Assigning specific midi CC to XY pads

[donovansi]

Hi,

I'd like to be able assign a specific midi CC to the x & y axis of each pad.

How can this be done? I do not have an external controller, so I can't wiggle a knob
and assign that way etc. I'd like to able to do this within my DAW or Zebra. I am using
the latest version of Zebra & ZebraHZ.

Thanks

Simon

[trance_lucent]

Hi,
I'd like to be able assign a specific midi CC to the x & y axis of each pad.
How can this be done? I do not have an external controller, so I can't wiggle a knob
and assign that way etc.

If you use Logic, you can create fader in Environment with needed midi controller.
If not, you can draw some automation for desired cc, press play and learn it from Zebra.

[donovansi]

Hi there,

Thanks for your reply.

I have been able to get your 2nd solution to work I think.

I do use Logic, so I am curious about your 1st solution also. Could you explain
in more detail on how to do this? Do you mean create a bus in logic or something?
I don't quite understand.

Thanks again for your help.

Simon

[ZenPunkHippy]

Is there a reason for choosing MIDI CC over automation lanes? Automation is generally a bit more accurate for controlling synth parameters because it's not limited to an 8-bit resolution (0 - 127).

Press the 'A' key to view automation lanes in the Logic arrange window. Click the menu to see the available automation parameters. Select one and start drawing in your curves.

Peace,
Andy.

[trance_lucent]

en able to get your 2nd solution to work I think.
I do use Logic, so I am curious about your 1st solution also. Could you explain
in more detail on how to do this? Do you mean create a bus in logic or something?
I don't quite understand.

Open Window->Environment. Ensure that Mixer layout is selected (upper left corner of Environment window). In Environment Window: Menu New->Fader->Auto. Connect Fader to Audioinstrument with Zebra. Set Fader settings to desired CC (upper "-1-" in settings). You can control desired cc with this fader now.

[trance_lucent]

Is there a reason for choosing MIDI CC over automation lanes? Automation is generally a bit more accurate for controlling synth parameters because it's not limited to an 8-bit resolution (0 - 127).

Recently I learned CCs for XYs too: for TouchOsc. And I had to create fader, because TouchOsc XY always transmit both values for X and Y (two midi messages).
Also using midi you can transform it with environment tools, even create stepsequencers or LFOs in Environment.

[ZenPunkHippy]

Recently I learned CCs for XYs too: for TouchOsc. And I had to create fader, because TouchOsc XY always transmit both values for X and Y (two midi messages).
Also using midi you can transform it with environment tools, even create stepsequencers or LFOs in Environment.

For basic control automation is generally a better choice, but yes those are all good reasons - I won't argue with that!

Peace,
Andy.

[donovansi]

Awesome, thanks for your help, I will try this when I get a chance...

Best,

Simon

[trance_lucent]

For basic control automation is generally a better choice, but yes those are all good reasons - I won't argue with that!

I also won't argue with the fact MIDI has too low resolution for nowadays. I'd want Logic can freely process OSC messages to control AU parameters, and it would be great if it also can transform it with Environment. But now its OSC support too obscurely.

[xh3rv]

Dunno if this helps, but the XYs can be a bit easier to map with the XY knobs in the assignment pane. IIRC TouchOSC can also double up with graphic controls to single underlying parameters - a single dimensional fader for x's and y's might help mapping.

As for OSC - it just dictates the message format, but not the underlying structure of things. That model is done somewhat ad-hoc per application. It's incomplete. I don't know how well OSC implementations are coordinating, if there's any sort of consensus model emerging, but there wasn't last time I looked. (Too uncaffeinated to double check but I believe while the UC-Berkely OSC project was moving towards this major element of OSC, it was defunded under Schwarzenegger )

[trance_lucent]

As for OSC - it just dictates the message format, but not the underlying structure of things.

How I see it: Apple have to declare the system of messages to control Logic.

For example: "/mixer/aux1/volume -3.0" or "/selectedtrack/insert2/<automation parameter name> <value>". Or something other. And also system of messages to report information to control device - may be right up to current mixer objects, inserts, parameter names and values.

Currently the only way I found to build complex interface for Zebra is to create controls in TouchOsc, assign CC for it and learn it from Zebra (how boring!). Currently there is some OSC support in Logic, but as I understand it is hardcoded for LogicPad and cannot be used for building custom interface.