Peter McCulloch

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?

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?

behringer-bcf2000

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?

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: 

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 

with software that has good "learn" capabilities like live, and 

bcf itself. once you work past the useless manual it becomes very 

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. 

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 

"Sometimes the appropriate response to reality is to go insane."

> 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:// 
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

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

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......

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.

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.

> 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......

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.

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......
>


> 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 

if they could hear it and no one could. a minor problem, 

"Flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."

> 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

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

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)

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)

Anyone has used these faders with 14 bit resolution?

I know it is possible with this model, but I don't know

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
>
>


>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 

202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X

>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


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.

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.

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

Anywho, there's the thought process here...

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 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.

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...
>
>


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 

my exact same reasons for going with the behringer. i also looked 

forum as a possibility - and i am still thinking of a box of 

but it was ridiculous when the behringer was under $200. and as i 

has stood up to a fairly active year of abuse. it would be nice to 

but the intuitive editing setup makes up for it a bit.

"Reality is whatever refuses to go away when I stop believing in it.."

> 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

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

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).

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

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

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).

Thanks all for the advice. If I come up with some interesting patches for

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

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)

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

> Thanks all for the advice. If I come up with some interesting 

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)

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


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 

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.

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?)

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). 

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.


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.

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.  

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 #

> None of the encoders support an "acceleration" factor when turned

> faster in relative mode, it's a simple +/- 1 increment/decrement

> 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

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

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.

> 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).

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


Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 20:49

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...

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

I've even seen evidence of a "rogue" BCR unit that appears to support encoder acceleration...
