Control Surface Integration (CSI) Technical Feature Discussion

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by matthew john

Hello Geoff,

my name is Matthew, I'm new to Reaper but not new to the business.
A few years ago I switched from Pro Tools to Cubase. I'm trying to find out if Reaper can be an option for the future.
To make a mix with mouse and keyboard, Reaper has everything Cubase offers. I come to a result in both programs.
I use three Avid Artist Mix and one Avid Transport for my daily work in Cubase.
The Eucon integration in cubase is pretty good.

The decision whether to use Reaper as my DAW in the future will be made dependent on the controller integration.

I have tried the following:

one artist mix with reaper - with the eucon beta plugin for reaper

one icon qcon pro x with reaper - with the mcu-klinke plugin for reaper
(I ordered the qcon for a 30 day trail)


let's start with eucon:

it all works pretty much the same as in cubase - with the help of the Eucon manual I made good progress. I particularly like the ability to set the fineness of the encoder with plug-in parameters. The mapping will take some time with my UAD collection - but I had to do this work with Cubase (Remote Control Editor) as well.

Now my questions:

I can not close plugin windows that I open with the artist mix. In Cubase I choose the "Top Back" button and the previously opened plugin window closes again.

Have I overlooked something or is this not working in Reaper?

What always bothered me about Cubase is that I have to open and close each plugin individually. If the Artist Mix is in the "Input" + "Channel" mode, all loaded plugins on the selected track will be displayed above the encoders. Pressing on an encoder opens the corresponding plugin. But if I want to open the next plugin I have to close the plugin with "top back" and open the desired plugin again with the next encoder. the artist mix does not follow changes (open/close plugins) i make with the mouse.

Is there in a possibility to switch between the individual insert effects of tracks and make the artist mix follow the selections of the mouse?
In the process, the controller should update itself. I open, for example in the first insert slot with the artist mix a plugin. The paramaters for this plugin are now visible on the artist mix. I would like to simply click through the plugin chain of this track with the mouse and the artist mix should follow. If I click on the first insert effect, the artist mix should show the parameters of this effect. I click with the mouse on the 2nd insert effect, the artist mix should show the parameters of this effect. this would be a fantastic worklow improvement for me. if you try to gainstage your insert channel for example.

is this possible in reaper?

I also tried the qcon with the mackie protocol from Klinke and that's exactly what is possible there. if you just have the fx paramater on the controller, the controller always updates itself when i click on another plugin.

but over all I'm happier with the eucon protocol, the feel is just way better. pan settings are possible with absolute value - mackie is skipping some values - not that this would be necessary for life - nobody cares if the guitar is panned to 67 or 68 percent. but the speed of the encoder is simply better with the artist mix - I'm probably too used to the device.

would be cool if you can give me a little feedback to my questions. cause if i can do the same things in reaper with my controllers as in cubase i would look deeper into this daw. if i can do less than in cubase it can be a dealbreaker.

thanks in advance
greetings
Matthew

Welcome !

The EuCon project is not being developed any further in the foreseeable future.

Here is video demoing CSI (the subject of this thread) using Avid Artist series in Mackie mode, it's pretty snappy, even with 1400+ tracks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ravhFzHcYKI

The maps are all external in CSI as well so you can customize heavily, think EuCon customization on steroids

[Diego]

Geoff did a fantastic job with the Eucon plugin and now id developing a wonderful tool for many control surfaces... Unfortunately I have the same issue you have with Avid control surfaces (I have an Artist Mix and an Artist Transport.): many of the unit buttons don't transmit (in Eucon and MCU mode) MIDI messages and can not be mapped to the CSI plugin...
For the moment I was happy to donate to Geoff for the new plugin but I stay with the Eucon: I wish Geoff could find a way to activate some kind of "new mode" that force the unit to send MIDI messages for all the buttons (and functions).

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by Diego

Geoff did a fantastic job with the Eucon plugin and now id developing a wonderful tool for many control surfaces... Unfortunately I have the same issue you have with Avid control surfaces (I have an Artist Mix and an Artist Transport.): many of the unit buttons don't transmit (in Eucon and MCU mode) MIDI messages and can not be mapped to the CSI plugin...
For the moment I was happy to donate to Geoff for the new plugin but I stay with the Eucon: I wish Geoff could find a way to activate some kind of "new mode" that force the unit to send MIDI messages for all the buttons (and functions).

I do too !!

If anyone knows of a secret boot mode, etc., please let us know

I agree, CSI with the Artist Mix and Artist Transport but without the Artist Control does not get the job done, we really need to get those extra controls functioning !

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by Diego

many of the unit buttons don't transmit (in Eucon and MCU mode) MIDI messages

And do what exactly instead ?

-Michael

[Diego]

Originally Posted by mschnell

And do what exactly instead ?

They work in Eucon mode (obviously 100% when you use PT and 70% in reaper) but with CSI they do nothing...

[ivansc]

Geoff: Loving the demo on Youtube!

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by Diego

They work in Eucon mode (obviously 100% when you use PT and 70% in reaper) but with CSI they do nothing...

This is obvious, but was not the question. Activating same needs to be visible to the PC in some way.
What exactly do they do rather then sending something. Switching some internal state within the device ? If yes what does this state mean/do with respect to it later sending some messages ?

-Michael

[matthew john]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Welcome !

The EuCon project is not being developed any further in the foreseeable future.

Here is video demoing CSI (the subject of this thread) using Avid Artist series in Mackie mode, it's pretty snappy, even with 1400+ tracks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ravhFzHcYKI

The maps are all external in CSI as well so you can customize heavily, think EuCon customization on steroids

Thanks for your quick reply. I will look into this CSI Plugin this evening and the next days. Anything special to pay attention to? You say you use the artist series in mackie mode? Why?

Greetings
Matthew

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by mschnell

This is obvious, but was not the question. Activating same needs to be visible to the PC in some way.
What exactly do they do rather then sending something. Switching some internal state within the device ? If yes what does this state mean/do with respect to it later sending some messages ?

-Michael

The state switching occurs hidden within the firmware/EuControl software somewhere. completely hidden from end users/programmers.

When you write software for the EuCon protocol (as I did for Reaper) you use and SDK which hooks you in at a pretty high level of abstraction (way too high for me).

This has advantages of consistency across devices/apps/platforms, but is also, by definition, constraining.

That's why I chose to use the Mackie Control Protocol available on the Artist series for the CSI project.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by matthew john

You say you use the artist series in mackie mode? Why?

Greetings
Matthew

See previous post for answer

[matthew john]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

See previous post for answer

Thanks Goeff. You say that without Artist Control, this does not work properly.

Can you please be more specific?

What works now - right now - with 1 artist mix and 1 artist transport and the CSI plugin?

Eucon is no longer being promoted, you say? How can I understand that? You've done a lot of work? Has not anyone supported by Cockos then? I mean a clean Eucon integration into a DAW is still a good advertisement for a DAW or not?

I have not been very busy with how it works at Reaper, but I've always had the impression that really good and meaningful functions that are provided by users are then also an integral part of Reaper? Did Cockos then show no interest in Eucon?


This all sounds very bad now - but it is certainly not meant to be evil. I do not want to insult anyone from Cockos or any member of the community here. I just want to understand the structures.

Because if I want to work professionally with a software, most of the stuff should work out of the box without having to program for a long time.

I just have to know what I am here for. if reaper with the controllers is not ready yet, I have to wait. I can play around with it - but for the daily work i need a tool that works without problems - even if it is just the controller integration.

please let me quick no what i can do with an artist mix and an artist transport in reaper right now. i would not have a problem to spent a few hours to set all up -but after that it should work.


greetings
Matthew

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

That's why I chose to use the Mackie Control Protocol available on the Artist series for the CSI project.

Yep. If the "Native Mode" is not documented (other than with e.g. the XControl), it would be rather hard to support it. Reverse-engineering the protocol details will be rather time-consuming

-Michael

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by matthew john

This all sounds very bad now ... please let me quick no what i can do

Very obviously, a decent documentation of the Midi protocol the device uses is necessary, and supposedly only the manufacturer can provide this.

-Michael

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by mschnell

Yep. If the "Native Mode" is not documented (other than with e.g. the XControl), it would be rather hard to support it. Reverse-engineering the protocol details will be rather time-consuming

-Michael

You need to read this and you will see that reverse engineering doesn't even enter into the picture, it is a completely different model:http://connect.euphonix.com/document...aper_oct06.pdf

As a programmer you simply do not get to see the raw hardware surface output.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by matthew john

Thanks Goeff. You say that without Artist Control, this does not work properly.

Can you please be more specific?

That's because there are so few Artist Mix controls implemented in the Mackie protocol, it's really more like an extender.

Originally Posted by matthew john

What works now - right now - with 1 artist mix and 1 artist transport and the CSI plugin?

Well, to be clear, this is an ongoing project that is at the pre-alpha stage, a long ways from complete.

Originally Posted by matthew john

Eucon is no longer being promoted, you say? How can I understand that? You've done a lot of work? Has not anyone supported by Cockos then? I mean a clean Eucon integration into a DAW is still a good advertisement for a DAW or not?

Not sure it's a good advertisement, the Artist control and Transport have been discontinued.

Had a look at Avid's stock price lately ?

Originally Posted by matthew john

I have not been very busy with how it works at Reaper, but I've always had the impression that really good and meaningful functions that are provided by users are then also an integral part of Reaper? Did Cockos then show no interest in Eucon?

Yeah they did, that's why they hired me to build it.

Originally Posted by matthew john

This all sounds very bad now - but it is certainly not meant to be evil. I do not want to insult anyone from Cockos or any member of the community here. I just want to understand the structures.

Because if I want to work professionally with a software, most of the stuff should work out of the box without having to program for a long time.

I just have to know what I am here for. if reaper with the controllers is not ready yet, I have to wait. I can play around with it - but for the daily work i need a tool that works without problems - even if it is just the controller integration.

please let me quick no what i can do with an artist mix and an artist transport in reaper right now. i would not have a problem to spent a few hours to set all up -but after that it should work.


greetings
Matthew

Right now you can use the Mix and Transport via:

EuCon plugin -- natively

Any one of the many plugins out there that support Mackie protocol, the stock one, my old MCU/C4 one, Klinke's, the new CSI, etc.

[matthew john]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

That's because there are so few Artist Mix controls implemented in the Mackie protocol, it's really more like an extender.



Well, to be clear, this is an ongoing project that is at the pre-alpha stage, a long ways from complete.



Not sure it's a good advertisement, the Artist control and Transport have been discontinued.

Had a look at Avid's stock price lately ?



Yeah they did, that's why they hired me to build it.




Right now you can use the Mix and Transport via:

EuCon plugin -- natively

Any one of the many plugins out there that support Mackie protocol, the stock one, my old MCU/C4 one, Klinke's, the new CSI, etc.

thanks a lot for the info.

yes the avid controllers are pricey.
i can just speak from my experience with cubase - there is nothing out there that can compete with them for cubase. i guess other developers can make also good surfaces - the icon qcon pro x i have here for testing feels good. but it´s the eucon protocol that sets those units apart from the other controllers. i don´t know if you ever hat the chance to try them with cubase - as i mentioned at the beginning there are just some workflow improvements that would be nice with the artist series in cubase - let the controller follow the mouse a bit more and everything would be fine for me. apart from few other things i really like in reaper this was a thing i was hoping for.

and yes avid stopped control and transport - dock has to be sold... :-)


ok - thanks for your clear answer. i will stay with cubase right know cause the integration is actual less in reaper. perhaps in the future when your new integration is ready. i will keep an eye on it.

thanks a lot that you took your time to save me a lot time before i look deeper into this.

best greetings
Matthew

[Geoff Waddington]

Okay, making a change to .axt syntax for programming reasons, but need input from you folks:

We'll used a super simple contrived example, the Play button.

In the .axt

Play Action1
ShiftPlay Action2
ShiftControlPlay Action3
ShiftControlOptionPlay Action4

could change to:

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
Shift+Control+Play Action3
Shift+Control+Option+Play Action4

or:

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
ShiftControl+Play Action3
ShiftControlOption+Play Action4

Which do you prefer ?

[andyp24]

The first of the two possibilities feels more logical to me.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by andyp24

The first of the two possibilities feels more logical to me.

Thanks yeah, we'll go with that one, it has the added advantage that you can specify combos in any order

[fundorin]

Nearly every mapping software that I've seen uses this type of syntax:

[Geoff Waddington]

^ Man, that is uuuuggggly and bordering on incoherent

[mschnell]

... and seemingly targeting the PC keyboard and not a controller surface, so supposedly rather off-topic.

-Michael

[Freex]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
Shift+Control+Play Action3
Shift+Control+Option+Play Action4

All day long

[nofish]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Okay, making a change to .axt syntax for programming reasons, but need input from you folks:

We'll used a super simple contrived example, the Play button.

In the .axt

Play Action1
ShiftPlay Action2
ShiftControlPlay Action3
ShiftControlOptionPlay Action4

could change to:

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
Shift+Control+Play Action3
Shift+Control+Option+Play Action4

or:

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
ShiftControl+Play Action3
ShiftControlOption+Play Action4

Which do you prefer ?

I've been out of the latest developments / discussions so my suggestion may be off but how about:

Play Action1
Play+Shift Action2
Play+Shift+Control Action3
Play+Shift+Control+Option Action4

(thought, seeing at first all 'Play' assignments at a glance)

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by nofish

I've been out of the latest developments / discussions so my suggestion may be off but how about:

Play Action1
Play+Shift Action2
Play+Shift+Control Action3
Play+Shift+Control+Option Action4

(thought, seeing at first all 'Play' assignments at a glance)

I really like that one from the perspective of finding the Play assignments easily.

OTOH this one puts the Widget(Play) closer to the Action name:

Play Action1
Shift+Play Action2
Shift+Control+Play Action3
Shift+Control+Option+Play Action4

I think the tie-breaker goes to the one above, because the modifier specification order is more intuitive.

Great thought though !

[nofish]

I can follow that.

And as I didn't answer the actual question, 'Shift+Control+Option+Play' notation for me also.

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

^ Man, that is uuuuggggly and bordering on incoherent

Yeah. True. What if someone would call some of his regular surface buttons the same way as you already called some of your "internal" modifiers? There's no consistency in the arbitrary namings.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Yeah. True. What if someone would call some of his regular surface buttons the same way as you already called some of your "internal" modifiers?

In fact, that already happens with no problems at all.

Take a look at the MCU.axt file for instance.

There are Widgets named Shift, Option, Control, and Alt.

There are also modifiers named named Shift, Option, Control, and Alt.

It all works out because of context.

Originally Posted by fundorin

There's no consistency in the arbitrary namings.

Don't know what you mean by this.

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

There are Widgets named Shift, Option, Control, and Alt.

There are also modifiers named named Shift, Option, Control, and Alt.

Is it capable of distinguishing click from holding the button?

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Is it capable of distinguishing click from holding the button?

Yes, depending on how you map it.

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Yes, depending on how you map it.

Could you, please, show an example for both click and hold? Are there any other methods available, like, maybe, double click, click and hold, double click and hold?

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Could you, please, show an example for both click and hold? Are there any other methods available, like, maybe, double click, click and hold, double click and hold?

Have a look at MCU.rst and Console1.rst

[MixMonkey]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Could you, please, show an example for both click and hold? Are there any other methods available, like, maybe, double click, click and hold, double click and hold?

I would say these are way out of the complexity/usability sweet spot of the project at the present time.

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Have a look at MCU.rst and Console1.rst

Where can I find it? There's no link in the first post (or at the last three pages) and you've decided to make the project close-source, as it seems. So, no DL from Github, also.

[MixMonkey]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Where can I find it? There's no link in the first post (or at the last three pages) and you've decided to make the project close-source, as it seems. So, no DL from Github, also.

...and yet here it is:

https://stash.reaper.fm/v/33037/CSI%20pre%20alpha.zip

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by MixMonkey

...and yet here it is:

https://stash.reaper.fm/v/33037/CSI%20pre%20alpha.zip

Thanks.

There's no explanation of what it the difference between Button, ButtonWithRelease, ButtonWithLatch and ButtonCycler in the manual.

[Freex]

Originally Posted by fundorin

Thanks.

There's no explanation of what it the difference between Button, ButtonWithRelease, ButtonWithLatch and ButtonCycler in the manual.

My thoughts are the manual is far from complete or at some points easy to follow.

From messing about I've found button is a one stop use,
ButtonWithRelease is for modifiers,
ButtonWithLatch is for sticky keys (like caps lock on a keyboard).
ButtonCycler for use when using the same knob for several actions, used to move between action.

[fundorin]

Originally Posted by Freex

From messing about I've found button is a one stop use,

So, a momentary button?

Originally Posted by Freex

ButtonWithRelease is for modifiers,

So, a hold button?

Originally Posted by Freex

ButtonWithLatch is for sticky keys (like caps lock on a keyboard).

So, a toggle button?

Originally Posted by Freex

ButtonCycler for use when using the same knob for several actions, used to move between action.

How does one sets the number of cycles? How to map action to, let's say, cycle number 2?

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by Freex

My thoughts are the manual is far from complete or at some points easy to follow.

From messing about I've found button is a one stop use,
ButtonWithRelease is for modifiers,
ButtonWithLatch is for sticky keys (like caps lock on a keyboard).
ButtonCycler for use when using the same knob for several actions, used to move between action.

Thanks for chiming in once again !

Yup, you got it right, as usual, and yeah, there should be a manual

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by fundorin

How does one sets the number of cycles? How to map action to, let's say, cycle number 2?

You just add them in the order you want to the list in the .axt file.

If there are just 2, it is a toggle, if more, they cycle.

Here's an example from an .axt file:

ChannelRotaryPush Cycled ChannelRotary TrackPan TrackPanWidth

The ChannelRotaryPush toggles the ChannelRotary between TrackPan and TrackPanWidth.

Since Track Pan is first, it starts in Track Pan mode.