 will lock quit repsonding to Tracktion. Repowering the C4 will clear things.
They look damn cool too!
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 831 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
You wouldn't choose the C4 for doing Dance?
Would you mind to explain why?
Would you mind to explain why?
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
What I meant is, I wouldn't choose the C4 for heavy duty tweaking. The vpots feel pretty robust, so I'm sure they'd take the punishment of an acid workout, but they aren't really ideal for it. I have a Korg Prophecy which at this point serves entirely as a control synth. For tweaking, the five knobs on the Pro do me better than the C4. They are larger, and more suited to being angrily jerked around.
If I'm building patches on Vanguard, or (if I didn't also have the MCU) tweaking volume/pan settings etc, the C4 would be, and is, ideal. Tastes are tastes though. For me the C4 is a mixing aid, not a performance aid, but you may feel differently. I'd say check one out, but if you are looking for a 32pot version of phatboy, perhaps test one before taking it home.
If I'm building patches on Vanguard, or (if I didn't also have the MCU) tweaking volume/pan settings etc, the C4 would be, and is, ideal. Tastes are tastes though. For me the C4 is a mixing aid, not a performance aid, but you may feel differently. I'd say check one out, but if you are looking for a 32pot version of phatboy, perhaps test one before taking it home.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRist
- 175 posts since 27 Aug, 2002 from Sweden
Any news about a C4-mode for the Behringer BCR2000? The MCU-mode for the BCF2000 has been around for quite a while now it seems...
-
- KVRAF
- 1615 posts since 28 Mar, 2005
Love the MCU - the faders are really nice for tweaking -(as Valley said they would be!) nice resolution easy to grab etc...
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
I'm glad you're enjoying the MCU there semiquaver - they are rather gorgeous, aren't they. 
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 831 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
Ah, now i get your point valley.
TX.
Some more questions:
how are the parameter assignments solved?
Appears ADSR, cutoff, Q from OSC1 of different VSTis always on the same pots, or do they change from synth to synth?
Is it possible for the user do define the location of parameters on the C4?
I imagine it would be best for me, if the same kind of parameters, appear always on the same locations (i.e. no matter what EQ-plugin is selected, gain is in row 1, frequency in row 2,.Q in row 3,...).
Tell me!
TX.
Some more questions:
how are the parameter assignments solved?
Appears ADSR, cutoff, Q from OSC1 of different VSTis always on the same pots, or do they change from synth to synth?
Is it possible for the user do define the location of parameters on the C4?
I imagine it would be best for me, if the same kind of parameters, appear always on the same locations (i.e. no matter what EQ-plugin is selected, gain is in row 1, frequency in row 2,.Q in row 3,...).
Tell me!
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
Sorry I wasn't clearer first time around.Barbarossa wrote:Ah, now i get your point valley.
Automatically. They are in the order that the plugin delivers them. If you look at the parameter list (IE with the "A" automation button) of a filter you will see the order that the parameters will show in C4.how are the parameter assignments solved?
No, but it'd be a hell of a feature request for T3, IMHO.Is it possible for the user do define the location of parameters on the C4?
Sorry to dissappoint.I imagine it would be best for me, if the same kind of parameters, appear always on the same locations (i.e. no matter what EQ-plugin is selected, gain is in row 1, frequency in row 2,.Q in row 3,...).
Tell me!
Remember though that the C4 has a very clear 'scribble strip' display that allows you to see the function assigned to any vpot at any particular time.
It generally works very well, but with a few VSTis (z3ta springs to mind) that sport a million different pages, and parameters, the C4 really can't offer anything over and above the GUI. A synth such as Vanguard, or an EQ such as Eqium, however really does lend itself to the C4 'cos you can get on with tweaking sounds to match the mix by using your ears, not by watching what the mouse is doing on screen.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRAF
- 1615 posts since 28 Mar, 2005
Barbarossa - the problem is that plugins have parameter indices and names: so 1 may say "Hi Gain" and associate it with index "3" another may report what is essentially the same parameter as "gain3" and have it on index "1". So I can't imagine how T or the MCU could parse those to put them anywhere in particular.
Being able to *specify* the order manually though *would* be a great thing, esp for us MCU folks who may not be able to tweak any given pair of parameters at once as they might default to different pages!
Being able to *specify* the order manually though *would* be a great thing, esp for us MCU folks who may not be able to tweak any given pair of parameters at once as they might default to different pages!
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 831 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
TX.
That was very dissapointing for me.
Do PlugIns maybe send an ID or at least their name for any kind of identification?
Then there could be at least the possibility for third party developers, to remap parameters?
And maybe the cheap BCR2000 could become more user friendly, although it has no LCD-display?
That was very dissapointing for me.
Do PlugIns maybe send an ID or at least their name for any kind of identification?
Then there could be at least the possibility for third party developers, to remap parameters?
And maybe the cheap BCR2000 could become more user friendly, although it has no LCD-display?
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
The kind of remapping you are after would need to be done by Tracktion.Barbarossa wrote:TX.
That was very dissapointing for me.
Do PlugIns maybe send an ID or at least their name for any kind of identification?
Then there could be at least the possibility for third party developers, to remap parameters?
And maybe the cheap BCR2000 could become more user friendly, although it has no LCD-display?
As I say, it is a good feature request. If you want to raise it, I'll happily add my name to the "me too"s.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRAF
- 1615 posts since 28 Mar, 2005
me too!