EUPHONIX ARTIST SERIES CONTROL SURFACE

[Anderton]

I've always said that controllers need to be learned, and the MC Mix is no exception. Granted, there are some good graphic aids to help you along, but at least to me, a controller is an instrument and as such, you need to learn it and practice it.

Case in point: The knobs. Now, it's common sense that a small box with eight faders, eight knobs, and a bunch of switches is not going to replace an full-blown analog mixing console. So the question becomes, how well can the box fool you into thinking you're working with a console?

The MC Mix knobs have two main modes: Normal mode, where a knob affects the same parameter across multiple tracks, and Channel mode, where a knob affects multiple parameters within the same track.

For example, when you punch the EQ button in channel mode, the left-most channel in the display is the channel you're affecting. But the knobs are a different matter: With Logic Pro, from left to right the eight knobs control Frequency and Gain for the four EQ stages. But, if you hit the Select button, the knob controlling Frequency now controls Q...and the On button underneath the stage control turns the stage on and off. Remember, because we're in Channel mode, all the knobs affect one channel.

But wait, you say...Logic Pro has eight stages of EQ. And indeed it does! Hit the Page button, and now the eight knobs control the high cut/low cut/high shelf/low shelf parameters.

So...which is easier, using the screen, or using the knobs? Well...it depends. For making a single, quick tweak, I'd vote for the screen. But where the knobs come in very handy is if you're working on a track and want to make a series of adjustments. In that case, you can keep your hands on the controller and move easily between midrange, high end, low end, etc.

But the most important thing - and this is a big deal - is that you can edit two parameters at once because you have two hands. For example, suppose you want to edit the high and low cutoff frequencies to add a bandpass effect. Using a mouse, you adjust one parameter, then the other, then go back, etc. until you get where you want to go. With the MC Mix, you can turn the knobs associated with each parameter at the same time.

Now, here's an example of "someone was thinking": For parametric stages, the Freq knob does double-duty as the Q control (you alternate between the two by hitting the SEL button). The gain remains as a separate parameter on a separate knob. It makes sense that you'd choose the frequency, and then, decide on the amount of gain/Q at that frequency.

[Anderton]

As I've mentioned before, I really like to use controllers. However, the usefulness diminishes inversely in proportion to how often you use a function.

Faders? Use 'em all the time, and find it a major inconvenience to go back to using a mouse after using a control surface. On a recent project, I was mixing only four tracks from a harpsichord recording (left room, right room, left main, right main) so we're not talking a major multichannel mix - and even then, using a control surface beats using a mouse, hands-down. I needed to get the blend between all four channels perfect, and making changes one channel at a time was pathetic compared to having four faders I could move sumultaneously.

Or take a soft synth. I haven't tried controlling a soft synth yet with the MC Mix, but have done it a lot with Cakewalk's ACT technology. If I'm using the control surface to vary the blend between different voices, or affecting all parameters of an effect (e.g., delay time, delay feedback, delay mix), then a control surface is great. But for a "hit and run" tweak of some esoteric parametric, it takes me longer to select a bank/preset/whatever, remember which control affects which parameter, and change it compared to just grabbing a parameter with a mouse and making a change.

In a way, this is what's cool about Native Instrument's KORE controller. Because NI controls the instruments being controlled, they can make sure that, say, filter cutoff is always the same knob. MC Mix does the same thing, in that while it takes a while to learn which knobs and switches control which parameters, once you have it figured out then it becomes second nature to reach for a particular control at the right time.

But I can't emphasize enough that you need to LEARN a controller. It's only after reaching for a control becomes second nature that you really start to reap the rewards of using any controller, and the MC Mix is no exception.

[Anderton]

The more I work with the Artist Series, the more I "get" the workflow, and the more I see what kind of thought went into defining the functionality. I will say that my comments about having to learn a control surface seem even more relevant as I work more with the Artist Series; in particular, there's extensive use of the OLED display to clue you in on what's happening. Much of this takes the form of "visual shortcuts" that aren't obvious until you're a little further up the learning curve, but once you do that climb, it makes sense.

 

For example, I mentioned Channel mode and Normal mode before, but to recap, in Normal mode, the display for each channel relates to that channel. In channel mode, multiple parameters for one channel are spread across multiple displays. There are two ways to know you're in channel mode: The CHAN button you need to hit to get in to Channel mode illuminates, but also, the OLED display places a series of dots around the faders.

 

Take a look at the attached photo. As you can see, the Chan button toward the left is illuminated. But look at the displays. Note the matrix of dots just under the Intro Vocal labels identifying the channels. The dots indicate that the displays are showing channel mode; in normal mode, no dots are visible.

 

More importantly, though, note that for the Main Voc display, the matrix of dots extends behind the track name itself. What this tells you is which channel has the "attention," i.e., which channel's parameters (in this case, Aux Send for Main Voc) are being spread out among the various displays.

 

So, while the Chan switch at least lets you know you're in channel mode (as does the presence of the matrix of dots), being able to see which channel has the attention is obviously very helpful.

 

This is also what I mean about a learning curve. Having read the manual, I had a head start but I will say that once you figure out the dots indicate Channel mode, you're not going to forget that, especially because you have the constant visual feedback of the Chan button being lit.

 

If you want to change which channel has the attention, it's easy: you just hit the Sel button for the channel fader associated with the channel you want to have the attention.

 

But there's more...

[Anderton]

With channel mode, you can show up to 8 aux sends, which you control with the knobs. What about Normal mode?

Referring to the attached image, first of all, you can see that there are no dots in the display. You can also see that the left Intro Voca channel has a send, and shows the Bus the send control will send signal to; the right Intro Voc shows that there's no send for that channel.

As to accessing the different sends to different buses , that's done with the page buttons. Pressing Page steps through the send slots, and does so for all channels simultaneously.

For example, suppose you have the channels set up as follows:

Channel 1, slot 1: Bus 3
Channel 1, slot 2: Bus 14

Channel 2, slot 1: [no send]
Channel 2, slot 2: Bus 13
Channel 2, slot 3: Bus 14

You'll start off seeing "Bus 3" in channel 1's display and nothing in channel 2's display, because the control surface is showing what's in the first slot for each channel.

When you press the Page > button, you'll now see what's in the second slot. So, in channel 1, you'll see "Bus 14" and in channel 2, you'll see "Bus 13."

Press Page > again, and you'll see what's in the third slot. This means you'll see nothing in channel 1 and for channel 2, "Bus 14."

Once you know the surface works this way, you'll understand that it's more important than even to pay attention to how you insert and assign buses. For example, if several channels have reverb sends, ideally you would want these all in the same slot so that if you're in Normal mode, and you use the Page to access that slot, you'll be able to adjust all the reverb sends simultaneously. This is something that's worth doing anyway just to keep a session organized, but with the Artist Series, doing your assignments intelligently will allow for a much faster workflow.

The only problem I have about all this involves Logic, not the Artist Series: You can't name a bus so it says, say "Revrb" or "Delay and as a result, you won't see a name like this in the display, only "Bus 3," "Bus 4," etc. [Edit: The preceding is incorrect, you can name the buses and the long bus name can show up in the MC Mix...see subsequent posts.]

[Anderton]

During the course of doing this Pro Review, I think that I accidentally stumbled on the best way to learn it, so I'll pass along my observations here for two reasons: 1) If someone from Euphonix has a better idea they can mention it, and 2) anyone who ends up buying the Artist Series controllers -- and I suspect that's going to be quite a few people! -- may find it helpful.

First, you learn the general lay of the land in terms of buttons, select buttons, where the "Function buttons" (Aux, Pan, EQ, Inserts, etc.) are, and the like. That basically familiarizes you with the "toolset" the program offers.

Second, you dig into one function at a time and learn as much about it as you can: Adjusting levels, adjusting EQ, editing sends, etc. As you do so, you'll find out about what functions they have in common (e.g., channel vs. normal, use of Page buttons), as well as what special tricks there might be for each function. Once you've learned a function thoroughly, then you can move on to the next one.

[modul8]

Hi Craig,

You indicated Logic does not allow you to name Busses. Please forgive me if you are aware as I do not wish insult, but, if you go to Options->Audio->I/O Labels, you can assign Names and Short Names to the Buses that are available.

When you select a bus for a send or I/O option, you will see the menu display your Bus list as: "Bus# (bus name)" respectively.

Had you provided names for the Busses and Logic simply did not pass this info on to the MC Mix? I'm curious to know if this is helpful as we Logic users might want to request this issue be addressed in a future rev...

[Anderton]

Hi Craig, You indicated Logic does not allow you to name Busses. Please forgive me if you are aware as I do not wish insult, but, if you go to Options->Audio->I/O Labels, you can assign Names and Short Names to the Buses that are available. When you select a bus for a send or I/O option, you will see the menu display your Bus list as: "Bus# (bus name)" respectively. Had you provided names for the Busses and Logic simply did not pass this info on to the MC Mix? I'm curious to know if this is helpful as we Logic users might want to request this issue be addressed in a future rev...

 

 

 

Thank you! You are 100% right, but my confusion came about because when I entered ONLY a short name and not a long name, the short name did not show up as a bus label or in the MC Mix. Apparently, it's necessary to enter a long name for the MC Mix to show that in its displays. If it's too long to fit in the display, the MC Mix shortens it intelligently rather than select the short label. Logic, on the other hand, substitutes the short label on-screen if the long label is too long.

 

Thanks again!

[therage57]

Why is this thing so expensive?

 

Does it have built in DSP to run plugs?

[Anderton]

Why is this thing so expensive? Does it have built in DSP to run plugs?

Well, list is about $1,399, street is typically $999. Perhaps someone from Euphonix can chime in, but my assumption is that a fair amount of the price went into the Alps motorized faders, and the power supply needed to power them. I don't think the OLED display is cheap, either, but it's a crucial part of the deal--it's so much more informative than, say, 7-segment LEDs or less expensive LCD types. There are also the knobs, a lot of switches, and a fair amount of software development both for the unit itself and for compatibility with various programs.

It also looks cool so the industrial design is probably something that needs to be amortized.

There is no DSP built in to run plugs.

By way of comparison, the Mackie Control Universal is about $100 less (street or list), while the Mackine Control Universal Pro is $1,299 street and $1,549 list. Things with moving faders tend to be costly.

[basshag]

You are absolutely correct, Craig. High-quality controllers are not cheap to build, and the MC Mix's price is pretty sweet when you consider that it not only has touch-sensitive ALPS motorized faders, but is also the only controller at this price to offer touch-sensitive encoders and hi-res OLED displays. Everyone else is still using the usual encoders with the same low-res LED's that we've seen for years.

[~Musicman~]

OK, this may seem like a silly question.

 

The end result of a controller is to use a knob/slider/whatever to control a parameter of the program.

 

So how would this Euphonix set up compare to Novation's Nocture in regards to an end result?

 

Novation has the Auto map universal 2.0 and it seems to control everything the home studio musician would need. Right?

 

So does my mouse, or anything else I can program, but my concern is How much does one spend on a controller, How much of the controller does one really need. What factors would you use to justify the level of want in a controller?

 

If I am recording and playing back 2 tracks with 3 effects, I don't really need a controller. Where as a mix of many tracks and effect are used, a controller would be a big help. The question here is, how would a less expensive controller (Novation) stand up against a more expensive one (Euphonix)?

[Anderton]

I haven't used Nocture, but I'll google it and see what comes up.

 

If it doesn't have moving faders, that's a huge point of differentiation right there that may or may not be crucial to what you want to do.

 

Also, I'm starting to see a "dividing line" forming between control surface concepts: One, like the MC Mix, seems intended to reproduce the experience of using a console in a DAW context. The other seems more intent on reproducing the experience of having an analog synth, with its collection of knobs and faders for real-time contro. With the latter, moving faders isn't as important, because you're using the controls more to program a sound. With the former, moving faders are crucial in terms being able to interact with the audio on a continuous basis.

[~Musicman~]

I haven't used Nocture, but I'll google it and see what comes up. If it doesn't have moving faders, that's a huge point of differentiation right there that may or may not be crucial to what you want to do. Also, I'm starting to see a "dividing line" forming between control surface concepts: One, like the MC Mix, seems intended to reproduce the experience of using a console in a DAW context. The other seems more intent on reproducing the experience of having an analog synth, with its collection of knobs and faders for real-time contro. With the latter, moving faders isn't as important, because you're using the controls more to program a sound. With the former, moving faders are crucial in terms being able to interact with the audio on a continuous basis.

 

 

Good point about the dividing line. I have played around with controller assignments in Logic and I could control almost every parameter in Logic using only my DX7 data entry slider.

 

The smaller more compact Controllers require the operator to select one section (Fader/mix screen, or the Insert screen, or some other screen) at a time, where as a giant Daw control console has faders/knobs/buttons all laid out at your fingertips. Again it all goes back to needs. If you don't needs it, don't gets it.

[Lawrence Farr]

Craig: Thanks for the review as I am very interested in these devices.

Can you do us a favor? Look in the memory manager (or whatever Mac calls it) and tell us how much memory the EuCon software uses?

Thanks.

[kaboomer]

Hi Craig:

Thanks so much for your super in-depth review! I wish I had this much information available to me every time I was considering dropping a thousand bucks!

You mentioned the divide you're seeing developing between console control surfaces and soft synth controller surfaces - can you speak to how well the Euphonix works as a soft synth controller?

I use Logic Pro 8 and make extensive use of the program's internal instruments, especially the B3 emulation, and I'm hoping the Euphonix and its faders will make a useful and somewhat intuitive control surface for that, as well as Logic's mixer.

Again, thanks for all the 411!

[daviddd]

It shows about 60MB usage and 1 GB virtual memory.
But you cannot compare Apples memory system to Windows.
And you can define, how many channels are stored in ram from Eucon settings.
I wouldn´t care about that, RAM is cheap.

You can control B3 emulation with McMix, but as far as I checked it out,
you are better off with Novation stuff, where you can assign what to control.

FX and Mixer control is great.

Any Nuendo McMix users around?

David

[Anderton]

Hey everybody - sorry for "going dark" on you, but I've had to get all my video/audio/music gear ready for Frankfurt (I leave in about 10 hours). One of the drawbacks of a hardware pro review is that if I'm traveling, I can't really do anything...but the advantage, of course, is that I can pick up where I left off once I get some of the Frankfurt videos edited. Meanwhile, perhaps some others will have taken the plunge with the Artist Series and continue to post their experiences as well.

See you in about 10 days...although I will be monitoring the thread as much as possible.

[TonyPost]

A great review so far. Thanks a lot for that. As soon as a local shop stocks them I'll be trying out the faders. And in the meantime I'll be watching very, very closely for Windows support. I surely hope the devs of my favorite DAW (I do sound design on it mostly) Reaper can be persuaded to support this protocol. Most of the functionality is there, and I'd love to have a good bunch of faders with touch sensitive knobs, set up this well.

 

Have fun in Frankfurt.

[jmk]

Thanks for your review. One issue I've not seen mentioned anywhere is that when you're using a volume pedal to control midi volume (CC#7) while recording into logic with a keyboard controller the fader is chattering about trying to deal with the 128 steps of midi verses the 1024 Eucon fader throw. (Perhaps there's a fix for this using the Logic environment but I dont' know of one)
It would be helpful to have a toggle in the EuCon software that would "disable faders" in order to deal with this problem. During mix playback this would be a good feature to have as well.

I would also like to see a fix for the faders snapping to to zero when clicking in the finder or another app while Logic is open.
Other than that it's a great product and I look forward to future updates and developement.

Best,

John

[Chaim]

Thanks for the review, I bought this thing. (before reading the review)

 

There are 2 things I wish Euphonics will change here:

 

1. an option that when scrolling the banks on the MC mix, it should NOT scroll my tracks in my DAW (DP) - Mackie control has a preference for this in the hardware.

 

2. Give us please an option to lock the MC Mix to my DAW, that it SHOULD stay in focus even when my DAW is in the background.

 

These 2 things bother me VERY much.

[Chaim]

There are 2 things I wish Euphonics will change here: 1. an option that when scrolling the banks on the MC mix, it should NOT scroll my tracks in my DAW (DP) - Mackie control has a preference for this in the hardware.

 

 

Update: there IS an option for this in the Eucon software but it doesn't work while the MC is in Mackie Control emulation mode.

[Chaim]

I was in contact with Euphonics, they said, they are working on both issues above.

[Anderton]

Okay...I'm back from Frankfurt, I've posted 3 hours of Frankfurt videos in the theater (check 'em out!!!), went through 10 days of a nasty flu, and I'm ready to get back to the Pro Reviews.

But before continuing, first of all, congratulations to Euphonix for winning a MIPA (Musikmesse International Press Award) at the 2008 Frankfurt Musikmesse. That's a very prestigious award and Euphonix definitely should feel good about it.

[modul8]

Welcome home Craig :-) I am sorry to hear you have been under the weather. International flights (flying in general) can really put your immune system to the test.

Now that both the MC Mix and MC Control have been released, Euphonix have made a nice video tour for each unit available on their website. These tours are a fantastic resource and marketing tool.

I was waiting (hoping that Euphonix would enter the project/home studio market) for the Artist series before it had ever been announced simply because of the System 5MC video tours and Artist spotlights. They give a nice overview of the units. Truly amazing integration of native DAW technologies.

Any chance you will have the opportunity to merge your MC Mix review to include the MC Control Craig? I appreciate the Euphonix approach in allowing both units to be used independently, but, I really see the benefit of both units working side by side.

It is very exciting to see companies like Euphonix and Apogee creating professional, scalable technologies that make natve DAW solutions come to life. Low latency, tight integration... exactly what I've been hoping for. Now if we could just get ahold of that SSL patching matrix as a stand alone, Eucon aware product... :-)

[Anderton]

Well, I just got the latest software upgrade (1.0.4.53477) and there's a new installable piece of software called EuCon Workstation, which you install on a different computer (not the one that already has the MC Mix software). This lets the MC Mix control applications running on the second computer, but at the moment, it seems to be Mac-only.

As I've already covered quite a bit about what the MC Mix does and the workflow, it seems like a suitable challenge would be to try and get the Artist Series controllers working with a Windows program, like Live or Sonar. Anyone have any clue on how to do that? At the moment it doesn't seem possible, because Sonar requires that you have EuCon software loaded on the machine before you can add a EuCon control surface.