can't get us428 to control transport

[haydxn]

yes indeed, you could always do it that way (for anyone who doesn't know, that involves mapping midi messages to normal keyboard keystrokes)

that does have other issues, for example requiring the program to have focus. but yes it is an entirely functional way of working also.

[haydxn]

unfortunately the US428 sends CC data from the transport controls; MMC is a SysEx protocol, and the only way T2 will recognise the keypresses for what they're intended as is to convert the CC data to SysEx before it reaches T.

[Steve Prince]

unfortunately the US428 sends CC data from the transport controls; MMC is a SysEx protocol, and the only way T2 will recognise the keypresses for what they're intended as is to convert the CC data to SysEx before it reaches T.

Haydxn,
Thanks heaps for your effort. Even though I own a mac I feel you've advanced this wanted facility for Tracktion owners big time

There is a possibity, as I mentioned earlier, that Tascam might add Mackie Control emulation for the US-428. I'm sure the mac techeads here can adapt the work you've done.

In the mean time, I've been eying off the Tascam FW-1082 which has firewire audio as well as motorised faders and more control surface emulation than you can poke a stick at. Gear lust is begining to rise $$$$ being the only issue

Thanks again Haydxn

Steve

[haydxn]

yup the money is the clincher!

no problem, i like solving problems. i think i went about it in a long complicated way tho! the basic gist of the guide is that the correct MMC SysEx strings are generated in place of the chosen input MIDI messages. It is necessary that they arrive at a MIDI input port, so you just need some kind of (A) Midi translator and (B) MIDI virtual patch cable.

i hope that some mac users are able to put their knowledge of the platform to use in coming up with an alternative!

[bewing77]

Like I said, if you are just looking for a cheap control surface that Behringer is the way to go. It's like what, $200, and it has 100mm motorized faders, v-pots etc etc. Does almost everything that the Mackie Control does only it's a bit harder to learn it seems. I'd get one right away if I didn't own the MCU.

[rich_h]

If I understand the review in Sound On Sound correctly, the Behringer can be set up pretend to be a Mackie Control.

[bewing77]

If I understand the review in Sound On Sound correctly, the Behringer can be set up pretend to be a Mackie Control.

Yes it can. It can't duplivate everything on the MCU (fewer buttons) and has no display, but apart from that it works great.

[haydxn]

i'd rather like to get my hands on something like that

[Graeme]

Shouldn't it be possible to use the Mackie Control implementation within T2 to use other control sufaces?

That was my thought as well, but you can never be sure about these things .

I have a Yamaha 01x - which has Mackie emulation - but I can only get it to control the first eight tracks. Not sure if this is a T2 or Yamaha problem as yet, but I really would like to use these two togther.

[piaz]

I've got the Behringer BCR (rotary encoders).
Obviously it could be set as a Mackie emulation too, after all, it's only a matter of sent messages.
The thing is, does somebody know how to make my rotary act as a fader, in terms of Mackie CU?

Just explain the scheme, I'll manage the wiring

[piaz]

Uh ho
Seems I was a bit optimistic... after a few checks on the web, it seems that it is way more complicated than I thought
Anyway, we can still try...

[rpc9943]

okay so is something going to happen? if so, what?

RonC

[piaz]

For now, the thing that's gonna happen is 16 banks on a BCR and an associated prewired edit...

[haydxn]

oh dear ron hasn't tried it and it was he who triggered it in the first place

[rpc9943]

tried what?

ROnC