Tu baccarat rules gioco poker online gratis casino games demo casino jeux de table download free ringtones wwe…

I was lucky enough to chop my Houston in for a Mackie Control and despite Steinberg’s brain-damaged implementation of this excellent control surface it provides a useful way of working with the software, but I think the single-fader route isn’t the right way to go for me; I’d prefer more faders as the whole “fader paging” route is quite a trial - having to do this for every channel change would be really hard work.

This sort of controller is perfect for ‘my’ personal set up. I already own a Kore, so controlling AU/Vsts is all set. But I find when mixing, I get a cramp from the awful Apple mouse, and find myslef on Safari looking at reviews of the AlphaTrack and Faderport.

If I could use this thing in Logic 8, I would be the first in line to purchase one on day of release.

The fact that there is a dedicated button to bring up my VST, I could use that to activate Kore and control any other plugs I want. I use the Logic EQ, and yearn for dedicated buttons to control it. This thing is a dream and my worst nightmare.

This is actually something that I’ve been wanting for years (although not on Cubase). The best way to describe it is as a device to augment the mouse.

I don’t like having to look down at my control surface or futzing with pages when I want to change a parameter… don’t tell me you’ve never touched or changed the wrong parameter before. With a universal knob, I would never have to look away from the screen… one hand on mouse, the other hand on the knob. No fuss, no mistakes, just point and tweak.

Why one knob and not two or four? Because the whole point is to skip the need for assignment. So this wouldn’t work with multiple knobs.

I’m not saying one universal knob is all you need. Having a bunch of knobs is great. But a lot of times I just want to grab that parameter on screen and tweak it, NOW, without having to thiink about assignment.

That being said, I don’t like the way Steinberg implemented this contoller. It should be smaller. And I don’t use Cubase.

After using Live and Logic/Sonar for the last few years the mouse-only approach was beginning to cramp my style and I went looking for a transport control. I bought an AlphaTrack and I immediately felt the difference that having actual knobs and buttons - even software-encoded ones - makes. There is a reason that the layouts of mixers and tape recorders are still emulated in most software: it works.

I agree with Peter. A faderbox doesn’t replace the mouse or the keyboard but augments them in a very useful way. I find that my tracking and mixing is much more fluid.

So, okay, having one “automatic” knob makes some sense. But why not have a manually-assigned knob next to it? Or for that matter, why would it be so hard to point-and-click to assign two knobs versus one? You could, say, hold down keys 1-4 and click and assign to the associated knob.

I’d say that’s a tiny bit of technical overhead for a huge usefulness payoff. And as the wet/dry versus delay time illustrates, if you’re limited to one knob, the actual usefulness of the hardware falls to zero and you wind up just having to use the mouse.

There are other solutions, as well — not perfect, but I still think better than this.

The SL approach is of course to let you scroll through parameters and access them through hardware that way. Now, admittedly, this *isn’t* ideal when you have lots of parameters … but then you can have the software let you pick your favorite “macro” parameters, as in the Ableton Live device racks, or as KORE does with its 8 knob software setup.

It’s not rocket science. And the fact is, you could do this with the SL and Cubase.

And if you don’t like squinting at the LED, then again, Novation has a solution for you — put the parameters up on your screen and make them really big. (There’s a certain amount of squinting at Cubase’s interface — sorry.)

But I agree, the mouse is a generally underrated input device. I just still find it useful to augment what you’re doing with the mouse sometimes.

This looks like a hardware representation of a typical default Cubase channel. No assignments necessary (except that multifunction knob, of course) - dead simple to operate. If you don’t mind the extra space next to your keyboard vs. one of the alternatives - and this seems like a minor issue - it looks like an interesting product.

I’m not a big fan of physical control surfaces in general - it didn’t take long for me to look at editing effects parameters on a HUI (or similar) to wonder how squinting at a small LCD was somehow better than seeing the parameters represented on a nice GUI.

I found entering automation graphically with the mouse more satisfying for me, personally. Before DAWs, productions usually had three phases: a tracking phase, an overdub phase and a mix phase. Today, everything is jumbled together and the mix happens as the project progresses, so much of the time, by the time you’re done tracking, the mix is also mostly done, so you don’t need to put 10 fingers on faders to mix from scratch.

There have been times when I wanted to ‘perform’ or ‘feel’ the automation for a particular track, and I found the Presonus Faderport to be exactly what I needed. Very useful, not overly-complicated. Compact.