The state of hardware controllers for plugins.

[zfy]

I'm sad. I love my plugins. I want to control them the same way I would control a hardware potentiometer, with the same (or close) resolution. Why are people okay with 128 steps of resolution? I want to play the resonance of a plugin filter like I can with my Boog Model D, but I can't.. I get 128 possible places my filter can land on, and I can hear the smoothing algorithm in between those values, it's so tiring, it's like I'm molding clay with gloves on.

I want to control the pitch of the oscillators in The Legend. I want to control the delay time of a tape echo emulation.. But no, if I want fine control I have to shift-drag with my mouse, I can't use my Midi Fighter Twister for super fine control like that, the resolution of the encoder is simply not high enough.

I know 14-bit NRPN's exist, but I don't know of any controller with pots/faders that actually send 14-bit data, and even then there's the problem of 31250 bits/s data rate of MIDI over DIN, clearly not enough for the type of fine control you'd get from a pot on an analog synth, and then there's the problem of whether the plugins even accept 14-bit MIDI messages....

MIDI works fine for triggering stuff, or fast parameter changes where the smoothing algorithm works best, or parameters where you just set and forget and don't need much precision. But for slow, subtle parameter changes while performing it really doesn't work well at all... And no one seems to be bothered by it..

I guess my needs are quite niche, since I don't see many people complaining about this. Have people like me just moved most of their stuff to hardware?
Interested in your thoughts.

[chk071]

I'm sad. I love my plugins. I want to control them the same way I would control a hardware potentiometer, with the same (or close) resolution. Why are people okay with 128 steps of resolution? I want to play the resonance of a plugin filter like I can with my Boog Model D, but I can't.. I get 128 possible places my filter can land on, and I can hear the smoothing algorithm in between those values, it's so tiring, it's like I'm molding clay with gloves on.

I don't get it. Most (all?) DAW's translate MIDI internally, and offer higher precision, as do most/all plugins.

I rather see the issue in the fact that most MIDI controllers offer 16 controls, which are unlabelled, so you're only able to control a fraction of what's going on on the screen with your hardware. Even though I kinda got used to it, because, no matter how many controls your controller will have, it's simply impossible to control more complex soft synths with it, and have one knob per function.

[zfy]

I don't get it. Most (all?) DAW's translate MIDI internally, and offer higher precision, as do most/all plugins.

What do you mean "offer higher precision"? How?
If I control a parameter with my MIDI controller, the parameter will always land on one of 128 possible values. Another way is to use an endless encoder with relative messages, but then you're still limited by the encoders pulses per revolution, which are usually very low.

[chk071]

Well, I probably mixed something up, but, I was under the impression that the MIDI messages get translated to the DAW internal system, and process with higher precision, but, could be that I confuse that with parameter smoothing, as described here: viewtopic.php?t=555542

Anyway. I don't have any issues with filter stepping or something, as most if not all of my plugins do MIDI CC smoothing for the parameters where it matters.

[aMUSEd]

NI controllers use higher resolution VST automation rather than midi but the price is for plugins to be hosted by their own software (Komplete Kontrol)

[jdoo]

I use an SL MKIII to control an OB-6. Wrote about the increased resolution needed for some of the OBs controls — NRPNs

https://forum.sequential.com/index.php/ ... 3#msg54302

Bottom line, it makes a big difference, where needed on the OB. Not certain that translates to soft synths though…

J

[muki]

as far as i can see, the faderfox EC4 talks NRPN

http://www.faderfox.de/ec4.html

heres a nice review by loopop

[zfy]

But.. They're endless encoders, their resolution isn't determined what MIDI messages they send, but their pulses per revolution, which is 36 for this one. If I wanted to cover every 14-bit value, I'd have to do a 360 degree turn 455 times (16384/36). Now imagine a device with a normal potentiometer and a 14-bit ADC, the only thing limiting you from reaching every value would be your physical ability to precisely turn the knob. The larger the pot, the easier. I don't know any devices like that though.

[zerocrossing]

NI controllers use higher resolution VST automation rather than midi but the price is for plugins to be hosted by their own software (Komplete Kontrol)

Or Maschine.

That’s it for me. Maschine mk1, GEM S2 for keys, pitch, mod, poly aftertouch, expression, and a Touché for fun. I realized that knobs are mostly unnecessary for me, though it is fun to sometimes load an effects plugin into Maschine and play with it like it’s an effects pedal.

[pdxindy]

But.. They're endless encoders, their resolution isn't determined what MIDI messages they send, but their pulses per revolution, which is 36 for this one. If I wanted to cover every 14-bit value, I'd have to do a 360 degree turn 455 times (16384/36). Now imagine a device with a normal potentiometer and a 14-bit ADC, the only thing limiting you from reaching every value would be your physical ability to precisely turn the knob. The larger the pot, the easier. I don't know any devices like that though.

Basically, the lowest common denominator decides things. Most people are fine with low precision so that is what is mostly available.

[BONES]

I'm sad. I love my plugins. I want to control them the same way I would control a hardware potentiometer, with the same (or close) resolution. Why are people okay with 128 steps of resolution? I want to play the resonance of a plugin filter like I can with my Boog Model D, but I can't.. I get 128 possible places my filter can land on, and I can hear the smoothing algorithm in between those values, it's so tiring, it's like I'm molding clay with gloves on.

I'm thinking it's all in your mind. I'm thinking that if you gave us audio examples, none of us would be able to hear what you think you can hear.

The good news, though, is that MIDI 2.0 offers 32 bit precision, so you just need to find a DAW that supports MIDI 2.0 and a controller that sends it, like the Erae Touch.

[zfy]

I'm thinking it's all in your mind. I'm thinking that if you gave us audio examples, none of us would be able to hear what you think you can hear.

Ok. Here you go:

You can't attach mp3 files on this forum, so I had to find somewhere to upload it to.
Here's me controlling the cutoff with high resonance on my Boog Model D:
https://whyp.it/tracks/48812/1?token=rR7DX

Using my Midi Fighter Twister to control The Legend:
https://whyp.it/tracks/48813/2?token=z7xbW

Of course if you do these sweeps really fast then there won't be much of a difference because it'll be smoothed in software, but I mentioned that in my first post and I have no issues with that.
But anyway, it's not just audio related things like filter sweeping where it bothers me, it's any parameter where you want high precision. Imagine a delay where the delay time is 0-1000 ms, with 128 steps it would jump 7.8ms every time I change it, not very useful for dialing in a groove. I'd have to have another knob for fine adjustment or just use my mouse.

[BONES]

Cool. I'm off camping this weekend but I'll have a listen when I get home tomorrow night.

[rod_zero]

I don't have much problem with the resolution of the pots but what I think is really the worst part that hasn't changed in like 20 years, while we have seen endless controllers launched to the market: The number and distribution of controls.

Almost all controller present the same 8 knobs, 8 faders and maybe some pads. This hasn't changed, it was true in 2004 and it is true today. Why?

I personally think that when you are trying to control a software synth and you look at the available controllers two problems arise:

1.- Not enough controls, most synths need like 3 per oscillator, 4 for the filter plus 8 for 2 envelopes. Going through "pages" of 8 controls is horrible.

2.- The controllers don't look like a synth, like it is really that hard to design a controller for controlling software synths?

The System 8 is a good concept in how to solve this problem, just get rid of the internal engine and add a second LFO controls. and yes I know there have been some small midi controller manufacturers that put out specialized controllers but they were done way too close to a single synth.

Maschine, arturia spark are examples of how much better the interaction with software can be if you design a controller and software tightly.

[pdxindy]

The good news, though, is that MIDI 2.0 offers 32 bit precision, so you just need to find a DAW that supports MIDI 2.0 and a controller that sends it, like the Erae Touch.

Logic Pro supports Midi 2.0