anybody ever found a clever way to use the bcf like this: Bcf out-> cubase mixer in-> cubase mixer out->CW mixer->, and at the same time: cubase mixer out-> bcf in.
that way i would be able to control the cw mixer and cubase mixer with my bcf2000 and have motorized faders going up and down on the bcf2000. and i would have perfect automation facillities within cubase, also for my cw mixer.
BUT! would this cause problems?
lets say i route asio channel 1 to the cw mixer ch 1.
I then apply a comp to the cw mixer ch. 1
but the fading down the signal in cubase would cause the cw comp to lose input signal!!
so the question is:
any suggestions how to do this the RIGHT way, so i wont loose input signal, but still be able to use the bcf for cw mixers, and have full automation facilities for the cw mixer from within cubase. ( I dont really care about using my bcf2000 to control the cubase mixer..)
this boils down to:
controlling CWmixer with bcf, but having cubase automation!thanks!
controlling CWmixer with bcf, but having cubase automation!
-
the19thbear
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
What you're basically saying is that you want to be able to record the midi data from your automation moves. I'm sure many do this. The easiest way to achieve this will depend upon where you have the BCF connected (probably usb?) and if you want to be able to catch fader moves done with the mouse.
If you intend to ONLY use the bcf, at least for recoring automation the signal flow you described above should work fine, just record enable the track that you want to capture the automation data on (you can basically use it as the "through"). You can still catch mouse only movements in Scope on other midi channels, although a more elegant solution might be to merge both the routed external midi (from bcf) and the midi output from Cubase as it goes into whatever you're controlling. You would do this simply by having their inputs set to where you wanted the midi data to originate, the BFC input in the case of the BCF and the Scope midi in (as named in Cubase) when catching mouse movents. You could then use 2 separate tracks to record the data (or more), assigned to the BCF and scope's midi independantly. and then those separate tracks get routed back into Scope and merged by simply sending them to the same midi output (cubase output, sequencer input within scope).
However, care will have to be taken when trying to record new automation over areas where automation currently exists.
Using modern control protocols like HUI or MC is much more refined when doing automation moves as you have the catch/latch/overwrite options, whereas midi typically simply has merge (unwanted for automation) and overwrite. So in Midi mode you would have to redo the section you were wanting to fix, or else the midi data playing back (not muted) will fight the new data you're trying to lay down. So editing is often easier done with just typical mouse edits (at least imo). This would mean that the 'touch' method of having the fader overwrite the current data as soon as you start to change it would require using an emulated mode and not MIDI.
So, mixing with automation in Cubase itself works better with BCF's Mackie Control emulation mode, but since Scope uses midi you'd have to convert the data. I'm not sure if mixermaps have yet gotten the ability to convert MC automation to midi data to send to scope. in Logic I would use a fader to send the MC style data back to the BCF and use environment features to convert that to cc downstream as it heads to Scope. Perhaps a Cubase SX 3.x or 4 user here might be able to expand on that further.
If you intend to ONLY use the bcf, at least for recoring automation the signal flow you described above should work fine, just record enable the track that you want to capture the automation data on (you can basically use it as the "through"). You can still catch mouse only movements in Scope on other midi channels, although a more elegant solution might be to merge both the routed external midi (from bcf) and the midi output from Cubase as it goes into whatever you're controlling. You would do this simply by having their inputs set to where you wanted the midi data to originate, the BFC input in the case of the BCF and the Scope midi in (as named in Cubase) when catching mouse movents. You could then use 2 separate tracks to record the data (or more), assigned to the BCF and scope's midi independantly. and then those separate tracks get routed back into Scope and merged by simply sending them to the same midi output (cubase output, sequencer input within scope).
However, care will have to be taken when trying to record new automation over areas where automation currently exists.
Using modern control protocols like HUI or MC is much more refined when doing automation moves as you have the catch/latch/overwrite options, whereas midi typically simply has merge (unwanted for automation) and overwrite. So in Midi mode you would have to redo the section you were wanting to fix, or else the midi data playing back (not muted) will fight the new data you're trying to lay down. So editing is often easier done with just typical mouse edits (at least imo). This would mean that the 'touch' method of having the fader overwrite the current data as soon as you start to change it would require using an emulated mode and not MIDI.
So, mixing with automation in Cubase itself works better with BCF's Mackie Control emulation mode, but since Scope uses midi you'd have to convert the data. I'm not sure if mixermaps have yet gotten the ability to convert MC automation to midi data to send to scope. in Logic I would use a fader to send the MC style data back to the BCF and use environment features to convert that to cc downstream as it heads to Scope. Perhaps a Cubase SX 3.x or 4 user here might be able to expand on that further.
-
the19thbear
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
well
thanks! but, i´m sorry, i dont really fully understand your "walkthrough"..
woudl it be possible for you to make it even more clear?
but thanks! i will continue to experiment with this,
woudl it be possible for you to make it even more clear?
but thanks! i will continue to experiment with this,
-
the19thbear
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
yes
yeah... it only lets you control 8 parameters, wich is not really enough.... at least as far as i understood.
bu thanks anyways!
bu thanks anyways!