There aren’t any controllers for synths

u0421793

I’ve been thinking more about this whole topic

This item would have no way of playing a tune or rhythm, ie no keyboard and no pads, (that sort of thing is already served by many products) – this would be purely control panel, and not just grids of knobs or rows of sliders, more importantly it’d be arranged in a sort of ‘process’ topology, ie flow a signal through while imparting treatments

I think the important thing is that when we have something like what I have in mind, absolutely nobody would want a ‘real’ synth, ever, the prospect of having lots of actual hardware synths would be crazy, what, are you insane, I’ve got this! I can use it on my thousands of software synths, it’s simply far better! (I’m temporarily excepting the separate urge which people have to buy certain hardware synths because they have actual transistors inside, or at least transistors which don’t form into a big cpu but are spread out a bit more)

terminology

• a notional ‘module’ might have one side flowing through to the other side, one side would be the source, the other side would be the product, in-between or below would be treatments (which typically modulate the way that the source makes its way to the product)
• in the case of a generator, like a vco, lfo or envelope generator, that’s the source (internal source) but there might still be treatments and consequently a resulting product
• a patch connection (ie like a patch cable or a matrix entry) might have an origin and a target

usage

the controls with which you control that ‘through’ or in-flow process would typically be arranged in that sort of layout – source flowing through to product, with treatment near or perhaps underneath that flow-through

patching is still the problem – how to visually indicate that a source in this module came from an out-of-module product, ie a filter would have a source from a patch connection’s target, that patch connection’s origin came from a different module’s product – I don’t know a good way of representing that, but I haven’t thought about it as much

so to sum up, I reckon a fairly generic ‘module’ could be presented in the form of some generic controls (buttons switches knobs sliders readouts indicators) on one side for source, another bunch of that sort of thing on the other side for the product, another bunch underneath the above flow-through for the treatment

we’re only talking about a handful of controls here, per module – now aggregate a few of those together like a typical mono synth, and that’s a very powerful generic controller

kirmesteggno

Here's a video of Pyrolator (Kurt Dahlke) using an MPMidi controller with plugins in Ableton:

Costs like an iPad Air 5 and can control all desktop plugins. That's what I'd get if I couldn't do without knobs.

He said that he tried many controllers including Push but that those weren't doing it for him and ultimately found the right controller.

https://mpmidi.com

He's using it with a Stream Deck inserting the plugins, but that part could be covered with an iPad and something like Metagrid I guess.

SealTeamSick

Kinda amazed this topic doesn’t come up more. It’s not just functionality being left on the table, for my part I think aesthetics means a lot also. I’ve always been amazed at how incredibly boring/ugly every keyboard/knobs controller is. If there was a single cool looking controller I would buy it even if it wasn’t a functionally perfect layout. (Like for example one that looks like a Poly D with the folding up and down, but really there aren’t limitations if it is just a controller!!)

Fingolfinzz

I just want 127 faders

jamietopol

If they finally manufacture it, this option from Behringer looks terrific:
https://synthanatomy.com/2021/01/behringer-bcr32-bcr2000-midi-controller-comeback-with-built-in-zaquencer.html

u0421793

I’ve been thinking about this concept all over again because it’s still not satisfied

So I ask everyone – what in your opinion is the most generic actual hardware synth you can think of, that a somewhat slightly universal hands-on controller could be modelled after

I don’t necessarily mean the most minimal stripped down set, that’s not helpful, but perhaps not too far the other way with plethora of too many unique controls that don’t apply to most other scenarios – we’re probably looking at the optimum set of optimum controls in an optimum layout etc, that’s can overlay most software synths successfully and most of the controls will naturally find their place on most of the affordances of the software synth it is controlling

Obviously there’s going to be plenty of non-overlap, eg an optimum generous analogue vintage synth layout may have nothing in there for usefully controlling a wavetable synth without a lot of relabelling and juggling, but that aside, I wonder what the most generic ‘synthesiser’ layout of controls could exist

hes

@u0421793 said:
I’ve been thinking about this concept all over again because it’s still not satisfied

So I ask everyone – what in your opinion is the most generic actual hardware synth you can think of, that a somewhat slightly universal hands-on controller could be modelled after

I don’t necessarily mean the most minimal stripped down set, that’s not helpful, but perhaps not too far the other way with plethora of too many unique controls that don’t apply to most other scenarios – we’re probably looking at the optimum set of optimum controls in an optimum layout etc, that’s can overlay most software synths successfully and most of the controls will naturally find their place on most of the affordances of the software synth it is controlling

Obviously there’s going to be plenty of non-overlap, eg an optimum generous analogue vintage synth layout may have nothing in there for usefully controlling a wavetable synth without a lot of relabelling and juggling, but that aside, I wonder what the most generic ‘synthesiser’ layout of controls could exist

FWIW, I'm not sure I have the slightest idea of what you're talking about.

But I have heard the Korg Minilogue referred to as a good synth to use as a synth controller, because it's a fairly generic synth and you can map its knobs to the knobs of any virtual synth you want. Then use the knobs as intended, e.g., 'Filter' knob on the Minilogue gets mapped to 'Filter' on the virtual synth. Also, the Minilogue has a 'module' version that comes without keyboard: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1476275-REG/korg_miniloguexdm_minilogue_xd_module.html

Here is an example of using the Minilogue hardware to control the Omnisphere software synthesizer. Sounds are from Omnisphere, control is from Minilogue:

tom_ward

Just read through this thread for the first time, so it's entirely possible it was too much for me to digest in one go. Seems like the modular environment was the original inspiration, but patch cables and other cumbersome elements are a hindrance. But, existing generic/universal MIDI controllers are not good, because they are too generic. Correct me if I've got that wrong?

I would guess that a generic, universal, modular control system that meets the criteria, unless I've got them wrong, would need bi-directional communication. It won't be good enough for the controller to simply work with everything, even if it's modular, because there's no telling what a software synth is, does, or is composed of. Some system where:

• Each "module" is a combination of control(s) and screen
• Control is whatever you want: a knob, slider, etc.
• Screen is a small screen, LCD or OLED, intended to be the parameter label and value readout
• You combine the screen with some number of controls, of your choosing, to create the module
• The APP should instruct the module what its function is, via MIDI learn/similar. There'd be some mechanism to apply a custom label for your module's screen. Otherwise, it's back to the normal mapping that we already have to do.

This sounds very expensive, but doable. I got the idea by imagining a Novation SL MkIII without keys, buttons, or sliders. After thinking through it all, I came to the conclusion I would personally just buy the SL and be happy.

rs2000

@u0421793 said:
I’ve been thinking about this concept all over again because it’s still not satisfied

So I ask everyone – what in your opinion is the most generic actual hardware synth you can think of, that a somewhat slightly universal hands-on controller could be modelled after

I don’t necessarily mean the most minimal stripped down set, that’s not helpful, but perhaps not too far the other way with plethora of too many unique controls that don’t apply to most other scenarios – we’re probably looking at the optimum set of optimum controls in an optimum layout etc, that’s can overlay most software synths successfully and most of the controls will naturally find their place on most of the affordances of the software synth it is controlling

Obviously there’s going to be plenty of non-overlap, eg an optimum generous analogue vintage synth layout may have nothing in there for usefully controlling a wavetable synth without a lot of relabelling and juggling, but that aside, I wonder what the most generic ‘synthesiser’ layout of controls could exist

For me, without doubt the best answer to this question is the Clavia Nord Lead 3. And you don't even need to model a controller after it because it can already act as one itself.