October 24, 2014, 10:01:16 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email
News: Arturia's webmaster is glad to offer you these brand new forums ! Have fun using it and feel free to email any encountered problem at webmaster@arturia.com.

Arturia Forums



Author Topic: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control  (Read 3740 times)

Thomas@Arturia

  • Global Moderator
  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: 1
Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« on: May 16, 2011, 06:06:01 pm »
Please help us improve our synths: Hardware control,

We are currently updating our V-series synths.
One direction for improvement is to make hardware control easier.
Features being discussed are:
- Loading and saving MIDI mapping configurations
- Preset configuration dedicated to Arturia controllers
- Controlling one or multiple parameters from a single hardware controller.
- Controlling one parameter from several hardware controllers (how would you use it ? how to combine the control actions towards different parameters)
- Setup range values (min and max)
- Filtering by MIDI channel

In the mean time, do you expect support for third party controllers such as automap, hypercontrol... ?

Please send us your feedback,
Sincerely yours,
Thomas

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 439
  • Karma: 19
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2011, 12:56:20 pm »
Oh, this interests me a lot!

Let's see... I guess I'll simply start writing here what I have to say about it, even though, some of what I say may need further and proper thinking, because some of the suggestions may clash with each other or may turn out to be very impractical to others (hey, it's my humble opinion, so) or even to implement:


Please help us improve our synths: Hardware control,

We are currently updating our V-series synths.
One direction for improvement is to make hardware control easier.
Features being discussed are:
- Loading and saving MIDI mapping configurations
- Preset configuration dedicated to Arturia controllers
- Controlling one or multiple parameters from a single hardware controller.
- Controlling one parameter from several hardware controllers (how would you use it ? how to combine the control actions towards different parameters)
- Setup range values (min and max)
- Filtering by MIDI channel

In the mean time, do you expect support for third party controllers such as automap, hypercontrol... ?

Please send us your feedback,
Sincerely yours,
Thomas



1) Load/Save MIDI map configs is a good solution if implemented in a way that's very easy to set what's the default map to load on first instance run but also quick to change to an existing map on other instances.

Example: Usually, I have a 5 controller keyb setup. I would set all V-Synths default to my main keyboard, so at first run of, let say Jupiter-8V, I would know that it would respond to my main keyb controls right away. Starting another instance of Jupiter-8V would behaved in the same manner, but if I wanted, I would quickly map that instance to my 2nd keyboard (and by quickly, I would say 2 to 3 clicks away from main GUI).

BTW, dunno how or if this makes any sense, but... the config map preset being used should be part of the available parameters saved by the DAWs that supports capturing the VST state snapshot.

Edit: This quick change aspect would also cater for those frequent situations where I'm not at my usual setup and I only have with my 1 or 2 of the smaller keyboard controllers. Quickly changing the map to those on the opened instances would be a time saver.



2) Preset configuration dedicated to Arturia controllers is a must, of course, no discussion here ;)



3) Controlling one or multiple parameters from a single hardware controller, if possible to implement, is a must, really, when looking at how limited "knob/fader/button" count-wise most of the controllers are. I'm not sure if this point is refering to:

3a) "Should it be able to allow various synth parameters mapped to the same controller control/fader/knob/button ?" ...and to this, I say a big fat "Yes!" ...with an unintrusive (preferably not needing an "OK" click) warning msg like "That control is already mapped to another parameter" in the mapping stage.

3b) "Should it be able to allow and support sets/layers of controller controls allowing mapping to more parameters than the available controller controls ?" ...to this I also say "Yes please!", where the mapping implementation should support increment/decrement or direct selection of sets/layers of maps for that controller.

Example of direct access to these layers: Mapping controller "Button B1" to Layer A, where the available controls concentrate on OSC paramenters, "Button B2" would change to Layer B, where those same controls now are dedicated to Filter+Envelope related parameters... etc.

Example of inc/dec access to layers: Same as above but one would only need a pair of buttons to access next/previous layer of control maps



4) Controlling one parameter from several hardware controllers is to me a nice-to-have feature, especially useful when having non-keyboard controllers that may complement/extend the existing controls of a keyboard controller. Example: Someone with an Arturia Analog Experience THE LABORATORY midi controller + Arturia Spark Controller ...those Spark controller rotaries are begging to control some synth parameters, extending what's possible to control with the built-in controls of the Lab controller.
How to achieve this? Well... from a user point-of-view, the way I would expect to see the mapping of a synth parameter is with an array of possible controller controls mapped to that parameter. So, in the mapping stage, clicking on the required synth GUI control (i.e. parameter) I would expect to see a list (editable array?) of controllers+controls and if possible min/max ranges mapped to that parameter.

As I describe this, I'm almost assuming that, to have such level of mapping complexity, maybe a dedicated "V-Synth Map Editor" would be the way to go... freeing the existing GUI from this degree of extra complexity... although on-the-fly MIDI learn implemented on each instrument GUI is very useful too, for quick, temporary or track/song/project based mapping.



5) Setup range values (min and max), if possible, yes, but again, to me, it's a nice-to-have.



6) Filtering by MIDI channel is a must, to me, especially useful when dealing with controllers that have keyboards and pads, that usually are on different MIDI channels (pads on Ch10, usually).
MIDI channel filtering would allow a proper use of those Note sending Pads, not interfering (i.e. mirroring, turning them useless in most cases) with the notes sent by the Keyboard.



Sorry for the long post, but as I said in the beginning, I thought it would be best to simply start typing out the ideas for discussion or (most likely) for later editing (by me) as I think more about this while in front of my controller setup and all of the V-synths.


One issue I still have no idea how to deal with is the case of the Moog Modular V, how to deal with the dynamic setup it represents... maybe the mapping would simply work per possible module, then no matter which modules are present, there would always be a control mapped to each parameter... and this would definitely need those "layers/sets" I've mentioned in 3b)


...and speaking of the MMV (and ARP2600V), please improve the wiring physics/animation, please!!! -.-'



Edit: I would think that automap/hypercontrol/directlink controller owners would expect some sort of support for their controllers, but can't say much about it because I've been avoiding those for a while, so I don't own any of these types of controller.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2011, 06:56:31 pm by Koshdukai »

Thomas@Arturia

  • Global Moderator
  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: 1
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2011, 06:04:49 pm »
Hello Koshdukai !

Thanks a lot for your detailed and complete answer.
Many good ideas, no matter with your long post, was a pleasure to read ;-)

Few elements of answer...

1) Your remark regarding saving mapping into project does make sense. You would retrieve all mapping when loading a project, great. Parameters may not be used for that purpose, but saving the mapping into a song can be done anyway.

3b) As far as I understood, you expect to be able to change mapping configuration from hardware buttons. Perhaps, instead of creating layers within mapping, this could be done by simply selecting mapping configurations from controller buttons. Would it meet your expectations ?

At that time, the concepts are there. I guess the real challenge will be to provide an efficient GUI.

Thanks again for your feedback,
We'll keep you informed of the progress of our work of course.

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 439
  • Karma: 19
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2011, 06:18:37 pm »
3b) As far as I understood, you expect to be able to change mapping configuration from hardware buttons. Perhaps, instead of creating layers within mapping, this could be done by simply selecting mapping configurations from controller buttons. Would it meet your expectations ?

At that time, the concepts are there. I guess the real challenge will be to provide an efficient GUI.
Ah yes, that would end up providing the same kind of functionality, if the mapping preset change was fast enough to be almost transparent to the user.

Also, one would have to be a little careful about the naming convention, to have a consistent order of "sub-preset" i.e. presets specialized on certain parts of the synth aka "mapping layers". Meaning, I would have to be sure that these would stay sequential within the controller and... be careful not to go "overboard" and choose the previous or next set of presets belonging to another controller.

It's a good compromise, IMHO.


I haven't had time to sit at my usual setup with the V-synths but I'm planning to ASAP.
This may result in further editing or a new post, if any new ideas come up.

Thanks for taking the time to read'n'reply to this :)


Edit: oh! and speaking of the GUI, even though this might be a bit difficult to actually implement or figure out how to deal with multiple controls mapped to 1 parameter, but... it would be amazing if there was a toggle option to turn on/off an info translucent layer over the synth's controls, pointing out at least which of them are mapped... or even better, showing some sort of user made label at the time of map creation, to easily and quickly understand, graphically, what's mapped to what.  ...very useful on the cases described in 3b)
« Last Edit: May 20, 2011, 06:47:56 pm by Koshdukai »

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: 4
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2011, 04:10:11 pm »
    The short version ---any and all improvements would be welcome. I'd be more interested in improvements to the CS-80V multi-mode and general Arp 2600V updates which would bring it closer to the sound and function of the original. I've posted previously on both, so I won't repeat here.
    Also, Koshdukai's suggestions are certainly in the right direction.
   

HerrFrey

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: 0
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #5 on: May 30, 2011, 02:12:56 pm »
I don't know if this is technically possible to include it in the synth: I use Behringer's BCF2000. I think to implelemt native smooth 14bit-steps on fader- or wheel movements would be great.

And, of course it's not hardware controll, but a better preset management would be great. The actuall thing seems buggy. I dscribed it here:
http://www.arturia.com/evolution/smf/index.php?topic=3855.0;topicseen

And a huge preset-problem I still have with MMV:
http://www.arturia.com/evolution/smf/index.php?topic=2661.msg13667#msg13667

yellowchops

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2011, 12:02:20 am »
I just purchased the V Collection 2.0 & Analog Laboratory bundle and I'm super excited to try this out!

I am very interested in seeing support for 3rd party MIDI controllers like Novation's automap.  I'm glad to hear that Arturia is looking to improve users with 3rd party MIDI controllers.

This is awesome!

Thanks, Arturia!

moogy blues

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Karma: 1
    • Acoustic Focus
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2011, 08:49:44 pm »
The V series synths are too detailed to be operated by 3rd party controllers effectively IMO

Arturia should carry out a poll to see if their users or potential customers would be willing  for to pay for a multi purpose hardware MIDI controller that would operate key aspects of all the synths (along with specific add on modules dedicated to specific instruments/functions). This would determine if it would be commercially feasible to pursue

I'd be up for paying for a proper Arturia MIDI hardware controller as this would bring the V series to life

Thomas@Arturia

  • Global Moderator
  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: 1
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2011, 11:39:01 am »
Thanks for your contributions,

At that time, we intend to improve MIDI mapping features: provide the possibility to set up and select quickly MIDI mapping configuration, manage multiple configurations. Also this would include preset configurations supporting our controller keyboards. No plan to support third-party controllers such as Novation at that time.

Indeed, controlling the synths in all the details seems too ambitious, also this feature would be more destined to parameter automation rather than full sound design.

Feel free to contribute, topic is not closed:)

paulbinns

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: 2
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2011, 05:34:50 am »
The key thing for me is that you include all parameters to be mappable.
As long as the parameter is available for automation then I can setup a mapping on my novation controller. I own the Jupiter and Prophet synths and it is a source of continued frustration that only some of the controllers can be setup on my Novation.

Resonant

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: 0
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2011, 10:52:35 pm »
Adding support for automap controllers would be incredible, as so many people use them.
Furthermore, there are conflicts between Arturia and Automap so bad that one makes the other crash. So many of us use Novation and other popular Automap controllers that this seems like a no-brainer.
please please please Automap support, an end to the crashes
(I use CS-80V as an AU plug-in within Live 8, Numerology 3 Pro, and use a Novation 25SL-MkII controller, which works with everything except for my most beloved synth: my CS)

matt1314

  • Beta-testers
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 50
  • Karma: -1
    • Virtual Vintage Dreams
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2011, 02:21:33 pm »
Yep, also hoping for Automap support. I'm using the Novation Ultranova with Automap and sometimes it's quite hard to control Arturia's V-Collection synths with only 8 or 9 knobs and knowing each parameter.
matt1314

A.k.a. Virtual Vintage Dreams

codevyper

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Karma: 0
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2011, 05:03:21 am »
Well, as a 1000 others have posted in these forums, 64bit please. It never mattered to me in the past but I am now moving to Mac and Logic so it would be nice to have native 64bit support. No matter, I love my V-Collection synths! I use them all the time on gigs and in my studio! Keep up the good work!

bernybutterfly

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: -2
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #13 on: August 10, 2011, 06:15:34 am »
Hello,

I would prefer, that the plugins will also SEND Midi-Data!

So I could use for example the BCR2000 or other controllers with moterfader and would see the actual values of the parameters at the controller.
Also when changing presets, the actual value would be visible.

I don't understand, why this feature is not implemented.
With automap I would have to use such an automap-controller ... .

Bernd 

tectonick

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
Re: Help us improve our synths: Hardware control
« Reply #14 on: August 26, 2011, 10:45:57 pm »
Sorry, for posting my suggestion twice, but I saw this thread a bit too late :)

I also use a combination of bcr2000 and novation nocturn for controlling my vsti under Cubase Studio 5. I control them all via the generic-remote-feature, that is capable of sending parameter-feedback. When stepping through the presets, the lamps of the assigned buttons and rotaries will follow automatically the positions as shown within the vsti-gui. This works great with many of my vsti and makes it as intuitive as controlling real hardware, using the advantages of the software. Only Native Instruments and Arturia-plugins usually don't have this great feature.

It is also great for quick-assigning controllers to hardware with learn-functionality, as it is offered by nocturn and bcr2000. (I believe the generic remote and the novation automap use the same controller-tables (?) )

Maybe you just implement a vst-2-compatible controller-instance in front of the respective existing cc-controllers within your source-code (as some sort of "translator", to have the least effort possible). At Steinberg they told me, that control-messages that don't appear in the generic-remote-tables just don't comply with the vsti-2-standard...
« Last Edit: August 26, 2011, 10:50:51 pm by tectonick »

 

Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.8 | SMF © 2014, Simple Machines