Can MOTU 3 trick pony added sorely NEEDED 4th trick?

[toodamnhip]

You know what, TDH? We're talking in circles here. I've finally decided it does not good for me to try and argue the point. I'm sorely tempted. This isn't about spec gigs for prestige. I give. You've simply worn me the $%^& down.

I don;t want to wear you down, you can hold your viewpoint..I won;t say it’s 100% certain you;re wrong..We are both speculating...If you think MOTU just can;t do it due to R&D costs then that’s what you think..It’s fine

[James Steele]

Yes, I have taken gigs for Prestige. When I got my 1st gig as an Arista producer, I called one of my mentors to ask how much money to ask for? He told me how he never worried about $ but instead focused on what any prod gig could do for his career and standing in the industry. The person I am referring to hear is pretty huge..anyone here would know his work. That policy worked amazing for him. SO I didn’t sweat the domes, though I did get paid well, I didn’t bark to get more and eventually to stay long term, I took a reduction which got me more records.

Okay... I'll bite. I submit to you that spec gigs as a producer has nothing to do with MOTU actually spending LOTS of money to produce a product that may or may not sell enough to pay for itself. Did you PAY money for your first gigs? Maybe that's a better analogy.

As far as buying groceries, I don;t really see a very precise correlation between going to the grocery store and buying food and a company investing in long term market share and market presence.

Really? Is it that obtuse?!! The point is YOU NEED MONEY TO PAY FOR STUFF! You will not be handed stuff with prestige. You cannot meet payroll with prestige. Is it really that hard to understand?

We may never agree here...

I think that's not only prescient but pretty damned obvious looking over the thread...

...but I think the mechanics of investing in long term market share sometimes require time without immediate profit. Way different than groceries. Look at all the internet companies. They go for yrs without making $ and are worth billions at the end.

They're not in the business of manufacturing are they? And how immediate are you talking. You seem to be sure that MOTU introducing a control surface is going to be a guaranteed financial winner, even though you sidestepped the point about nobody knowing just how small that subset of DP users that would use something like that is. And how many of those internet companies when belly up after they burned through investor capital? Even if they were analogous to a company like MOTU, which they aren't.

They focus on becoming VALUABLE. Then comes success, big time.

Really? Valuable? So the "Zuckerberg" of MOTU can take the company public and cash in on an IPO? Really? I'm sorry, but your reasoning here is off base. MOTU becomes valuable by selling crapload of hardware and software, not by burnishing their image so they can take it public only to go in the crapper as did Avid did with their stock price.

But in all this back and forth with neither of us 100% correct, I think we are getting a bit extreme here. I really can;t imagine it to be likened to the climbing of Mount Everest for MOTU to make a control surface. You know they could man..they COULD do it! They just don;t feel it is important enough.

Well duh. And that "not important enough" thought process might include the thought process that goes something like "our research tells us that many people feel third party solutions are adequate and we could dump half a million bucks or more bringing it to market only to lose our asses... prestige or no prestige." Frankly, speaking for myself, if I were a multi-millionaire I'd damn well PAY them to do so just to stop hearing it beat to death on this board.

Most likely for a combination of reasons. So my argument is 1) They can do it. 2) if they dont do it, it is because they appear not to want to do it..3) It could help their prestige if they did. 4) It is needed because no one else is going to make a tightly fitting controller for DP which, as a DAW, seems a bit unusual under the hood.

1) Of course they CAN.
2) Right. They may not want to and for good reason.
3) I don't think they give a damn about pissing away a lot of money to bring a product to market they could lose their asses on just to burnish their credentials. They may not be nearly as insecure about their prestige as you seem to be.
4) Why is nobody else making a tightly fitting controller? Remember I mentioned Slate Digital? Why was he not supporting it with Raven? Maybe it's more incumbent on MOTU to take up something where there is not proven demand, but even THEY can't do it if the demand isn't high enough.

Speaking of DP being unusual under the hood,
I will add something here I have never said before.
I have often lamented DP being out of sync in various ways with 3rd party companies. And often, I have wondered f they were stubborn and unresponsive to 3rd part interaction, I mean, look at the MOTU proprietary audio engine which is now rarely supported as itself but still runs in DP> (Maybe it makes it sound better, who knows). DP does dance to it;s own drummer it appears right?...

Please name for me a DAW that is not using a proprietary audio engine? There's no open source audio engine. In the end they all have to write their own code that speaks to the hardware. They all have "proprietary" audio engines.

Well, the thing I have never said before is that there was one major software maker that confided in me that the reason their plug had problems with DP is because DP was too accurate, and required more precision than any other daw for a plug in to run correctly.
So DP was basically TOO GOOD!!!!..lol It required more of a plugin than any other DAW, more accuracy.

They had to design in a fix to the plug in that fooled their software into working with DP.

So there ya go. One DP “problem" that was because DP was TOO GOOD. Go figure..

I've heard of that too. I too, as you had mentioned about yourself, am no newbie to beta testing and have seen a lot of what goes on "under the hood" so to speak. More than I can let on in a public forum. As such, I have to sit back and bite my tongue when people say things on forums that I know are for a fact incorrect without violating my NDA. Best I can do some times is drop little hints to try and put them on the right path so they figure it out for themselves.

So maybe the reason DP doesn;t tightly integrate with any controller is because it is too good...who knows?

Probably not. Indeed, who does know. But I think sometimes you perceive demand for a feature through the prism of your own workflow methods and requirements which not everybody shares, regardless of your personal belief in their merit. Not everybody snapshots automation for plugs to the extent you do, or needs a controller that integrates tightly with plug ins, or needs to copy parameters from one plug to another with copy/paste, etc. When and if a company like MOTU decides to invest major bucks in R&D to bring a product out, they need reason to believe there will be wide appeal. I can't even believe I'm having to say that. It's Business 101.

By the way, for the most part, my DP has been running beautifully. I still fear Mach 5 and the stuck notes it can make, and it still has sync problems with VE Pro loops, but other than that, it’s been pretty damn solid.

Right... and as usual, I don't get your stuck notes, but then that's just the nature of these things. Not all problems manifest themselves for everyone.

Okay... now at this point you take the last word. I now officially give up.

[James Steele]

You know what, TDH? We're talking in circles here. I've finally decided it does not good for me to try and argue the point. I'm sorely tempted. This isn't about spec gigs for prestige. I give. You've simply worn me the $%^& down.

I don;t want to wear you down, you can hold your viewpoint..I won;t say it’s 100% certain you;re wrong..We are both speculating...If you think MOTU just can;t do it due to R&D costs then that’s what you think..It’s fine

I posted that before I took one last, futile crack at trying to articulate my position. At this point I'd freaking LOVE for MOTU to make a controller. If I had a million zillion bucks I'd pay for their R&D myself if they promised that they send you the first one.

UPDATE: You said that I think they can't do it due to R&D costs. I'm not saying they can't afford the upfront expense. I'm saying that, like any business, they aren't likely to plow a whole bunch of capital in bringing a product to market if they don't think they can somehow recapture those costs either through sales of the unit itself, or some ancillary benefit, like selling more of their other products. Essentially, they have to have a good inkling that their investment will pay off. Otherwise, you end up with a product that is released and then ultimately abandoned and not supported for very long... the Mixer 7s of the 21st century.

[toodamnhip]

You know what, TDH? We're talking in circles here. I've finally decided it does not good for me to try and argue the point. I'm sorely tempted. This isn't about spec gigs for prestige. I give. You've simply worn me the $%^& down.

I don;t want to wear you down, you can hold your viewpoint..I won;t say it’s 100% certain you;re wrong..We are both speculating...If you think MOTU just can;t do it due to R&D costs then that’s what you think..It’s fine

I posted that before I took one last, futile crack at trying to articulate my position. At this point I'd freaking LOVE for MOTU to make a controller. If I had a million zillion bucks I'd pay for their R&D myself if they promised that they send you the first one.

UPDATE: You said that I think they can't do it due to R&D costs. I'm not saying they can't afford the upfront expense. I'm saying that, like any business, they aren't likely to plow a whole bunch of capital in bringing a product to market if they don't think they can somehow recapture those costs either through sales of the unit itself, or some ancillary benefit, like selling more of their other products. Essentially, they have to have a good inkling that their investment will pay off. Otherwise, you end up with a product that is released and then ultimately abandoned and not supported for very long... the Mixer 7s of the 21st century.

That woul dbe tremendously kind of you to have MOTU send me the first one, and I;d complain if it didnt work right .....right?...lol...

[toodamnhip]

Maybe I can do the miracle you did with the fader unit and gen up enough support to get MOTU to make this controller? Naaw..only one miracle per year on this board, you pulled off the last one..how s that fader working anyway?

[toodamnhip]

You know what, TDH? We're talking in circles here. I've finally decided it does not good for me to try and argue the point. I'm sorely tempted. This isn't about spec gigs for prestige. I give. You've simply worn me the $%^& down.

I don;t want to wear you down, you can hold your viewpoint..I won;t say it’s 100% certain you;re wrong..We are both speculating...If you think MOTU just can;t do it due to R&D costs then that’s what you think..It’s fine

I posted that before I took one last, futile crack at trying to articulate my position. At this point I'd freaking LOVE for MOTU to make a controller. If I had a million zillion bucks I'd pay for their R&D myself if they promised that they send you the first one.

UPDATE: You said that I think they can't do it due to R&D costs. I'm not saying they can't afford the upfront expense. I'm saying that, like any business, they aren't likely to plow a whole bunch of capital in bringing a product to market if they don't think they can somehow recapture those costs either through sales of the unit itself, or some ancillary benefit, like selling more of their other products. Essentially, they have to have a good inkling that their investment will pay off. Otherwise, you end up with a product that is released and then ultimately abandoned and not supported for very long... the Mixer 7s of the 21st century.

I must add one last thing, I am really surprised more people dont want to mix with physical faders...Once you do it man, you never want to use a mouse again...a mouse is ok for small things, but that’s it. I mixed many records with mouses and finally having faders in my small prod. studio changed things man. I could look down, close my eyes, grab a fader and listen without looking...that’s just for starters////, better sound focus.... then theres control..the ability to manipulate several tracks simultaneously, I could go on and on... I think people don;t know what they’re missing. Maybe whomever finally made a great control surface should teach people what their missing somehow so they DO know?...
I think ipads started to do this.

[Michael Canavan]

I must add one last thing, I am really surprised more people dont want to mix with physical faders...Once you do it man, you never want to use a mouse again...a mouse is ok for small things, but that’s it. I mixed many records with mouses and finally having faders in my small prod. studio changed things man. I could look down, close my eyes, grab a fader and listen without looking...that’s just for starters////, better sound focus.... then theres control..the ability to manipulate several tracks simultaneously, I could go on and on... I think people don;t know what they’re missing. Maybe whomever finally made a great control surface should teach people what their missing somehow so they DO know?...
I think ipads started to do this.

I think the main thing I'm missing here, that others may be as well is what is exactly wrong with the Mackie Control for you? The faders, mute, solo, pan, basic controls all work as expected. The only niggle I have is the cycle does't turn off, but I use the keyboard commands for that sort of thing.

That might be another even larger reason for MOTU not developing their own motorized fader control surface. The Mackie Control works well enough for most people.

[toodamnhip]

I must add one last thing, I am really surprised more people dont want to mix with physical faders...Once you do it man, you never want to use a mouse again...a mouse is ok for small things, but that’s it. I mixed many records with mouses and finally having faders in my small prod. studio changed things man. I could look down, close my eyes, grab a fader and listen without looking...that’s just for starters////, better sound focus.... then theres control..the ability to manipulate several tracks simultaneously, I could go on and on... I think people don;t know what they’re missing. Maybe whomever finally made a great control surface should teach people what their missing somehow so they DO know?...
I think ipads started to do this.

I think the main thing I'm missing here, that others may be as well is what is exactly wrong with the Mackie Control for you? The faders, mute, solo, pan, basic controls all work as expected. The only niggle I have is the cycle does't turn off, but I use the keyboard commands for that sort of thing.

That might be another even larger reason for MOTU not developing their own motorized fader control surface. The Mackie Control works well enough for most people.

Never tried it. Is it still for sale and, can it automate plug in parameters with faders?

[James Steele]

That might be another even larger reason for MOTU not developing their own motorized fader control surface. The Mackie Control works well enough for most people.

Nail hit squarely on the head. This is what I've tried to say. This may work well enough for most people because most users may not need to " automate plug in parameters with faders" as TDH requires. If third party solutions have thus far proven adequate for many, than lacking significant numbers of users clamoring for these greater capabilities, it doesn't seem likely to happen.

[bayswater]

Nail hit squarely on the head. This is what I've tried to say.

I was trying to say the same thing. I don't have a use for a hardware controller for effects, but I see no end of devices advertised to do it. Isn't the fact that these can't easily link up to objects like plugin parameters in DP, a software issue?

[toodamnhip]

That might be another even larger reason for MOTU not developing their own motorized fader control surface. The Mackie Control works well enough for most people.

Nail hit squarely on the head. This is what I've tried to say. This may work well enough for most people because most users may not need to " automate plug in parameters with faders" as TDH requires. If third party solutions have thus far proven adequate for many, than lacking significant numbers of users clamoring for these greater capabilities, it doesn't seem likely to happen.

I’d love to try one or see a youtube video on one. The problem is, one doesn't really get a feel for the issues with a unite until using it for awhile, feeling it responsiveness etc.
I wonder how the faders feel compared to my artist mix?..hmm...
Also, looks like Behringer is coming out with something soon.
But again, as these units come out, trying to get MOTU and whatever company that makes the unit “dance” together....always feels like such a helpless proposition. If the up coming Behringer feels good, I’ll most likely try that over the artist mix. But what are the odds something won;t integrate right? Always a compromise.
So, ok, if you guys are right that MOTU has no incentive for R&D on a control surfacr, perhaps they could somehow integrate better with the next gen of controller from whomever. Maybe now that all is 64 bit and the PC roll out is done, MOTU will be able to modify drivers quicker if glitches do arise...things do seem to be getting better. And if it is not MOTUs drivers that are the problem, again we’ll be back to "little incentive-land"..as the 3rd party control surface makers refuse to modify to match DP. And on and on it goes...Let’s see what the Behringer brings us....hopeful!!

[Michael Canavan]

toodammhip, the Mackie works really well at volume fading, mute, solo, jumping to markers, panning etc. I've never bothered using it for instantiating a plug in or attempted to figure out if I can get it to do automation for plugs because that seems kind of out of it's UI depth. Even if it could use the faders or knob for automation you would be scrolling through an LED trying to find the right one…. counter productive IMO. For that the one that seems interesting to me is the iPAd app that shows the plug in GUI on screen, you get as close to a tactile experience of point and automate with that. I don't own an iPad though.

[toodamnhip]

Even if it could use the faders or knob for automation you would be scrolling through an LED trying to find the right one…. counter productive IMO. For that the one that seems interesting to me is the iPAd app that shows the plug in GUI on screen, you get as close to a tactile experience of point and automate with that. I don't own an iPad though.

The fact that one would have to do some odd thing or work-around to use the control surface to adjust plug ins is exactly why I want DP to develop something that does not need strange work arounds or digging through rarely used sub menus etc....
Please keep in mind that this concept of controlling plug ins isn’t something I made up. It is something should be DO-ABLE and a part of EVERYONE’s mixing. And, this possibility has been put into designs by designers for sometime. When I mix in Pro Tools, this one aspect of the AVID artist mix, easily accessed plug in control via a control surface, is soooooo nice.
I think some here think I am over demanding in this aspect or asking for some off beat function.
Sometimes mixers and producers just don;t know what they don;t know. If the technology is limited and one grows up in music NOT using faders to ride compression ratios, EQ boosts, delay levels, reverb tails at the end of vocal phrases...etc.. plug in DETAILED automation can seem like something “un-necessary” or offbeat. But if control surface technology would smooth out and become universally access able, mixers that never automated plug ins in detail may actually LEARN that this is a truly invaluable way to mix. As it stands now, the option isn’t easily there for most mixers so don;t don;t think it is valuable or even understand it much.

I do some seriously intricate things,,yes..but every one does their own intricate things. And I see a lot of people NOT doing certain intricate things just because they just don;t know it’s possible OR the technology kind of blocks them in some way, such as this control surface issue.

If many here watched me mix and ride plugs with faders, they’d want to do the same. They’d say "wow, I really hear how you used compression ratios to open up the vocal there..very cool”..etc...
And, vice versa, I am sure watching many here, I too would learn.
But I really get the feeling what I am asking for is looked at as some sort of boutique-specialized request. Start mixing with full plug fader manipulation and you’ll never go back to "setting and forgetting" an EQ or compressor..nor will you want to “mouse around” anymore.

So, whatever needs to happen, by way of development buy MOTU, Mackie, Smackie or Lackie, I hope this ridiculous failure of technology to smooth itself out...ends soon.
It’s an artificial disability. Mixers should be able to grab a hardware representation of anything in DP.
So what are the bugs in the Mackie after all is said and done?

[waterstrum]

Just saw this "pony" topic and posted on the new topic too about the V-Control.

Not perfect, but allows plug in editing with faders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAVZUpg5qfU

I've been using it for a while and it is pretty cool.

My apologies if this has already been mentioned.

[Michael Canavan]

The reason I said it's counter productive is because it should be easier and quicker to do with a control surface than with a mouse. If a plug in has 128+ parameters, (and a lot of them do) then you're searching through a long list on an LED in a control surface. This is actually slower than learning how to use an iPad to do this same thing. On an iPad you actually have the GUI for the plug in, the only downside is the lack of tactile feedback, and for most people the upside is well worth that trade off I'm thinking. Same reason software synths are so popular, the upside beats the downside.

When you're talking about compressors and other devices that have only a dozen or so parameters then Novation at the moment do this right. Automap detects and assigns the first batch of automatable parameters from a host. There is a cheap, 8 knob controller from Novation called Nocturn that does what you want with endless rotary encoders instead of motorized faders. http://us.novationmusic.com/MIDI-controllers/nocturn