APC40 design could be way better

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
intellijel
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:13 pm

APC40 design could be way better

Post by intellijel » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:49 pm

Did they not even look at Robert Henke’s monodeck II which had clip COLORS too (since it used rgb leds) and way better track sections?

Am I the only one who like to work on more than one channel at a time? i.e. dedicated eq and sends for each channel plus some spare dedicated controls on each channel to use for fx specific stuff.

I HATE the concept of selecting the track you are working on and then getting to see the controls for that track...may as well be clicking with my mouse on the screen.

It would have been cool if they made this in modules:
1. clip matrix
2. master controls
3. track controls/virtual mixer <--NO ONE MAKES A GOOD ONE OF THESE

This way I could piece together a double wide matrix, full 16 channel midi mixer with sends/eq and just one master section. Everyone would be free to expand their system or keep it small and cheap.

carlv
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:37 pm

Post by carlv » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:52 pm

My wish would be to have 'banks' like on the MPD where you have 48 virtual pads...

anamexis
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:43 pm
Location: Oakland
Contact:

Post by anamexis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:52 pm

carlv wrote:My wish would be to have 'banks' like on the MPD where you have 48 virtual pads...
It does have banks.

andydes
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: Bremen

Post by andydes » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:52 pm

Still the closest thing to the ideal live performance controller we've seen from a mainstream (ie. remotely affordable) manufacturer.

ollyb303
Posts: 2666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:49 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: APC40 design could be way better

Post by ollyb303 » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:53 pm

intellijel wrote:Did they not even look at Robert Henke’s monodeck II which had clip COLORS too (since it used rgb leds) and way better track sections?

Am I the only one who like to work on more than one channel at a time? i.e. dedicated eq and sends for each channel plus some spare dedicated controls on each channel to use for fx specific stuff.

I HATE the concept of selecting the track you are working on and then getting to see the controls for that track...may as well be clicking with my mouse on the screen.

It would have been cool if they made this in modules:
1. clip matrix
2. master controls
3. track controls/virtual mixer <--NO ONE MAKES A GOOD ONE OF THESE

This way I could piece together a double wide matrix, full 16 channel midi mixer with sends/eq and just one master section. Everyone would be free to expand their system or keep it small and cheap.
STFU!
.:O:B:1:.
ob1techno.com

Robert Henke
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 10:38 am
Location: Berlin

Post by Robert Henke » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:53 pm

I am a bit too over the top to provide a real answer. The short version: this is the best compromise we could come up with, considering the very individual use cases, the desired final price, the fact that it shall fit into hand laguage etc...

I plan to use an APC in the studio because it is small enough to sit right next to the computer. On stage I will probably stick to the Monodeck :-)
( And I use the RGB LEDs in the Monodeck not for clip colors but for more detailed clip status messages )

Robert

lola
Posts: 1100
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 1:57 pm

Post by lola » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:57 pm

Robert

Since the new controller holds the digit 40
Does this mean we can expect a 60 or 80 version?

Robert Henke
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 10:38 am
Location: Berlin

Post by Robert Henke » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:58 pm

you guys ask questions....

anamexis
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:43 pm
Location: Oakland
Contact:

Post by anamexis » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:58 pm

The new "APC300" sticker on the control surface formerly known as Monodeck should provide a hint there.

intellijel
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:13 pm

Post by intellijel » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:02 am

I agree that it is good first step but I guarantee that if they better documented their API (and shared more so that the people at liveAPI wouldn't have to work so hard) DIY would make way better controllers.

Big companies like AKAI have the advantage that they can very easily engineer custom button matrices and integrate rgb led. This is much tougher for the average DIYer but they are still building it.

Also look at the midibox.org community. People there have made way better midi controllers than anything available on the market.

As aforementioned, Robert Henke came up with so many great ideas (it is a midibox.org based system). Primarily it is durable, has tons of visual feedback (so no computer screen is needed) and everything has dedicated controls.

For him to make this was expensive since they had to write special python scripts, max patches, hand wire tons of lights and switches and sort out lot's of mechanical issues. This makes his one off prototype pricey but a manufactured version would be so much cheaper!!!!

The technology behind this stuff is simple too. The toughest part is software integration which is easy when you have signed an NDA and have full access to the API (and coders at Live helping you integrate).

Robert Henke
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 10:38 am
Location: Berlin

Post by Robert Henke » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:06 am

Hi intelljel, you seem to overlook one very exciting point here: The MAX integration will allow users to access Live with far more elegane and ease than how it ever was possible via the old (inofficial) API. If you want to build your own hardware:

go ahead. the doors are wide wide open now. plus full documentation! Access to Live will become a supported feature and not a secret science...

R.

jonny72
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:43 pm

Re: APC40 design could be way better

Post by jonny72 » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:07 am

intellijel wrote:Am I the only one who like to work on more than one channel at a time? i.e. dedicated eq and sends for each channel plus some spare dedicated controls on each channel to use for fx specific stuff.
I thought the same when I first looked at it but now I've watched the videos I think I'm sold on it. I reckon the main problem for me is that I came from DJ'ing and am used to having the eq and gain controls for each channel. The bigger problem is still working like that in Live, I need to get over it as there are other ways to work and do things.

Plus it looks like Max for Live will allow you to customise the way it works.

sublimelobc
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: St George, Utah
Contact:

Post by sublimelobc » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:09 am

The APC40 is what it is.

The shiny black 911 turbo of controllers!

Function is nice, no slam on the monodeck but I'm glad that a smaller form factor and sex appeal also weighed in on a design that has so many of us giddy beyond belief.

chris_in_london
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:36 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by chris_in_london » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:11 am

Robert Henke wrote:The short version: this is the best compromise we could come up with, considering the very individual use cases, the desired final price, the fact that it shall fit into hand laguage etc...

I plan to use an APC in the studio because it is small enough to sit right next to the computer.

Robert
this is a very interesting development. as this APD unit seems to develop the existing mpd functionality, i hope that this means we'll soon see a fixes for the existing mpd32/Live bugs:

- the mpd32 faders don't work with soft takeover in live
- live on os x 10.5 is unable to remember mpd32 midi preferences
- the the mpd32 doesn't save all the global settings (including pad sensitivity/curve etc) when powered off.

please help us on this one if you can - akai support has been very poor on resolving these issues. any help you can give would be greatly appreciated.

robleighton22
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:35 am

Post by robleighton22 » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:13 am

i agree, i dont like the idea of controlling one track at a time in terms of device control. i reckon a work around will b available. in a djing environment, i think it would be ace if you could remap the track controls to control a 2nd track. so you could change effects from 2 tracks at the same time. i reckon as its all reconfigurable, a lot is going to be possible - its definitely better than the vcm 600, apart from missing eqs. i hav a dj mixer, so not too bothered about that anyway.

Post Reply