] [Thread Prev
RE: My foot controller steps on Your Foot controller
At 07:10 AM 2004.09.18, Lance Zechinato wrote:
>PMC didn't send up fireworks for me (as a better FCB). But my OS comment
>like saying a PC OS built for x86 architecture is like any other, which is
>obviously false (e.g., Win vs. Linux).
That's what I was confused by - I would hope ALL the controllers out there
are designed to MIDI spec.
>It's what the thing can do, which
>was your point in your other response and you're right.
>Reading Per's explanation of his FCB workarounds, I was thinking about all
>the freakish workarounds I've done through the years from MIDI & outboard
>sequencer stuff to Frankensteined PCs for recording, and it seems there's
>almost always a workaround.
That's true - especially if you have a PC involved (or a sophisticated
patchbay) since then you can get into remapping program changes to do
anything you want. There is at least one list member that uses a standard
controller just to send program changes to a PC-1600 which then turns
around and sends more elaborate commands to the rest of the system.
>For the "perfect" floor controller I wanted the Ground Control, but it
>kinda big and the small clickity switches aren't my cup of tea, but man
>thing seems like a very sweet contoller. Whether they're really clickity
>don't know, but I'm still not a fan of the tiny foot buttons. Where the
>perfect controller? (Wait don't tell me! The PMC. Maybe you're right.
I haven't found the perfect controller yet ;)
The perfect controller would be in production, more road-worthy than the
PMC, as inexpensive as the FCB1010, etc...