View Single Post
  #25  
Old 02-07-2020, 07:50 AM
reichman's Avatar
reichman reichman is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 2,209
Default Re: Control Surface v. Mouse and Keyboard

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
IMO the biggest issue with control surfaces in a modern workflow is more in the implementation/support department, then in value of one in a raw sense.

Consider an S3. If it had full surface plugin mapping, you could map an EQ so you have gain on the fader, freq on the first knob row, and q on the top. You could have 5-6 bands and still have a lot of surface left.

If then you could also store a channel strip preset plus mapping, to where you could also map your favorite gate, comp, and even put some sends with send pans etc all on one "channel mode" flip of the surface. Then throw in macros, layouts, vca spill, and a small enough surface that you can stay in the sweet spot (things it has now) and IMO you would have something really useful.

But can you do all that? No.
Custom mapping on the S3 would be great. But even without it, your muscle memory of where the parameters fall is learned quickly and Eucon is snappy, so it's all working fine. Most of what you describe is here now with S3/Dock.
__________________
Nathaniel Reichman
Supervising Producer Re-recording Mixer
Dubway Studios
Reply With Quote