Control Surface Performance

cosmo wrote on 12/10/2004, 7:52 AM
Anyone using control surfaces with Vegas 5? I've been using an Edirol UR-80 and I have a little xSession as well. Both work flawlessly with Cubase and Reason. With Vegas however - they don't work so well. They're easy as pie to set up, but when I do something such as slide a fader up and down - Vegas is extremely slow to respond to that. It also makes a grating little noise sometimes as well (while controlling something).

I'm picking up a Mackie Control Universal this week or next and I was wondering if these same problems exist with that console as well.

Thanks.

Comments

PipelineAudio wrote on 12/10/2004, 10:39 AM
Im having the same sort of problems with a mackie control. The biggest one I have is that if you change the track order, then hit undo, it can lock vegas to crash or lock it for very long periods of time.

Pulling the faders down, often they pop right back up, so you have to hold themdown for a while ( in trim mode yes, not automation mode).

Sony needs to be aware of these problems, as control surface support for us is in its infancy and will surely just get better from here.

Now that you have used one in vegas, how do you feel about the way they are implemented? For me, besides the pitiful button assignment editor ( like the equally pitiful keyboard preference editor), I really think they have implemented the control surface functionality philosophy VERY well
cosmo wrote on 12/12/2004, 11:10 AM
I agree - they've implemented the philosophy very well indeed. By that I mean it's very easy to set up a generic control surface very quickly. The non-responsiveness is a little annoying but I love love love using a real tactile surface to control my DAW Equipment.

So Pipeline - you have a Mackie control surface huh. HUI or Universal? What about the 01v - is there anything you can tell me about that unit? I'm really torn here between which surface to buy. Both the Mackie MCU and the 01v sell for roughly the same price on eBay, but each have very different feature sets it seems.

01v - I use Cubase SX 1.02 as my main tracking app. I know it's an old version but it works soooo well I have no need at all to upgrade versions. My Cubase also has the 01v listed in it's "Add Remote" list. So I assume the integration there is pretty good. This unit is also of course a seemingly high quality digital mixer as well so I guess it could have lots more uses than the MCU. My main questions about the 01v are 1) are the motorized faders as responsive to mix automation as Mackie's? and 2) is the 01v limited to 16 channels or can you bump up bank sets like other controllers? I'm sure it has banks - I just haven't read anything that expressly says so - on either count.

Mackie - this unit seems newer and more *expressly* supported - but NOT in Cubase SX 1.02. Of course I can set up a generic remote and I've read on the Cubase forum where people have done that successfully with MCU surfaces. However - I also read a lot of comments about MCU faders # and #7 not performing correctly, and general unhappiness with fader problems. Of course the Mackie MCU is expandable too.

So I guess the 01v is more bang for the buck, IF it does the two things I'm still unaware about - responsive motorized faders and bankable channels.
PipelineAudio wrote on 12/12/2004, 8:30 PM
Im running the Mackie Control Universal

After we get the main freezing and goofy sticky bugs worked out, we gotta look at the implementation.

Plugins with related parameters end up on separate pages with unrelated parameters and it makes thrid party plugs almost useless to control with the MCU
cosmo wrote on 12/12/2004, 10:56 PM
Yuck dude...that sounds nasty. Heard anything about the Tascam controllers? They get awesome reviews everywhere I look. I'm looking at the FW-1884 now, still around a grand but with soooo much more in the way of ins and outs and stuff. I don't know...it's looking good.
PipelineAudio wrote on 12/13/2004, 8:11 AM
Im betting it will be the same story: GREAT performance in cubendo, not so cool in vegas

Sony seems to be using the MCU as default so I think that optimizations will happen to it first, if and when we make them aware of the troubles were having.

The Tascam ones look like a better deal in a lot of ways, lots more faders for less money. Do they have an MCU emulation mode?
cosmo wrote on 12/13/2004, 12:50 PM
Yeah dude...the FW-1884 and also the FW-1802 have Mackie HUI emulation and MCU emulation(that's how it get's used with ProTools I think). The FW-1884 looks amazing to me, features-wise. I currently only have 2 ins for my DAW(which is fine for just me of course) and this console will bump that to 8 ins and a coax and an S/PDIF. Lots of outs as well to accomodate surround mixing. ADAT connections built in and a Firewire interface to the PC. And it's expandable. 100mm flyers....I'm sold. They're going for $1000 on ebay. I've been searching out user reviews as well and I have yet to read a bad one. AND it comes with Cubase LE and a copy of GigaStudio 3(with piano samples only I think).

As for Vegas - I'm sure you're right, even the Tascam will probably drag a bit...it seems like a software specific issue. I long for the day when Vegas can truely replace my Cubase system. Until then I'll keep on using it for all of my video and surround work -)