You remember that user teasing a Melbourne MIDI controller here repeatedly without any proof? You might be interested in what they replied to me after asking for a picture of my setup:
„That’s a lot of Fader Fox!
You’ll be excited by our forthcoming new product that will solve a lot of your deskspace issues! Announcement in late January.“
So I guess there will be a MIDI controller by Melbourne. Which means it will have motorized knobs that recall exact values instead of confusing you. Call me excited!
Wondering about the implementation though, as it will have limits compared to their own synths. There would need to be a complete loopback of MIDI CCs if it should be able to always reflect correct values using multiple plugins or multitimbral synths. I guess it would be more like you can define and save default values and it will thus reflect your changes after you’ve touched a knob.
For a motorized MIDI controller it would be a double win if they add a motorized fader or two. Curious how the price will fare compared to their synths.
That being said, I would imagine this requires a dedicated power supply.
This is one key parts of MIDI 2.0. Not saying that they will have that, but if it did that could account for the delay developing this device.
Could it have both motorized knobs and sliders ?
A keyboard might be a nice part of this too, although it would not be an essential part of that sort of thing.
I think of the Korg Keystage, a MIDI 2.0 controller, and it’s shortcomingx with the eight pots. Something with motorized knobs would be one fix for that.
You mean like text that shows what the controls are associated with, also like on the Keystage.
Yeah, I’d need that if it was to replace my Faderfoxes (for volumes). Fortunately, motorized faders have been around for quite some time, though they seem to be expensive.
@Jukka: Good to hear MIDI 2.0 could solve the problem. That would be mostly useful for using it with a DAW, right? Or would that also work if you use it with a synth/Elektron box?
I assume it won’t have keys, since they’re talking about solving my deskspace issues. Unless they’re also aiming for me to get rid of my Keystep.
Exactly. There would be potentially lots of parameter “pages”, so naming them would be critical in my opinion.
ability to rename them via OSC or Sysex, this is the best for flexibility. That’s what I do with my FaderFox EC4, associated with Max For Live, I can dynamically rename the controls, it’s super handy.
Or in addition to MIDI 2.0 software synths and DAWs, any MIDI 2.0 capable hardware synth. Korg again has been the pioneer, with the Modwave, Wavestate, and Opsix all supporting this, and also i expect that the Multi/Poly will eventually, and maybe the kingKorg Neo.
I don’t expect Elektron ever will, but then you can use a inferior regular MIDI work around of this problem.
No synth part and no audio electronics helps. If there is no keyboard or there are two versions of the product, one with and one without, that also could help. How many mappable controls at basis do you really need ? I think of the controllers with just one motorized fader ( Presonus Faderport ), so at the simplest 4 to 8 controls that you might easily map individually could be enough.
Think about morphing with those controls, with changing A and B settings. ( This might be interesting if controlling more than one output device at the same time, or with two or more splitable separate morphs. ) Think of having programmable detents, and controls for multi position selectors, when you want. Think of slow speed LFOs, physically moving the knobs.
Melbourne Instruments is a clever bunch they can come up with other useful ideas no doubt.
This is one of my favorite features of their synths. If they found a way to give us performance mode for the digis like it’s implemented in AR/A4/OT, that would be fantastic. You can get close to it with macros on the digis, but it always has to correspond to MIDI channels, so it’s hard to set up A/B performances for several tracks at the same time.
Honestly, my biggest dream is that Elektron partner up with Melbourne and give us pro versions of their digis with some motorized faders and knobs that are integrated into the workflow.
OEMing has always been a likely direction for MI with a breakthrough technology like this. Medeli/ASM OEMed their PolyTouch keybed to Korg for the KeyStage. This is a reason for MI to not do a controller themselves, and instead to OEM what they have to a company that makes controllers with really great DAW integration, who sells in volume.
If they really want to compete with Faderfox it better be portable and not clunky AF like Nina. I guess the motors are making it so heavy so I’m really wondering if they can achieve good portability.
I wouldn’t call Nina clunky, it’s rather compact compared to stuff like Sequential modules, but yeah, heavy as fuck. And the appeal of the smaller Faderfoxes is precisely that they are small but pack a lot of knob and fader into that surface, so Melbourne has to compete with that if they want to help me with my desk real estate like they’re claiming.
True! The size of the Prophets and OBs was always bugging me. Yearning for something like the Tetra and P12.
I believe they could make it work with something like 8 motorized controls combined with a few buttons and a carefully designed display UI. (Not like the EC2)
I’m only thinking of my live set IMHO the market needs more flexible gear which makes live sets more portable and efficient without the need to stick to a single box or two.
Really looking forward to find out what this will be. Am so close to buying some midi controllers but will hold off for a bit to see if this could be what I want.