I’m sorry if there are 1000 topics on this already…
I’m trying to set a Generic Remote Controller for a template that has dedicated controls over a few different things (volumes, FX inserts parameters, sends volumes…etc)
That I can recall the template and have my controller working with those specified parameters.
It all works until I start to add some channels into the project… then all controls sets in GR start to be messed up with what it’s going to actually control. Like if the linked parameters aren’t really defined by the specific track you want to control, but rather by it’s position in the project or something like this… I don’t get it… I’ve working with cubase 15+ years, and I pretty much always abandoned to work with midi controllers… compared to how it works with ableton or FL.
But in this setup I kinda need to have it work… if somebody has an idea, I’d be happy to hear.
Not sure I get right what you’re saying.
The parameters are linked to existing tracks… I don’t understand what it’s about the “assigned to selected”
The tracks exist, and the controller works… but if I add a new track in the project (maybe depending where I add it it seems), the linked parameters then get assigned to a different track than what it was originally linked to.
Damn !
Okay, I guess my best way to do it is to make sure I don’t change the position of any of the track “above” what I’ll create further in the project… I’ll make some tests and see if I can possibly live with that fact.
Thanks for your answer.
yeah - I think most regular users of remote controls, who want to emulate a hardware mixer are very diligent about using consistent project templates.
Also, depending on how many “channels” your midi control surface has, it may make things easier to create such a template organized in groups. For example, I’m typically using controllers with 8 sets of controls. So I organize my templates in groups of 8.
And I also organize the template in the opposite order from the general signal flow, since the closer I get to the output side of the signal flow, the more stable my project configuration tends to be.
Example A:
Channels 1 - 8 are outputs from the audio interface
Channels 9 - 16 are FX channels (i.e. the targets of various fx sends)
Channel 17 - 24 are group channels
Channels 25 and higher are various audio and instrument channels
Example B:
Channels 1 - 4 are outputs from the audio interface
Channels 5 - 8 are parallel FX channels (i.e. the targets of various fx sends)
Channel 9 - 16 are group channels
Channels 17 and higher are various audio and instrument channels
So my project template always contains a fixed number of output channels, fx channels and group channels in a consistent order. – And only after that come the instrument and audio channels, and highly variable between projects.
p.s. HOWEVER: After figuring all of that out, and configuring it for my setup, I realized, that I’m actually not that much into the entire hardware mixer metaphor anymore. I find myself “programming” the mix by entering values at the right places in the project (either on events or in the controller lanes of the various tracks). So my hardware controller ends up rather underutilized.
Thanks, I appreciate the detailed answer and inputs !!
After understanding that, I had tweaked my tracks position in the project, so anything I’d add to it would come after the tracks that have linked parameters… Seems to work great so far.
Actually I don’t use a controller like a mixer surface controller… all my mixing job is done with the mouse
I do use my setup for live electronic jamming with a bunch of hardware / modular, and the controller here is needed to do some basic actions during the live (volumes, fx sends, filters…)
Was doing it 100% in Ableton or Bitwig so far, which are amazing for controlling, sequencing, modular integration etc… but I can’t deal with their interface for audio editing… So I’m doing my best to mix it all up and have it recorded straight into Cubase for post editing… (okay, that’s another topic)
Cheers man, thanks for your help !
