Tracktion Software

Barbarossa · Post by **Barbarossa** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:27 am

I just read @Mackie forums, that T2 does not only not support parameter-feedback like Cubase, but it even doesn't understand relative controller-messages?

Is this really true?!?

braj · Post by **braj** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:29 am

Can you explain those features for the humble among us? Thanks.

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:32 am

If I don't know what the heck that is, I'm not likely to be needing it anytime soon.

djsubject · Post by **djsubject** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:35 am

i have relative controller-messages running from my bcr2000? but i did hack into the MCU commands to do it

relative controller-messages is when it keeps going & going AFAIK

but all the mappings in the cc mapper only go up to 127

Subject

Barbarossa · Post by **Barbarossa** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:37 am

With relative controller-messages, the controller doesn't send the absolute value when moved, but only the realtive value, how much it is incresed or decreased.
This is necessary, if turning knobs on the controller, doesn't result in jumping faders.

Barbarossa · Post by **Barbarossa** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:39 am

djsubject,
can you confirm, that T2 doesn't understand the relative values from your BCR? You need the MCU-mode, to make it work?

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:39 am

Gotcha. Yep, I can see your point there. When I get a keyboard with faders and knobs, I'm sure I'll be wanting relative controller-messages. (being sincere, not sarcastic)

Barbarossa · Post by **Barbarossa** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:41 am

That's absolutely necessery. Without parameter feedback, mixing without that, or even programming VIs is simply not possible in a decent way.

braj · Post by **braj** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 9:44 am

OK, I get it. Live4 gives you a bunch of those options and they were necessary for setting up some controllers. I haven't messed enough with anything besides an Oxygen8 with the T demo. And my StudioMix, but that's got it's own issues.

djsubject · Post by **djsubject** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:06 am

Barbarossa wrote:djsubject,
can you confirm, that T2 doesn't understand the relative values from your BCR? You need the MCU-mode, to make it work?

alll the controllers you can set up in the cc mapper in T2 have a range of 0 - 127 only, at the moment!

i am hopeing this will in time be updated

but for me where i have been able to hace the MCU controlls its not so bad becouse thay do support paramater feed back & relative controller-messages

the cc mapper will only let you control filter paramaters

AFAIK!!!!!!!

Subject

haydxn · Post by **haydxn** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:20 pm

yes, the CC mapper will let you control any filter parameters that can already be controlled by the A automation. however, indeed it only uses absolute MIDI-CC messages and converts them into an automation value. i'm sure jules will look into having relative values too... i hope.

the BCR itself lets you choose whether the knob sends absolute or relative data. so for the BCR it's not even remotely an issue. i would have imagined that most controllers capable of sending absolute messages would have the choice too but i guess i could be wrong there; for me the problem is the other way round. i have a fixed-pots controller which means i can't send relative messages, which is a bugger because some MCU commands respond to relative controller messages.

which is what djsubject was talking about...

we've been working together mapping his BCR to the MCU command spec, and it's been working great. the 'relative controller' messages used there are just what the MCU uses; for example, for pan, the MCU doesn't use absolute values, it only responds to relative midi messages to adjust left/right. this means that jules has got code in T to respond to relative messages so it shouldn't be too hard to add.
some of the MCU commands have been mapped with the aid of MIDIOX, making use of relative controllers; for example, it's possible to map a relative controller knob to ZOOM or SCROLL, by sending the correct MCU command for 'h zoom in' with each incremental message, and 'h zoom out' with each decremental message. etc.. etc..

i've almost got a complete map of the MCU commands written out, and i shall be putting it up here along with ANOTHER guide on how to map any midi controllers for MCU control. however, of course you won't get feedback unless it's specifically designed into the controller, and some controls will only really work if your controller has support for relative controls

[mine doesn't] but as djsubject will tell you, his BCR is pretty effective for controlling T2 now!

djsubject · Post by **djsubject** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:32 pm

thanks for explaining

Barbarossa · Post by **Barbarossa** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 1:37 pm

Haydxn,
that is good news from you and let me say i appreciate your efforts very much, but once again extremely bad news about T2, but i'm wondering now, why you and others flamed me about my complaining about the lack of parameter feedback in another thread.
I'm sure this was not overlooked, but is an icecold marketing decision to force the Tracktion community to buy Mackie controls, if they want to automate T2 in a decent and normal way these days, without jumping faders.

Hell, there even were responses of people, that they can automate T2 very well with their absolute-MIDI-controllers,

- things that didn't work already 10 years ago!

Please tell me, the Tracktion community also has serious users.

I see once again, fanboys are definately not good for developing a product further, because they do not represent the critical, serious customer, nor does the number of posts reflect the level of music-production and it's a shame for this community, that so many childs? rave about an email from Mackie regarding T2, but no one tells them, what bastards they are, if they want to force the consumers to buy Mackie-Controls, if they want to MIDI-control T2 in a non-ridiculous way.

I wish you good luck with the BCR-implentation, and i'm afraid T2-users will desperately need it, if they can't afford a C4, and today i'm even more sure, that Jules has nothing to decide anymore. Obviously the managers took over T2 and thanks to the supporting fanboys, they can follow their dirty plans without being disturbed.

At the moment T2 is nothing more than a v1.8 for at least doubled price. Well done Mackie!

nuisance sonore · Post by **nuisance sonore** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 2:07 pm

Barbarosa, while I do agree that Mackie hardware support was the top priority in the further developement of T2 this time around, I don't buy into the conspiracy theorie at all. I think it's just a function of timetable versus features, and of course Mackie wants, no, rather need, for it's software to support it's own hardware and that had to be top priority. Put yourself in their shoes and you'll see it' just logical. Plus, I'm not a programmer, the only "program" I've ever written was done by punching hole in cardboard cards to automate machinetool, but I do know that making hardware interface with software is a complex and time consuming process, and Jules doesn't have all the time in the world to do it and AFAIK he's only a one man team. Would you have waited another six months just so the features set is more complete? Would Mackie customers have waited?
I'm very confident that most features we want for our sequencing software (including relative controler message)will, in time, be implemented; we just have to be patient. In the meantime, T1 (and now T2) is a highly useable and versatile piece of software still, giving power into our hands that we could only dream of a decade ago.

haydxn · Post by **haydxn** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 2:09 pm

you get flamed when you post things like this, i'm afraid. what your post demonstrates is a fundamental inability to see past paranoid initial conclusions.

mackie are not 'bastards', 'forcing' anyone to buy anything in particular. T2 has been in development for quite some time, as i'm sure we're all too aware. it has not been lying around finished waiting for mackie to release it until now.

now that jules has got it in a position where it is working with control surfaces, and the other main planned features are included, and - largely - working without fault, it's sensible to release it.

of course, they COULD spend another good few months putting in the support for OTHER controllers (so that they're no longer evil, of course). what you are saying is paranoid, impulsive, short-sighted and ignorant.

it is entirely necessary that T2 supports mackie's own controller hardware. it is a mackie product, and they'd be stupid to not support their own stuff [consider the mackie controller's registered users, recieving info on mackie's new sequencer, and then learning that they're for some reason unable to integrate their hardware with software from the same company, when they already can with alternative software].

yes, yes YES of COURSE there are other controller surfaces. but look at the controller surface panel in Tracktion. a big window and only two entries. there's obviously going to be support for more; they have to start somewhere. there has to be a first few entries to the list. it would be a remedial action to NOT have mackie controllers be those first ones.
and - for crying out loud - it's not even out yet. it's out in may, and by that time we could have ourselves a wealth of options in that list. we may not. it doesn't matter. it's an inconvenience for those WITH other surfaces, but mackie are in no way bad for this to be the case.

noone is forcing anyone into buying mackie hardware. you WILL get flamed for this kind of post, barbara streisand, because it is entirely pathetic and demonstrates not even an ounce of thought.

yes it was an oversight to not include direct support for relative controls, but then most controllers ARE configurable as to which type of message is sent, seeing as absolute messages are actually the only type directly supported by the midi standard. it is not mackie or jules being evil. it is not even them being stupid. they just haven't put every possibility in yet and some people are going to get pissed off of course. it's just a matter of time, and remember that paying for T2 is not just paying for the feature set we're getting in T2.0. Paying for T1 got all sorts of extra features before T2 had popped up. there are plenty of refinements to come in updates that i'm sure won't be paid-for updates.

Tracktion Software

KVR Audio

OMG: T2 no relative controller-messages, too?!