Since Rolling Updates say it's almost fully baked I just watched Softubes official demo video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbLFsiZGuOc)
 
I'd be curious to hear more on that subject from the Sonar user perspective ... thoughts, experiences, considerations, ...
 
At the first glance this looks nice but the limitation to only Softubes plugs is a knock-out criteria for me - unless the Sonar team deliberately breaks that tight Softube software-hardware linkage and somehow manages to also control ProChannel EQ etc. ... and apart from a few LEDs on the Console 1 there does not seem to be anything that could not be controlled via any generic ACT/MIDI controller (if Cakewalk would fix a few bugs there) ...
 
 
 
 

http://www.azslow.com/index.php/topic,324.0.html
Note that this preset is not created nor tested by me. But I guess the author is successfully using it for controlling Sonar, FXes and ProChannel modules.

azslow3
http://www.azslow.com/index.php/topic,324.0.html
Note that this preset is not created nor tested by me. But I guess the author is successfully using it for controlling Sonar, FXes and ProChannel modules.

thanks for the info.
 
"...here is a preset for the Softube Console 1 controller. It actually does what I always wished for my own workflow: controlling the SONAR channel strip modules with hardware knobs, including full parameter feedback. I use it in combination with a Mackie Control..."
 
so if a user can make it integrate via Mackie mode and your tools, azslow, Cake should be able to do a tight integration. well, I'm really curious how it turns out (considering that they refused to make virtually any changes/updates to whatever goes with external control i.e. ACT, MackieControl, VS-700, ...)

Rob[atSound-Rehab]
 
"...here is a preset for the Softube Console 1 controller. It actually does what I always wished for my own workflow: controlling the SONAR channel strip modules with hardware knobs, including full parameter feedback. I use it in combination with a Mackie Control..."
 
so if a user can make it integrate via Mackie mode

I think he is using Console 1 AND Mackie Control (device).
 

and your tools, azslow, Cake should be able to do a tight integration. well, I'm really curious how it turns out (considering that they refused to make virtually any changes/updates to whatever goes with external control i.e. ACT, MackieControl, VS-700, ...)

I am always curious why people pay so much attention which label they see on something... There is AZ Controller, I also has fixed some problems with original ACT MIDI and MackieControl plug-ins. Everyone can use the result, report problems and/or ask for some improvements/changes.
 
Also as you can see, the preset creator has got ZERO comments. Which is probably close to the number of users interested in future development.

azslow3
I am always curious why people pay so much attention which label they see on something... There is AZ Controller, I also has fixed some problems with original ACT MIDI and MackieControl plug-ins. Everyone can use the result, report problems and/or ask for some improvements/changes.
 
Also as you can see, the preset creator has got ZERO comments. Which is probably close to the number of users interested in future development.

I think it's also a question about liability and continuity. You are putting great effort into providing tools that fix some issues (which actually the original software company should fix since people paid for that); hopefully at least people here on the forum appreciate and use your tools (despite the little feedback) ...
 
However, you can't blame anyone not applying these tools because you do all this free of charge out of your personal interest, so you are free to stop improving/supporting your tools anytime as you do not have any liability to improve/fix your tools once your interest shifts to something else ...
 
So to me this "almost baked Console 1 support" is interesting because it will indicate the direction things will go in the future i.e. are they building it based on existing features and fixing some bugs along the line (thus reviving some of the good functionality that is there but needs a little revamp) or are they once more implementing proprietary hardware controller, which will be short lived due to missing future support.
 
I own and heavily use the still best control surface for Sonar (VS700) and want to keep using it. Currently it can fix most of what I need to fix by changes to the ACT definition files and the use of a MIDI translator tool in the background; a few bugs are there, which I'm aware of and have to live with (e.g. control of FX chains).
 
 

Rob[atSound-Rehab]

azslow3
I am always curious why people pay so much attention which label they see on something... There is AZ Controller, I also has fixed some problems with original ACT MIDI and MackieControl plug-ins. Everyone can use the result, report problems and/or ask for some improvements/changes.
 
Also as you can see, the preset creator has got ZERO comments. Which is probably close to the number of users interested in future development.

I think it's also a question about liability and continuity. You are putting great effort into providing tools that fix some issues (which actually the original software company should fix since people paid for that); hopefully at least people here on the forum appreciate and use your tools (despite the little feedback) ...

I was talking about Console 1 preset. Some people appreciate other presets, but this one has zero feedback so far. "original software company should fix" is not the case. Softube was never claiming Console 1 can control Sonar and something inside it. You can ask them. Cakewalk/Gibson is not going to receive a single cent from the (not subtle) price asked for that device.
 

However, you can't blame anyone not applying these tools because you do all this free of charge out of your personal interest, so you are free to stop improving/supporting your tools anytime as you do not have any liability to improve/fix your tools once your interest shifts to something else ...

I am not blaming anyone. But:
a) a company can stop support any time once there interest is shifted. As VS-700 owner, you know that. In fact there is no legal reasons to complain, there was no warrantee they support it forever (of for next version of software, OS, etc.)
b) everything is done by concrete people. With a company you never know who has done the development behind the scene. He/she can change the job any time.
 

I own and heavily use the still best control surface for Sonar (VS700) and want to keep using it. Currently it can fix most of what I need to fix by changes to the ACT definition files and the use of a MIDI translator tool in the background; a few bugs are there, which I'm aware of and have to live with (e.g. control of FX chains).

FX chains control problem is not VS700 specific, as well as ACT mapping files in general. I mean nothing on VS700 plug-in side can "fix" these problems.

I have a Console One and it is a brilliantly executed idea built for one specific purpose, which is to to facilitate ITB mixing as if you were mixing on a real console. You cannot think of it as a DAW controller, and although you can use it in Mackie emulation mode, that would be counter productive. It should be thought of as a plug in controller, but even that is not accurate, as it only controls the channel strip. You can't even use it to control other effects like the Softube TSAR reverb, only Softube EQs and compressors.
 
Personally I don't find the lack of plug in support an issue at all. In addition to the default SSL SL4000 I have purchased the Active Passive pack and the FET compressor and this has really covered pretty much all bases for me. I will probably get the British Class A and the Drawmer 1973 next time it is on special, but I don't really need them. I can't really think of any third party plug ins I would want to use in the Console One channel strip. Certainly not the Pro Channel EQ, which is fine, but the SL4000 EQ is just fantastic. Maybe if you have an investment in UAD it would be another story, but if you are set up with a decent rig and can do all your processing in the box then why get locked into the UAD dongle drama? Certainly I have found myself to be much more productive with a few very high quality plug ins that I know really well, combined with a hardware controller that helps me to mix with my ears rather than my eyes.
 
The final point is the integration with Sonar. At the moment it will populate track numbers from Sonar to Console One, but not track names, which is a pain. I spent a considerable amount of time setting up a track template with all VST instruments and default track names manually, so this is not really an issue for me anymore.
 
It would be nice if Console One track changes were reflected in Sonar, so you can flip back and forward to adjust other channel effects, but to be honest if you are using it as designed for final mixing it is not really an issue. I thought it would be confusing working on Console One on one track while Sonar was on another, but as long as you are using Console One for the complete channel strip it really does not matter what is happening in Sonar. The Console One plug in controls soloing, muting, panning and gating, so I just don't touch those in Sonar anymore.
 
To sum up, if you are looking for a DAW controller to replace the VS700 look elsewhere. This is not the controller you are looking for. You can still use the VS700 with Console One, I currently still use a VS100 as a control surface in conjunction with the Console One, particularly when tracking.  
 
Also if you are really attached to existing channel strip plug ins, compressors or EQs from other vendors then Console One is probably not ideal. You cannot insert your other plug ins in the strip, so you can only place them before the Console One Plug in, so not really an ideal scenario but might work depending on what sounds you are trying to achieve.
 
If you want the benefits of the Console One workflow you really need to embrace the Softube plug ins. But believe me, that is not really any limitation at all :)
 
Thanks,
Dean 

hey, thanks a lot. this is really informative. just the feedback I was looking for ... and makes me wonder even more what the advertised new integration with Sonar will bring.
 
BTW, does it work with the softtube plugs sold via NI (passive EQ, etc?)

That's a good question, to be honest I don't know. I don't own those plugins, and I have not seen any videos of anybody using them with Console One. 
 
In the Softube demo video you mentioned when they demonstrate how to swap out the plug ins at 7:27 you can see the complete list of available equalizer plug ins, does not appear to include the NI plugs.
 
Thanks,
Dean 
 

 
This announcement from Softube answers my initial questions ...
 
http://www.softube.com/index.php?id=news166
 
Ever since its introduction, Console 1 has worked in tandem with every major DAW on the market. Now, the next level of control is here. In Presonus Studio One and Cakewalk SONAR, vital DAW functions can be controlled right from the Console 1 hardware—allowing an even smoother workflow. The update will be available in October, but you can see it at AES Los Angeles 2016 (booth 427).
 
The new control functions are:
 
Track Selection
The new Console 1 software allows the DAW track selection to be reflected in Console 1 and vice versa.
 
Volume and Pan
As always, the Console 1 Output Volume and Pan knobs can be used to control the corresponding settings in the Console 1 software—but they can now also be switched over to control the pan knob and volume fader on the selected DAW track.
 
Solo and Mute
The Solo and Mute can also be switched to control the selected DAW track or—as previously—to control these settings in the Console 1 software.
 
DAW Send
Levels Hold Shift and control the selected DAW track's send levels directly from the Console 1 hardware.