I wrote:
>> my question would be: don't you have to have the keyboard that will be used
>> just to play midi notes separated from the LC? If I send a bunch of notes,
>> all mapped to do things to the LC, to transformers, out to IAC, back into
>> LC, won't other notes I'm using just to play, say, a soft synth, control the
>> LC too? Or is that where I need an advanced filtering lesson?
>
J. Pitcairn wrote:
> Yeah, because you have control over _which_ notes get sent out of
> Logic via IAC to be recognized as LC notes. Logic looks at a
> particular port for its LC, so if you specify IAC bus 1, say, then
> only the notes loopbacked to IAC 1 from Logic will become LC
> commands, not those same notes as they enter Logic the first time. Do
> your note-split via transformer in Logic after the Physical Input
> (it's best to tap off only the specific ports you want and leave the
> "sum" outlet unconnected when doing loopbacks, BTW), send some to IAC
> 1 for LC emulation, the rest to the sequencer input (or wherever).

I'm going to try that. whacky!!!

thanks John,
Teddybut

>my question would be: don't you have to have the keyboard that will be used
>just to play midi notes separated from the LC? If I send a bunch of notes,
>all mapped to do things to the LC, to transformers, out to IAC, back into
>LC, won't other notes I'm using just to play, say, a soft synth, control the
>LC too? Or is that where I need an advanced filtering lesson?

Yeah, because you have control over _which_ notes get sent out of
Logic via IAC to be recognized as LC notes. Logic looks at a
particular port for its LC, so if you specify IAC bus 1, say, then
only the notes loopbacked to IAC 1 from Logic will become LC
commands, not those same notes as they enter Logic the first time. Do
your note-split via transformer in Logic after the Physical Input
(it's best to tap off only the specific ports you want and leave the
"sum" outlet unconnected when doing loopbacks, BTW), send some to IAC
1 for LC emulation, the rest to the sequencer input (or wherever).

Note when using IAC as an input in OS9, you have to specify it as an
input in the "OMS Input Connections" pref.

John P

>> I wonder how I could get my PCR's buttons to change from mute
>> to solo to record without changing the memory selection.
>
> Short of a transpose or key-remapping function in the PCR itself,
> you'd either have to insert a piece of midi processing software
> between the midi-in and Logic (tricky, as Logic likes to grab the
> ports directly), or do it all in Logic then output via OMS IAC bus
> loopback to Logic, with Logic looking to incoming OMS IAC for its LC
> source, not directly to the PCR port.
>
> If you leave the PCR transposed, you can always un-transpose for the
> non-LC keys in Logic...

hmmmm, very intriguing indeed!

my question would be: don't you have to have the keyboard that will be used
just to play midi notes separated from the LC? If I send a bunch of notes,
all mapped to do things to the LC, to transformers, out to IAC, back into
LC, won't other notes I'm using just to play, say, a soft synth, control the
LC too? Or is that where I need an advanced filtering lesson?

teddybut

>I wonder how I could get my PCR's buttons to change from mute
>to solo to record without changing the memory selection.

Short of a transpose or key-remapping function in the PCR itself,
you'd either have to insert a piece of midi processing software
between the midi-in and Logic (tricky, as Logic likes to grab the
ports directly), or do it all in Logic then output via OMS IAC bus
loopback to Logic, with Logic looking to incoming OMS IAC for its LC
source, not directly to the PCR port.

If you leave the PCR transposed, you can always un-transpose for the
non-LC keys in Logic...

------

Anyway ... with the assistance of a few hours feverish Max
programming to provide the loopback and sysex-parsing I now have a
semi-working onscreen emulation of the LC's LCD screen in Logic.

I say semi-working because it's not refreshing itself properly in all
situations, and displayed values are wrong when controls are moved
(vol, pan values etc, but the parameter names are correct) - I'll
have to hook up a real LC and try to diagnose why.

While that's enormously helpful, it's not as good as you might think
for plugin insertion etc due to the "lag" that Logic has when doing
so. It displays the available plugins, but when changing them you
have to go pretty slow as they take a while to follow your knob-move.
This is true of the real LC as well by the way - response time for
changing plugins, groups, channel mode etc is not speedy.

I think I'll continue to use Max for the necessary loopback and sysex
handling, there's a freely downloadable "Max Runtime" that can run
the Max patch, though I'll doubtless need to tweak the i/o assignment
according to platform.  I might yet build the whole thing in Max...

The good news is that Max is now available for Windows too, though
those of you looking for LC emulation on Windows might want to have a
look at Laurent Chapin's LC emulator - http://www.dancetools.com

OK, that's it for now.

John P

> >John, you might want to download the UR-80 docs from
Edirol's site as they
> >have implemented a switch that goes between solo, mute,
etc for the buttons.
> >I think there's a doc that says what is being sent out to make
that
> >happen...
>
> Interesting. I'll take a look, though I suspect the switch is just
> doing its thing inside the U-80, and simply causing the buttons
to
> send the message Logic expects to see for solo, mute, etc. I
don't
> think there's a way to remap the LC messages themselves
(according to
> the LC midi spec).

as usual you're right. there's no midi output for that button in the
UR-80 docs.

I wonder how I could get my PCR's buttons to change from mute
to solo to record without changing the memory selection. With
my CS-10 Emulation in pro tools I can do that because the
CS-10 uses a button for mode in Pro tools. Also, Leigh Marble
made that pro tools mode display software so it's pretty easy and
cool and uncluttered.

I guess I could always leave my keyboard transposed for the
buttons, put assigns, flip and banks on the buttons and use
something else to play midi into Logic... hmmmm

teddybut

>I wonder if that can be done just by using transformers in the environment.
>My guess is that they wouldn't work with the existing LC as they'd be coming
>from a different port on the PCR and Logic likes to see all the messages
>coming from the same port for the LC. Please god, don't make me move to OSX
>just for this.

Yeah, you'd still need some kind of loopback external to Logic in
order to merge the transformed notes with the correct "incoming" port
for them to be recognized as coming from the LC.

You won't have to move to OS X, I'm pretty sure.

>I thought that was what you were talking about when you said
>
>>  I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would be used as
>>  buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key to
>>  determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select, record, or
>>  rotary-push.

That's pretty much it - you'll be able to assign functions to the
keys of your choice.

>John, you might want to download the UR-80 docs from Edirol's site as they
>have implemented a switch that goes between solo, mute, etc for the buttons.
>I think there's a doc that says what is being sent out to make that
>happen...

Interesting. I'll take a look, though I suspect the switch is just
doing its thing inside the U-80, and simply causing the buttons to
send the message Logic expects to see for solo, mute, etc. I don't
think there's a way to remap the LC messages themselves (according to
the LC midi spec).

--
John Pitcairn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revolver Design  |  Opus Locus  |  Auckland, New Zealand
http://www.revolver.co.nz/forsale.phtml - updated 12 Sept 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

> --- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, "Teddybut" <kumpkin@e...> wrote:
>> what you planned on doing with that. Being that I only have 9
>> buttons on my PCR I just use them for mutes and FLIP. Now that
>> you can open the possibility of using notes on my keyboard for
>> buttons my mind is expanding.
>
> Given the LC button messages are just notes anyway, can't you do that
> now? Or does the PCR insist on directing the keys to the "wrong" port?
>
> John P

ok, I tried it and it does indeed work. I had to make 2 changes to my PCR
(output port and max velocity) which are not save-able to a PCR memory. bla.

what I'd love to be able to do is assign/transform my keyboard notes (in
Logic) to whatever notes I want so I can line up all the most useful
functions and not have to change the port on my Edirol or set velocity.
i.e.:

F2-C3 = solo
C#3-G#3= mute
A3     =assign track
A#3    =assign send
B3     =assign plug
C4     =flip

I wonder if that can be done just by using transformers in the environment.
My guess is that they wouldn't work with the existing LC as they'd be coming
from a different port on the PCR and Logic likes to see all the messages
coming from the same port for the LC. Please god, don't make me move to OSX
just for this.

I thought that was what you were talking about when you said

> I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would be used as
> buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key to
> determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select, record, or
> rotary-push.

toodleoo
teddybut
John, you might want to download the UR-80 docs from Edirol's site as they
have implemented a switch that goes between solo, mute, etc for the buttons.
I think there's a doc that says what is being sent out to make that
happen...

> --- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, "Teddybut" <kumpkin@e...> wrote:
>> what you planned on doing with that. Being that I only have 9
>> buttons on my PCR I just use them for mutes and FLIP. Now that
>> you can open the possibility of using notes on my keyboard for
>> buttons my mind is expanding.
>
> Given the LC button messages are just notes anyway, can't you do that
> now? Or does the PCR insist on directing the keys to the "wrong" port?
>
> John P

hmmmmm. dunno. I'll try. interesting.

teddy

--- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, "Teddybut" <kumpkin@e...> wrote:
> what you planned on doing with that. Being that I only have 9
> buttons on my PCR I just use them for mutes and FLIP. Now that
> you can open the possibility of using notes on my keyboard for
> buttons my mind is expanding.

Given the LC button messages are just notes anyway, can't you do that
now? Or does the PCR insist on directing the keys to the "wrong" port?

John P

--- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, John Pitcairn
<johnp@r...> wrote:
> >ok. but then when I use the "V-pots" to choose a slot won't
logic want me to
> >spin through the plugs with the "V-pot" to choose a lug?
>
> Oh I see, you want to insert a plug from the LC emulation, not
just
> open an existing one. Yeah, that's really difficult without the
LCD
> screen feedback. But I think Max or PureData can definitely
help us
> out there...
>
> John P

well, I don't really need that functionality, but I was just wondering
what you planned on doing with that. Being that I only have 9
buttons on my PCR I just use them for mutes and FLIP. Now that
you can open the possibility of using notes on my keyboard for
buttons my mind is expanding.

teddybut

>ok. but then when I use the "V-pots" to choose a slot won't logic want me to
>spin through the plugs with the "V-pot" to choose a lug?

Oh I see, you want to insert a plug from the LC emulation, not just
open an existing one. Yeah, that's really difficult without the LCD
screen feedback. But I think Max or PureData can definitely help us
out there...

John P

>> ya, but how do you see what plug in you're choosing?
>
> Have a track mixer window open, 8 channels wide, with "follow control
> surface" checked...

ok. but then when I use the "V-pots" to choose a slot won't logic want me to
spin through the plugs with the "V-pot" to choose a lug? with no visual
feedback as to what I'm choosing it might be hard to implement. Or am I
missing the point?
>
>> I'd like to see you focus on staying in track parameter=arrange. I
>> think that's the smartest thing Emagic has added since freeze. I
>> guess it is kind of self defeating sometimes because you have
>> to use the mouse to choose what parameter you're tweaking and
>> to add an automation lane (is that what they're calling it these
>> days?). Still i think it's the most free way to work when
>> automating.
>
> You mean the multitrack "displayed parameters" mode - track button +
> cursor all the way right (or option-right)?

YES, sorry. terminology gets confusing.

> Yeah, I do spend a lot of
> time there. But multitrack "send" mode is also very useful, as is
> "plugin" mode. It would be nice if the tracks' displayed automation
> parameter could be changed via the LC.

boy wouldn't it be?
>
> All the indicator LEDs and flashing buttons for solo/mute are sent
> from Logic to the "LC" too. The current emulation lights the correct
> "select" button, flashes the mutes when a track is soloed, etc. That
> put a big grin on my face.

neato!
>
>> I guess that's one area where the
>> Remote 25 really does the trick, but it has no editor or Mac
>> drivers yet. blah!
>
> But it has a midi-out doesn't it? No drivers needed if so, just a
> midi interface ... rotaries are a bit tricky anyway, since each
> manufacturer tends to use a different  message for "+1" and "-1",
> also for the "acceleration" factor. Configuring hardware rotary knobs
> will probably require a different input conversion for different
> devices.

hmmm, the plot thickens.

teddybut

>ya, but how do you see what plug in you're choosing?

Have a track mixer window open, 8 channels wide, with "follow control
surface" checked...

>I'd like to see you focus on staying in track parameter=arrange. I
>think that's the smartest thing Emagic has added since freeze. I
>guess it is kind of self defeating sometimes because you have
>to use the mouse to choose what parameter you're tweaking and
>to add an automation lane (is that what they're calling it these
>days?). Still i think it's the most free way to work when
>automating.

You mean the multitrack "displayed parameters" mode - track button +
cursor all the way right (or option-right)? Yeah, I do spend a lot of
time there. But multitrack "send" mode is also very useful, as is
"plugin" mode. It would be nice if the tracks' displayed automation
parameter could be changed via the LC.

>you can see it?? where? how? do I just cable a midi monitor
>from an audio object and it's there?

Nah, you need an external app like Midi Monitor to look at what Logic
is sending back to the "LC", but once you have that the LCD sysex is
just a header plus the ASCII codes for the screen characters being
overwritten. It doesn't necessarily send the whole screen every time,
just what's changed.

All the indicator LEDs and flashing buttons for solo/mute are sent
from Logic to the "LC" too. The current emulation lights the correct
"select" button, flashes the mutes when a track is soloed, etc. That
put a big grin on my face.

>I guess that's one area where the
>Remote 25 really does the trick, but it has no editor or Mac
>drivers yet. blah!

But it has a midi-out doesn't it? No drivers needed if so, just a
midi interface ... rotaries are a bit tricky anyway, since each
manufacturer tends to use a different  message for "+1" and "-1",
also for the "acceleration" factor. Configuring hardware rotary knobs
will probably require a different input conversion for different
devices.

John P

--- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, John Pitcairn
<johnp@r...> wrote:
> >>  I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would
be used as
> >>  buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key
to
> >>  determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select,
record, or
> >>  rotary-push.
> >
> >and some visual feedback about that!
>
> Yeah, that's easy enough. An onscreen text fader would tell you
which
> mode you're in.

yeehaw! that would be a great addition to my setup!

> >also, I have had really bad times with trying to get the plug in
thing to
> >work right without visual feedback from something telling me
what I'm
> >choosing. I guess there's no way to do that in the environment
with menus,
> >not sophisticated enough. I also wish the damn LC setup
window was save-able
> >in a screenset.
>
> If you use a particular procedure for the plugin mode - plugin
> button, rotary push for the track, cursor up/down for the slot -
the
> plugin window will open every time. Best to use a single, linked
> plugin window for this.

ya, but how do you see what plug in you're choosing?
>
> I'll be able to provide some feedback as to which mode you're
in -
> track/send/pan etc. Providing feedback for multitrack vs
channelstrip
> modes might be difficult, I haven't really looked at that yet,
though
> I don't think Logic sends it as sysex.

I'd like to see you focus on staying in track parameter=arrange. I
think that's the smartest thing Emagic has added since freeze. I
guess it is kind of self defeating sometimes because you have
to use the mouse to choose what parameter you're tweaking and
to add an automation lane (is that what they're calling it these
days?). Still i think it's the most free way to work when
automating.
>
> The LCD screen data, OTOH, all comes back from Logic as
sysex - I can
> SEE the damn tracknames and values etc in there using midi
monitor,
> but due to Logic's crap sysex-parsing ability I can't do anything
> with it in Logic, otherwise I could give you a full LCD screen,
> onscreen.

you can see it?? where? how? do I just cable a midi monitor
from an audio object and it's there? I guess the problem is when
you want to see 8 of those at a time and have them switch with
the bank you're on.... whoa, we're getting in over my head here!
>
> >I'd love to see a way for me to use my sliders (faders) on the
PCR, just as
> >they are now in addition to this 8 knob monster. In other
words, how are you
> >going to make it so that if I already have an LC emulation
setup on some
> >faders I can just add your environment as knobs (V-pots)?
Could they be
> >emulating the same LC in the Control surface setup or would
we need 2?
>
> Mapping non-endless controls to endless rotaries really
doesn't
> produce satisfactory results, as you've no doubt discovered
with the
> PCR's own emulation. Regular knobs or faders will have to be
mapped
> to the LC faders. If you have real endless rotaries those will
map to
> the LC rotaries.

ouch. that is the biggest downfall of the PCR! it really sucks that
they didn't think that through. I guess that's one area where the
Remote 25 really does the trick, but it has no editor or Mac
drivers yet. blah!
>
> What might be possible in the above situation would be to run
two LC
> emulations as separate control surface groups. Then the PCR
faders
> would map to LC #1 faders, and the PCR knobs would map to
LC #2
> faders, but in flip mode so they control the rotary parameters.
> Keeping the two synchronised to the same bank may well be a
nightmare
> however.

ya, that sounds like too much to think about. I do like having the
knobs on my PCR as regular old cc outputs. makes things easy
when you just want to quickly automate Phatmatik Pro or the EXS
without opening a bunch of automation lanes in arrange.
>
> I think it's more likely you'd run two LC emulations in the same
> control surface group, so your faders are channels 1-8 and
your knobs
> are channels 9-16, with the whole thing permanently in "flip"
mode so
> they are all volumes, all pans, all sends, etc.

ok, I can see that being ok. I always use duplicate mode anyway
because my knobs are cc's.
>
> To everybody: please bear in mind this is going to take a wee
while
> before it's ready to use even in its most basic form. All I have at
> present is a basic LC emulation, with no user-friendly
interfacing to
> external controllers. It's working for the 49 keys and modwheel
of my
> crappy Evolution MK149 keyboard, but no mapping functions or
soft
> takeover are in place. I won't have a chance to do anything
more
> until October...

take your time, John. it'll be well worth it. thank you for doing this.

teddybut

>>  I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would be used as
>>  buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key to
>>  determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select, record, or
>>  rotary-push.
>
>and some visual feedback about that!

Yeah, that's easy enough. An onscreen text fader would tell you which
mode you're in.

>whoa!!! dude, that is awesome. would the modifier key be a cc# or could it
>actually be a key command (better in my world but I'm guessing no)

Would have to be a midi message.

>also, I have had really bad times with trying to get the plug in thing to
>work right without visual feedback from something telling me what I'm
>choosing. I guess there's no way to do that in the environment with menus,
>not sophisticated enough. I also wish the damn LC setup window was save-able
>in a screenset.

If you use a particular procedure for the plugin mode - plugin
button, rotary push for the track, cursor up/down for the slot - the
plugin window will open every time. Best to use a single, linked
plugin window for this.

I'll be able to provide some feedback as to which mode you're in -
track/send/pan etc. Providing feedback for multitrack vs channelstrip
modes might be difficult, I haven't really looked at that yet, though
I don't think Logic sends it as sysex.

The LCD screen data, OTOH, all comes back from Logic as sysex - I can
SEE the damn tracknames and values etc in there using midi monitor,
but due to Logic's crap sysex-parsing ability I can't do anything
with it in Logic, otherwise I could give you a full LCD screen,
onscreen.

>I'd love to see a way for me to use my sliders (faders) on the PCR, just as
>they are now in addition to this 8 knob monster. In other words, how are you
>going to make it so that if I already have an LC emulation setup on some
>faders I can just add your environment as knobs (V-pots)? Could they be
>emulating the same LC in the Control surface setup or would we need 2?

Mapping non-endless controls to endless rotaries really doesn't
produce satisfactory results, as you've no doubt discovered with the
PCR's own emulation. Regular knobs or faders will have to be mapped
to the LC faders. If you have real endless rotaries those will map to
the LC rotaries.

What might be possible in the above situation would be to run two LC
emulations as separate control surface groups. Then the PCR faders
would map to LC #1 faders, and the PCR knobs would map to LC #2
faders, but in flip mode so they control the rotary parameters.
Keeping the two synchronised to the same bank may well be a nightmare
however.

I think it's more likely you'd run two LC emulations in the same
control surface group, so your faders are channels 1-8 and your knobs
are channels 9-16, with the whole thing permanently in "flip" mode so
they are all volumes, all pans, all sends, etc.

To everybody: please bear in mind this is going to take a wee while
before it's ready to use even in its most basic form. All I have at
present is a basic LC emulation, with no user-friendly interfacing to
external controllers. It's working for the 49 keys and modwheel of my
crappy Evolution MK149 keyboard, but no mapping functions or soft
takeover are in place. I won't have a chance to do anything more
until October...

John P

dear JP Genius man...

So, how will this work? Would I just send cc's from my knobs and then you
will transform them into the needed fader info in the environment?
>
> I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would be used as
> buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key to
> determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select, record, or
> rotary-push.

and some visual feedback about that!

> So that's 13 keys needed, plus you'd definitely want
> keys assigned to the track, send, pan, plugin buttons, and the 4
> cursor keys. A two octave keyboard would get you a long way.

whoa!!! dude, that is awesome. would the modifier key be a cc# or could it
actually be a key command (better in my world but I'm guessing no)

also, I have had really bad times with trying to get the plug in thing to
work right without visual feedback from something telling me what I'm
choosing. I guess there's no way to do that in the environment with menus,
not sophisticated enough. I also wish the damn LC setup window was save-able
in a screenset.

> More than 8 controls of the same type would probably be unsupported
> at first, for example to use 16 knobs effectively might require
> emulating 2 LCs or an LC+XT. Do-able, but at first I'd be aiming for
> basic LC emulation, multiple units would come later.

I'd love to see a way for me to use my sliders (faders) on the PCR, just as
they are now in addition to this 8 knob monster. In other words, how are you
going to make it so that if I already have an LC emulation setup on some
faders I can just add your environment as knobs (V-pots)? Could they be
emulating the same LC in the Control surface setup or would we need 2?

great ideas, JP, you da man.

Teddybut

>Would this tie us to particular hardware?

Not as far as I can tell. The LC is supported in Logic 5.1+, Mac or
PC, any supported OS. Software midi loopback should be possible in
OSX (tested), OS9 and Windows. Obviously we'll need to do some
testing.

For LC emulation, the first version would be making the assumption
that you have 8 knobs, faders or rotary dials, and something to use
as buttons (midi keys). The LC has lots of buttons (102), not all of
which are crucial to an emulation.

I anticipate providing a mechanism whereby 8 keys would be used as
buttons for tracks 1-8, and you'd hold down a modifier key to
determine whether those 8 keys are mute, solo, select, record, or
rotary-push. So that's 13 keys needed, plus you'd definitely want
keys assigned to the track, send, pan, plugin buttons, and the 4
cursor keys. A two octave keyboard would get you a long way.

Fewer than 8 knob/fader/dial controls might be tricky, though it will
be possible to use, say, 4 controls with a modifier key to switch
those between LC controls 1-4 and 5-8, etc.

More than 8 controls of the same type would probably be unsupported
at first, for example to use 16 knobs effectively might require
emulating 2 LCs or an LC+XT. Do-able, but at first I'd be aiming for
basic LC emulation, multiple units would come later.

John P

>this sounds good; but as i am using a hammerfall multiface, where
>would this leave me in osx?

Not sure what you mean. Presumably you must have a midi-in for your
controller somehow? The loopback can be done internally in OS X via
Midi Patchbay (free). This will also work in OS 9, but would require
OMS for the loopback, as noted.

>and would this environment be seen as an upgrade from fm1.0 or would
>we have to purchase a new license?

Yeah, free.

John P

Would this tie us to particular hardware? That would be my only
concern. But, being able to upgrade to Logic 6.2 would be
nice...looking forward to using ReWire.

On Saturday, Sep 20, 2003, at 02:28 US/Pacific, John Pitcairn wrote:

> An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
> Edirol). Logic Control emulation.

--
tim cosgrove
tfc@...
01.415.786.6484 (m)

whoa... dude... brilliant!!!! follow your instincts, they are always good as
far as I'm concerned. That way people could use it with TDM (selfish me!)

teddybut

> So ... how would you all feel about Logic Control emulation?
>
> An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
> Edirol). Logic Control emulation.
>
> John Pitcairn

hi john
this sounds good; but as i am using a hammerfall multiface, where
would this leave me in osx?
and would this environment be seen as an upgrade from fm1.0 or would
we have to purchase a new license?
thanks.
best regards
jason kahn

>An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
>Edirol). Logic Control emulation.
>
>I have at present a reliably-working model of a Logic Control made
>totally in the environment, with the assistance of a software midi
>loopback - Midi Patchbay on OS X, but OMS IAC and Midiyoke or similar
>should be able to do the same thing in OS9/Windows, or just connect a
>hardware midi-out to a midi-in.
>
>There's enough LC functionality working to do most things, though some
>controls are not working correctly at present (notably the "global"
>mixer modes and the jogwheel), and there's no emulation of the LCD or
>LED screens (which requires much better sysex parsing than Logic can
>manage). I can add 8 soft takeovers and a control/note-mapping
>mechanism in front of the "LC", and it would be pretty much
>functional. Then I'd improve on that.
>
>There are some downsides, but on the whole it would provide a more
>robust and retrofittable solution than a large, massively
>interconnected environment like Fadermapper. My personal opinion is
>that given the current Logic 6 environment bugs, this is where my
>efforts should go, rather than documenting, beta-testing and
>supporting the current FM2.0 - opinions please...
>
>John Pitcairn
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>fadermapper-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Sounds good John...!

I'm up for some of that :)

Best

Dan
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: John Pitcairn
   To: fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 10:28 AM
   Subject: [fadermapper-users] So ... how would you all feel about Logic Control
emulation?


   An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
   Edirol). Logic Control emulation.

   I have at present a reliably-working model of a Logic Control made
   totally in the environment, with the assistance of a software midi
   loopback - Midi Patchbay on OS X, but OMS IAC and Midiyoke or similar
   should be able to do the same thing in OS9/Windows, or just connect a
   hardware midi-out to a midi-in.

   There's enough LC functionality working to do most things, though some
   controls are not working correctly at present (notably the "global"
   mixer modes and the jogwheel), and there's no emulation of the LCD or
   LED screens (which requires much better sysex parsing than Logic can
   manage). I can add 8 soft takeovers and a control/note-mapping
   mechanism in front of the "LC", and it would be pretty much
   functional. Then I'd improve on that.

   There are some downsides, but on the whole it would provide a more
   robust and retrofittable solution than a large, massively
   interconnected environment like Fadermapper. My personal opinion is
   that given the current Logic 6 environment bugs, this is where my
   efforts should go, rather than documenting, beta-testing and
   supporting the current FM2.0 - opinions please...

   John Pitcairn


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT




   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   fadermapper-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

yes, please!

this sounds great to me!  Of course I'd also love to be able to us FM2
someday, but this would certainly be very cool.


On Saturday, September 20, 2003, at 05:28 AM, John Pitcairn wrote:

> An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
> Edirol). Logic Control emulation.
>
> I have at present a reliably-working model of a Logic Control made
> totally in the environment, with the assistance of a software midi
> loopback - Midi Patchbay on OS X, but OMS IAC and Midiyoke or similar
> should be able to do the same thing in OS9/Windows, or just connect a
> hardware midi-out to a midi-in.
>
> There's enough LC functionality working to do most things, though some
> controls are not working correctly at present (notably the "global"
> mixer modes and the jogwheel), and there's no emulation of the LCD or
> LED screens (which requires much better sysex parsing than Logic can
> manage). I can add 8 soft takeovers and a control/note-mapping
> mechanism in front of the "LC", and it would be pretty much
> functional. Then I'd improve on that.
>
> There are some downsides, but on the whole it would provide a more
> robust and retrofittable solution than a large, massively
> interconnected environment like Fadermapper. My personal opinion is
> that given the current Logic 6 environment bugs, this is where my
> efforts should go, rather than documenting, beta-testing and
> supporting the current FM2.0 - opinions please...
>
> John Pitcairn
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~-->
> ReplayTV: CNet Ranked #1 over Tivo!
> Instant Replay & Pause live TV.
> Special Sale: 50% off!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/UUMW7B/.5qGAA/ySSFAA/bDIolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ~->
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> fadermapper-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

An interesting new possibility has arisen, thanks to Teddybut (and
Edirol). Logic Control emulation.

I have at present a reliably-working model of a Logic Control made
totally in the environment, with the assistance of a software midi
loopback - Midi Patchbay on OS X, but OMS IAC and Midiyoke or similar
should be able to do the same thing in OS9/Windows, or just connect a
hardware midi-out to a midi-in.

There's enough LC functionality working to do most things, though some
controls are not working correctly at present (notably the "global"
mixer modes and the jogwheel), and there's no emulation of the LCD or
LED screens (which requires much better sysex parsing than Logic can
manage). I can add 8 soft takeovers and a control/note-mapping
mechanism in front of the "LC", and it would be pretty much
functional. Then I'd improve on that.

There are some downsides, but on the whole it would provide a more
robust and retrofittable solution than a large, massively
interconnected environment like Fadermapper. My personal opinion is
that given the current Logic 6 environment bugs, this is where my
efforts should go, rather than documenting, beta-testing and
supporting the current FM2.0 - opinions please...

John Pitcairn

>you can do it with the PCR keyboards because it has 2 midi out ports built
>in. I have the sliders acting as an LC and the knobs are cc's.

Now there's a thought - I can probably setup a routing in the MTP AV
to do it. Shame the MTP and the LC do not coexist as happily as the
MT4 and LC.

--
John Pitcairn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revolver Design  |  Opus Locus  |  Auckland, New Zealand
http://www.revolver.co.nz/forsale.phtml - updated 21 August 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Shame really, as I'd quite like to use the LC faders as LC, and the
> pots and a few buttons with Fadermapper (in endless rotary-mode).

you can do it with the PCR keyboards because it has 2 midi out ports built
in. I have the sliders acting as an LC and the knobs are cc's. you can send
any control to any output. Of course there's only 9 buttons aside from that
so there's no where near the functionality of a real LC, but it's actually
pretty sweet for what I do over here.

maybe the Edirol UR-80 is cool. I haven't tried it yet. Have you guys seen
that thing?

teddybut

>> I guess that's $300 (or is it pounds?) for us idiots who don't really speak
>> "english"?
>>
> £300
>
aha, thanks

>> thanks for the info.... I think this project is over my head, especially in
>> the time department... maybe not, but all I have is a hammer and a couple of
>> screwdrivers...
>>
> Yup, no doubt it's daunting at first - but remember, i was totally new to
> anything electronics prior to starting this so I had to get all the tools n
> whatnot - plus I etched n stuffed the pcbs myself and the panel was done by
> hand. However, you can buy all the modules allready madeup, and u can get
> proper lasercut panels easily enough - so fabrications is minimal..

hmmmmm, intriguing.
>
>> like what is "flush"? when your face gets red?
>>
> Flush, like when ur wallet is more flush...ie, u got more money :)

aha!!!! thanks for the translation and keeping this email in a more standard
form. Although I lived in England for a year when I was a kid in 1972 I
never learned any slang.

teddybut

>Please tell us about the 'endless rotary mode.'  Perhaps I missed the memo.

FM2 will handle endless rotaries to increment/decrement Logic stuff
with no soft takeover needed. And motorfaders, with full feedback to
the motorfaders, ie Fadermapper can move the faders. And LED-buttons
with full feedback, ie Fadermapper can light/unlight the LEDs.

Scaling of feedback is supported, so if you have a motorfader
controlling something that has a range of 0-15, moving the onscreen
control through its 0-15 range will move the motorfader through its
full range.

Touch-sensitive faders are not supported, ie for automation rewrites
they will fight you, so it's better to use endless rotaries or
regular faders/knobs for rewrites.

Changing memory/bank/shift sends the appropriate feedback, so
motorfaders/LEDs update to reflect the new control status. Wheee!

It was all pretty sweet with my Fostex VM200 digital mixer (9
motorfaders, 26 LED buttons, 12 endless rotaries - it's for sale,
BTW).



The following combinations are possible:

endless rotaries + regular knobs/faders with soft takeover
endless rotaries + motorfaders/LEDs with feedback
endless rotaries + motorfaders/LEDs with feedback + regular
knobs/faders WITHOUT soft takeover

Up to 128 controls are usable (sorry Dan, 2 channels is too much of a
pain in the ass), with an input selector that lets you specify each
source control as "absolute" (regular knob/fader or motorfader/LED)
or "relative" (endless rotaries).

motorfaders/LEDs + regular knobs/faders with soft takeover is not
possible (well it actually is, I had an early version that could do
it, but there's not enough separate 2-byte midi controller messages
available to handle it without a ton of extra work on my part, and it
uses waaay more memory/filesize than the current version anyway).

It'll be necessary to specify a version with or without soft
takeover, ie soft takeover and motorfader/LED feedback are mutually
exclusive.



REQUIREMENTS:

All controls must send/receive on the same channel.

Requirements for regular knobs/faders/buttons are unchanged from v1.

Endless rotaries need to each send a different controller #, with a
value of 0-63 being "decrement" and 64-127 being "increment". If
there's a "speedup" mode where higher/lower values are sent if you
turn the knob faster, that can be accommodated with a little
customization.

Motorfaders must each send a different controller, and each must be
setup to use the same controller for send/receive.

LED buttons are similar to motorfaders, but must send/receive values
of 0/127 for off/on, though it's an easy transform at Fadermapper
input/output if they send 0/1.

If you have a controller that does "fake relative" mode, ie endless
knobs that can receive a start value and then transmit regular
controllers from that value, they can be used with Fadermapper in
"motorfader" mode.

Similarly, devices like the Doepfer Regelwerk that include their own
soft takeover can use the motorfader mode to get appropriate feedback.




See why it's taken so long? Not just a Logic 6 bug workaround...


--
John Pitcairn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revolver Design  |  Opus Locus  |  Auckland, New Zealand
http://www.revolver.co.nz/forsale.phtml - updated 8 August 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

John,

Please tell us about the 'endless rotary mode.'  Perhaps I missed the memo.

/robb

>BTW: John, that GPC mode i mentioned works by making the LC 'v-pots' act
>like a regular controller - transmitting cc's 0-127. you flick thru the
>params (ie 1-8, 9-16) via the jog wheel :). Your right, that the LC occupies
>the whole midiport, but apparently some trickery with midi-ox and midi-yoke
>allows to filter the GPC cc's to a midiyoke port...

Nice you can do that in Windows - in OS X, you can tap off a midi
input port with MidiPipe or similar, but it's a parallel tap as Logic
insists on taking its midi input directly from all available ports -
so there's no way to tell it to ignore the LC without deleting it
from the controller setup window (and even then it'll grab it again
when you open a song).

Shame really, as I'd quite like to use the LC faders as LC, and the
pots and a few buttons with Fadermapper (in endless rotary-mode).

--
John Pitcairn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revolver Design  |  Opus Locus  |  Auckland, New Zealand
http://www.revolver.co.nz/forsale.phtml - updated 8 August 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------