This is the new Steinberg control surface. (See the hands-on video at SonicState.) It’s built to integrate out of the box with Cubase 4, which if you’re a Cubase 4 user should be good. You or I might give it a name like “CubaseControl” or something, but Steinberg has seen fit to call it the CC 121, which sounds like it was lifted off of a MIDI specification. No matter — they can call it Eustice if it’s a good controller.

But that’s not the only odd thing about the CC 121. There’s a little light that goes on to say it’s “Cubase Ready.” (The marketing materials say this gives it “instant plug and play.” I’m not entirely sure why you need an LED for that, but I guess it’s comforting or something.) Then there’s the control layout, which has so much blank space that it looks a little like someone dropped a stack of encoders and buttons on a piece of paper and glued everything where it fell.

But the oddest thing about the CC 121 is the controller choices themselves. The whole point of previous single-fader control surfaces — at least, so I thought — was creating a compact device that can sit by your mouse. The point of the CC 121 seems to be, well, EQ. There are a full twelve dedicated EQ encoders. For everything else, there’s … uh … one knob. (It’s the one that says “VALUE” on the right side.) It is supposed to be a really smart knob, at least. Here’s how Steinberg describes it:

“Ultra-precision Advanced Integration controller knob with ‘point and control’ support: controls any visual Cubase 4 parameter, internal FX setting or VSTi parameter using mouse pointer selection”

Translation: you can click on any setting in Cubase and control it with our encoder, one setting at a time. Want to control more than one setting at a time? Say, delay time and wet/dry mix? Sorry. There are four buttons so you can change the function of the one value knob, but not the obvious solution of having any more than one knob. I know what you’re thinking. There’s blank space all over this unit, so why couldn’t you just have four “Advanced Integration Controller Knobs”? I think I have the answer: if you did that, you wouldn’t have room for the “Cubase Ready” light.

You may think I’m just using this opportunity to beat up on Steinberg and be snarky, but I’m not.

The Magic of Third Parties and Broad Compatibility

No, on the contrary, this illustrates something I’ve suspected for a long time. Just as most screenwriters shouldn’t direct their own films, software developers shouldn’t necessarily make hardware controllers for their own software. Sometimes the magic works; sometimes it doesn’t. Either way, having choices beyond those the software vendor chose is a good thing. Third-party hardware can work with more than one app (in case you ever use something other than Cubase), it can provide more choices (in case your needs are different than someone else), and it provides the much-needed perspective beyond the folks who built the software. You may not get the brand name of your DAW on the unit, but smart software can still make the out-of-box experience just as integrated. That doesn’t mean I think the software vendors shouldn’t try — as Alan Kay is often attributed as saying, “People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware.” But, even assuming he did actually say that, and assuming we should all listen to him, he didn’t say that you had to make that hardware for your own software, or that you’d be successful all of the time.

Someone out there I’m sure really, really loves tweaking EQ. Congratulations: the CC 121 is for you. For everyone else, you have not one but four excellent choices: Novation’s SL line, Frontier’s AlphaTrack and TranzPort, and PreSonus’ FaderPort. They all integrate fairly automatically with Cubase (even older versions which are incompatible with the CC 121), and give you lots of control. And that’s just compact control surfaces.

Not only that, but Novation, Frontier, and PreSonus all make hardware that works with other stuff not from Steinberg. The AlphaTrack, for instance, just added extensive support for GarageBand 4 (adding to a long list of other supported software), plus software you probably haven’t even heard of — SAWStudio by RML Labs and MultitrackStudio from Bremmers Audio Design. SAWStudio support didn’t grab the Messe headlines the way a Steinberg control surface did, but I’ll bet if you’re a SAWStudio user, you’re really excited. And that’s the point: we choose our software personally, so we should choose our hardware the same way.

Here’s a quick review of the other compact control surfaces available — not only for Cubase, but a lot of other software, as well:

JazzMutant’s Lemur touchscreen turned a lot of heads, at least as a concept: precise, multi-touch tracking that could follow all ten of your fingers independently, and interactive, custom controller touch layouts looking like something out of Star Trek: The Next Generation. That was the good news. The bad news: difficult assignments for OpenSoundControl (OSC), extra steps required for MIDI (especially in the early versions), controller layouts limited to pre-defined objects, no tactile feedback as with physical controllers, and a steep price (US$2500). Some dedicated electronic musicians loved it, and were willing to put in the time to use it. Many others just shrugged and stuck to far-cheaper, sometimes more-flexible hardware knobs and faders. Still, many at least acknowledged that the Lemur could be a first indication of the future of hardware, even despite its flaws.

Now, JazzMutant is back with something they call the Dexter? All-new hardware, right? Nope. The unit itself looks identical to the Lemur, which is too bad — part of what made the Lemur experience feel incomplete to me was its bulky and boxy case, which failed to reflect the innovation of the screen. A lower price? We just don’t know yet: pricing and availability is TBD.

What the Dexter is designed to do is to work more fluidly out of the box as a traditional DAW controller. There are pre-defined layouts for Cubase, Sonar, Logic Pro, Nuendo and Pyramix, and lots of new object features specifically designed to DAW editing.

Looking over what they’ve planned, I immediately see items that makes me say immediately say, “slick!” — and others that make me go, “huh?”

Ever since Apple’s Logic Pro bundled a huge library of synthesizers and effects into a DAW, its competitors have been gradually adding more instruments and sound processors. Even without Logic, the step is a pretty obvious one: there are only so many DAW features you can add from year to year to try to compel people to upgrade, so bundling extra sound toys is the other alternative.

Cubase SX4 hasn’t been officially announced, but while I was vacationing this weekend some SX4 screenshots were leaked online. Music thing has the story with convenient links to the images. Tom says the knobs look like Ableton, because he sees some two-dimensional knobs. (Here’s a tip: those knobs look more like Max/MSP, which in turn may have inspired Ableton to opt for 2D controls.)

Mostly, though, SX4 looks inspired by Logic Pro. Internal audio mixing is remiscent of Logic’s Environment, though it may be easier to use. The interface for Prologue looks just like the ES2 to me, and the visual style resembles instruments like Sculpture, sometimes approaching a direct rip-off. (Then again, sometimes software looks alike because UI services are outsourced to third parties; I don’t know whether that’s happened here or not.) The synthesizers themselves look interesting, with some spectral processing and synthesis options. I don’t imagine it’ll make you switch to SX4, but it could keep Cubase loyalists from switching to something else.

It’s just a glimpse, of course — it’s funny watching Cubase users pre-judge the entire SX4 upgrade based on some leaked, unofficial screen shots. I’d say take them as a small taste, and wait for the official stuff. Don’t expect the competition to stay still, either; aside from the imminent Ableton Live 6, I would expect Logic Pro to get a large update some time soon. Stay tuned.

EditorsKeys shortcut keyboards use stickers overlaid on your existing keyboard rather than requiring you to replace your keyboard. That has some definitely advantages: I’m not letting go of my beloved Microsoft keyboard, and the custom “shortcut” keyboards sold for programs like Logic and Pro Tools are often absurdly expensive. The EditorsKeys sticker sets cost under US$20, and right now they’re 20% off.

EditorsKeys Shortcut Keyboards

EditorsKeys tells us they’ve now unveiled a new set for Logic Pro, the first to be semi-transparent, so you can move the stickers to different keys if you’ve remapped your shortcuts.

Logic Pro Keyboard

Other sets include Pro Tools, Reason, Cubase, and SONAR, all updated for the latest releases, plus graphics software like Avid, Vegas, Final Cut, Photoshop, Premiere, and After Effects.

Now all I want is a keyboard with tiny LEDs that can change shortcuts depending on the active software. (And yes, I know a prototyped attempt to do just that evidently failed. Maybe later.) In the meantime, these are the most affordable solution.

Want proof that you can’t keep on top of which DAW is best? Updates are now nearly round-the-clock, and point-one updates can bring serious features. Hot on the heels of MOTU’s free 4.6 upgrade to DP, Steinberg has over 50 new features in Cubase SL/SX 3.1, coming as a free download in August. Some of what’s new:

External hardware integration: Updated Studio Connections technology lets you monitor external hardware’s audio as if it were an internal VST. One caveat: this comes out of Steinberg’s ongoing partnership with its now-parent-company Yamaha, so your hardware manufacturer must rhyme with Lamaha.

Freeze; you’re surrounded! Dolby Digital and DTS Encoder support

Processor optimization for the latest multiprocessor Macs and PCs, plus optimization for new AMD and Intel DualCore processors and Hyperthreading (that last feature means you can now make the Kessel Run in . . . oh, never mind.)

“Equal Power” panner

MIDI delay compensation (more hardware integration, remember?), plus “freezing” of MIDI track playback

Got all that? This will have decidedly less mainstream appeal than some of the other updates announced this week, but for some Cubase hardcores and pros, it should come as good news. Of course, this update runs on Mac and PC only — sorry, Atari ST users.

It’s two, two, two Cubase stories in one. Here goes:

Cubase.net forum will require USB key number: Don’t like entering serial numbers and the like when you’re installing software or talking to tech support? Now you may need them just to post to a forum. The revised forum policy on Cubase.net requires users to add their USB key number (the dongle’s identifier) to a hidden field in their user profile. Refuse to comply, and you won’t be able to post Cubase SX-related technical questions. Users of Cubase software without a key, like Cubase LE, can continue to post normally, and all the general chat is still open. But ongoing piracy lockdowns just keeping getting more annoying for those of us who have legit investments in our software. (via gearjunkies) And in other Cubase news . . .

Cubase LE/SE installers incompatible with Tiger: No, Cubase itself is compatible with Mac OS X 10.4. The problem seems to be the installers: if you’ve got a pre-installed copy of LE or SE 1.07, you’re fine, but you can’t install anew on a Tiger system. See Steinberg’s forum post. A fix is promised.

There's nothing quite like a 3-way. I reviewed Steinberg
Cubase SX 3.01, Apple Logic Pro 7.01, and MOTU Digital Performer 4.52
for Macworld.com; read the complete review and conclusions.

Of course, a really fair comparison of all-purpose DAW software would
be more like Cubase vs. Logic vs. DP vs. Cakewalk SONAR vs. Ableton
Live vs. Mackie Tracktion vs. Digidesign Pro Tools LE vs. Steinberg
Nuendo vs. Pro Tools TDM vs. . . . but any reviewer's head
would immediately explode if they had to do that. Even with just three
products, the complexity and nuance of each has to wrangle with limited
word counts. These are all deep products.

That said, there are some conclusions here in terms of how these
compare. I won't spoil the ending — go check it out. And since
Macworld.com doesn't have comments, you can conveniently flame me here.