MOTUnation.com

TinenTech wrote:

toodamnhip wrote: I have a good buddy I am in a straight ahead jazz group with. He is a producer, pro tools guy etc. I keep trying to get him to understand that once you mix with faders and a control surface, you NEVER would go back. He doesn't seem to "get it". I watch him crawl around with his mouse....so slow...MOUSES SUCK!! And that is just a plain truth and anyone who doesn't know that, well, I feel for them man, i really do. And ipads suck too. No feel man....

I empathize. I have a client who never wants me to use faders because they put too many dots into the volume layer, and she likes to edit dot-by-dot, with nice neat ramps inbetween. A lot of people have gotten into mixing with their eyes instead of their ears; faders make mixing faster and better. But there are times when doing another write pass is more cumbersome than editing the controller. I find I use the mouse mostly after doing a few passes with the faders.

WELL another way is to use the TRIM control after a few passes. I LOVE trim mixing....it’s a way to make 100% sure you’ve got the absolute best mix you can have, For if you “tug” on a mxing with trim and un-do, and compare the two passes, you get great insight,,,,try it...

toodamnhip wrote:

Shooshie wrote:

toodamnhip wrote: Wowie/// I feel so big looking down on that lil’ MOTU pony....
Where’s my whip?

Aaaa. Greenhorn! Haven't you heard of the Horse Whisperer?
You have to show the pony what you want it to do, unambiguously. Whips mean something entirely different than what you want. You start with the gray matter between the rider's ears, and once that is unambiguously focused, you transfer its wants to the pony in language it can understand, convincing it that life is good when your goals are aligned. The rest is about clear instruction. When the pony fails to understand, the fault is always in the instruction. Other than a little maintenance and care, that's pretty much the long and short of pony tricks.

Shooshie

shhhh h-a-r-d-w-a-r-e- c-o-n-t-r-o-l s-u-r-f-a-c-e G-O-O-D...........motu...shhhhhh

Now you're whisperin' pardner! Pretty soon that pony will be eating out of your hand!

Shoosh

Does MOTU like green apples or red ones?

If MOTU made a control surface, I would buy it. However, it doesn't seem to be in the cards.

billf wrote:If MOTU made a control surface, I would buy it. However, it doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Time to shuffle the damn things then..lol
What cards?

I'll be honest, unless I have a dedicated control surface hooked up (which I usually don't), and even then, I find myself editing automation manually. Yeah, I could go through it and massage the results later, but what I've usually found in cases like this is that I end up spending just about as much time massaging recorded automation as I would editing manually anyway. It's not even a question of editing with your "eyes" over your "ears", no one edits controller data without listening. Maybe it's "tactile" vs "visual" but the aural component is the same.

I'm not suggesting that live automation is flawed, it's been used on thousands of hit songs for over half a century, but it isn't necessarily better than manual automation, just a different, but I think completely legitimate style of working.

toodamnhip wrote:What cards?

Three Card Monte.

billf wrote:

toodamnhip wrote:What cards?

Three Card Monte.

If there was a card game to describe MOTU's lack of a dedicated control surface, I think it would be "Go Fish", followed by "52 card pickup"....
And if they don;t eventually make one, we'll start playing "War".mm

God a'mighty. So tedious.

TinenTech wrote:In your line of work, I bet you'd like a 32 or 48-channel surface, right? Like an Icon? That would be out of scale for a relatively small company like MOTU. A high-end, expensive product like that isn't where their core market is, and the high-end guys would take a lot of convincing to get away from Avid or SSL or Yamaha desks. I don't think the market would be that big and the cost of entry is very high.

Just the opposite for me. I neither want, nor need a control surface with that many channels. The reason I have the Matrix is because it solved so many problems in my studio, and made recording fun again. It is a "hybrid" system. The MCU it uses to control DP isn't nearly as cool as the Euphonix (now Avid) I used before, but the trade off for me is worth it.

TinenTech wrote:Why should MOTU develop its own dedicated control surface when they've done such good implementations of the ones that are already out there..........snip

not true, their iplementation still includes this hardware playthru level bug :

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... =+playthru

Sorry James

best luck to all

Klaus

Klaus wrote:

TinenTech wrote:Why should MOTU develop its own dedicated control surface when they've done such good implementations of the ones that are already out there..........snip

And DP doesn't work right with AVID artist mix either. And, MOTU doesn't need to do huge amounts of faders. This Shows you don't understand the market. You do 8 faders at a time, link-able., not 48.

toodamnhip wrote:

Klaus wrote:

TinenTech wrote:Why should MOTU develop its own dedicated control surface when they've done such good implementations of the ones that are already out there..........snip

And DP doesn't work right with AVID artist mix either. And, MOTU doesn't need to do huge amounts of faders. This Shows you don't understand the market. You do 8 faders at a time, link-able., not 48.

Did I mention something ... 48 ch ?
Maybe it was not ment for me ?
BTW
*I* don't have to understand the market ;-0

Klaus

Nice one, Klaus.

Someone said MOTU would need to make 48 faders, if it wasn't you, sorry for the inner quote upon quote confusion. But the point remains, whomever wrote that does not understand the control surface market...no offense. 8 fader units link-able...that is all that needs to be developed.