I’ve noticed there are two devices in the Generic Remote configurator: Mixer and VST mixer.
They both seem to have identical options…so what’s really the difference?
cheer!
Did you find out? I’d like to know too. I did find that in setting up Generic Remote the two mixers see tracks differently:
Using external controllers assigned Mixerc Fader 1 will start at input channel while if set to VST Mixer control seems a ignore some tracks and control others. I’m sure there a reason for this but don’t know, it yet.
Wel the Mackie Control Pro is the same thing, very confusing it looks at the main window of Cubase. So you can have a good MIXER in Cubase (show hide etc) but the Mackie shows a completely different mixer. Namely the MAIN WINDOW… I have hated this for a long time and is allmost unworkable. But we are with C95 and the intrest into Generic Remotes is lacking attention for years now. Once the Mackie was made in cubase they never looked at it again… OK it works, but not as expected…
The Mackie MCU can show tracks many different ways The main window is just one. It 's also show just midi, just audio, just I/o channels, and it can select from track view presets - and so on. All of this is easily switched right on the control unit.
I know, you just try to present the MIXER 1 and you will be confused, because it will not be accordingly Mixer 1 but the main window presentation… 
Its never bothered me, because I’m more than comfortable using my ear for mixing. About the only time I’ll need to look at the mixer on screen is when gain-staging. But even then its not to see the on-screen representations of faders but the post-panner meter levels. Even there, I use the pan pots on the X-touch to set levels. Very fast workflow. You can even do a rough stage just looking at the peak meters on the X-touch itself.
I’m currently evaluating Cubase Artist 9.5 and am wondering the same thing. The whole Generic Remote/Quick Controls/Track Quick Controls thing is very confusing, and this basic question should be answered by Steinberg.
Are they present in their own forums? Or would a registered user get an answer from support for this kind of question? This is important to me, because if buggy/incomplete/unclear features cannot be figured out with the help of the software maker, I’m not buying.
Hi you,
the “Quick Controls” are easy to set up and understand.
The Generic Remote is - I quote a Steinberg Employee some time ago here in the forum: “a bastard feature”. This means: The feature is badly implemented (terrible), the ability of what and how to control are neither well documented nor are they following a reasonable logic.
So: Noone really knows in-depths what is possible and how. You will not get any real support, since the feature has been implemented a decade ago and never been redesigned or clarified.
You CAN do some things successfully - if you take the time and find out things on your own plus some support from fellow-cubasers.
As a general advice I still say (having done quite a lot with GR): Avoid it if possible. It is one of the dirtiest corners in Cubase (another “dirty corner” is the Midi Device Panels).
BR, Ernst
I think it can be even worse than that. The last three major changes have been made for Yamaha controllers. CMC. CC121 and Nuage so I expect that yamaha has a word regarding this. And the Japanese approach is play it safe, what ever you do dont take any risks. The managers thinks that they lose face if the engineers do something. And are they wrong? Yamaha does not sell much of controllers this days so why should they? No upside only a risk. It should be interesting to here anything official from steinberg managers. It’s hard to believe that they have missed Softube Console 1 and AVID’s (digidesign EUCON) impact on market. Do they even have a strategy? Maybe they have a bug list, or they do not. I have added support issues on generic remotes transport functions changes from 8 to 8.5 and they cant even tell me if it is a bug or not, or why there is no changes in the manuals for this change, but their first response was that there was not any change. But I think they now have accepted that there is a change. The case was created in dec 2017 when 9.5 was released. This issue (similar at least) was known in this forum since 9 or 8.5 but no solution there.
Hi, in my signature there’s a link to a thread with a lot of information about GR. Yes, it is tricky to set up, but, it is possible to get it to do a lot for you depending on what you’re working with. See posts by Brian Roland on this subject. He’s one of the best at explaining how to get the most from GR.
This video may also help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi51PyTSyVg
Mixer allows “record” for midi and “record enable” for audio
VST Mixer = no record enable for midi
VST Mixer also doesn’t transmit back to the generic controller properly
Mixer also works in the 3 mixer windows
I see no value to VST mixer, it must be a mode added to accommodate some particular style of controller that no one is using any more…
You have:
vst mixer - audio in project window.
Mixer - In/out channels to interface, and also vsti Rack
Midi mixer - Everything midi
So the vst mixer is a big part of the control setup.
If you start seting up your audio channel control in the vst mixer, it will automaticaly, move the control over on the mixer channels if you run short on audio channels in the vst mixer compared to what you have set up. So if you have several banks, you can just bank on until you take control over the input channels and output channels in the mixer. If you want to “ride” the fader old style while printing to the vst mixer.
This whole thread has alot of miss information.
If you want to be able to record enable a midi channel, then you will have to set it up in the midi mixer part of the generic remote. the vst mixer part of the generic remote dosent see the midi mixer part.
This is probly also where the generic remote has a other weakness. It can get quite confusing if you have midi and audio channels all mixed up in order in the project window (vst mixer). then you have banked out 24 channels of audio control and then 24 channels of midi, and you start jumping about. You will strugle to keep up, if there is no logic in your layout.
I have a massive generic remote setup with my mixer. I also use bome midi translator to take it to the next level.
I bank by 24 audio channels or 24 midi channels.
The one thing I hate with the generic remote, is that still in 2020 it is way quicker working the xml script, to get things done and sorted. It is stone age windows layout, working the generic remote inside cubase.
It is also annoying that we cant setup the generic remote to be a bit smart about channels in the vst mixer.
If we could set up both midi and audio for the channel number. The generic remote will switch control between midi and audio, all deppending on the channel number and what type of track that is on it.
A other thing is the timing on the flags we use in the generic remote. Due to not beeing able to set custom times, my console dident light up the buttons properly when selecting functions. Workaround was to set up a massive extra of controls just to send a single flag message to the lights. Separating send and receive. (Many houres of xml edit).
But all in all im happy with the control generic remote gives me over cubase.
Thanks for the post. I’ve cobbled out a workable system, more or less. No where near as advanced as yours, but it does work and it was worth the effort. I still have MetaGrid, etc. on the horizon.
When time permits, would you say a few words about editing XML rather than working in the antiquated GR interface?
It should be “right click” assign selected channels to controls – something very simple and effective. A flexible system for users at all levels. Maybe A DANTE-like assign function with a simple select and lock for routing. My old multi-port MIDI patchbay had a better routing system than GR. Let’s hope the GR system can be replaced. I have no idea what would be required for that to happen, time, money, pay off for doing it?
But, until then, thank god for GR, how I hate it!
I didn’t see it mentioned above but there is also a difference in which channels are actually present. I don’t remember exactly which ones are included in VST Mixer vs. Mixer but, for example, maybe MIDI channels are not in the Mixer and input channels are not in the VST Mixer.
Some basic investigating will yield the answer if needed.
If you are saying that the vst-mixer selects tracks in the lane like track project space on the left, then cool, maybe i should look into that for selecting, muting and soloing etc. I have noticed the need to click in the mixer area at the bottom or it doesn’t work sometimes. The opposite would be equally annoying though.
You discussed some track arrangement stuff and I’m sure what you have is working but here is the thing. If you have midi tracks and audio tracks recording in the same folder, then…
I record by folder, not by track. Drums, Vocals, Guitars, all have multiple tracks but no midi. VSTs and Externals have a folder each (sometimes multiple instruments), and their associated audio.
If you start trying to use vst-mixer in that situation you get the wrong script in my experience, but I am a nube and Cubase again after a decade… When I bank left from the outgoing group tracks (the ones right before main … or main group in my case), the track select buttons select the first track (which is always the grouped audio) of the Folder. I then, am in Macro land.
Select previous; monitor; record enable; select next
i.e.
Guitar Folder
- Group <------- selected track
- From Amp Mic
- From Board
- From Amp Mic 2
- From Board 2
- Clean
Synth Folder
- Group <------- selected track
- Audio for synth 1
- Midi for synth 1
- Audio for synth 2
- Midi for synth 2
No I am not editing this in the keyhole problem window… so if there is a way to select the Folder instead of the track that would be beneficial, except… then the Fader wouldn’t automatically control the folder’s group out.
Thanks for getting me thinking though.
…Now if I could just get audio out of independent loop tracks. seems like a non feature, feature so far.
In your signature? I’m not sure what you mean, Stephen.
Sam
Sorry about that. In the “old” forums the profiles had a “signature” where lots of us would include system information. I need to update my profile for the new format.