Faderport 8 and new MBV4 Update

[Craig]

Is the FP8 fully working with 32c V4? Everything on the channel strip controllable, including the 12 mixbus sends?

I do not have 32c but I'm gonna check for the demo.

The FP8 works incredibly well with MBV4.... far above and beyond the mackie protocol.

Should be the same on 32c

Craig

[allank]

According to the email out to plugged in members, yes it is fully supported.

Wish I had room on my workstation..

Oh well, there are some new MIDI map features that will make the dedicated MIDI section on my Zed R16 more usable. YOu can now set up controllers to be active for the current track.

[x42]

Yep, the FP8 in "native mode" (not mackie mode) is supported by Mixbus 32C. In general it behaves just like for Studio One, except for cases where the DAWs differ.

You can control the 12 Mixbus sends and bus-assigns but you have to bank to get them all: 1...8 ,.., 8..12. Likewise for the EQ: The highpass and lowpass controls don't fit by default (but are available in "edit-plugs" mode). All channelstrip controls are available (incl stereo-width on mix-busses), the only exception is the 32C per-bus-balance (concentric GUI knobs) which is not yet mapped to any control surface interface, because we have not yet found a nice and useful way to expose per-bus balance/panning for the FP8. In case of the FaderPort8, the single global encoder is somewhat limiting.

[richhickey]

The FP8 works incredibly well with MBV4.... far above and beyond the mackie protocol.

What does it do beyond MCU mode? MCU/XTouch units have more controls on them, and are more prevalent. It would be a shame if there couldn't be parity.

[x42]

The FP8 works incredibly well with MBV4.... far above and beyond the mackie protocol.

What does it do beyond MCU mode? MCU/XTouch units have more controls on them, and are more prevalent. It would be a shame if there couldn't be parity.

Disclaimer: I have never connected a MCU to Mixbus, and I only know about the differences from reading the specs and source-code. Others may be able to provide a better user-centric answer.

The main difference is that the FP8 not a generic protocol. The Mixbus FP8 control-surface is specifically tailored for the FaderPort 8, which speaks an extended MCU protocol. Differences that come to mind are plugin-controls and parameter-banking, colored buttons, compressor-reduction display, but also overall integration: It's not just another MCU device.

Some of this would be possible with any MCU device, but as far as I can tell, the amount of MCU devices with subtle differences makes it hard and nobody has yet ventured down that road.

[Craig]

The FP8 works incredibly well with MBV4.... far above and beyond the mackie protocol.

What does it do beyond MCU mode? MCU/XTouch units have more controls on them, and are more prevalent. It would be a shame if there couldn't be parity.

I'm gonna try and make a video of the FP8 and mixbus this weekend
I purchased 32c last night and I can tell you that FP8 will control the 32c channel strip "out of the box" as soon as you plug it in...!

I had a Mackie MCU and extender and after I tried the demo using it with Mixbus along with all of the frustrations using the MCU with Sonar and Studio One I decided to give the FP8 a shot.

I was blown away by the Studio One intergration.... it's really amazing. When I tried the FP8 with Sonar and Mixbus in "Mackie Mode" it was back to the half baked functionality that all of the DAWs experience with the "Mackie standard" I was a little bummed that Mixbus didn't have dedicated support but when X42 mentioned that V4 would have near full support I was curious to see just how good the integration was in Mixbus. As it turns out Harrison did a great job and what a difference. Especially with automation on the fly. Once you get used to channel strip layout on the FP8 you can make changes very quickly and accurately to the EQ, compression etc..
This will work for me for now but I'm still wanting to see a dedicated Mixbus controller with a faithful recreation of the channel strip layout.
Channel strips would be modular so you could build your mixer over time to ease the cost to the home enthusiast. I don't know if that would ever happen but we can dream.

Craig