Are Steinberg/Yamaha planning an affordable 8-10 hardware fader controller with CC121-like integration?

You are aware that Yamaha owns Steinberg right? They have direct under the hood access i would assume. Softube is third party. Steinberg made a smart move with Midi Remote and SDK updates and we are finally picking the fruit!

Isn’t that pretty much him in every other video though?

3 Likes

I never believe him. Haha

I can’t believe that if you use it with Pro Tools its still using HUI and not Eucon.

Because Avid produces their own controllers. They’ve always been like that. No other controllers that I know of can use Eucon with PT. Even Yamaha Nuage had to resort to HUI.

3 Likes

[[quote=“MattiasNYC, post:60, topic:152185, full:true”]
It’s not the first controller except for cc121 that can follow track selection in Cubase/Nuendo. He’s wrong about that. I get that he’s trying to be excited and enthusiastic, but that should be noted.

Also max 100 channels?
[/quote]

That’s right. The SmartAV Tango did this bi-directionally in 2009 (If only they could have kept going!). 240 channels too.

1 Like

And while the video pretends it’s the first to follow track selection, nuage (does it a bit different but does it) and all eucon controllers can all do this and also handle unlimited tracks as well.

It’s just the first non eucon/nuage/tango controller to do this.

1 Like

I laughed hardest at the channel clipping.
I get that you might want to mix with channel levels remaining below zero but that doesn’t mean your channels clip. It’s a workflow choice, not a physical necessity. And yes, I know he likes to use external analog effects. Still, such a tabloid usage of words.
I usually like Dom’s videos but this one was a bit of a let down.

1 Like

Well, depending on the price, this C1 fader MKII is excellent news!

I hope they can sort out the 100 track limit, cause that is definitely a deal breaker. But for the rest of stuff, I’m sold!

If there is a 100% clean EQ for the channel strip, I might even get that unit too.

My only projected criticism, without further looking into it is: don’t these people ever pan stereo channels?? There is always ONE pan knob, without any way to control the panning of the Right side. Even less front-rear panning. This is always frustrating for me, cause I know I’ll be reaching for the mouse to pan anyways.

Boom. It’s what has been missing on the SSL devices and others. I challenge others here that say not is not the first - it is. I bought (and sent back) a UF8 because it could not do it. Neither the other SSL single fader device (sent that back too). Avid S1 (have one here) and other Eucon can do it, but the hardware is so HUGE for what it does, and the indicator light for the active track is TINY. Also Eucon can be problematic with OS updates etc.
HOWEVER - the CC121 is somehow ultra elegant being completely integrated and I agree with the OP that for Cubans to fully mature and nail the market, we need a mid priced dedicated (1 fader or maybe 3, that follow the outputs chain on track edit page, or hell, 8) controller that is integrated. Yamaha - lets do it!

Please forgive me for being “picky” about this, but there really is a problem when people like Dom and you say it is “the first” when it isn’t.

The problem is that people might not know what you know and then only hear the first part, that it is the first and then not understand that there are options out there that are very different and possibly a lot better for them. So you are not doing people any favors by not being more exact about this.

I don’t really agree that the s1 is huge, if that’s what you meant. Comparing the s1 to the Softube fader mkiii:

W: 12 / 17
H: 1 to 4 / 2
D: 9 / 15

So the softube is wider, it is taller in the front and lower in the back (height), and then quite a bit more shallow.

This is a tradeoff for a reason, so it’s hard to compare a controller that’s designed to be able to comfortably integrate a tablet versus one that isn’t. With that extra space comes a lot of features (“what it does”) that aren’t comparable (yet at least) which makes them hard to compare.

But sure, if a person is looking for “compact” arguably the Softube is better.

just a reminder that the softube is a 10-fader.

I know it is.

Well CRAP! Beware, all - I just finished setting up my Console 1 Fader Mk III with Nuendo and found that it does NOT support the same level of Direct DAW control without plug-in instantiation that Cubase apparently supports. Since when do Nuendo and Cubase not work the same way (answer - since the dawn of time)???

Softube told me that they are working with Steinberg on this, but if that is a deal-breaker for you (as it was for me with the Mk I), be aware of this if you intend to get this device.

Huge buyer’s remorse here.

5 Likes