Had to happen sometime. Thanks to all who purchased.

I'll leave this group running however, and will attempt to support
those of you who bought it, though it's now a very long time since I
had to open it up and remember how it works, so, er...

John Pitcairn

--- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, "John Pitcairn" <johnp@r...>
wrote:
> Just so this is clear to newcomers: the free crossgrade to LC Xmu is
> available to those who purchased Fadermapper prior to the initial
> release of LC Xmu - September 2003.

Duh. That's December 2003. Call it the end of December.

JP

Just so this is clear to newcomers: the free crossgrade to LC Xmu is
available to those who purchased Fadermapper prior to the initial
release of LC Xmu - September 2003.

John Pitcairn

>I bought the PC version of Fadermapper but have since transferred to
>OSX. I don't use (or have) fadermapper on the mac, but LC Xmu has piqued
>my curiosity and I wondered what my position would be with regard to an
>up/crossgrade.

Free. Try the demo first to make sure it works for you.

--
John Pitcairn

-------------------------------------------------------------
Logic Control emulation for generic midi controllers:
LC Xmu demo: http://www.opuslocus.com/lcxmu/
-------------------------------------------------------------

Hi John

I bought the PC version of Fadermapper but have since transferred to
OSX. I don't use (or have) fadermapper on the mac, but LC Xmu has piqued
my curiosity and I wondered what my position would be with regard to an
up/crossgrade.

All the best

Simon Duffy

-----Original Message-----
From: John Pitcairn [mailto:johnp@...]
Sent: 16 December 2003 06:24
To: fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [fadermapper-users] LC Xmu freebies

OK folks - those of you using Mac OS X who want this please email me
for your copy. You might want to check out the demo first though.

Those using OS 9 will have to wait a little longer.

Those using Windows, um, sorry. It's not a technical problem, it's an
outrageous license fee problem.

And, er ... don't rush to grab a copy if you won't be using it for a
while. I'm not going anywhere.

Note that in the (fairly unlikely) event that Fadermapper 2 sees
release, and you have taken me up on the free LC Xmu offer,
Fadermapper 2 would then be a paid upgrade.

John P.


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




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fadermapper-users/

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/

OK folks - those of you using Mac OS X who want this please email me
for your copy. You might want to check out the demo first though.

Those using OS 9 will have to wait a little longer.

Those using Windows, um, sorry. It's not a technical problem, it's an
outrageous license fee problem.

And, er ... don't rush to grab a copy if you won't be using it for a
while. I'm not going anywhere.

Note that in the (fairly unlikely) event that Fadermapper 2 sees
release, and you have taken me up on the free LC Xmu offer,
Fadermapper 2 would then be a paid upgrade.

John P.

hi john
great news! thanks.
best
jason kahn

>Jason, Tim, everyone:
>
>I believe I promised Fadermapper users a copy of the basic LC Xmu
>version for free, in lieu of the Fadermapper 2 upgrade (which will
>probably never happen, though y' never know...), and I always attempt
>to honour my promises.
>
>So yeah, Fadermapper users get one free, but any upgrades from there,
>whether future LC Xmu or Fadermapper versions, will be paid upgrades.
>
>Give me a few days though. I want to get the demo up first.
>
>Mac OS X version will be available before the OS 9 version, solely
>because documenting the setup procedure for OS 9 is a little more
>complex.
>
>John P
>
>
>
>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/

Jason, Tim, everyone:

I believe I promised Fadermapper users a copy of the basic LC Xmu
version for free, in lieu of the Fadermapper 2 upgrade (which will
probably never happen, though y' never know...), and I always attempt
to honour my promises.

So yeah, Fadermapper users get one free, but any upgrades from there,
whether future LC Xmu or Fadermapper versions, will be paid upgrades.

Give me a few days though. I want to get the demo up first.

Mac OS X version will be available before the OS 9 version, solely
because documenting the setup procedure for OS 9 is a little more
complex.

John P

Maybe premature, but how does this apply to Fadermapper owners?
Upgrade, new product, etc?

Thanks!

On Dec 11, 2003, at 3:25 PM, John Pitcairn wrote:

> 'Tis done.
>
> http://www.opuslocus.com/xmu/
>
> Mac only. Demo up this weekend I hope. Just a few legal issues
> outstanding.
>
> JP
>

Nice1 John!

If i had no LC (and a Mac) I'd be right in there!!

Peesh

Dan

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...>
To: <fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:25 PM
Subject: [fadermapper-users] Re: So ... how would you all feel about Logic
Control emulation?


> 'Tis done.
>
> http://www.opuslocus.com/xmu/
>
> Mac only. Demo up this weekend I hope. Just a few legal issues
> outstanding.
>
> JP
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>

'Tis done.

http://www.opuslocus.com/xmu/

Mac only. Demo up this weekend I hope. Just a few legal issues
outstanding.

JP

--- In fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com, "tommy" <tecnofiend@a...> wrote:
> just wondering on the progress . havent heard anything in a while .

It's been slower than expected - I've emailed you the beta directly.
Anyone else want a go? OSX and OS9 beta versions now available for
testing. Very minimal documentation at this point. Sensible feedback
expected.

OSX screenshot here:

http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/EOu1P8X78MkZTyVsEE3zwQvIU6JNa0lY0w8LymFNp-UnVOVzwUL\
CwqhwtndlpcoM6LZbXI4qW5Ldx-K1ZKI/10b4_logic%26top%26arrvw%26soloX.gif

John Pitcairn

just wondering on the progress . havent heard anything in a while .


tommy

Teddy and I have beaten most of the kinks out of this so far, now I'm
looking at a wider round of beta-testing before I release the basic
version. For now, I need a few intrepid testers. Requirements:

Mac OS X or Mac OS 9. Windows is not supported (yet).

Mac OS 9 requires that you use OMS as your midi driver. OMS "in
addition" to the built-in midi drivers will not work.

Logic Gold/Platinum 5.5 or higher. Logic Audio is not supported -
although it does support the Logic Control, it doesn't allow splitting
off of midi input ports at the Physical input (damn).

You must be prepared to download AND READ the Logic Control manual.

Your controller must have:

8 knobs or faders sending CC messages. Endless rotary dials are not
supported at present, unless they can function in a "regular CC knob"
mode.

At least 25 buttons sending CC messages, capable of sending a separate
value for button-down and button-up.

Or at least a 25-key midi keyboard with at least 8 CC knobs. The
minimal setup is an Oxygen 8.

Email me off-list.

John Pitcairn

hi john ,

im running OS X with Logic 6 mostly and 5 too sometimes...



tommy
tecnofiend@...


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

Hey John...

My aim is to eventually have a G5 mac osx based logic box, but it won't be
anytime soon - certainly not this year...

Best

Dan




----- Original Message -----
From: "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...>
To: <fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 5:58 AM
Subject: [fadermapper-users] Who's on OS X here?


> Spot survey ... who's running Logic on OS X? Logic 5.x or 6.x?
>
> And if not, who's planning to in the near future (ie this year)?
>
> --
> John Pitcairn
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Revolver Design  |  Opus Locus  |  Auckland, New Zealand
> http://www.revolver.co.nz/forsale.phtml - updated 12 Sept 2003
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>

Spot survey ... who's running Logic on OS X? Logic 5.x or 6.x?

And if not, who's planning to in the near future (ie this year)?

--
John Pitcairn

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

> Um ... officially unavailable. Why do you want it? Seriously, the
> shift feature adds bugger-all to the size of the thing, all that it's
> doing is manipulating the event destination headers on the fly. It's
> soft takeovers (mostly) and banks (somewhat) that crank the size up.
> Chop it down, Dan. Just make the FM control window smaller so you
> can't see the shifty bits ;-)

I think I can handle that ;)

Cheers

Dan //

>Have you FM0.92 still kickin around then? The last version before the shift
>feature was added...

Um ... officially unavailable. Why do you want it? Seriously, the
shift feature adds bugger-all to the size of the thing, all that it's
doing is manipulating the event destination headers on the fly. It's
soft takeovers (mostly) and banks (somewhat) that crank the size up.
Chop it down, Dan. Just make the FM control window smaller so you
can't see the shifty bits ;-)

--
John Pitcairn

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

> Shouldn't conflict with an LC, real or emulated. The only way to do a
> "mini" Fadermapper is just to address fewer Audio Objects (as per the
> smaller supplied versions) and maybe use fewer banks. Everything else
> is in FM necessary, or at least damn hard to rip out without busting
> it.

Makes sense....

Have you FM0.92 still kickin around then? The last version before the shift
feature was added...

I can only 0.91 and then no other's till 0.95 here....

Cheers

Dan

>
>
>
> 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/
>
>

> I don't know what OS you're on but if you have Logic 6.1 you can use the
> "arrange" view mode where you map what controls you want to control from
the
> v-pots by what's showing in arrange. You could have 8 controls for the
same
> track or different tracks, totally random. just put your lc in arr view
> (global plus shift toggles between mix and arr), arrange
submenu>view>"show
> track automation" and put the automation parameter for each track on
> whatever you want to automate. plus you can put those tracks with those
> automation views in folders and save screensets with different folders
> showing and switch right to that set at any time with a screenset. It's
> really great.

Still a PC lap user here...:

>plus you can put those tracks with those
>automation views in folders and save screensets with different folders
>showing and switch right to that set at any time with a screenset. It's
>really great.

Or just have multiple track mixer or Arrange windows open in the same
screenset, each showing the contents of a different folder, and
switch among those with the "next window" keycommand.

JP

> From: "Pipex" <apak03@...>
>
> Hey John....
>
> Just wondering - I've been using the LC, but am not so keen on the way you
> have to scroll thru aload of params to get to what u wanna control of ie, a
> plugin or instru...
>
> Dan
  I ain't keen on that either, especially with big monsters like Virus Indigo
TDM.

I don't know what OS you're on but if you have Logic 6.1 you can use the
"arrange" view mode where you map what controls you want to control from the
v-pots by what's showing in arrange. You could have 8 controls for the same
track or different tracks, totally random. just put your lc in arr view
(global plus shift toggles between mix and arr), arrange submenu>view>"show
track automation" and put the automation parameter for each track on
whatever you want to automate. plus you can put those tracks with those
automation views in folders and save screensets with different folders
showing and switch right to that set at any time with a screenset. It's
really great.

teddybut

>Would it possible to utilise a 'mini fadermapper' enviro where I can
>still use FM just for plugin/instru control - with the banks and
>stuff....?

Shouldn't conflict with an LC, real or emulated. The only way to do a
"mini" Fadermapper is just to address fewer Audio Objects (as per the
smaller supplied versions) and maybe use fewer banks. Everything else
is in FM necessary, or at least damn hard to rip out without busting
it.

Hey John....

Just wondering - I've been using the LC, but am not so keen on the way you have
to scroll thru aload of params to get to what u wanna control of ie, a plugin or
instru...

Would it possible to utilise a 'mini fadermapper' enviro where I can still use
FM just for plugin/instru control - with the banks and stuff....?

I can utilise the GPC mode my controller has (whilst in LC mode, i can switch to
gpc which turn the vpots in to regular cc param controllers, ie, cc0-8, then use
the jog dial to scroll up down the 127 availble cc;s)

Then i'd have the best of both worlds :)

Cheers

Dan
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: teddybut
   To: fadermapper-users@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 3:48 AM
   Subject: Re: [fadermapper-users] Re: So ... Logic Control emulation?



   >> I'm going to try that. whacky!!!
   >
   > Save your work often - if you get an uncontrolled loopback going,
   > you'll likely crash. You'll need to make sure the initial LC
   > handshake from the PCR gets routed to the IAC bus too.
   >
   > JP

   hey John,

   why is it that the physical input doesn't show something coming in from OMS
   or USB?

   teddybut


         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]

John P.,

using your loop-back idea I hooked it all up with the PCR last night. it
works GREAT!!!!

thank you so much for the idea.

let me know how things progress with your new version.

teddybut

>why is it that the physical input doesn't show something coming in from OMS
>or USB?

Have you assigned the OMS IAC busses you want to use as inputs in OMS
Input Mapping? Checked "connect all real instruments" there too
(which connects all "real" OMS nodes that are defined in OMS Setup as
being able to transmit, but not virtual stuff like IAC)?

  From memory, OMS inputs might all appear at the "sum" port, or the
input # as defined in OMS Input Mapping, and this seems to vary
depending on the Logic version (ie it's buggy).

If you mean the "LC" OMS IAC port loopback, Logic grabs LC messages
before they hit the Physical Input.

John P

>> I'm going to try that. whacky!!!
>
> Save your work often - if you get an uncontrolled loopback going,
> you'll likely crash. You'll need to make sure the initial LC
> handshake from the PCR gets routed to the IAC bus too.
>
> JP

hey John,

why is it that the physical input doesn't show something coming in from OMS
or USB?

teddybut

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

Save your work often - if you get an uncontrolled loopback going,
you'll likely crash. You'll need to make sure the initial LC
handshake from the PCR gets routed to the IAC bus too.

JP

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