Stoopid control surface question...

P

pearldrum944

New member
I previously thought that midi control surfaces (like the Behringer BCF2000) would only control midi instruments... I have been lusting after the Mackie MCU...but college keeps taking my money. I was looking into surfaces more and it turns out you can control the mixer in cubase, live, etc with midi controllers? So the midi surfaces will control DAW software?
 
Yessir.

And the BCF2000 is the solution to the problem for many studio operators on a budget --- and many that have money for better control surfaces but would rather use it elsewhere.

For example, Craig Anderton, editor of EQ magazine, wrote about his live setup and detailed his use of 2 BCF's for various duties mostly to control Ableton Live.

As far as durability goes, I've been a very satisfied BCR2000 owner --- the one with the knobs instead of the faders --- and it's performed like a champ with no trouble whatsoever.

There are templates available on the web, both from Behringer and the individual software manufacturers, that will do the donkey work of setting up a usable configuration of your BCF or BCR for you.


.
 
pearldrum944 said:
I previously thought that midi control surfaces (like the Behringer BCF2000) would only control midi instruments... I have been lusting after the Mackie MCU...but college keeps taking my money. I was looking into surfaces more and it turns out you can control the mixer in cubase, live, etc with midi controllers? So the midi surfaces will control DAW software?
Click to expand...

The BCF2000 is ready to plug and go with cubase.

I currently have 2 BCF2000's for use with Logic, Sonar and FL Studio and it controls them all brilliantly.

In my view, they are a must have for budgeters.
 
The Behri seems to work ok for these purposes. The faders definately felt cheaper than the Mackie, it lacks any kind of read out and some of the features are odd. The way it sets up is not nearly as nice as the Mackie controller. Then again it costs a lot lss too;)
 
xstatic said:
The Behri seems to work ok for these purposes. The faders definately felt cheaper than the Mackie, it lacks any kind of read out and some of the features are odd. The way it sets up is not nearly as nice as the Mackie controller. Then again it costs a lot lss too;)
Click to expand...


I agree that they would be better with a screen, but using it alongside programs like Sonar which have control surface's displayed alongside every channel makes it really easy.

For the price of one mackie, you could get 4 of these; thats 32 channels to mackies 8 =]
 
Yepper... midi works with midi ...the Behr is a good value and works but, you still want an MCU :D don't ya? The prices are starting to come down though...did you notice ;) Nevermind me, I'm an enabler and a huge fan of the MCU. By the way, I like to tell my friends that MCU stands for My Cool Unit. :eek:

Seriously, the Behri will work just fine. For scrubbing bigger mixes, the MCU with all the additional plug-in control capability, the display, the Zoom and the jog/shuttle wheel and where time is money or, if you just don't have patience...that's where it starts to pay for it's self.

I picked up a Behri controller not too long ago that I use just for soft synths. Works great!
 
I agree techno. For the money it does a great job. I just wanted to point out what the differences are so that the poster can make an informed decision. The Behringer does have some serious issues with updating etc... as well. An update has to be done in EXACTLY the order and way that they say or it renders the USB useless until the unit is actually sent in to Behringer. Also to get the Behri set up in a way that is very useful it is MUCH more complicated than the Mackie. If however you are accepting of these limitations and workload, then the Behringer is a good bargain. If you want to be able to plug it in and learn it quickly and easily, nothing comes close to the Mackie. The next easiest I have seen is also what I consider to be the best yet, the Yamaha O1V. Once the yamah is set up to talk to your DAW app (which is not always too easy) it is simple as anything. Select a hannel on the yamaha and it selects in your DAW, use the EQ on that channel and it does, aux sends, even plugins. It also gives enough visual feedback to make it easy as pie:)
 
xstatic said:
I agree techno. For the money it does a great job. I just wanted to point out what the differences are so that the poster can make an informed decision. The Behringer does have some serious issues with updating etc... as well. An update has to be done in EXACTLY the order and way that they say or it renders the USB useless until the unit is actually sent in to Behringer. Also to get the Behri set up in a way that is very useful it is MUCH more complicated than the Mackie. If however you are accepting of these limitations and workload, then the Behringer is a good bargain. If you want to be able to plug it in and learn it quickly and easily, nothing comes close to the Mackie. The next easiest I have seen is also what I consider to be the best yet, the Yamaha O1V. Once the yamah is set up to talk to your DAW app (which is not always too easy) it is simple as anything. Select a hannel on the yamaha and it selects in your DAW, use the EQ on that channel and it does, aux sends, even plugins. It also gives enough visual feedback to make it easy as pie:)
Click to expand...

Oh I totally understand, even though I had no such complications setting mine up at all.. and as for the layout, everythings where I should think it would be...

The MCU is great, dont get me wrong; im kind of upset tascam stopped making their monster of a control surface, because that really did give a MCU a run for its money.. and I believe you could pick them up cheaper!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top