AKAI Pro launch the Advance Keyboard Series for VST, AU ...

[aMUSEd]

Strange, the knob assignments seem rational to me. For the first ever, they've actually made every single control available. Every menu item, button, even the preset selector. Even the display of which parameter is showing it's modulations in the display page. That's one thing that might be confusing. When you click a parameter and show it's 6 available modulations, these are actually named in the host parameter as what slot they are in the full modulation matrix, not what number of the 6 slots for that parameter, if that makes sense. So you could click on filter cutoff and assign it's slot one to LFO3. But if you already had other modulations, it might actually be assigned to mod slot 4 for example, which you can see in the mod matrix. so the mod source and amount would say mod slot 4 source and amount. That's the only potentially confusing thing, but if you think about how the mod matrix is set up, it makes sense. The display in the middle is just showing all the modulations from the mod matrix targeted at that specific control.

All I know is it's not working for me in Kore 2. If I try and learn a param I find it doesn't then respond to Kore's knobs, and yet it is clearly the right param because if I turn it in the synth gui the Kore knob turns. So it works backwards but not the right way. On the other hand, if I try and use one Kore knob assigned to more than one param then it works and I can control 2 (or more) params but it doesn't work again if I switch it back to one. It just makes no sense.

And it doesn't help that the param names are meaningless.

[beely]

I agree that 8 parameters at a time is not enough for hardware control. However 24 controls (like 8 sliders and 16 knobs, or just 24 knobs) plus additional buttons (like the SL has another 32 buttons per page) could work really well for 100% control. Because like I said, with that many buttons, every page is just one button press away potentially (if they wised up and implemented that). Very few synths would need more than the available 24 controls X 32 pages (32 buttons available to jump right to a page).

These solutions just don't work that well for me - I don't want to have to remember that the synths filter envelope for "synth plugin X" is on page 23. *Some* kind of standardisation scheme helps, but ultimately, the beauty of synth programming on a full panel synth (eg Prophet 5 or Jupiter 8 ) is that all the controls are right there, so you can instantly tweak and interactively tweak with multiple controls. Where you have a paging system, you need to flip pages but worse, you can't interactively tweak with two controls that are on different pages. It's putting barriers in the way all the time.

I think that what you are proposing has merit, and companies could also do better with this kind of product too. But it's not what I want - I don't need access to a million parameters, I just need consistent, direct access to the most important ones for all my tools.

I understood what you meant, I just don't agree that dedicated controls helps at all, exactly because controls are always different.

Then it's not the product that suits you - that's fine. I'm just talking about what *I* want, because *all* the controllers made up until now have been more towards your way of working. I want something better.

If you want a simple cut down layout that would actually be able to be labelled permanently, it's very easy to build that layout on something like the SL. Making the layout permanent just doesn't help I don't think.

Sure, and I do in fact do something similar. And it works ok, but it's a hassle to do, and with varying issues that using generic controllers alone can't solve. Which is *exactly* why I would like someone to build a product to do this *properly*, coming up with various solutions for the things generic controllers can't do, and that doesn't require a myriad of learning, assigning, remembering and fixing all the time, and in a way that looks and feels nice and can become a centrepiece of my setup.

[Echoes in the Attic]

I agree that 8 parameters at a time is not enough for hardware control. However 24 controls (like 8 sliders and 16 knobs, or just 24 knobs) plus additional buttons (like the SL has another 32 buttons per page) could work really well for 100% control. Because like I said, with that many buttons, every page is just one button press away potentially (if they wised up and implemented that). Very few synths would need more than the available 24 controls X 32 pages (32 buttons available to jump right to a page).

These solutions just don't work that well for me - I don't want to have to remember that the synths filter envelope for "synth plugin X" is on page 23. *Some* kind of standardisation scheme helps, but ultimately, the beauty of synth programming on a full panel synth (eg Prophet 5 or Jupiter 8 ) is that all the controls are right there, so you can instantly tweak and interactively tweak with multiple controls. Where you have a paging system, you need to flip pages but worse, you can't interactively tweak with two controls that are on different pages. It's putting barriers in the way all the time.

This is a really good point and it's another weakness of current systems. If a controller can only change the entire setup page at once, then necessarily there will be many combinations of controls that you can't access at the same time. This can also be the case with tabs in software synths though too. This is fairly easy to work around by having two control surfaces. Either the same thing twice or more interesting is to have two different ones. I have a Novation SL and Push for example, so provided I can get to any page fast, I can have any combination of parameters between the two. It's the getting there fast part that is hard. As you say, it's not really possible with complex instruments to remember what page number something is on. This is why we need PAGE NAMES that are visible on a display. This is the other side of the Novation fail. No direct access to pages and no page names. You need both fast full control. And this is the other thing I like about Nektar. Pages get names to pick from. I'm waiting until it works better with VSTs in Bitwig (hopefully like in Cubase) and then I'll likely get one. I *think* in the Panorama you can also change the left and right side controls separately too. But this again will depend on the DAW specific scripting.

I think that what you are proposing has merit, and companies could also do better with this kind of product too. But it's not what I want - I don't need access to a million parameters, I just need consistent, direct access to the most important ones for all my tools.

I understood what you meant, I just don't agree that dedicated controls helps at all, exactly because controls are always different.

Then it's not the product that suits you - that's fine. I'm just talking about what *I* want, because *all* the controllers made up until now have been more towards your way of working. I want something better.

If you want a simple cut down layout that would actually be able to be labelled permanently, it's very easy to build that layout on something like the SL. Making the layout permanent just doesn't help I don't think.

Sure, and I do in fact do something similar. And it works ok, but it's a hassle to do, and with varying issues that using generic controllers alone can't solve. Which is *exactly* why I would like someone to build a product to do this *properly*, coming up with various solutions for the things generic controllers can't do, and that doesn't require a myriad of learning, assigning, remembering and fixing all the time, and in a way that looks and feels nice and can become a centrepiece of my setup.

Ya I get where you're coming from. Both styles have merit. I am often thinking in terms of having a synth keyboard that is off to the side, not directly with my mouse and screen. So the idea of easily being able to find any parameter via hardware is great, rather than having to roll the chair over to the desk to do more editing. But I also like having something with quick access to common controls right in front near the mouse. I've got Push for that which only has the 8 knobs so that is set up in the DAW device order (used to use it with Ableton, now I use Bitwig).

Something else that I think all devices should have is the Novation quick control knob on the mkII which lets you mouse over a control and the knob controls that parameter. It's not so bad using a trackpad to get to a parameter, I just don' twant to adjust it with the mouse/trackpad so that helps a lot.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Strange, the knob assignments seem rational to me. For the first ever, they've actually made every single control available. Every menu item, button, even the preset selector. Even the display of which parameter is showing it's modulations in the display page. That's one thing that might be confusing. When you click a parameter and show it's 6 available modulations, these are actually named in the host parameter as what slot they are in the full modulation matrix, not what number of the 6 slots for that parameter, if that makes sense. So you could click on filter cutoff and assign it's slot one to LFO3. But if you already had other modulations, it might actually be assigned to mod slot 4 for example, which you can see in the mod matrix. so the mod source and amount would say mod slot 4 source and amount. That's the only potentially confusing thing, but if you think about how the mod matrix is set up, it makes sense. The display in the middle is just showing all the modulations from the mod matrix targeted at that specific control.

All I know is it's not working for me in Kore 2. If I try and learn a param I find it doesn't then respond to Kore's knobs, and yet it is clearly the right param because if I turn it in the synth gui the Kore knob turns. So it works backwards but not the right way. On the other hand, if I try and use one Kore knob assigned to more than one param then it works and I can control 2 (or more) params but it doesn't work again if I switch it back to one. It just makes no sense.

And it doesn't help that the param names are meaningless.

That's weird, who knows what's up there. But not really surprising right? I mean would you really expect an Arturia synth to work 100% as expected? I wouldn't. However I don' think the parameter names are meaningless, I think they actually did that part pretty well. It's just the display in the center that is basically a quick view to that parameters modulation sources from the matrix. If anything I think the GUI just shouldn't have the numbers 1 to 6 labelled on them, as that part will be confusing for people who try to automate those, since they'll see a different number. But that number represents the modulation matrix slot which is easy to check. I think the parameters are all named well. Still don't care for the cpu hog of a mediocre synth though.

[layzer]

meh... keyboard controllers only need a mod and pitch wheel, aftertouch and a program change control at most... editing VSTs with a mouse on the big LCD is still the way to go. imo

[EvilDragon]

...unless you want to take your VSTs on the stage, where you don't want to mess around with a big LCD and a mouse live, but you want to have your fav plugins going on with some preassigned parameters for live tweaking.

[Mathazzar]

Questions for Big Tick or anyone else who's used this...

As a Panorama P6 user and former AutoMap sufferer, one of the major benefits that I enjoy in a non-wrapper environment is maintaining a clear view of what's loaded at any given time.

If I glance quickly at my track list, I can see Omni, Zebra, LuSH, etc. With this system, does Akai integrate with the DAWs to provide patch or plugin based naming for tracks or do you just see a long line of "VIP" on each track with no sense of what's actually loaded therein? Obviously one could simply re-name or colour-code to get around it, but I'm curious to know how they addressed this.

Also, for those of us running huge templates, what's the overhead like on using plugins from within the VIP wrapper instead of natively?

Lastly, how customizable are the parameter setups for plugins? Can we make custom mappings easily, or modify the stock ones to, for example, standardize certain parameter-to-knob placements between commonly used synths?

Thanks!

[beely]

I am often thinking in terms of having a synth keyboard that is off to the side, not directly with my mouse and screen. So the idea of easily being able to find any parameter via hardware is great, rather than having to roll the chair over to the desk to do more editing. But I also like having something with quick access to common controls right in front near the mouse.

Yeah. I just want something I don't have to think about, to quickly edit any patch on any synth's core parameters - oscillators, filters, envelopes - in a consistent manner. If I want to adjust the filter EG attack time, regardless of what instrument I'm editing, there is a knob for it, right there, that does the same thing, every time.

And for it to let me sound design by feel - if I want to do anything more complex, like analyse and resynthesise a sample in Alchemy, then of course I'm going to be going to the GUI/mouse - and that's fine, it's an acceptable compromise for synths that are more complex. But for sure I'm going to be able to adjust the oscillator pitches, balance, wave select, filter, envelopes and stuff right from my synth control surface in front of me.

Editing these things via mouse is so painful, particularly when you are trying to find the musically playable sweet spot, and you are having to tweak for example the filter cutoff, resonance, filter env amount, filter key follow and filter envelope parameters and other filter mod source amounts all together (all parameters that are affecting the cutoff of your sound on the keyboard) to get in the ballpark.

For people that want to adjust one parameter at a time and find the mouse the best way for them to do that, that's fine. These interfaces let people have access to far more complex features than you could do any other way.

But it is absolutely a far inferior way than a proper tactile synth control panel for a lot of important parameters, and imo it's the bigger reason why old vintage synths continue to hold their value - not because of the way they sound, not because of their features, but because they are fun, inspiring, convenient and easy to sculpt sounds. They don't have every feature in the book, but they give you the important ones, right there, under your fingers, and very little gets in the way. And you can close your eyes and play/tweak until it sounds right.

And that's what I'd like to get closer to, in todays software world.

It makes a *massive* difference to get your software under the control of your fingers, just like it makes a massive difference to have your mix come up on a control surface with real faders, pans, mutes/solos and so on.

So, don't want no generic unlabelled control surface.
I want a synth design surface.

And I am really surprised no-one has done this yet - every year I keep expecting to see this happen...

[Mathazzar]

So, don't want no generic unlabelled control surface.
I want a synth design surface.

And I am really surprised no-one has done this yet - every year I keep expecting to see this happen...

You've basically described the Roland Aira System-1, and why I like mine so much.

It gets a lot of flak for being...green? Roland? I dunno really—but it's absolutely fantastic at what it sets out to do: provide an immediate tactile interface for designing sounds.

The keyboard isn't expressive at all (good for making patches, not performing them), but the controls are all there, they all respond beautifully, and frankly I'm fond of the sound. I even love the fact that it has only 8 patch slots because it forces me to actually make something instead of just being a preset zombie. It's creative, compact, and the plug-out concept is fantastic as far as I'm concerned—great idea for modern hardware extensibility. Hopefully they make some unique ones too, not just emulations of old hardware.

I've owned a Monomachine, a Bass Station II, and a variety of other hardware synths...but I find the System-1 more fun and immediate to work with than either of them.

Anyway, the point is that a synth control surface does exist (I love mapping it to other synths as a MIDI controller), people just hate on it.

[Big Tick]

does Akai integrate with the DAWs to provide patch or plugin based naming for tracks

The track in the DAW shows up as 'VIP', but displays the name of the currently loaded patch.
On the hardware you can see both the patch and the plugin name.

Also, for those of us running huge templates, what's the overhead like on using plugins from within the VIP wrapper instead of natively?

It is quite low, as the wrapper is fairly lightweight. However it has the ability to switch between patches smoothly (so the previous patch fades out while the new one plays), which means creating several instances of the same plugin. You can disable that feature for plugins that are too cpu/memory hungry.

Lastly, how customizable are the parameter setups for plugins? Can we make custom mappings easily, or modify the stock ones to, for example, standardize certain parameter-to-knob placements between commonly used synths?

You can modify the stock mappings, of course. You can even define custom mappings per patch.
You can control the min/max of the parameter value, use reverse/bipolar mode for the knobs, toggle/momentary/step mode for the buttons.

[Mathazzar]

Excellent, thank you so much for the answers!

If you've played any of Nektar's Panorama boards, could you comment on how the keyboard feel compares between them and the Advance series? I'm typically a fan of Akai's high-end keyboard feel, so I'm very curious to know how these are. I don't like the overly clicky or bouncy feeling of some of the major brand keybeds.

[rod_zero]

The system 1 is an excellent idea as a MIDI controller. I will just change:

- No Internal sounds
- Encoders instead of pots.
- Screen to see parameter values
- Mod and pitch wheels
- An XY pad or a joystick
- 61 Keys

Any synth has the same architecture: oscilators, filters, envelopes and modulations options. Just give us 8 controls per section and it will be quite good enough to be usable with lots of software.

[electro]

meh... keyboard controllers only need a mod and pitch wheel, aftertouch and a program change control at most... editing VSTs with a mouse on the big LCD is still the way to go. imo

Right on. Knob boxes today are the easiest thing to supplement the lack of tactile controls on a keyboard.
Roland almost got it right.
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1243

How about a semi weighted 88 waterfall keybed with aftertouch?

[layzer]

...unless you want to take your VSTs on the stage, where you don't want to mess around with a big LCD and a mouse live, but you want to have your fav plugins going on with some preassigned parameters for live tweaking.

ok, so controllers should have 4 extra knobs besides pitch and mod to control filter, reso, volume and pan

[layzer]

meh... keyboard controllers only need a mod and pitch wheel, aftertouch and a program change control at most... editing VSTs with a mouse on the big LCD is still the way to go. imo

Right on. Knob boxes today are the easiest thing to supplement the lack of tactile controls on a keyboard.
Roland almost got it right.
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1243

How about a semi weighted 88 waterfall keybed with aftertouch?

not being a live performer myself, i picked up a ucontrol 16 knob controller and only
used it a few times before i went back to just using the mouse again. i dunno, in studio
work, its just more of a hassle trying to remember what knob controls what parameter
for multiple vst's without getting out the paper and sicssors to make template overlays.
too much of a hassle


oh yeah.... there ya go! *drool*