[ardour-users] [ANN] Mackie MCU, BCF2000 and Tranzport testers wanted

[John Anderson]

On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Desbarats wrote:

> I think that next/prev mark is a good  thing especially when you have
> a shuttle (Contour Design) to control Ardour speed and position
> (thank's Sampo for sxpress ;-) ). I was wondering something about
> marks : is there a way to set-up a location marker directly with a BCF
> in Mackie mode ? I'll find it useful. 

I've just checked in code to do that. Will probably be in rc2.

>         What's a good speed for ffwd and rewind? +2 and -2?
> 
> +2 -2 seems to be good  
> 
> 
>         bye
>         John
> 
> I have some questions about the MCU mode :
> - Has the MCU mode of Ardour been tested with something else than a
> BCF (real Mackie or US2400 in emulation mode) ???

Someone helped us test against an MCU at one stage. It was mostly
successful. The code has changed a lot since then though.

> - With a real MCU will the lcd display work ??

No. But if you have access to an MCU you could help with that.

> And now for Paul and his fantastic devel team, My Ardour-BCF feed
> back: 
> I'm using Ardour for more than 5 years now and I bought my BCF2000 for
> it more than 2 years ago. The first implementation of midi control in
> Ardour was effective but setting-up a session with midi control was
> really painful.Now with the MCU mode it's a real pleasure, but
> (there's always a but) I think that the MCU should be a true image of
> the mixer window : If I hide a strip I would like it to be removed
> from the controls, and of course putted back when I show it again. 
> I don't know much of non linux softwares but I think that Cubase works
> this way.

You could do something like this by changing the remote id for the route
to none. Then the MCU will ignore that track. I know that's more work
than just hiding the track.

Last time I checked, the extent to which the surface reflects the gui
and vice-versa was hotly debated. It also bumps up against the core
design of ardour.

> About pan controls for stereo tracks, when I was using Ardour 0.9 I
> was used to control the first cursor of pan an link the other one.
> Maybe the pan pot could control the first cursor and the second when
> it's shifted.

I like the idea, but the BCF sends the same code for the pot regardless
of hardware shift state. It would be possible to implement an option
button to do something like that, but not by 2.0

> And why not switching between link modes with a shift+ pan button ?? 

Also a good idea, but we run into the same problem as with the pot.

I have to say, I find it a bit daunting that the surface controls can
have whatever meanings we want them to have.

> For more than 2 cursors I don't have a clue.
> 
> Well this it, thank's again for your wonderful work.
> 
> Tho
> 
> PS: sorry for my english :-(

Hah. Votre Anglais est surement mieux que mon Francais. Je ne connait
pas, meme, si celles-la sont les mots juste.

bye
John