Zebra 3.0 - out now

[inkling]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

In both bitwig and on my Launchkey there is a jump when changing/automating the control knob value after changing presets. I assume that Zebra does not send the new value (0?) once the preset has changed. Is this something that can be addressed in a future update?

[IvyBirds]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

We tried to also turn them into Macros that save with presets, but this resulted in highly confusing behaviour for people who have MIDI based workflows (e.g. MPE).

Because they are not saved with preset now, they also do not recall with project unless automated.

We might try to resolve this issue by saving them with project only. Not sure how involved this would be, and how fail safe.

Maybe it would be easier to implement a choice. Or make 2 sets. 1 set for mpe (etc) and 1 set for macro behavior which can be saved in presets. I believe Equator2 has this as well. Works pretty good *edit: just checked to be sure and, nah..equator just has 2 sets of midi controls; 1 typically for normal midi work and 1 for MPE work..macro's are just the 5 macro's which do save with the presets

Host Automation should be saved at the host level, it doesn't make sense to save them at the instrument preset level

This allows you to automate whatever you want depending on what you are trying to do at that moment in that instance of the plugin on that track

Same goes for Macros these should be at the host level also you don't need them at the plugin level and all they do is waste screen real estate

[exmatproton]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

We tried to also turn them into Macros that save with presets, but this resulted in highly confusing behaviour for people who have MIDI based workflows (e.g. MPE).

Because they are not saved with preset now, they also do not recall with project unless automated.

We might try to resolve this issue by saving them with project only. Not sure how involved this would be, and how fail safe.

Maybe it would be easier to implement a choice. Or make 2 sets. 1 set for mpe (etc) and 1 set for macro behavior which can be saved in presets. I believe Equator2 has this as well. Works pretty good *edit: just checked to be sure and, nah..equator just has 2 sets of midi controls; 1 typically for normal midi work and 1 for MPE work..macro's are just the 5 macro's which do save with the presets

Host Automation should be saved at the host level, it doesn't make sense to save them at the instrument preset level

This allows you to automate whatever you want depending on what you are trying to do at that moment in that instance of the plugin on that track

Same goes for Macros these should be at the host level also you don't need them at the plugin level and all they do is waste screen real estate

Meh..i disagree. Macro's can be very handy. And them being saved is what i use often with other synths..you know, making a patch, change the macro's to hit a sweetspot and save that for later use. Instead of saving that state in a project (host level) every time is just a waste of space and 100% unnecessary

[ptnah]

macros (when implemented right, which of course they are in zebra) are also a way to keep the assigned parameter(s) accessible on the gui, as only the macro knob is moved by the automation, not the respective parameter knob(s) itself

[IvyBirds]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

We tried to also turn them into Macros that save with presets, but this resulted in highly confusing behaviour for people who have MIDI based workflows (e.g. MPE).

Because they are not saved with preset now, they also do not recall with project unless automated.

We might try to resolve this issue by saving them with project only. Not sure how involved this would be, and how fail safe.

Maybe it would be easier to implement a choice. Or make 2 sets. 1 set for mpe (etc) and 1 set for macro behavior which can be saved in presets. I believe Equator2 has this as well. Works pretty good *edit: just checked to be sure and, nah..equator just has 2 sets of midi controls; 1 typically for normal midi work and 1 for MPE work..macro's are just the 5 macro's which do save with the presets

Host Automation should be saved at the host level, it doesn't make sense to save them at the instrument preset level

This allows you to automate whatever you want depending on what you are trying to do at that moment in that instance of the plugin on that track

Same goes for Macros these should be at the host level also you don't need them at the plugin level and all they do is waste screen real estate

Meh..i disagree. Macro's can be very handy. And them being saved is what i use often with other synths..you know, making a patch, change the macro's to hit a sweetspot and save that for later use. Instead of saving that state in a project (host level) every time is just a waste of space and 100% unnecessary

And you can easily do all of that at the host level which is where it belongs. In Cubase for example I can load a plugin save any automations I want, map MPE controls, make macros etc, and then save it as a tack preset and then simply reload that track preset in the future

This is way more efficient than at the plugin level especially with deep Synths like Zebra 3 because I can create unlimited track presets for different things.

While your methodology might work well for some Synths that don't have a lot of parameters it fails once you start working with deep and powerful Synths like Zebra 3

At the host level I can save all the automations I want for sound design and have virtually unlimited macros in the process and not be limited to what the developer offers.

Your methodology is creating for you issues as you are needing every developer to reinvent the wheel for you in the exact way you want

So while you are waiting for Urs to implement the changes you want that might not ever come, I can do everything already that you want at the host level and could from day one

I can also use host automation tools for deep sound design options mapped to the things I want for Zebra's Wavetable Engine which will be different than those for FM or additive, which will be different than when I use the presets I created for live performance or sequencing even in the same exact presets

That's the advantage of using host automation rather than cluttering the plugin itself.

[Held]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

None of my other synths require me to automate the macros just so they can keep their values, so it will be difficult to remember to always add automation when I change them.

Compared to Serum, Pigments, PhasePlant, Nexus etc. the behavior of these controls is very strange. I'm sure they are useful for whoever suggested this, but I'd appreciate it if you could at least save the state in the project.

Or maybe hide them. I'd rather not use them than try to debug strange sounding projects.

[exmatproton]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

We tried to also turn them into Macros that save with presets, but this resulted in highly confusing behaviour for people who have MIDI based workflows (e.g. MPE).

Because they are not saved with preset now, they also do not recall with project unless automated.

We might try to resolve this issue by saving them with project only. Not sure how involved this would be, and how fail safe.

Maybe it would be easier to implement a choice. Or make 2 sets. 1 set for mpe (etc) and 1 set for macro behavior which can be saved in presets. I believe Equator2 has this as well. Works pretty good *edit: just checked to be sure and, nah..equator just has 2 sets of midi controls; 1 typically for normal midi work and 1 for MPE work..macro's are just the 5 macro's which do save with the presets

Host Automation should be saved at the host level, it doesn't make sense to save them at the instrument preset level

This allows you to automate whatever you want depending on what you are trying to do at that moment in that instance of the plugin on that track

Same goes for Macros these should be at the host level also you don't need them at the plugin level and all they do is waste screen real estate

Meh..i disagree. Macro's can be very handy. And them being saved is what i use often with other synths..you know, making a patch, change the macro's to hit a sweetspot and save that for later use. Instead of saving that state in a project (host level) every time is just a waste of space and 100% unnecessary

And you can easily do all of that at the host level which is where it belongs. In Cubase for example I can load a plugin save any automations I want, map MPE controls, make macros etc, and then save it as a tack preset and then simply reload that track preset in the future

This is way more efficient than at the plugin level especially with deep Synths like Zebra 3 because I can create unlimited track presets for different things.

While your methodology might work well for some Synths that don't have a lot of parameters it fails once you start working with deep and powerful Synths like Zebra 3

At the host level I can save all the automations I want for sound design and have virtually unlimited macros in the process and not be limited to what the developer offers.

Your methodology is creating for you issues as you are needing every developer to reinvent the wheel for you in the exact way you want

So while you are waiting for Urs to implement the changes you want that might not ever come, I can do everything already that you want at the host level and could from day one

I can also use host automation tools for deep sound design options mapped to the things I want for Zebra's Wavetable Engine which will be different than those for FM or additive, which will be different than when I use the presets I created for live performance or sequencing even in the same exact presets

That's the advantage of using host automation rather than cluttering the plugin itself.

Listen..you are just wrong. Objectively i mean. Macro's are even more awesome on synths with a lot of parameters. And synths which have a deep rich feature set. To be able to quickly change 20 parameters with one knob is just great (if applied to your liking). + When saved on the patch-level you don't have to screw around when using the plugin in different DAW's or when one wants to share the preset with other users. Your points are very narrow minded, with all due respect.

[Urs]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

None of my other synths require me to automate the macros just so they can keep their values, so it will be difficult to remember to always add automation when I change them.

Compared to Serum, Pigments, PhasePlant, Nexus etc. the behavior of these controls is very strange. I'm sure they are useful for whoever suggested this, but I'd appreciate it if you could at least save the state in the project.

Or maybe hide them. I'd rather not use them than try to debug strange sounding projects.

They are not macros. That is the point I conveyed. They don't work as macros, they works as "remote controls" for the MIDI Control Changes that some users do not have access to to.

[Held]

Are these controls only meant for live performances?

Yes, pretty much.

They are meant to give people access to MIDI Control Changes (Performance!) from DAWs and workflows that are not MIDI based. They do automate, so one can make them part of a project simply by automating them.

None of my other synths require me to automate the macros just so they can keep their values, so it will be difficult to remember to always add automation when I change them.

Compared to Serum, Pigments, PhasePlant, Nexus etc. the behavior of these controls is very strange. I'm sure they are useful for whoever suggested this, but I'd appreciate it if you could at least save the state in the project.

Or maybe hide them. I'd rather not use them than try to debug strange sounding projects.

They are not macros. That is the point I conveyed. They don't work as macros, they works as "remote controls" for the MIDI Control Changes that some users do not have access to to.

But they look like macros and are in the same location where other synths put their macros. So I hope you can understand why I am confused (and probably other people too).

[IvyBirds]

Listen..you are just wrong. Objectively i mean. Macro's are even more awesome on synths with a lot of parameters. And synths which have a deep rich feature set. To be able to quickly change 20 parameters with one knob is just great (if applied to your liking)

Never said they weren't. I can already do that with Zebra 3 however and you can't. Why? Because I use host automation to do so at the host level while you are left beholden to whatever the developer created for you if they ever do it all

So while you pretend macros are important to you, your actual workflow indicates it's not

For me I say macros are important, so much so that I can use them on every plugin I own and use regardless of what the developer created for them

In fact my system has 120 knobs and 40 faders that can be assigned to Macros in seconds. Those are all pre mapped to hardware knobs and faders and can also be adjusted with a mouse onscreen or with my fingers since I use touch screen

Each knob can be assigned to a single parameter or dozens or even hundreds and I can attenuate and use response curves on each individual parameter

. + When saved on the patch-level you don't have to screw around when using the plugin in different DAW's or when one wants to share the preset with other users. Your points are very narrow minded, with all due respect.

I don't either and quite honestly your arguments are very narrow minded

But again I can already use unlimited macros in Zebra 3 and any other plugin I want in any DAW I want and your narrow minded methodology doesn't allow for that

[exmatproton]

Never said they weren't. I can already do that with Zebra 3 however and you can't. Why? Because I use host automation to do so at the host level while you are left beholden to whatever the developer created for you if they ever do it all

That is all fine and good..untill you switch systems, work with others, share presets...

So while you pretend macros are important to you, your actual workflow indicates it's not

macro's are important to me. I do not pretend. I don't like that accusation at all. I use macro's everyday and a lot.

For me I say macros are important, so much so that I can use them on every plugin I own and use regardless of what the developer created for them

In fact my system has 120 knobs and 40 faders that can be assigned to Macros in seconds. Those are all pre mapped to hardware knobs and faders and can also be adjusted with a mouse onscreen or with my fingers since I use touch screen

Each knob can be assigned to a single parameter or dozens or even hundreds and I can attenuate and use response curves on each individual parameter

well..good for you. This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness. Maybe egocentric is a better term. If you don't get what i mean..then just leave it.

But again I can already use unlimited macros in Zebra 3 and any other plugin I want in any DAW I want and your narrow minded methodology doesn't allow for that

See my earlier statement. As a side note; i do quite a lot of collabs. Your system is completely moot in such a situation, unless your 'collab partner' has the (exact) same set-up.. again..This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness..

[Urs]

But they look like macros and are in the same location where other synths put their macros. So I hope you can understand why I am confused (and probably other people too).

I guess we should not have labelled them or kept the original labels. We also should have called them "MIDI A/B/C/D" instead of "Control A/B/C/D". Maybe we'll rethink that in the next version, to avoid any confusion as to what they are.

[IvyBirds]

Never said they weren't. I can already do that with Zebra 3 however and you can't. Why? Because I use host automation to do so at the host level while you are left beholden to whatever the developer created for you if they ever do it all

That is all fine and good..untill you switch systems, work with others, share presets...

Only I have no issues doing any of that. That's your narrow minded methodology coming into play.that has you making incorrect assumptions

So while you pretend macros are important to you, your actual workflow indicates it's not

macro's are important to me. I do not pretend. I don't like that accusation at all. I use macro's everyday and a lot.

But you don't use them everyday and they are clearly not important to you, for example you are not using them with Zebra 3. If they actually were important to you, you would have an open mind with your workflow and constantly try to improve it, rather than settle for things that don't work that you claim are important. You accused me of being narrow minded while you are stuck in a workflow paradigm that doesn't work for you on the very things you claim are important to you. Unlike you I don't need Urs or anyone else to develop a Macro system that works for me the way I want it to work. I already can do exactly that

For me I say macros are important, so much so that I can use them on every plugin I own and use regardless of what the developer created for them

In fact my system has 120 knobs and 40 faders that can be assigned to Macros in seconds. Those are all pre mapped to hardware knobs and faders and can also be adjusted with a mouse onscreen or with my fingers since I use touch screen

Each knob can be assigned to a single parameter or dozens or even hundreds and I can attenuate and use response curves on each individual parameter

well..good for you. This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness. Maybe egocentric is a better term. If you don't get what i mean..then just leave it.

What exactly is narrow minded about how I do things. I can create a single macro or hundreds. I can have each one control a single parameter or hundreds, I can arrange them on screen however I want and control them however I want. I can use a mouse, a single hardware controller, multiple hardware controllers, a touch screen, and iPad, even my phone. Unlike you I have unlimited freedom and flexibility to create them exactly how I want to do exactly what I want and be controlled exactly how I want

What's the alternative? Being beholden as you are to whatever the developer created for me? To wait around as you are doing for Urs to make something you can use which will probably never happen ? To hope that he makes as many macro controls as I want it need and that I can control them however I want?

But I get it, Macro controls are just not very important to you and you don't really want or need them in every plugin you use. You really could not care less about them. You will use them sure, but only if the developer has premade them for you because in the end you can't be bothered to do anything else. That's fine of course, I get the fact that you couldn't care less about them but think you do

But again I can already use unlimited macros in Zebra 3 and any other plugin I want in any DAW I want and your narrow minded methodology doesn't allow for that

See my earlier statement. As a side note; i do quite a lot of collabs. Your system is completely moot in such a situation, unless your 'collab partner' has the (exact) same set-up.. again..This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness..

I do collabs also and play in multiple different bands, that's the thing my band mates and the people who I collaborate with can use any DAW they want and don't need to use any hardware controllers if they don't want, and it they do use hardware controllers can use whichever ones the want. They can use an iPad or not if they want. They can use touch screen monitors if they want or just use standard monitors

You seem to be making a whole bunch of incorrect assumptions here. Which is rather sad I have to say

[exmatproton]

Never said they weren't. I can already do that with Zebra 3 however and you can't. Why? Because I use host automation to do so at the host level while you are left beholden to whatever the developer created for you if they ever do it all

That is all fine and good..untill you switch systems, work with others, share presets...

Only I have no issues doing any of that. That's your narrow minded methodology coming into play.that has you making incorrect assumptions

So while you pretend macros are important to you, your actual workflow indicates it's not

macro's are important to me. I do not pretend. I don't like that accusation at all. I use macro's everyday and a lot.

But you don't use them everyday and they are clearly not important to you, for example you are not using them with Zebra 3. If they actually were important to you, you would have an open mind with your workflow and constantly try to improve it, rather than settle for things that don't work that you claim are important. You accused me of being narrow minded while you are stuck in a workflow paradigm that doesn't work for you on the very things you claim are important to you. Unlike you I don't need Urs or anyone else to develop a Macro system that works for me the way I want it to work. I already can do exactly that

For me I say macros are important, so much so that I can use them on every plugin I own and use regardless of what the developer created for them

In fact my system has 120 knobs and 40 faders that can be assigned to Macros in seconds. Those are all pre mapped to hardware knobs and faders and can also be adjusted with a mouse onscreen or with my fingers since I use touch screen

Each knob can be assigned to a single parameter or dozens or even hundreds and I can attenuate and use response curves on each individual parameter

well..good for you. This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness. Maybe egocentric is a better term. If you don't get what i mean..then just leave it.

What exactly is narrow minded about how I do things. I can create a single macro or hundreds. I can have each one control a single parameter or hundreds, I can arrange them on screen however I want and control them however I want. I can use a mouse, a single hardware controller, multiple hardware controllers, a touch screen, and iPad, even my phone. Unlike you I have unlimited freedom and flexibility to create them exactly how I want to do exactly what I want and be controlled exactly how I want

What's the alternative? Being beholden as you are to whatever the developer created for me? To wait around as you are doing for Urs to make something you can use which will probably never happen ? To hope that he makes as many macro controls as I want it need and that I can control them however I want?

But I get it, Macro controls are just not very important to you and you don't really want or need them in every plugin you use. You really could not care less about them. You will use them sure, but only if the developer has premade them for you because in the end you can't be bothered to do anything else. That's fine of course, I get the fact that you couldn't care less about them but think you do

But again I can already use unlimited macros in Zebra 3 and any other plugin I want in any DAW I want and your narrow minded methodology doesn't allow for that

See my earlier statement. As a side note; i do quite a lot of collabs. Your system is completely moot in such a situation, unless your 'collab partner' has the (exact) same set-up.. again..This is exactly what i meant with your narrow-mindedness..

I do collabs also and play in multiple different bands, that's the thing my band mates and the people who I collaborate with can use any DAW they want and don't need to use any hardware controllers if they don't want, and it they do use hardware controllers can use whichever ones the want. They can use an iPad or not if they want. They can use touch screen monitors if they want or just use standard monitors

You seem to be making a whole bunch of incorrect assumptions here. Which is rather sad I have to say

really..whatever..

[IvyBirds]

really..whatever..

Yes really, and not whatever. What's sad is if Macros really are important to you, you would think you would be open to learning new ways on how to implement them more efficiently and with greater flexibility, however obviously you don't