A conceptual discussion about DAW control

[~ufo~]

Because most DAWs were developed to emulate a recording studio and build from there, so have DAW controllers.

In essence we've been stuck with dated concepts and controllers that were trying to emulate emulations of something that may not even be relevant anymore other than that we're used to them.
Sure there's nothing WRONG with the operation of a fader, you move something on a one dimensional axis to change a single parameter, makes perfect sense.
But we're in a different realm now, with virtually unlimited possibilities. Now that we've pretty much exhausted the emulation of analogue in the DAW I think it's time to embrace the fact that the DAW is in fact a virtual realm and it can be whatever we want it to be.

Since we're moving away from the fixed/finite reality of a console and moving into the much more flexible realm of touch screen, I think it's a revolution we should take advantage of.
In stead of thinking about how we can emulate how it used to be done, perhaps we should focus on the present and future.
We have an application in a virtual realm and we have an input device that's flexible and much more suitable to control the digital world than finite a collection of sliders, rotaries and buttons are.

So, is it not time to rethink the DAW controller and perhaps, ultimately even the DAW itself?
I think so. The work we do here will be easily ported to the VR world we may move towards.

So let's brainstorm about ideas here. Not notions of the past, but ideas about the future.

For instance, how about we se if we can link multiple track parameters so that we can manipulate them in a more natural way?

A fader is merely a volume tool and sometimes that is just what we want but often times it goes much further than that.
What is it we want to do?
We want to place something in the virtual three dimensional sound scape.
We want to bring something closer to us or farther away, volume is merely one parameter in that seemingly simple but complex task.

How about we get a hot spot near the fader where we link volume and pan? That's a start.
This could be an interesting functionality addition to the matrix view no? (Can we get something like that in Pro Tools?)

[kjd01]

I am going to throw a potentially really wierd idea out that is on the physical realm. It might not fit into your idea of this topic but it might.
I recently got my self one of the Roli Seaboard Rise 25 and as I am sitting there trying it out playing synths etc. I had a thought. Wouldn't this be great as a controller to move faders, pan etc. Yes it is not a motorised style fader it would have to be a Delta type fader but I could see it working.
The Seaboard has vertical movement up the keys/waves. It also has slide sideways for pan pots. It has pressure sensitivity, which might be more natural feeling for vocal riding automation. Where you press in more when you want the vocal louder and less when you want it softer.
It has a X,Y control for some other functions etc. Obviously it is not a cheap solution but if you had one for your synth anyway then why not use it.

[~ufo~]

There you go.

That seaboard idea: there's several touch screen technologies that could make that happen on touch screen.
One is force touch, the other is this: http://tactustechnology.com

If you could get your touch screen to make two ridges, between which your finger would slide up and down and you can apply pressure to these ridges. You can get close to or even improve upon that seaboard experience.

I don't think it's a weird idea at all. That seaboard could be a good mixer controller. If I were them I'd jump on that.

Of course, in the mean time, we can link volume and pan/balance on a simple XY pad on our current touch screens.
It seems like an obvious addition to the matrix view.

[DT_bettinzana]

How about we get a hot spot near the fader where we link volume and pan? That's a start.

Hello ~ufo~,
can you explain better your idea?
I have some implementation doubt for Pro Tools, because of the weird management of the pan with the HUI protocol. Anyway, your idea could be useful for Cubase too.

Thanks!

Silvano Bettinzana
Devil Technologies

[~ufo~]

How about we get a hot spot near the fader where we link volume and pan? That's a start.

Hello ~ufo~,
can you explain better your idea?

Sure!
Say you have a square like in the matrix.
If you place your finger on it and hold it still, nothing happens.
But if you hold your finger on the surface and move it upwards, the volume goes up, move it downwards, the volume goes down (delta style).
Likewise, if you move it to the right the pan/balance goes to the right, same thing for the right.
In effect you have something similar to an XY pad where X is level and Y is pan/balance. But you don't need a big XY pad, where the value can jump to where place your finger on the pad.
In this case, you just need that little square as a starting point from where you make your adjustments.

If you can do that with multiple squares simultaneously, for instance, you can have a very 'organic' way of panning and levelling two guitars against each-other.
This seems like something you could implement on the matrix view.

It could be a start of this DAW control 2.0 I'd like us to start developing.

[DT_bettinzana]

Say you have a square like in the matrix.
If you place your finger on it and hold it still, nothing happens.
But if you hold your finger on the surface and move it upwards, the volume goes up, move it downwards, the volume goes down (delta style).
Likewise, if you move it to the right the pan/balance goes to the right, same thing for the right.

Thank you!
Could we start making the fader knobs "horizontally" sensitive (for the pan)?
We could implement this with no problems and making it optional with a check-box in the DTouch settings window.
Other users opinion?

The problem that I see with the matrix is that it is big on a 1920x1080 and you have not much space available for vertical movements for the very first and last rows. I hope that you understand my bad description. It is true that we could redesign the matrix window (with less tracks, probably).

~ufo~, arent you on Pro Tools? Because with PT we have a lot of "protocol" constraints which make this almost impossible. In fact, no matrix window in DTouch for Pro Tools.

Silvano Bettinzana
Devil Technologies

[~ufo~]

Could we start making the fader knobs "horizontally" sensitive (for the pan)?

The problem that I see with the matrix is that it is big on a 1920x1080 and you have not much space available for vertical movements for the very first and last rows.

~ufo~, arent you on Pro Tools? Because with PT we have a lot of "protocol" constraints which make this almost impossible. In fact, no matrix window in DTouch for Pro Tools.

Yeah, I'm on Pro Tools so I understand if it's not possible.

I also thought about the limitations of the Matrix window, constricting the delta movement of anything when you start close to the edges of the screen.

This whole idea is more of a conceptual think tank.
To start moving away from our legacy methods/controls (faders, knobs) and start to conceptualise how we might better operate our DAWs in the (near) future.

[DT_bettinzana]

Could we start making the fader knobs "horizontally" sensitive (for the pan)?

The problem that I see with the matrix is that it is big on a 1920x1080 and you have not much space available for vertical movements for the very first and last rows.

~ufo~, arent you on Pro Tools? Because with PT we have a lot of "protocol" constraints which make this almost impossible. In fact, no matrix window in DTouch for Pro Tools.

Yeah, I'm on Pro Tools so I understand if it's not possible.

I also thought about the limitations of the Matrix window, constricting the delta movement of anything when you start close to the edges of the screen.

This whole idea is more of a conceptual think tank.
To start moving away from our legacy methods/controls (faders, knobs) and start to conceptualise how we might better operate our DAWs in the (near) future.

OK, we have already introduced some news with the "fade pad" and Matrix window in DTouch for Cubase.
For example the fade pad is a great tool in my opinion because it avoids to waste a lot of precious space for the fader travel. Unfortunately, we have some users who feels more "comfortable" with the view of a moving fader knob.
To be honest, in my opinion, the overview of 128 simultaneous tracks as in the Matrix window is my preferred DTouch for Cubase tool.
For example you can see all the tracks "contributing" to a send or cue_send. It is the "reverse" concept of the sends level in the regular analog console style channel strip.

Thank you for your continuing support.

Silvano Bettinzana
Devil Technologies

[brucerothwell]

Could we start making the fader knobs "horizontally" sensitive (for the pan)?
We could implement this with no problems and making it optional with a check-box in the DTouch settings window.
Other users opinion?

I think, for starters, this is the best approach to add pan control to the fader -- like you, add a button along side the fader that enables side-to-side sensitivity that translate to panning, when a fader is being adjusted.

[MichaelScott]

Yes I would certainly welcome this and as Bruce mentions, this could be added as a button selection, or as an additional macro selection along with the other fader macro selections.
Concerning the conceptual thoughts ufo has started, along with volume, pan could we also visualize attaching parameters from plugins that could be added depending on the track and what could be accomplished in an xy pattern movement? I see endless possibilities in this regard.