What controller do you use for drive soft synth ?

[Hmrc]

Hope to post in right session,
Just to talk about what controller excluding the mouse
to edit - program the sounds of the soft synths,
if it is a dedicated unit, or from masterkeyboard equipped with dedicated part,
or other more,
thanks in advance for any about,
cheers.

 

[DM60]

Your question needs some clarification. There are controllers for the VSTi, which controls parameters from the Plugin. There are controllers that control the DAW. There are controllers that can control the DAW and the VSTi or VST in case of effect.

I am using Novation Launchkey. Works pretty good, 49 touch sensitive keys and touch pads. I use the touch pads for drums. But it can also be used to launch in Ableton. If you're into EDM, you may want a performance type controller.

Point I am making, not a straight forward question. Let us know your objectives and then we can help.

 

[Hmrc]

Your question needs some clarification. There are controllers for the VSTi, which controls parameters from the Plugin. There are controllers that control the DAW. There are controllers that can control the DAW and the VSTi or VST in case of effect.

I am using Novation Launchkey. Works pretty good, 49 touch sensitive keys and touch pads. I use the touch pads for drums. But it can also be used to launch in Ableton. If you're into EDM, you may want a performance type controller.

Point I am making, not a straight forward question. Let us know your objectives and then we can help.

Thanks for the info ,
soft synth are used mostly as VSTi, AAX if on Pro Tools,
and the number of parameters to manage seems to increase as new versions come out,
so a useful thing to know could be what controller has the highest number of presets ready to recall when needed,
or with the easiest way to create the templates-presets, like the "Learn" option as on Ableton Live,
as long as the Soft Synth supports it, although it should be a must,
the best thing would be that when the Soft Synth window is opened by mouse click,
also the controller load the relative preset-template,
without having to manually call it on the controller,
another important thing is that it is equipped with a good number of controls,
rotary encoders, switches, etc.. ,
to avoid having to change many pages for go from one parameter to another,
other things could be an appropriate number of displays to the number of controls
for the optimized "where i'm" user-operator interfacing,
and the led rings on the rotary encoders, unless the parameter value-level is visible on display,
being that it would be equipped with rotary encoders, switches, etc..
it could also work as DAW controller for volume, panpot, mute,solo, aux send levels, etc..,
something like a multi mode,
as some controller like those by Avid, Mackie, Icon, etc..., have been doing for some time now,
but which they do not offer an optimized section for Soft Synth
which can also be used for more classic plugins like compressor, eq, reverbs,etc..,
with at least 24 rotary encoders (3 rows each with 8 "slots")
each slot with a rotary encoder, 1 or 2 switches, and a display
that show the name of parameter on upper row and the level of it as horizontal line on lower row,
like for example on the Akai Mpc-X,
a unit to place on the desk aside the cotrol room monitors unit,
or in the center in front of the DAW computer keyboard,
another use of it could be as an editor-remote control of hardware synths
if mappable with midi CC controls and other similar, and store the patch-template in an internal memory,
so the more versatile it is and the more the type of use and users too increases as well,
an additional way of use could be as hardware old school stand alone sequencer,
that various manufacturers put back on the market in the form of relatively small boxes,
but with an extended number of parameters and options digitally controlled,
then if equipped with the option to switch between programmable remote controller and sequencer modes
would the number of users not increase further ?
(as well for manufacturer too...)
Or maybe just a point of view.

 

[Papanate]

Thanks for the info ,

Or maybe just a point of view.

TLDR - You can edit stuff on the computer (my preference) and you can edit stuff on a keyboard (My second preference - but really only for drums) -
I like things organized and keyboards tend toward disorangized for me - unless its quick edits - but if you changing loads of parts it’s easier on a computer.

 

[rob aylestone]

I think you've fallen into the trap of seeing one mega controller that will do what everyone wants, when the reality is most want very important specific things and not the rest. I bought a master keyboard that had lots of faders, lots of buttons, lots of pads and lots of rotary controls - plus it has tape transport and I use at the moment - three faders - and none of the others. I could spend ages mapping all my VSTi collection to the controls, but in three months when I pull up that rare synth, would I remember where I stuck it? What cc it used? Now if I need control, I'll either just quickly map it to a knob or fader, use it, then forget it.
I have the capability of having everything at my fingertips - but the only constant is my Steinberg cc121 - and probably 25% of it's controls I use. On the master keyboard, so few that I am quite content to use other keyboards to drive my system, because I simply have not got time or patience (or memory in my head) to remember that X VSTi, has a great noise when you map one parameter to a real knob. The Swissonic 88 I have is very clever, but I have better playing keyboards.

 

[Hmrc]

TLDR - You can edit stuff on the computer (my preference) and you can edit stuff on a keyboard (My second preference - but really only for drums) -
I like things organized and keyboards tend toward disorangized for me - unless its quick edits - but if you changing loads of parts it’s easier on a computer.

Thanks for post,
like for so many others it is really a "PTA" edit a sound with a mouse on Soft Synth,
even worse when you have to do it while the sequencer is playing
to be able to record the variation of sound on fly
so that it occurs at the desired points and ways,
only rotary control or a fader can allow it,
Imagine having to do this with a mouse to program filter variations etc..
on a some TB303 software replica
for various times inside a track,
maybe 10 times more time is not enough,
in addition of having to then touch up everything countless times in the relevant slots of the controls on the sequencer,
a catastrophe !
"curses" aside, from the loss of creative flow
you feel as if your brain is suggesting you take and throw everything out the nearest window...

 

[Hmrc]

I think you've fallen into the trap of seeing one mega controller .......

Thanks for post,
not "mega" as supposed
if you check for example what a recent workstations like Fantom MK2, or others,
with internal sequencer are able to do,
so now remove all the internal sounds (the expensive part of)
and leave the controller and sequencer one, or only the controller one,
the Mpc pads section it can also be removed or left as well, which however would require more space,
or it would become a unit like the Mpc Renaissance,
add rotary encoders up to 24, the required display type,
and 1 or 2 switches as well on each rotary encoder,
the rest isn't it just only software?
Which has already existed for a long time,
an example about could be the old QY700 sequencer+sound unit+controller
the operating mode can be activated simply by pressing the dedicated switch (hard or soft)
*Sequencer - *Sounds - *Controller,
so wouldn't it just be a matter of relatively simple updating ?
Really impossible for a programmer engineer who has already been working in the sector for some years?

that will do what everyone wants,.....

With the "Learn" programmable option it can meet the needs of most users,
if 24 control slots (each with a rotary encoder + 1-2 switches, and a display or a section of it, if 1 large for each group of 8 slots)
if weren't enough you could expand it putting 2 controllers
48 control slots for a soft synth should be enough,
no ?
Ok let's do 3 , for 72 control slots in front of DAW computer keyboard,
and 1 for control hardware synths without a sufficient number of hard controls, as well.

......because I simply have not got time or patience (or memory in my head) to remember that X VSTi, has a great noise when you map one parameter to a real knob. The Swissonic 88 I have is very clever, but I have better playing keyboards.

Reason why if a "follow what on top of screen" option was achievable
the controller would trigger the preset related to the soft synth or plug-in or DAW controls (fader, pan, solo, mute....)
when the soft synth or plug in etc... control-edit window is opened-activated (if already open but behind other screens of other)
the controller recall the dedicated control preset,
obviously reporting the parameter values-settings as in the active sound patch of the opened-active soft synth screen,
which, if not incorrect, various controllers (Pro Control, Control 24, Mackie, etc..) already do since they were put on the market,
so, again,
wouldn't it just be a matter of changing-adapt how much is needed of what already exists?

 

[rob aylestone]

I'm not disagreeing - just saying it's (for me) pointless. I have so many VSTi packages installed - I tend to search for sounds, which get filtered into possibilities and I discover a VSTi that is installed that I didn't know had this sound - then to discover it has parameters that need adjusting and mapping. It's just easier to put them into learn mode and wiggle a control. I could of course drag out a digital mixer and automate all sorts, but my point is why? I don't need to do it. At most I will have pitch bend, mod, then perhaps expression and volume - just a few clicks and I can adjust things - then forget about that. I just do not have any need for some crazy controller that can do everything when maybe half a dozen cc's does what I want. Looking at the Swissonic, that seemed to give me ultimate control - I've just never been bored enough to use 5% of what it can do.

 

[DM60]

To OP.

I am assuming this is recording only? If so, remember you can map your VSTi and the time (I don't use PT, but assume it will do this), and record the automation. Then when you return to that session project, the mapping will be there. Like Rob stated, if you can remember it. Plus all of your tweaking will have been recorded as a MIDI signal and saved.

A good example, I use a VST Amp sim, I map a wawa pedal effect. When I record, I also record the pedal as I was playing (as a MIDI control signal). When I return back to the session, I can duplicate the pedal. What is even nicer, if I want to correct how I want the pedal, go and edit it. That is why today, we can do more with less takes. Same way with MIDI notes.

Maybe, as a suggestion, understand how your DAW uses MIDI (that is how controllers work) and determine which controller supports your DAW the best. The Launchpad for example comes with mapping presets for many DAWs. But it is mainly a keyboard first, controller second. But it can do (as most can) almost all of what you are wanting. I just have to map it for every new session or use the templates the manufacturer provides for my DAW. Since I use Ableton, controller is mainly targeting performance control.