cudnylon

My MSP patch is almost ready for it's debut but I have no way to interface with it outside of mouse/keyboard control. The top two contenders are the UC-33e and the BCF2000.

Pros for the UC-33e to me is the extra knobs and fader lights, but no motorized faders is a negative. On the other hand BCF2000 has motorized faders but less knobs and in youtube videos it sounds like the faders make audible clicks when adjusting presets. Since a majority of my sounds are ambient/drone/field recordings this extra noise will not be good during performances.

Is one of these easier to set up with Max than the other? I read some issues programming the BCF2000 in the past. Is there a better controller in the same price range I should be looking at?

My MSP patch is almost ready for it's debut but I have no way to interface with it outside of mouse/keyboard control. The top two contenders are the UC-33e and the BCF2000. 

Is one of these easier to set up with Max than the other? I read some issues programming the BCF2000 in the past. Is there a better controller in the same price range I should be looking at?


evolution-uc-33e-vs-behringer-bcf2000-vs

The Novation Remote Zero SL has been good to me. No motorized faders, but plenty of buttons and knobs.

The Behringers have been great at CNMAT. They break in a couple of years, then you buy a new one.

The Novation Remote Zero SL has been good to me.  No motorized faders, but plenty of buttons and knobs.

The Behringers have been great at CNMAT.  They break in a couple of years, then you buy a new one.

The Novation Remote Zero SL is the way to go. It has 

The Novation Remote Zero SL is the way to go. It has 
everything you need.


The Novation Remote Zero SL looks nice but is an extra $100 and seems more DAW focused with less knobs. Thanks though.

Ha yeah - my BCR2000 loses control of one knob per 6 months. 

I'll have to stop working around it soon.

mzed wrote on Tue, 25 August 2009 05:36The Novation Remote Zero SL has been good to me.  No motorized faders, but plenty of buttons and knobs.

Ha yeah - my BCR2000 loses control of one knob per 6 months. 
I'll have to stop working around it soon.


I've had a BCF2000 for about 3-4 years now, with no issues. The motorized faders is nice, and the interface to use them is very simple (merely send midi data back out to the device on the same channel you receive it to move the corresponding fader).

Here's the major benefit to motorized faders -> they can chase any automation your patch is doing. So say you have a value that sweeps, like an LFO, and you want to take direct control of it for a moment. On the BCF2000, you hit a button above a fader, and set up your patch so that the BCF controls the value that normally sweeps. With the motorized faders, you can set it up so that the LFO moves the fader as well, when you're not moving it.

If you don't have motorized faders, this happens: Say your value in the software is at 100, but your fader is still at 0. If you take control away from the internal generation, and then move the fader, you'll hear the value jump from 100 to 0 instantly.

They can be noisy, yes, but if you're playing a show nobody is going to hear them - and if you set it up correctly, they'll blend into the audio anyway.

I've had a BCF2000 for about 3-4 years now, with no issues.  The motorized faders is nice, and the interface to use them is very simple (merely send midi data back out to the device on the same channel you receive it to move the corresponding fader).

Here's the major benefit to motorized faders -> they can chase any automation your patch is doing.  So say you have a value that sweeps, like an LFO, and you want to take direct control of it for a moment.  On the BCF2000, you hit a button above a fader, and set up your patch so that the BCF controls the value that normally sweeps.  With the motorized faders, you can set it up so that the LFO moves the fader as well, when you're not moving it.

If you don't have motorized faders, this happens:  Say your value in the software is at 100, but your fader is still at 0.  If you take control away from the internal generation, and then move the fader, you'll hear the value jump from 100 to 0 instantly.

They can be noisy, yes, but if you're playing a show nobody is going to hear them - and if you set it up correctly, they'll blend into the audio anyway.


MuShoo wrote on Mon, 24 August 2009 20:52

That said, it is possible to work around this problem (and it is a problem): you can differentiate between changing a value/parameter internally or by using the controller, so you basically store two values. Then if the controller's value is different than the current one and you change it, it won't "latch" until you move it to the currently held value. Some system of gating/change/comparison could be worked out. A nice solution is probably really simple but it would take some time to hone it.

I use the Evolution and really like it, it's a good size and has worked well. Motorized faders would also be interesting to have, so I can't really weigh in for sure one way or the other. If you do go the Evolution route, I have a control patch here:

http://www.third-space-mind.com/max/max_UC33e_controller.htm

It does more than just bring in the ctlin values, like store pattr slots of current values, plus it's a fully-functioning mouse-ready interface that mimics the UC33e and has some color customization. This way you can use it without the controller if you want; the values just go to named sends. Might be helpful if you want a bit more than just basic ctlin.

MuShoo wrote on Mon, 24 August 2009 20:52
If you don't have motorized faders, this happens:  Say your value in the software is at 100, but your fader is still at 0.  If you take control away from the internal generation, and then move the fader, you'll hear the value jump from 100 to 0 instantly.

It does more than just bring in the ctlin values, like store pattr slots of current values, plus it's a fully-functioning mouse-ready interface that mimics the UC33e and has some color customization. This way you can use it without the controller if you want; the values just go to named sends. Might be helpful if you want a bit more than just basic ctlin.


[quote title=cudnylon wrote on Mon, 24 August 2009 21:16]

On the other hand BCF2000 has motorized faders but less knobs and in youtube videos it sounds like the faders make audible clicks when adjusting presets. Since a majority of my sounds are ambient/drone/field recordings this extra noise will not be good during performances.

For changing fader positions, I slowed them down using [$1 500] > [line] > [ctlout]

Well I said that at first too. I got a UC33e and it certainly 

does the job. Then I got a RemoteSL, not only do I get more knobs 

and pads and things, I can write my own text to the screen.

Now I can have meaningful text that tells me what that control 

does. Hands down, the RemoteSl is superior. I haven't touched

The RemoteSL may cost a little more, in my opinion you get

Well I said that at first too. I got a UC33e and it certainly 
does the job. Then I got a RemoteSL, not only do I get more knobs 
and pads and things, I can write my own text to the screen.
Now I can have meaningful text that tells me what that control 
does. Hands down, the RemoteSl is superior. I haven't touched
my UC33e since. 

The RemoteSL may cost a little more, in my opinion you get
what you pay for.


MuShoo wrote on Mon, 24 August 2009 19:52

If you have endless encoders, this jump doesn't happen, and you still get your controller visually updated if the encoders have LEDs (like on the great and very cheap BCR2000 ,)

Honestly, I have a BCR2000 since 3 years now, never had any issues, all knobs are up and working, I love the LEDs (so it get updated by the patch and I can play in the dark without looking at my screen). This is the best cheap MIDI controller I've ever had.

MuShoo wrote on Mon, 24 August 2009 19:52Here's the major benefit to motorized faders -> they can chase any automation your patch is doing.  So say you have a value that sweeps, like an LFO, and you want to take direct control of it for a moment.  On the BCF2000, you hit a button above a fader, and set up your patch so that the BCF controls the value that normally sweeps.  With the motorized faders, you can set it up so that the LFO moves the fader as well, when you're not moving it.

Nothing is going to beat the Behringer for price. The faders on the evolution thing break just as easy as Behringers and they're very plastic. The don't really raise up enough either. I mean they're kind of shallow and fiddly. Handy for live though cause it's very small and lightweight. The BCF 2000 is a bit more of a decision for a laptop gig.

http://www.thomann.de/ie/miditech_mtbcommand_black.htm

 - pretty much the same, same price range, but I like the look of the jogwheel.

Wonder would you be able to get a cheap second hand CM Motormix... fully motorised faders, made of metal and lights up like a christmas tree. The only thing I don't like about the motormix are the not so great conical knobs. They're ok but my fingers don't really like them.

Nothing is going to beat the Behringer for price. The faders on the evolution thing break just as easy as Behringers and they're very plastic. The don't really raise up enough either. I mean they're kind of shallow  and fiddly. Handy for live though cause it's very small and lightweight. The BCF 2000 is a bit more of a decision for a laptop gig. 

http://www.thomann.de/ie/miditech_mtbcommand_black.htm - pretty much the same, same price range, but I like the look of the jogwheel. 

Wonder would you be able to get a cheap second hand CM Motormix... fully motorised faders, made of metal and lights up like a christmas tree. The only thing I don't like about the motormix are the not so great conical knobs. They're ok but my fingers don't really like them.


This thread is slowly moving me out of the UC-33e camp and towards the BCF2000. Might just get a BCR2000 to go with it to make up for less knobs. Thanks for all the advice so far.

Well in the end I found a great deal on a new in box UC-33e on ebay which arrived today. Was able to assign every control to my patch within 15 minutes. I love it and am already thinking about getting another one for double the controls.

Nobody mentioned the nanoKontrol from Korg yet. For me the Behringer has only disadvantages. But I consider motor faders a disadvantage anyway . 

They only make sense for DAW studio work for me. I'd never want multiple functions on the same controller in a live situation. Better get more faders/knobs. 

That is where the nanoKontrol jumps in. Dead cheap, if you need more just get more, you can fit probably about ten nanoKontrols in the same space and weight as a single Behringer. You can't beat a nanoKontrol in price or features.... The only disadvantage would be the short fader length, but you get space in exchange for it... 

(I'd love to see a nanoDial with 3 rows of rotary dials, just dreamin' ...)

Nobody mentioned the nanoKontrol from Korg yet. For me the Behringer has only disadvantages. But I consider motor faders a disadvantage anyway . 
They only make sense for DAW studio work for me. I'd never want multiple functions on the same controller in a live situation. Better get more faders/knobs. 
That is where the nanoKontrol jumps in. Dead cheap, if you need more just get more, you can fit probably about ten nanoKontrols in the same space and weight as a single Behringer. You can't beat a nanoKontrol in price or features.... The only disadvantage would be the short fader length, but you get space in exchange for it... 
(I'd love to see a nanoDial with 3 rows of rotary dials, just dreamin' ...)


I can't comment on the M-Audio unit, but do have a BCF2000 and like it very much. It is not as nice as a MotorMix or Mackie Control, but for the price, and lightweight portability to gigs it can't be beat IMO.

About the less knobs on the BCF2000, keep in mind there are four encoder groups, so that while you can only have access to 8 at a time, this is like having 32 knobs. Also the knobs on the BCF2000 also function as buttons, not sure if the M-Audio does that or not.

The way I work with my patches in live performance the motorized faders and LEDs on the encoders are a must. Don't forget that you can change the settings (either directly on the BCF2000 or via MIDI) to disable the motorized faders if they are too noisy or not needed for a certain situation.

I have spoken with other friends and colleagues about using a BCF2000 or MackieControl on stage or at the mixing console and motor noise is something that gets brought up. Most of the time, my opinion is this is performance noise no different than page turns and other non-notated noises that acoustic live performances sometimes require--so I usually don't worry about it.

I normally use at least 3 copies of the same preset assigned to different MIDI channels for controlling my patches and do experience noise when switching. If you really want to avoid the loud slam that can happen when you switch presets but still want to use the motors here is what I would recommend. Program the preset buttons to not change presets but send some sort of MIDI message to Max and only use the first preset on the BCF2000. When Max gets this MIDI message from the preset button, it will change the routing in your patch so you can still use the same preset but controlling different aspects of the patch. After Max has rerouted the MIDI input/output from/to the BCF2000, have Max update the fader positions with a slow line as posted above. That should create functionality similar to using multiple presets on the BCF2000 while making slow fader transitions.

I can't comment on the M-Audio unit, but do have a BCF2000 and like it very much.  It is not as nice as a MotorMix or Mackie Control, but for the price, and lightweight portability to gigs it can't be beat IMO.

About the less knobs on the BCF2000, keep in mind there are four encoder groups, so that while you can only have access to 8 at a time, this is like having 32 knobs.  Also the knobs on the BCF2000 also function as buttons, not sure if the M-Audio does that or not.

The way I work with my patches in live performance the motorized faders and LEDs on the encoders are a must.  Don't forget that you can change the settings (either directly on the BCF2000 or via MIDI) to disable the motorized faders if they are too noisy or not needed for a certain situation.

I normally use at least 3 copies of the same preset assigned to different MIDI channels for controlling my patches and do experience noise when switching. If you really want to avoid the loud slam that can happen when you switch presets but still want to use the motors here is what I would recommend.  Program the preset buttons to not change presets but send some sort of MIDI message to Max and only use the first preset on the BCF2000.  When Max gets this MIDI message from the preset button, it will change the routing in your patch so you can still use the same preset but controlling different aspects of the patch.  After Max has rerouted the MIDI input/output from/to the BCF2000, have Max update the fader positions with a slow line as posted above.  That should create functionality similar to using multiple presets on the BCF2000 while making slow fader transitions.


Roth.. how do you disable the motorised faders? Will this just disable the motors and let you use them as midi faders instead? :

Evolution UC-33e vs. Behringer BCF2000 vs. ???