Splat 
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8672
- Joined: 2010/12/29 15:28:29
- Location: Mars.
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/23 11:19:52
(permalink)
joakes
CakeAlexS
I doubt you will get it before X3E, and that's late March.
Oops ;-)
Cheers,
Jerry
Sell by date at 9000 posts. Do not feed. @48/24 & 128 buffers latency is 367 with offset of 38. Sonar Platinum(64 bit),Win 8.1(64 bit),Saffire Pro 40(Firewire),Mix Control = 3.4,Firewire=VIA,Dell Studio XPS 8100(Intel Core i7 CPU 2.93 Ghz/16 Gb),4 x Seagate ST31500341AS (mirrored),GeForce GTX 460,Yamaha DGX-505 keyboard,Roland A-300PRO,Roland SPD-30 V2,FD-8,Triggera Krigg,Shure SM7B,Yamaha HS5.Maschine Studio+Komplete 9 Ultimate+Kontrol Z1.Addictive Keys,Izotope Nectar elements,Overloud Bundle,Geist.Acronis True Image 2014.
|
Freex
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 478
- Joined: 2010/11/23 11:10:50
- Location: Northern Ireland
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/23 18:46:32
(permalink)
Ah, if only I had a clue what any of those files did or meant, then I'd be like the proverbial fly...
Hope some kind hearted code whizz finds a cure to all my machine ills.
Asus P9X79, Intel i7-3930k, 32GB RAM ,Windows 7, RME RayDat, Presonus Firestudio, Presonus Digimax FS, Mackie MCU, Mackie XT, Makcie C4, KRK Rokit 6 How To Setup A Drum Map...The Easy Way.PDF
|
smallstonefan
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2724
- Joined: 2003/11/20 11:41:35
- Location: Papillion, Nebraska
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/23 20:04:09
(permalink)
|
azslow3
Max Output Level: -42.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3297
- Joined: 2012/06/22 19:27:51
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/24 15:19:55
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
...
This software is distributed in the spirit of open source sharing under the MIT license. To this purpose we request that any stable/useful modifications to the control surfaces be published back for the community to build upon.
...
Dear Noel, I am not a big expert in licenses, but I have thought MIT license is more permissive. Does your statement means I am forced to release everything I write as an open source? The situation is the following. I am (very slowly) writing my own DLL. It is in 'C' (not 'C++'), so the only file I somehow use is IDL. There is no other subroutines, algorithms or ideas I take from the previously published API. From the first look, I can avoid a kind of workaround for ProChannel parameters in case I use new IDL. Do you think I will be allowed to release the dll as closed source? I just do not want to be accused in any license violations while publishing the source code is not an option.
Sonar 8LE -> Platinum infinity, REAPER, Windows 10 pro GA-EP35-DS3L, E7500, 4GB, GTX 1050 Ti, 2x500GB RME Babyface Pro (M-Audio Audiophile Firewire/410, VS-20), Kawai CN43, TD-11, Roland A500S, Akai MPK Mini, Keystation Pro, etc. www.azslow.com - Control Surface Integration Platform for SONAR, ReaCWP, AOSC and other accessibility tools
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/24 23:12:09
(permalink)
No to clarify, the MIT license doesn't require you to release your surface dll as open source.
The statement had more to do with the supplied surface dll's not the raw IDL. i.e we wanted to encourage developers who make constructive improvements to the surfaces (mackie etc) to share their improvements back to the community. It is not mandated however. So you are free to release your DLL as closed source or sell it commercially.
|
eric_peterson
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1103
- Joined: 2003/11/25 10:24:05
- Location: The jungles of Oregon ...
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/27 02:13:08
(permalink)
FYI, I was about to retire my old Radikal SAC-2.2 controller because: - The USB driver was unstable and would lock up SONAR on my old XP DAW.
- My new DAW is Win7 and Radikal driver support stops at Win XP.
- My old Dakota/Montana MIDI ports are not supported under Win 7/8, supposedly they don't function.
I was staring at my "paperweight" with motorized faders and I got inspired when I re-read this thread, I grabbed my kid's unused m-audio USB MIDI interface and configured the Radikal for Mackie emulation mode. Anyway, with very little effort I was back in action! All primary functions worked, faders/pans/transport. I let it run for hours without any lock ups. The advanced features don't work, but they never did. I'm one happy camper; Wahoo!
|
thomasabarnes
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3234
- Joined: 2003/11/11 03:19:17
- Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/02/27 03:19:22
(permalink)
This is great news! God bless Noel and Cakewalk.  Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
The Cakewalk-Control-Surface-SDK open source project is now live on GitHub. Thank you for your patience.
We have published the source code for several production control surfaces that ship with SONAR to the open source Cakewalk community. The code can be found in the Surfaces folder. This software is distributed in the spirit of open source sharing under the MIT license. To this purpose we request that any stable/useful modifications to the control surfaces be published back for the community to build upon. Initially access to the Control Surface SDK repository is read only. You may clone this repository for your own use. If you would like to commit your changes to the GitHub master branch, please contact us with a request for push access to the repository and a moderator will review your request.
Please review the basic documentation in the Docs folder and the file "Cakewalk Control Surface SDK.htm" for more information about the SDK.
The source code for the following surfaces is now available:
ACTMidiControllerGeneric ACT control surface from SONAR
MackieControlMackie control surface
VS100The VS100 control surface from SONAR
VS700The VS700 control surface from SONAR
SampleSurfaceA simple sample control surface that can be used as a starting point or for testing
ControlSurfaceProbe
A useful diagnostic control surface that may be used for debugging
post edited by thomasabarnes - 2014/03/03 00:26:11
 "It's not a song till it touches your heart. It's not a song till it tears you apart!" Lyrics of Amy Grant. SONAR Platinum X64 (jBridge), Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit, Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Processor 3.46 GHz 6 Cores, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Crucial Ballistix 24GB 1333MHz DDR3 @1333 MHz, TASCAM UH-7000, Behringer X-Touch, EVGA GTX 980TI Superclocked 6GB, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD, 150GB, 320GB, 1TB 7200rpm HDDs
|
TheSound
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 25
- Joined: 2006/11/28 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/02 21:46:50
(permalink)
Hey guys, I grabbed the source code for the Mackie Control Surface plugin to see if I could fix the "Connecting..." issue with Maschine and the Behringer X32. Please grab it here and let me know if it helps: dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4795919/MackieControlPlugin.zip Obviously, use it at your own risk. Just replace the one in the "Cakewalk/Shared Surfaces" folder with this one. You might want to back up the original so you can revert if you have to.
post edited by TheSound - 2014/03/02 22:07:17
|
TabSel
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 284
- Joined: 2011/02/15 04:32:33
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/03 05:36:13
(permalink)
What exactly did you change?
Just the wait for sysex reply?
|
TabSel
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 284
- Joined: 2011/02/15 04:32:33
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/03 05:36:15
(permalink)
What exactly did you change?
Just the wait for sysex reply?
|
TheSound
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 25
- Joined: 2006/11/28 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 10:44:46
(permalink)
Yeah. Basically:
The previous behavior was:
Request a handshake over and over again and do nothing else until you're responded to.
The behavior after my modifications:
Immediately pretend a successful handshake happened.
Never request a handshake.
If you get a handshake request, behave as usual and handshake back. (should keep everything that worked before, working still).
|
stxx
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 406
- Joined: 2010/01/31 17:32:02
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 16:10:30
(permalink)
First I love Sonar X3 . That said, not having these protocols working properly with control surfaces seriously compromises the ability for SONAR based studio owners to provide a truly professional environment. Without the ability to have a full functioning control surface like the other DAW competition, it puts SONAR out of the running for use in a professional environment that many clients expect, especially those who still prefer the hands on approach. I can mix as well as anyone using only a mouse and manual track by track automation. However, to get the "true studio experience", a control surface is required and many clients simply will not take you seriously if you do not have one. Multi finger mixing is a thing of beauty and even fader automation is barely supported in many CS's let alone plug-in pot movements etc. "MIX MOVES" have always been joyful part of mixing and to be able to capture those from a physical surface into the box is still critical to getting mixes with the human touch. Beautiful equipment like the SSL Nucleus, Mackie Control and even higher level stuff like the SSL Matrix is just not supported or really usable anywhere near their potential. This is a HUGE gap that it's time for SONAR to address. I have been considering moving up my level of production and studio experience only to read and discover none of the products I would consider are barely supported if at all. I wonder if the Tascam merger might change that as they make some awesome interfaces and control surfaces as well that also lack in true Sonar X 1,2 or 3 support.
|
Splat
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8672
- Joined: 2010/12/29 15:28:29
- Location: Mars.
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 17:06:10
(permalink)
Sell by date at 9000 posts. Do not feed. @48/24 & 128 buffers latency is 367 with offset of 38. Sonar Platinum(64 bit),Win 8.1(64 bit),Saffire Pro 40(Firewire),Mix Control = 3.4,Firewire=VIA,Dell Studio XPS 8100(Intel Core i7 CPU 2.93 Ghz/16 Gb),4 x Seagate ST31500341AS (mirrored),GeForce GTX 460,Yamaha DGX-505 keyboard,Roland A-300PRO,Roland SPD-30 V2,FD-8,Triggera Krigg,Shure SM7B,Yamaha HS5.Maschine Studio+Komplete 9 Ultimate+Kontrol Z1.Addictive Keys,Izotope Nectar elements,Overloud Bundle,Geist.Acronis True Image 2014.
|
Sanderxpander
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3873
- Joined: 2013/09/30 10:08:24
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 17:42:58
(permalink)
My guess is they're banking on more and better touch control and people getting nice big touch screens instead of dedicated DAW control hardware. Sonar is in the front lines with that and in many ways it makes more sense to invest in that, from the developer's as well as the consumer's POV.
|
stxx
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 406
- Joined: 2010/01/31 17:32:02
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 20:13:18
(permalink)
Their touch screen again is cool for the little guy working solo but if you have a real studio control room with u and a few bandmembers and you want to mix old school which is still very organic and is still how the big boys do it, every other daw can support that but sonar. Something like Raven which is the future of control surfaces I think still uses the protocols. Sonar to touchscreen is good for editing but the space to work with multiple set of hands and fingers just isn't there. Sonar must get this together. The protools avid sw / hw integration is just phenomenal and is a big reason sonar is the least "pro" than any of the others
post edited by stxx - 2014/03/04 20:29:55
|
thomasabarnes
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3234
- Joined: 2003/11/11 03:19:17
- Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 22:38:43
(permalink)
I have to be sympathetic with stxx. Control surface support in SONAR needs updating! In my experience, The ACT controller plug in works really nice, but only if I'm working with 8 rotors, 8 sliders, and 8 buttons. I have 24 rotors on my controller (M-Audio Keystation Pro 88), and when I setup those 24 rotors for use with the Cakewalk Generic Surface controller and ACT Plug In and use ACT learn mode to assign those rotors to the rotors of the Pro Channel EQ, SONAR doesn't remember the assignments (SONAR X1). To keep having to reassign those 24 rotor controllers upon re-opening a project is a pain in the butt. I really wish SONAR will become more solid in the area of control surface support, for generic control surfaces and with known control surface protocols, such as Mackie Control Universal! Please, Cakewalk, help us out in this area? And I perceive this recent move to present us with the release of the Cakewalk-Control-Surface-SDK open source project, is a step in the possible improvement for control surface support. However, it may be a good idea to aim to improve control surface support through efforts made by Cakewalk and the open source project.
post edited by thomasabarnes - 2014/03/06 10:45:39
"It's not a song till it touches your heart. It's not a song till it tears you apart!" Lyrics of Amy Grant. SONAR Platinum X64 (jBridge), Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit, Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Processor 3.46 GHz 6 Cores, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Crucial Ballistix 24GB 1333MHz DDR3 @1333 MHz, TASCAM UH-7000, Behringer X-Touch, EVGA GTX 980TI Superclocked 6GB, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD, 150GB, 320GB, 1TB 7200rpm HDDs
|
TheSound
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 25
- Joined: 2006/11/28 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/04 22:39:02
(permalink)
Cakewalk really killed it with the VS700. That was the deepest integration I've seen in a daw. Maybe we can modify the 700 plugin to work with other hardware now that it's open source. What are you looking for?
|
Sanderxpander
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3873
- Joined: 2013/09/30 10:08:24
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 04:12:24
(permalink)
I do see your point, really, but I think as touch screens become larger, more plentiful and cheaper, the hardware control surfaces will start to dwindle. When you think about it, a hardware control surface is really another step between you and the software. It is either tailored completely to the software you use (making it nearly useless for other software and thus an even more niche market) or it is a more general controller (e.g. Mackie) which means it's sort of an abstract general purpose box of faders and knobs. Fine for adjusting your drum mix or navigation, but not really that useful for editing the sound of your VST. A true large touch screen bypasses all of that, although I admit at the cost of the loss of the feel of faders. But we lost the physical keyboards on our phones too and everybody is raving about the new iFads anyway.
I don't think we're there yet, but consider a touch screen the size of the Raven at the cost of a Mackie Control (or close). Or even a touch screen only slightly larger than the Mackie Control. Perhaps make it even easier to select what is on the touchscreen from Sonar, and I really don't think HW CS will stand a chance much longer. Or at least I would believe this to be a workflow at least on par with (and for me superior to) any hardware controller.
EDIT: I'm talking about using the touch screen as if you're setting it up as a hardware controller, so on your desk and lying nearly flat. With your main screen(s) in front like you already have. Put the console on the touch screen permanently if you like, and it is already surpassing the Raven in that you're directly controlling the software. Pretty soon you'd find yourself adjusting a whole bunch of stuff you never would with a Mackie or Raven.
|
smallstonefan
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2724
- Joined: 2003/11/20 11:41:35
- Location: Papillion, Nebraska
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 07:19:03
(permalink)
I really like the idea of running a touchscreen as a dedicated console. I am concerned about viewing angle though. If I could get one that had a really nice viewing angle (because I wouldn't be looking straight at it, more of like a 45 to 60 degree angle) I might give up my Mackie Control Pro...
|
neirbod
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 343
- Joined: 2005/05/09 12:27:26
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 08:26:47
(permalink)
stxx
First I love Sonar X3 . That said, not having these protocols working properly with control surfaces seriously compromises the ability for SONAR based studio owners to provide a truly professional environment. Without the ability to have a full functioning control surface like the other DAW competition, it puts SONAR out of the running for use in a professional environment that many clients expect, especially those who still prefer the hands on approach.
I completely agree. This needs to be high on the priority list. For some touch screens may replace the need for a CS, but for many others there will simply be no substitute for putting fingers on a fader or knob, closing your eyes, and mixing.
----------------- Windows 7 64Sonar PlatinumIntel i7 3.4 GHzGigabyte GA-H67A-UD3H-B3 moboRME UFX and UCX
|
Sanderxpander
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3873
- Joined: 2013/09/30 10:08:24
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 09:00:30
(permalink)
I believe the point of this thread is that it is NOT high on the priority list and that's why the source code has been released to the community. I truly believe this is a transitional period that may be painful for some, but will ultimately bring a lot of good things. Time will tell I suppose.
|
stxx
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 406
- Joined: 2010/01/31 17:32:02
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 09:54:51
(permalink)
I think those of you who talk touchscreen are still missing the point a bit. There is SONAR touchscreen supporting the SONAR interface and mixer and there are touch screens like the SLATE RAVEN which are control surfaces at a whole other level which may still have similar issue as it is a HW device that still likely requires the protcols to run. Profession studios still rely on physical control surfaces and if they turn touch screen (3 party products) the communication issue still exists. Also, regarding the release of the SDK, it really is not acceptable to push that to the users and have us as individuals have to build the files to support the products. SDKs should be used for people who wish to make changes to existing code OR who are building a NEW device and need to support it. I also read that Sonar does not support the procols in a standard way expected by most manufactures either (read this in a n SSL NUcleus forum) resulting in the companies who make these control surfaces won't write associated modules for Sonar. That is why Sonar is the ONLY unsupported DAW in all these different manufacturers. The VS 700 may have been great but I do not want all the preamps, I only want a robust control surface to work properly with my projects and allow me to do multiple hands on movements. Windows 8 is not yet successful either so touchscreen by Sonar is limited. I tried the Mackie control and I was only able to use basically the faders and pan. Non of the other features including multiple plugins or Prochannel worked so I sold it. Again, windows 8 is currently a failure and we are many years away from serious touch screen widespread integration. Sonar is WAY behind the 8 ball here. As I upgrade my studio to a more commercial grade, I currently may have little choice than to switch to a more widely supported platform
|
thomasabarnes
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3234
- Joined: 2003/11/11 03:19:17
- Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 10:21:38
(permalink)
I strongly agree with you, Neirbod! neirbod
stxx
First I love Sonar X3 . That said, not having these protocols working properly with control surfaces seriously compromises the ability for SONAR based studio owners to provide a truly professional environment. Without the ability to have a full functioning control surface like the other DAW competition, it puts SONAR out of the running for use in a professional environment that many clients expect, especially those who still prefer the hands on approach.
I completely agree. This needs to be high on the priority list. For some touch screens may replace the need for a CS, but for many others there will simply be no substitute for putting fingers on a fader or knob, closing your eyes, and mixing.
"It's not a song till it touches your heart. It's not a song till it tears you apart!" Lyrics of Amy Grant. SONAR Platinum X64 (jBridge), Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit, Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Processor 3.46 GHz 6 Cores, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Crucial Ballistix 24GB 1333MHz DDR3 @1333 MHz, TASCAM UH-7000, Behringer X-Touch, EVGA GTX 980TI Superclocked 6GB, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD, 150GB, 320GB, 1TB 7200rpm HDDs
|
Klaus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 320
- Joined: 2009/07/14 07:34:02
- Location: Cologne, Germany
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 10:46:35
(permalink)
stxx
I tried the Mackie control and I was only able to use basically the faders and pan. Non of the other features including multiple plugins or Prochannel worked so I sold it.
FWIW, the app TouchDAW just emulates the hardware of an MCU on android tablets using Mackie Control protocol to control SONAR, and on my tablet, every fader, knob and button works like expected, including ProChannel modules. So it seems to be, the MCP used by SONAR isn't that bad at all, at least. Best, Klaus
SONAR Platinum ∞RME HDSPe AIO - Windows 10 64bit - Intel i7 2600K - 16 GB RAM
|
Sanderxpander
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3873
- Joined: 2013/09/30 10:08:24
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 11:29:28
(permalink)
stxx
I think those of you who talk touchscreen are still missing the point a bit. There is SONAR touchscreen supporting the SONAR interface and mixer and there are touch screens like the SLATE RAVEN which are control surfaces at a whole other level which may still have similar issue as it is a HW device that still likely requires the protcols to run. Profession studios still rely on physical control surfaces and if they turn touch screen (3 party products) the communication issue still exists. Also, regarding the release of the SDK, it really is not acceptable to push that to the users and have us as individuals have to build the files to support the products. SDKs should be used for people who wish to make changes to existing code OR who are building a NEW device and need to support it. I also read that Sonar does not support the procols in a standard way expected by most manufactures either (read this in a n SSL NUcleus forum) resulting in the companies who make these control surfaces won't write associated modules for Sonar. That is why Sonar is the ONLY unsupported DAW in all these different manufacturers. The VS 700 may have been great but I do not want all the preamps, I only want a robust control surface to work properly with my projects and allow me to do multiple hands on movements. Windows 8 is not yet successful either so touchscreen by Sonar is limited. I tried the Mackie control and I was only able to use basically the faders and pan. Non of the other features including multiple plugins or Prochannel worked so I sold it. Again, windows 8 is currently a failure and we are many years away from serious touch screen widespread integration. Sonar is WAY behind the 8 ball here. As I upgrade my studio to a more commercial grade, I currently may have little choice than to switch to a more widely supported platform
I think I'm a little confused here. Firstly, if you are already using Sonar, why would you ever get a Raven rather than a seriously large actual touchscreen, since that way you can directly control Sonar as opposed to a software layer between Sonar and you? Secondly, if you are not using Sonar, why is this even relevant to the discussion? Thirdly, I know plenty of professional studios who don't rely on physical control surfaces, but I suppose this has more to do with how one defines "professional". I don't even mean to really argue the point that it is a good thing to have a touch based option (real faders or virtual ones) to interact with the DAW. I also see the benefit of having real faders, but I simply think that once we're only a little further down the road, the benefits of a virtual control surface will greatly outweigh the loss of the feel of faders. The evidence right now, whether you or I agree with it or not, is that Cakewalk has seemingly decided to put further development of the HWCS protocols on the backburner, and meanwhile open the source codes up to the community. So the best option to get a completely integrated control surface for Sonar right now is to add a large touch screen to your setup, and put it in place of your hardware option. I hope touch support will continue to improve and touch screens will continue to drop in price.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 11:35:50
(permalink)
Yeah, for good or for ill, it's clearly been decided within Cakewalk that hardware control surfaces are not something they are pursuing right now. I imagine it would take quite a lot to get that undecided.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
thomasabarnes
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3234
- Joined: 2003/11/11 03:19:17
- Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 13:08:42
(permalink)
John T: Hi, long time no see. :) John T
Yeah, for good or for ill, it's clearly been decided within Cakewalk that hardware control surfaces are not something they are pursuing right now. I imagine it would take quite a lot to get that undecided.
If that's the case, that's bad news!
"It's not a song till it touches your heart. It's not a song till it tears you apart!" Lyrics of Amy Grant. SONAR Platinum X64 (jBridge), Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit, Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Processor 3.46 GHz 6 Cores, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Crucial Ballistix 24GB 1333MHz DDR3 @1333 MHz, TASCAM UH-7000, Behringer X-Touch, EVGA GTX 980TI Superclocked 6GB, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD, 150GB, 320GB, 1TB 7200rpm HDDs
|
stxx
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 406
- Joined: 2010/01/31 17:32:02
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 13:17:45
(permalink)
I do use Sonar, do not wish to go to Win 8 and want to use a control surface TODAY. I only used Raven as an example. It is frustrating to me that is all. I do not think it woulds be a huge effort to get it to work as they are half way there. Seems they just half assed it here and I think the response currently to touchscreen Sonar is lukewarm. Its great on a laptop but not too practical unless you have an 46 in screen laying flat. I know numerous studio people not using it for this reason and it never bothered me before until now when I am considering moving up a level or 2 and wanting to bring in a control surface for a more hands on approach for clients who like to say " let me try this and see how it sounds" without me having to take 30 minutes to generate all the automation curves to try that very thing you could do instantly with a well integrated control surface. No more on this from me but it is what it is for now.
|
denverdrummer
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 278
- Joined: 2011/01/10 12:15:24
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 13:25:27
(permalink)
My only experience with using Mackie control is on my Zoom R16, which quite honestly sucks as a control surface, you're better off using keyboard and mouse. I plan on buying the X32 compact which will become my main studio mixer/control surface, so this will eventually effect me at that point.
I disagree that the touchscreen support in Windows 8 is limited or a failure. Windows 8 has a larger install base than all version of Mac OS, and is still growing. In fact one of the best things in touch screen support isn't even moving faders, but being able to fly through your project sections with ease using swipe and pinch zoom. Compared to other DAW's the touchscreen support in CW is unsurpassed. Some of the 3rd party plugins still need support for touch, but it works on almost everything. In fact I love borrowing my wife's surface pro for small projects, I plan on getting a surface pro or some type of two in one for small projects. The Raven is a totally different beast and can't be compared to the native Windows API for touch.
But having touch screen support and having a control surface are two different things and I can understand why someone would prefer having a dedicated control surface.
Obviously this is an issue, but I think open sourcing the source code is probably the best scenario. Look I work in software development for a hardware manufacturer, so I understand where CW is coming from on this. At the end of the day there is only so much budget for projects, only so much time for developers on staff. If you look at the control surface market, the ones using CW products are probably on the VS700, the ones using Mackie products are probably using something else, so to spend a lot of development time and money updating the code.
Win 10 Pro 64 bit, Dell Inspiron 15, core i7, 16GB RAM, Focusrite Scarlett 18i20, Mackie MR5 Mark 1 speakers
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re: Mackie Control protocol broken in Sonar X1/X2/X3
2014/03/05 13:39:48
(permalink)
Note that the v700 is also now unsupported and open source. There's no special treatment there.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|