This thread is embarassing.
 
Michelle911 asks if Sonar supports Hypercontrol, and the forum "experts" (apologists) go on to explain that its problematic, not something that you should want, and that Sonar's ACT functionality already does this.
 
Michelle- Sonar does not have tight integration with much hardware on the market.  There is the Roland A500/800, and also the Nektar Impulse LX advertizes Sonar integration.  I have the Nektar, the basic functionality works well (transport, faders, bank switching), but there are problems using it to navigate the synth rack and control synth parameters.  Using the stock Nektar profile in conjunction with a custom ACT profile for plugin control can do most things, but its not ideal.
 
If you want tight hardware integration, probably best to choose Cubase as it seems many devices are compatible with it.
 
Hardware integration is weak in sonar.  There is ACT midi mapping, but it is definitely "roll your own" and takes some study.
 
 

200bpm
Michelle- Sonar does not have tight integration with much hardware on the market.

 
"Much" is subjective, but I don't think you're aware of the totality of available support. As mentioned previously, SONAR comes with over 40 ACT profiles, including 14 for M-Audio products and five for Axiom keyboards. It is also compatible with Mackie Control and Mackie Control-compatible controllers, including the SSL Nucleus (SSL made a SONAR profile), various Korg controllers, Behringer, etc. etc. SONAR also supports the EUCON ethernet controller protocol; Avid has published a document on how to use their Artist Control controllers with SONAR. (FYI if you decide to go the Mackie Control route, I wrote an article on how to use Mackie Control with multiple DAWs - I'm an equal-opportunity "expert apologist" - including Logic, Pro Tools, Live, SONAR, Digital Performer, Studio One Pro, Reason, Acid Pro, Vegas, and Cubase.)
 

If you want tight hardware integration, probably best to choose Cubase as it seems many devices are compatible with it.

 
Actually 200 bpm is wrong again, Ableton Live would likely be a better choice, as it has native support for 67 controllers from numerous manufacturers, including Live-specific (not mapped "generic" controllers) from at least Novation and Akai Professional. Of course, they also offer their own Push controller, as well as Mackie Control compatibility. Michelle, this kind of information is readily available on the internet. Simply search on "controllers compatible with [name of program]." OTOH Cubase has their CMC modular controllers, which are pretty cool. Some of them work with SONAR as well.  
 

There is ACT midi mapping, but it is definitely "roll your own" and takes some study.

 
You do not always have to roll your own. SONAR comes with over 40 ACT profiles. You don't have to program them. If you're using an unsupported controller, you only have to program an ACT controller once to create a profile, then save it.
 
Also, some people are not afraid of study. For example, I know how to study style, syntax, and tracers to determine whether people are posting under aliases or not.
 

"tight" is also subjective ;-)
my idea of "tight" is how my apc40 works with ableton live :-)
but craig is right in that study will help you; this is true for life in general

John

lawp
in response to the subject/question, my speculation is "no" as even MCU has been abandoned/made open source, which makes me think proprietary controller support is not a high priority

I'm not sure what you mean. MC support has not been abandon. Nor is there anything proprietary about it. It is the one everyone uses for compatibility. If a CS is not supported by a DAW it will have an MC mode. 

mcu needed a handshake fix; the code has been released as open source, and a user made available a fixed version; cakewalk have done no further development themselves; this is why i used the term "abandoned" with respect to support - how would you otherwise describe it?

John

Anderton
John, I think his point isn't that the MCU isn't supported in SONAR, but that it won't be developed further. Frankly, open source is the way to go - there are a lot of potential variations in the MCU protocol, and I think it's more likely some user is going to come up with a really useful twist on it than a developer at Cakewalk who is working on new features and bug fixes.
 
At this point, the MCU standard is pretty mature - the Mackie Control appeared in 2003 if memory serves. If you want to do transport, solo/mute, arm record, and move faders and panpots on your main channels as well as switch banks, it works pretty reliably. Hard to say whether Hypercontrol will be equally universal in 2025. 

John
Actually its a very complete protocol. It came that way from the Logic Control. Each DAW developer is free to implement its features as they choose. In other DAWs it will do all sorts of things not available in Sonar. Its not the MC that is lacking its real support from CW.  Also its still being sold.

i bolded the pertinent point for ya, craig knew what i meant ;-)
 

200bpm
Michelle911 asks if Sonar supports Hypercontrol, and the forum "experts" (apologists) go on to explain that its problematic, not something that you should want, and that Sonar's ACT functionality already does this.

I have just tried to explain why Hypercontrol is not something you can support. The missed part is Hypercontrol itself. The chain is not "SONAR->(plug-in)->Hypercontrol->Device", it is "SONAR->Hypercontrol->Device".
And I have thought that is informative... I "apologies" if that make no sense
 

lawp

John

lawp
in response to the subject/question, my speculation is "no" as even MCU has been abandoned/made open source, which makes me think proprietary controller support is not a high priority

I'm not sure what you mean. MC support has not been abandon. Nor is there anything proprietary about it. It is the one everyone uses for compatibility. If a CS is not supported by a DAW it will have an MC mode. 

mcu needed a handshake fix; the code has been released as open source, and a user made available a fixed version; cakewalk have done no further development themselves; this is why i used the term "abandoned" with respect to support - how would you otherwise describe it?

Abandoned implies Mackie has. CW just hasn't updated their support. Thats how I would have said it. Steinberg made the Huston and it is abandoned. CW had Peavey make the Studio Mix and it is abandoned. 
 
Mackie is still making the Mackie Control and its still being sold. Its a current product. 
 
 

John
Actually its a very complete protocol. It came that way from the Logic Control. Each DAW developer is free to implement its features as they choose. In other DAWs it will do all sorts of things not available in Sonar. Its not the MC that is lacking its real support from CW.  Also its still being sold.

Actually it is very simple protocol... and that is DAW developer who makes it provide the (whole) functionality you see.
I am finalizing the next version of my plug-in. And that version support Logic Control protocol bricks. Everyone can try to be the "DAW developer" in discussed context, crash curse for required "programming skills" is included into documentation...
 

200bpm
Michelle911 asks if Sonar supports Hypercontrol, and the forum "experts" (apologists) go on to explain that its problematic, not something that you should want, and that Sonar's ACT functionality already does this.

Please feel free to point out anything factually incorrect in this thread; experts become experts by being open to updating their knowledge when presented with new data (as long as it's accurate).
 
BTW I don't recall anyone saying that ACT does what Hypercontrol does. It has been presented in this thread as an alternative. I specifically said it did anything the original Hypercontrol (not AIR Hypercontrol, which is bi-directional instead of unidirectional) could do. This is correct. Both map MIDI controllers to parameters. I also included a link for further study.

lawp
"tight" is also subjective ;-)
my idea of "tight" is how my apc40 works with ableton live :-)

 
I thought the APC40 was brilliant when it came out...still do. I even got an APC20 to serve as a "sidecar" (I need 16 faders with Ableton Live, all my performances were originally set up for the Peavey PC1600). Don't know if you've tried the Push controller yet, but IMHO it takes the whole concept one level higher.