Behringer BCF2000

Jun 26, 2006 at 10:40pm

Behringer BCF2000

Is anybody using the Behringer BCF2000 with Max? I’ve seen it around
for $200, and that’s obscenely cheap for flying faders. I’m looking
to partially replace my Peavey PC-1600x, and really liked the
flexibility of its programming. (though I know the BCF2000 probably
won’t come close on that account) I’ve been reading mostly positive
reviews, but if it doesn’t play well with Max, that’s a deal-breaker.

Ideally, I’d like to create some sort of tabbed interface. Click a
button, and the settings for module N come up on the faders. (looks
like something for matrixctl and router) Anybody already done this?

Peter McCulloch

#26574
Jun 27, 2006 at 2:01am

On Jun 26, 2006, at 6:40 PM, Peter McCulloch wrote:

> Is anybody using the Behringer BCF2000 with Max? I’ve seen it around
> for $200, and that’s obscenely cheap for flying faders. I’m looking
> to partially replace my Peavey PC-1600x, and really liked the
> flexibility of its programming. (though I know the BCF2000 probably
> won’t come close on that account) I’ve been reading mostly positive
> reviews, but if it doesn’t play well with Max, that’s a deal-breaker.
>
> Ideally, I’d like to create some sort of tabbed interface. Click a
> button, and the settings for module N come up on the faders. (looks
> like something for matrixctl and router) Anybody already done this?

hi peter
i use the bcf2000 all the time in my live performances, and it has the
ability to do what you want i believe. while i haven’t used it with max
yet, i do use it frequently with ableton live and there is true two-way
communication going on: move a fader in live and the fader on the
bcf moves and visa versa. i believe someone has already written an
abstraction (?) or an external for the bcf: http://
http://www.maxobjects.com/?
v=objects&id_objet=2966&requested=bcf&operateur=AND&id_plateforme=0
from the jasch objects it seems. i find the bcf to be easy to
program, both
with software that has good “learn” capabilities like live, and
within the
bcf itself. once you work past the useless manual it becomes very
intuitive.
i spread myself over three banks of faders, and multiple knob banks,
and the moving fader/led ring combo is a godsend for keeping track of
what’s going on. i have dragged this thing across the country and over
the roads of nyc and it’s never hiccoughed. my only complaint is that
when i change banks it makes a distinctly audible whirrr as the faders
update, so if you work with quiet stuff like i do it’s a factor.
luckily it is
relatively quiet, you would only notice it in dead silence. but as the
performer you might find yourself wincing occasionally. ;-)
drop me a note if you come up with an interesting interface – i’d
love to
see it.
cheers
bruce

bruce tovsky
http://www.skeletonhome.com

“Sometimes the appropriate response to reality is to go insane.”
Philip K. Dick

#79656
Jun 27, 2006 at 3:46am

i own a bcr2000 and i use it with live as well…it is an amazing unit for 200 bucks mainly because you can run mackie emulation easily on it…you can run mackie emulation with other controller types, but the bcf/bcr is among the few that has the advantage of endless encoders/motorized faders……that way you get complete recall……i really mean complete…..there is no knob jumping anywhere…in my host that is…

they have mackie maps for cubase, logic…….but you can build your own mackie interface with this unit easily….they have a code chart..

plus i use it with max all the time…in max i dont think there is a specific advantage of using a bcf or bcr unless you have some kind of recall object……

#79657
Jun 27, 2006 at 3:52am

come to think of it..i think it wouldn’t be that hard to recall values to the bcr…….i’ll try it when i get some time…..let me know if your making any progress.

#79658
Jun 27, 2006 at 4:11am

I also use the BCF2000 in performance with MAX and it’s surprisly
robust and reliable for a Behringer product! Precise faders and
encoders too. I usally never suggest behringer products but for this
one! It is highly worth its price in my opinion.

The fader mouvement when your recall a preset is indeed noisy, but not
much than any other simmilar products I guess.

pc

On 6/26/06, papermesh wrote:
>
> i own a bcr2000 and i use it with live as well…it is an amazing unit for 200 bucks mainly because you can run mackie emulation easily on it…you can run mackie emulation with other controller types, but the bcf/bcr is among the few that has the advantage of endless encoders/motorized faders……that way you get complete recall……i really mean complete…..there is no knob jumping anywhere…in my host that is…
>
>
> they have mackie maps for cubase, logic…….but you can build your own mackie interface with this unit easily….they have a code chart..
>
>
> plus i use it with max all the time…in max i dont think there is a specific advantage of using a bcf or bcr unless you have some kind of recall object……
>

#79659
Jun 27, 2006 at 5:20am

On Jun 27, 2006, at 12:11 AM, P C wrote:

> The fader mouvement when your recall a preset is indeed noisy, but not
> much than any other simmilar products I guess.

i totally agree. it’s certainly quieter than pro control. i have even
asked friends
if they could hear it and no one could. a minor problem,
inconsequential in context.
cheers
bruce

bruce tovsky
http://www.skeletonhome.com

“Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
Douglas Adams

#79660
Jun 27, 2006 at 9:32am

Can you move the faders using MIDI Messages from Max? (e.g. send 80 to
ctlout 7; does the fader set itself?) Basically, I just want to make
sure that you can set and move the values of faders from within Max,
not just storing presets at the box. I had heard that it was very good
with Ableton, Cubase, etc., just wanted to find out if that was done
via MIDI, or something else. (that is, is it agnostic as to its data
input?) For me, not working well with Max or other applications is a
definite deal-breaker. (I’m looking at you, Greedy-design)

Peter McCulloch

#79661
Jun 27, 2006 at 9:32am

P.S. Thanks for the feedback so far

Peter McCulloch

#79662
Jun 27, 2006 at 11:47am

Anyone has used these faders with 14 bit resolution?
I know it is possible with this model, but I don’t know
know to set it up.

2006/6/27, Peter McCulloch

:
> P.S. Thanks for the feedback so far
>
> Peter McCulloch
>
>

#79663
Jun 27, 2006 at 11:59am

>On Jun 26, 2006, at 6:40 PM, Peter McCulloch wrote:
>
>>Is anybody using the Behringer BCF2000 with Max? I’ve seen it around
>>for $200, and that’s obscenely cheap for flying faders. I’m looking
>>to partially replace my Peavey PC-1600x, and really liked the
>>flexibility of its programming. (though I know the BCF2000 probably
>>won’t come close on that account) I’ve been reading mostly positive

Peter – just curious – why are you looking to replace your PC-1600x?
Although I’ve not kept up with all the different devices out there
now, I’ve yet to come upon one as you suggest that was as flexible
and all-inclusive in its programming ability…

The LCD recently died on mine, but I was able to replace it myself
after some investigation quite easily…

Dan

Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X
http://www.defectiverecords.com

http://www.jackosx.com

#79664
Jun 27, 2006 at 5:53pm

#79665
Jun 28, 2006 at 4:23am

I use mine in Logic Control mode. In this mode the faders transmit/
receive pitchbend data, so accessing the full resolution in max is as
simple as using xbendin/xbendout. The resolution of the faders is
actually 10 bit, which is still quite nice. Overall, I think the
device is quite flexible, especially for the price.

Greg

#79666
Jun 28, 2006 at 11:16pm

The PC-1600x is good for a lot of things, but the flying faders are really
great (well, at least in my theoretical estimation) for when you need to
control several groups of parameters. It allows you to see the current
values before acting on them, and I think that’s a big advantage. 16 flying
faders…well, that would be something, and if the old Yamaha digital mixers
weren’t so damn heavy, this would be a different discussion, but I’m trying
to put together a lightweight setup that’s backpackable on the subway, yet
gives me substantial flexibility in control routing.

I would agree that the PC-1600x has a lot of great features, such as the
mode where you can move the fader, and send the value only with the button,
and the ability for arbitrarily long button commands in hex is very cool,
but for me, I don’t need specific midi commands as much as an interface that
is flexible, and provides visual feedback as to the current settings of
various parameters. I’d actually looked into some of the projects posted
at uCapps.de, but finding flying faders for any reasonable price is quite
difficult. (well, at least after all the NYU ITP people cleaned out the
online selection last spring) At +$10 a fader, it’s probably most cost
effective to buy rather than build.

Anywho, there’s the thought process here…

Peter McCulloch

Peter – just curious – why are you looking to replace your PC-1600x?
> Although I’ve not kept up with all the different devices out there
> now, I’ve yet to come upon one as you suggest that was as flexible
> and all-inclusive in its programming ability…
>
>

#79667
Jun 29, 2006 at 2:36am

On Jun 28, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Peter McCulloch wrote:

> would agree that the PC-1600x has a lot of great features, such as
> the mode where you can move the fader, and send the value only with
> the button, and the ability for arbitrarily long button commands in
> hex is very cool, but for me, I don’t need specific midi commands
> as much as an interface that is flexible, and provides visual
> feedback as to the current settings of various parameters. I’d
> actually looked into some of the projects posted at uCapps.de, but
> finding flying faders for any reasonable price is quite difficult.
> (well, at least after all the NYU ITP people cleaned out the online
> selection last spring) At +$10 a fader, it’s probably most cost
> effective to buy rather than build.

peter
my exact same reasons for going with the behringer. i also looked
into the midibox
forum as a possibility – and i am still thinking of a box of
joysticks for my quad setup -
but it was ridiculous when the behringer was under $200. and as i
stated before, it
has stood up to a fairly active year of abuse. it would be nice to
have an lcd display,
but the intuitive editing setup makes up for it a bit.
cheers
bruce

bruce tovsky
http://www.skeletonhome.com

“Reality is whatever refuses to go away when I stop believing in it..”
Philip K. Dick

#79668
Jun 29, 2006 at 4:41am

I use the BCF 2000 quite a lot with Live and have used it just a little with MAX/MSP and my pluggo plugins.

Works VERY well. It’s not built like a tank, but I really love the lights around the dials.

Yes – the BCF’s faders will move if you send it MIDI from an outside source (like Max or live). Likewise the lights on the knobs of the BCR will change in response to MIDI.

Yes – the 14bit MIDI faders and knobs work well. Note that on the faders, 14bit mode means you have to rotate the knob many, many times before you get from the min to max value. Faders on the BCR make a lot more sense for 14bit. I also notice some ‘jitter’ when the knobs on the BCR are just sitting idle in 14bit mode – that is, I see the occasional MIDI controller get sent to Max even when I am not touching the knob; the value with jitter between two values (122 and 123..for example).

So far – I love it.

I’m selling my (last) PC1600x now because I like the Behringer even better.

Vance

#79669
Jun 29, 2006 at 5:21am

Thanks all for the advice. If I come up with some interesting patches for
the beast, I’ll post them.

Peter McCulloch

#79670
Jun 29, 2006 at 8:38am

same here – reading all of these posts inspired me to buy the BCR.
$129 for that many knobs? (and you can press them and use them as
buttons, too?) my performances will never be the same. (hopefully)

-evan

On Jun 29, 2006, at 6:21 AM, Peter McCulloch wrote:

> Thanks all for the advice. If I come up with some interesting
> patches for the beast, I’ll post them.
>
> Peter McCulloch

#79671
Jun 30, 2006 at 12:35am

Quote: lists@lowfrequency.or wrote on Thu, 29 June 2006 20:38
—————————————————-
> same here – reading all of these posts inspired me to buy the
> BCR. $129 for that many knobs? (and you can press them and use
> them as buttons, too?)

Only the top row supports encoder-push (and additional feedback formats).

But the 4 “encoder-groups” effectively give you 4 banks of those, plus the 24 simpler encoders in the lower 3 rows, and 20 user-assignable buttons.

None of the encoders support an “acceleration” factor when turned faster in relative mode, it’s a simple +/- 1 increment/decrement message.

On the face of it, the BCR is a good unit, but it’s hampered by a somewhat limited MIDI implementation (and poor documentation of that).

It also insists on force-updating its own button and encoder LEDs in the hardware, which means you need to jump through some additional hoops when sending feedback from Max.

I’ve been told that there is a BCR “raw” mode where it’s a completely dumb device, but of course no documentation for that is available, and emailing Behringer seems futile.

#79672
Jun 30, 2006 at 1:11am

My experience with emailing Behringer was very positive: I asked some questions about the Java based editor and received a customer support reply within a few hours, and this person then responded to every one of my 5 follow-up emails within a few hours of posting each one. I was stunned. I’ve never gotten that sort of response from Digidesign, MOTU, or name-a-dozen-other-audio-sofware-companies.

Your results may (very) vary.

#79673
Jun 30, 2006 at 5:54am

the bcr user’s manual is the worst i’ve ever seen for any kinda of product….

dont bother using the supplied bcedit program that comes with the bcr…..download a program called bcfredit by birdie…it’s so much easier…

if you do decide to use the supplied bcedit program….it wont work unless you have a specific version of java installed….search the live forums to get that version #

#79674
Jun 30, 2006 at 8:49am

John Pitcairn wrote:
> None of the encoders support an “acceleration” factor when turned
> faster in relative mode, it’s a simple +/- 1 increment/decrement
> message.

You can patch it in Max…

> On the face of it, the BCR is a good unit, but it’s hampered by a
> somewhat limited MIDI implementation (and poor documentation of
> that).

Would be no problem as Max would take care of it anyway…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com

#79675
Jun 30, 2006 at 10:35am

#79676
Jul 2, 2006 at 11:53pm

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 20:49
—————————————————-
> You can patch it in Max…

Sure, and such a “generic relative aceleration” patch with suitable tweakable timing parameters proves useful for other encoder-controllers too, like the Novation Remote or Fostex VM200.

But it’s irritating that the BCF can presumably support encoder acceleration when the BCR doesn’t while using the same encoders (OK, you can hack the preset sysex file somewhat, but beware checksum issues).

I’ve even seen evidence of a “rogue” BCR unit that appears to support encoder acceleration…

#79677
Jul 3, 2006 at 9:50pm

Am 03.07.2006 um 01:53 schrieb John Pitcairn:

>
> Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 20:49
> —————————————————-
>> You can patch it in Max…
>
> Sure, and such a “generic relative aceleration” patch with suitable
> tweakable timing parameters proves useful for other encoder-
> controllers too, like the Novation Remote or Fostex VM200.

-> the “acceleration” would be the first derivative (1.Ableitung) of
the successing delta-values, right ?
Would be great, if anybody could show a quick example how to patch
that in max … (-> the delta of the delta ?) ;-)
-and where would the timing parameters sit ? (sorry, may sound
stupid, but im just interested to know…)

cheers.
m

>
> But it’s irritating that the BCF can presumably support encoder
> acceleration when the BCR doesn’t while using the same encoders
> (OK, you can hack the preset sysex file somewhat, but beware
> checksum issues).
>
> I’ve even seen evidence of a “rogue” BCR unit that appears to
> support encoder acceleration…
>
>

#79678
Jul 3, 2006 at 10:42pm

Something like this…

#P window setfont “Sans Serif” 9.;
#P window linecount 1;
#P newex 379 455 100 196617 clip 1 8;
#P newex 439 385 23 196617 + 1;
#P newex 333 408 23 196617 !- 0;
#P newex 243 455 100 196617 clip -8 -1;
#P comment 244 159 264 196617 this handles values for ONE encoder using “rel2″ format;
#P newex 409 385 23 196617 !- 0;
#P newex 273 385 23 196617 !- 0;
#P newex 379 408 89 196617 scale 0 -90 1 9;
#P newex 379 319 30 196617 – 90;
#P newex 243 572 50 196617 print;
#P newex 303 385 28 196617 !- -1;
#P number 498 262 35 9 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 221 221 221 222 222 222 0 0 0;
#P comment 538 263 85 196617 max acceleration;
#P newex 243 408 85 196617 scale 0 -90 -1 -9;
#P newex 379 281 30 196617 timer;
#P newex 243 230 216 196617 sel 63 65;
#P number 481 231 35 9 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 221 221 221 222 222 222 0 0 0;
#P newex 243 319 30 196617 – 90;
#P newex 243 188 104 196617 ctlin BCR2000 102 1;
#P newex 243 281 30 196617 timer;
#P comment 524 233 79 196617 threshold (ms);
#P connect 5 1 6 0;
#P connect 5 1 6 1;
#P connect 5 0 1 0;
#P connect 5 0 1 1;
#P fasten 4 0 3 1 486 309 268 309;
#P fasten 4 0 14 0 486 352 278 352;
#P fasten 4 0 12 1 486 312 404 312;
#P fasten 4 0 15 0 486 355 414 355;
#P fasten 9 0 10 0 503 362 308 362;
#P fasten 9 0 18 0 503 365 338 365;
#P fasten 9 0 19 0 503 368 444 368;
#P fasten 9 0 20 2 503 371 474 371;
#P fasten 18 0 17 1 338 437 293 437;
#P connect 7 0 17 0;
#P connect 17 0 11 0;
#P connect 12 0 13 0;
#P connect 20 0 11 0;
#P connect 19 0 13 4;
#P connect 13 0 20 0;
#P connect 10 0 7 4;
#P connect 3 0 7 0;
#P connect 2 0 5 0;
#P connect 15 0 13 2;
#P connect 14 0 7 2;
#P connect 6 0 12 0;
#P connect 1 0 3 0;
#P window clipboard copycount 21;

#79679
Jul 6, 2006 at 11:14am

> -> the “acceleration” would be the first derivative (1.Ableitung) of
> the successing delta-values, right ?
> Would be great, if anybody could show a quick example how to patch
> that in max … (-> the delta of the delta ?) ;-)
> -and where would the timing parameters sit ? (sorry, may sound stupid,
> but im just interested to know…)

You can check out my externals tl.delta, tl.delta2 and tl.velocity.
Maybe they would be of use to you. You’ll find them at:

http://www.bek.no/~lossius/download

as part of tl.objects.

Best,
Trond

#79680
Jul 7, 2006 at 11:44am

great. thx a lot for your answers!

I havent looked at the BCFs behaviour according to fast movement, yet.
However, I was using a BCF recently for a concert-patch (no manual
around) and needed relative (incremental/decremental) controller
values, so i was simply using a boolean comparison within max to
convert the values to only increments/decrements of +1 or -1.
But no acceleration…not in that sense….
I was using the fact that moving a dial very fast, wouldnt put out
all midi-msges but would rather give out midi values according to its
internal timing-resolution as a feature.

-> I was using UART2, not USB, could this be a timing-bottleneck ?
Somehow i catched myself often wondering: what is it, that defines
the speed of MIDI-msges ? (protocol, bandwidth, ..) ?

cheers.
m

Am 06.07.2006 um 13:14 schrieb Trond Lossius:

>> -> the “acceleration” would be the first derivative (1.Ableitung)
>> of the successing delta-values, right ?
>> Would be great, if anybody could show a quick example how to patch
>> that in max … (-> the delta of the delta ?) ;-)
>> -and where would the timing parameters sit ? (sorry, may sound
>> stupid, but im just interested to know…)
>
> You can check out my externals tl.delta, tl.delta2 and tl.velocity.
> Maybe they would be of use to you. You’ll find them at:
>
> http://www.bek.no/~lossius/download
>
> as part of tl.objects.
>
> Best,
> Trond
>
>

#79681
Jul 11, 2006 at 11:00pm

Sorry for late response – I have been away and am behind on the Max
list.

I posted a patch that illustrates this a while back – check the
archives – it is very easy.

Best

L

On 27 Jun 2006, at 10:32, Peter McCulloch wrote:

> Can you move the faders using MIDI Messages from Max? (e.g. send
> 80 to ctlout 7; does the fader set itself?) Basically, I just want
> to make sure that you can set and move the values of faders from
> within Max, not just storing presets at the box

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk

#79682
Jul 13, 2006 at 5:48am

Marlon Schumacher wrote:
> Somehow i catched myself often wondering: what is it, that defines the
> speed of MIDI-msges ? (protocol, bandwidth, ..) ?

protocol – 32kbaud, three bytes per message mostly, which translates
roughly to 1 ms per message. If running status is used, its 2 bytes per
message and thus a bit faster…
There could be other bottlenecks, like the speed a synth can process
events…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com

#79683
Jul 13, 2006 at 1:56pm

thx!
So I guess the 32kbaud-limitation would apply also for virtual Midi-
Cables.. (like IAC) ?
cheers.
m

Am 13.07.2006 um 07:48 schrieb Stefan Tiedje:

> Marlon Schumacher wrote:
>> Somehow i catched myself often wondering: what is it, that
>> defines the speed of MIDI-msges ? (protocol, bandwidth, ..) ?
>
> protocol – 32kbaud, three bytes per message mostly, which
> translates roughly to 1 ms per message. If running status is used,
> its 2 bytes per message and thus a bit faster…
> There could be other bottlenecks, like the speed a synth can
> process events…
>
> Stefan
>
> —
> Stefan Tiedje————x——-
> –_____———–|————–
> –(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
> — _|_)—-|—–()————–
> ———-()——–www.ccmix.com
>
>

#79684
Jul 13, 2006 at 10:00pm

Marlon Schumacher wrote:
> thx!
> So I guess the 32kbaud-limitation would apply also for virtual Midi-
> Cables.. (like IAC) ?

No, I don’t think so, you could check it with some midi router, send a
thousand midievents with uzi and check when they are done. Also
multichannel interfaces used faster speeds to the interface than Midi…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com

#79685
Jul 14, 2006 at 7:54am

> > Can you move the faders using MIDI Messages from Max? (e.g. send
> > 80 to ctlout 7; does the fader set itself?) Basically, I just want
> > to make sure that you can set and move the values of faders from
> > within Max, not just storing presets at the box

Yes, you can do all that from within Max.
The Behringer stops accepting midi on a particular controller while you are moving the fader and for maybe a second afterwards.

Stuart

#79686
Jul 14, 2006 at 7:57am

Sorry.

The point of that second point was that there are no feedback issues. If you move the fader, no receive. If you send a value from Max, no send from BCR.

The whole thing is actually rather well thought out, even if most of us would change some feature here or there.

#79687
Jul 14, 2006 at 8:11am

> The Behringer stops accepting midi on a particular controller while
> you are moving the fader and for maybe a second afterwards.

Preemption makes sense, but force-feedback faders would be really fun –
do they exist?

#79688
Aug 2, 2006 at 6:10pm

I finally got around to trying out all of the functions on the BCR2000, and it’s really nice. The manual is pretty straightforward, and the unit feels light and plastic but is solid and responds well. All the LEDs are pretty slick-looking.

Just wanted to say that the nrpn 14-bit rotaries work great with jasch’s “bcf2000″ object (http://www.jasch.ch/dl/default.htm), and the I really like the fact that you can set the range yourself on both in the bcf2000 object and on the BCR itself (so you don’t have to turn the dial ~10 times to get to the max value).

My Oxygen8 left a bit to be desired in terms of programmability and control (those plastic “velocity-sensitive” keys are CHEAP), but the BCR has really impressed me, especially at this price.

#79689

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.