I've posted in a couple threads about this but wanted to make a clear topic name so Ableton hears it.
I have a Korg Z1 as my controller. It is not on the list of supported controllers. I do NOT want to be stuck with no way to save midi mappings when I purchase Live6. It will suck to have to re-map midi mappings for the 8 macro controls EVERY time I wnt to use an instrument rack preset!
Many other people with older keyboard controllers may be in the same boat. Please Ableton make some universal way to save midi mapping and not just on a controller by controller basis.
Hoffman2k had this to say in another thread which is another important point about user control.
"We need an all purpose map. Not everybody uses just one controller.
Some of us use a bunch of them.
I don't need 3 controllers that are mapped to the transport functions.
I want to map it to anything i want.
The fact that Ableton is doing loads of these templates for different controllers.....
Doesn't that prove the point that we all use different controllers?
That we need an all purpose map that can be customized for use with multiple controllers."
Please make a generic controller template
Thanks for the reply, Alex...
Isn't the wishlist is for the future?
I want to be able to do what other users will be able to do in Live6 when it ships.
The only supported controller that could replace the functions of my Korg Z1 is the ReMote SL61. Am I really supposed to change controllers and spend $600 in order to be able to save the midi map for the rack macros? I would still lose the fantastic arpeggiator in the Z1 which I rely on.
If you do not do something for Live6 to address this, I will have to remap whichever of those 8 macro controls that are used every single time I use an instrument rack preset. Sorry, but that is stupid to have to do that!
On the recent poll, Racks were voted as the top new feature along with MP support. You have created the situation where a critical aspect of one of the most important new features, is only available to some users. I think that is unreasonable position you put some users who do not have supported controllers and that this should be addressed for Live6 when it ships!
Thanks for listening... Oh, and if the better place for this to be seen is wishlist, go ahead and move it... but this needs to be addressed for 6!
Isn't the wishlist is for the future?
I want to be able to do what other users will be able to do in Live6 when it ships.
The only supported controller that could replace the functions of my Korg Z1 is the ReMote SL61. Am I really supposed to change controllers and spend $600 in order to be able to save the midi map for the rack macros? I would still lose the fantastic arpeggiator in the Z1 which I rely on.
If you do not do something for Live6 to address this, I will have to remap whichever of those 8 macro controls that are used every single time I use an instrument rack preset. Sorry, but that is stupid to have to do that!
On the recent poll, Racks were voted as the top new feature along with MP support. You have created the situation where a critical aspect of one of the most important new features, is only available to some users. I think that is unreasonable position you put some users who do not have supported controllers and that this should be addressed for Live6 when it ships!
Thanks for listening... Oh, and if the better place for this to be seen is wishlist, go ahead and move it... but this needs to be addressed for 6!
If we would follow this argumentation we would have to support all existing MIDI Controllers. Of course there is always someone having a controller that is not directly supported.You have created the situation where a critical aspect of one of the most important new features, is only available to some users. I think that is unreasonable position you put some users who do not have supported controllers and that this should be addressed for Live6 when it ships!
So you can vote for the support of a certain controller or for a generic solution.
But the final Live 6 will for sure not directly support all available MIDI controllers.
It is also obvious that Live's MIDI controller support will be extended (in which way ever) in future releases.
Regards,
/Alex
Hi Alex,Alex wrote: If we would follow this argumentation we would have to support all existing MIDI Controllers. Of course there is always someone having a controller that is not directly supported.
Regards,
/Alex
This points out why it is a bad idea to make an important feature depend on specific controllers. Because there are so many!! There needs to be a basic universal solution.
And you can support all controllers easily in some basic way by making it possible to save a midi map. It does not need to depend on the controller at all. The map can be just for racks 8 macro controllers. It just says to the rack, if cc#41 is received, it controls macro knob #1... very simple.
Instead now, you have made instrument racks far less useful to me and others, with no choice but to hope someday you support the Z1 and maybe that will never happen.
It is not unreasonable for me to expect to have a feature work for me when I have a controller by Korg, one of the top companies. It is unreasonable to expect you to create a template for every controller, but it is your choice to create that situation and give no alternative. That is why it is a problem choice.
regards,
deva
I agree - i think there should be a "generic" (there was in one of the alpha's - where did it go?)
but more importantly it needs to be configurable
at the moment I'm using a UC33 that I've re-programmed to use the BCR 2000 template, but I would like to be able to change the order some controls are mapped as some are not logical - some controls for sampler or operator span accross 2 tabs which is confusing
but more importantly it needs to be configurable
at the moment I'm using a UC33 that I've re-programmed to use the BCR 2000 template, but I would like to be able to change the order some controls are mapped as some are not logical - some controls for sampler or operator span accross 2 tabs which is confusing
Even though it's not possible to implement this for Live 6...
It should be in a 6.xx release.
It's really the only thing missing to make Live feel like an instrument.
If we have custom messages, it'll be easier to add custom hardware.
There are thousands off people that own a piece of hardware that wont be selectable for automapping in Live.
Also, automapping is only half implemented at the moment.
And most likely... When ableton does the map. It'll still be lacking stuff like sysex out for use with custom LCD displays...
This whole "trying to keep it simple" thing is killing my buzz.
We shouldn't have to resolve to 3rd party stuff....
Full integration of the stuff you own with Live. Thats what we want.
There should really be a dialogue with Ableton on this one, because the details of this go very deep.
And the benefits of it are so obvious....
It should be in a 6.xx release.
It's really the only thing missing to make Live feel like an instrument.
If we have custom messages, it'll be easier to add custom hardware.
There are thousands off people that own a piece of hardware that wont be selectable for automapping in Live.
Also, automapping is only half implemented at the moment.
And most likely... When ableton does the map. It'll still be lacking stuff like sysex out for use with custom LCD displays...
This whole "trying to keep it simple" thing is killing my buzz.
We shouldn't have to resolve to 3rd party stuff....
Full integration of the stuff you own with Live. Thats what we want.
There should really be a dialogue with Ableton on this one, because the details of this go very deep.
And the benefits of it are so obvious....
Ableton we need this added asap .. (100% agree with forge and hoffman2k)
I have got a couple of quality controllers which I will continue to use for the foreseeable future. I really need the ability to customize the automap setups to my personal preference if possible.
Please
I have got a couple of quality controllers which I will continue to use for the foreseeable future. I really need the ability to customize the automap setups to my personal preference if possible.
Please
MacBook MacOS Live 9.7.1 Max for Live Push Logic
I think saving macro mapping can be done for Live 6 or a quick following update...
If the macros mappings are saved with a rack, what to do if 2 racks are dragged in and both mapped to the same controllers.
Okay, suppose I have 2 racks each with a synth and each with filter cutoff mapped to macro#1 and macro#1 mapped to modwheel. Now I have the problem that if I want to control filter cutoff on one synth, but not the other (assume they are layered) I have to do some remapping.
I suggest a few options to add that require no change to the GUI.
1- a right click on an individual macro control could give a disable midi into this macro controller option.
2- a right click on any macro control gives a 'disable all' macros in the rack option.
3- there could be a function where you right click on one macro an use the option 'switch', then click on a second macro. This would switch the mappings of the two. If this is a gui problem, the right click could have the option 'switch' which was a pull down menu with the other macros.
I think the last would be useful anyway as a fast way to switch to different controllers.
Now, I do not think racks will that often have meaningful mappings for all 8 macros, so macro switching would also allow quick shuffling of overlapping macros on two racks if the user desired it, rather than disabling.
I think these options would cover most all circumstances adequately and be quite helpful for those with automap as well.
So I would say that Ableton should save macro mappings with the rack, implement these 3 functions. Any user with a synth controller is going to expect that a rack mapped to modwheel would save that with the preset. That is fundamental to controlling softsynths and effects. This functionality assures that for every user... with the rest left to automap functions.
If the macros mappings are saved with a rack, what to do if 2 racks are dragged in and both mapped to the same controllers.
Okay, suppose I have 2 racks each with a synth and each with filter cutoff mapped to macro#1 and macro#1 mapped to modwheel. Now I have the problem that if I want to control filter cutoff on one synth, but not the other (assume they are layered) I have to do some remapping.
I suggest a few options to add that require no change to the GUI.
1- a right click on an individual macro control could give a disable midi into this macro controller option.
2- a right click on any macro control gives a 'disable all' macros in the rack option.
3- there could be a function where you right click on one macro an use the option 'switch', then click on a second macro. This would switch the mappings of the two. If this is a gui problem, the right click could have the option 'switch' which was a pull down menu with the other macros.
I think the last would be useful anyway as a fast way to switch to different controllers.
Now, I do not think racks will that often have meaningful mappings for all 8 macros, so macro switching would also allow quick shuffling of overlapping macros on two racks if the user desired it, rather than disabling.
I think these options would cover most all circumstances adequately and be quite helpful for those with automap as well.
So I would say that Ableton should save macro mappings with the rack, implement these 3 functions. Any user with a synth controller is going to expect that a rack mapped to modwheel would save that with the preset. That is fundamental to controlling softsynths and effects. This functionality assures that for every user... with the rest left to automap functions.
In regards to user configurable automapping, i have this thought about how to implement it.
Instead of CC maps for devices, we could use priority maps.
What i mean by that is...
You get a list of the device parameters and the ability to arrange them in whichever order you like.
The numerical order points out which parameter is automapped first.
It's the other way around of assigning CC's to parameters. Instead you assign parameters to CC's.
Each device should be selectable by pressing a midi button. That way you can navigate your way thru all your devices without ever having to assign a parameter to anything.
I think this feature would also solve the 128 parameter limit of vst's. Because you would basically use the same approach in selecting which parameters can be automatized.
Instead of CC maps for devices, we could use priority maps.
What i mean by that is...
You get a list of the device parameters and the ability to arrange them in whichever order you like.
The numerical order points out which parameter is automapped first.
It's the other way around of assigning CC's to parameters. Instead you assign parameters to CC's.
Each device should be selectable by pressing a midi button. That way you can navigate your way thru all your devices without ever having to assign a parameter to anything.
I think this feature would also solve the 128 parameter limit of vst's. Because you would basically use the same approach in selecting which parameters can be automatized.
I like this approach very much..hoffman2k wrote:In regards to user configurable automapping, i have this thought about how to implement it.
Instead of CC maps for devices, we could use priority maps.
What i mean by that is...
You get a list of the device parameters and the ability to arrange them in whichever order you like.
The numerical order points out which parameter is automapped first.
It's the other way around of assigning CC's to parameters. Instead you assign parameters to CC's.
Each device should be selectable by pressing a midi button. That way you can navigate your way thru all your devices without ever having to assign a parameter to anything.
I think this feature would also solve the 128 parameter limit of vst's. Because you would basically use the same approach in selecting which parameters can be automatized.
And if each device can host it's own presets/templates this would really complete this idea..
This is a bit similar to Nord modular..
With generation 1 you have to assign the dials to the parameters..
With generation 2 you assign the parameters to the dials by dropping a module on the 'mapping' window.. All parameters of that module are then extracted and you can change the order of the parameters..
I must say I was suprised that the new Macros didn't address this whole issue head on, IE track specific assignments were what was lacking and Macros seemed designed to deal with that issue. But they don't - they once again give the lead hand to the hardware developers without addressing the issue at all.
Right now I am left wondering how to emulate a Mackie controller on my controller so I can make use of the new functions. So, lots of work for me to do. not exactly plug-and-play. Ableton don't even provide me with any clues or links to follow for this. It is left totally up to me.
My options seem to be - ditch all my existing controllers and buy a Mackie controller or one of those SL things (no chance)
or .. spend a lot of time trying to hack together a Mackie emulation for my controller.
fun, fun, fun.
Right now I am left wondering how to emulate a Mackie controller on my controller so I can make use of the new functions. So, lots of work for me to do. not exactly plug-and-play. Ableton don't even provide me with any clues or links to follow for this. It is left totally up to me.
My options seem to be - ditch all my existing controllers and buy a Mackie controller or one of those SL things (no chance)
or .. spend a lot of time trying to hack together a Mackie emulation for my controller.
fun, fun, fun.
I like hoffman2k's idea too.hoffman2k wrote:In regards to user configurable automapping, i have this thought about how to implement it.
Instead of CC maps for devices, we could use priority maps.
What i mean by that is...
You get a list of the device parameters and the ability to arrange them in whichever order you like.
The numerical order points out which parameter is automapped first.
It's the other way around of assigning CC's to parameters. Instead you assign parameters to CC's.
Each device should be selectable by pressing a midi button. That way you can navigate your way thru all your devices without ever having to assign a parameter to anything.
I think this feature would also solve the 128 parameter limit of vst's. Because you would basically use the same approach in selecting which parameters can be automatized.
MacBook MacOS Live 9.7.1 Max for Live Push Logic
yes, but a generic list of CCs to acheive the effect of Mackie mode would surely be simplest?kineticUk wrote:I like hoffman2k's idea too.hoffman2k wrote:In regards to user configurable automapping, i have this thought about how to implement it.
Instead of CC maps for devices, we could use priority maps.
What i mean by that is...
You get a list of the device parameters and the ability to arrange them in whichever order you like.
The numerical order points out which parameter is automapped first.
It's the other way around of assigning CC's to parameters. Instead you assign parameters to CC's.
Each device should be selectable by pressing a midi button. That way you can navigate your way thru all your devices without ever having to assign a parameter to anything.
If I was presented with a list of CCs and midi notes which were equivalent to specific Live functions such as 'chan 16: cc 127 = selected track EQ frequency' Iam perfectly capable of making myself a preset for my hardware - but I have no idea what I am aiming for.
they just left us out in the cold - it's weird, the underlying ability for track-specific mapping is obviously there, but only available through closed proprietory systems.
If I had a 'generic' list of functions and midi assignments to work from I could do the rest.
