Is it possible to CC map/Midi learn Auv3s? (Model D)

Hi there, if I want to CC map Model D in AUM I just go into AUMs Midi settings and there I can see the names of all parameters (Cutoff, Resonance, etc.) and it is VERY easy to map everything in 10 seconds.

In Nanostudio I haven‘t found a solution yet. When researching I found a video that showed that I can doubleclick the instrument name in the mixer but then I get some mappable things that don‘t do anything and they don‘t show the different mapable CC names like filter cutoff, Attack, Decay, Sustain and so on.

Was I looking in the wrong place or doesn‘t Nanostudio 2 fully support Auv3 midi CC naming?

Comments

  • edited September 7

    In NS it works this way:

    1/ AU Instrument has so called "Macro knobs" (and XY pad, mod wheel and pitch wheel) in performance tab. You assign those macro knobs to AU i strument parameters (using hamburger icon at left top side of AU instrument performance screen) - tap icon, tap knob, tap parameter in list.


    Macro knobs movements are recorded as automation.

    After you make assignmemts, you can save it as default for this particular AU plugin so next time you load same plugin, it loads wih your macro knobs assignment. To do this, tap again hamburger menu, tap any knob, in left list choose "All macros" and at right side tap "Save default map". Repeat this process for every AU plugin you use - those settings are saved per plugin.

    2/ now, in mixer detail view (you already did found this section) you can assign MIDI CC to those macro knobs.

    Again, this mapping can be saved, and then they are automatically set for very new AU instrument nstance added to project. Those mappings are saved as unique per selected MIDI Input+Instrument type (so obsidian, au instrument, slate can use different mappings on same midi input controller)


  • Aaaaaah, very nice of you, thanks! Wow, that is pretty complicated. So this means that I can not CC assign more knobs then the performance view in NS has knobs? That is pretty strange. Or am I getting it wrong?

  • edited September 7

    This may look a bit complicated but it has some benefits - you can create unified macro knobs map for each plugin (let's say to have filter cutoff / resonance defined always on XY pad) and then use same hw controller CC's to control xy pad - so no matter which plugin you load, you can instantly tweak cutoff / resonance by same hardware knob on comtroller, without need of reassigning it again and again ...

    It's like a bit more work to
    assign it first time, but then you save it and done - next time it is zero work ;)

    Of course this whole architecture is optimalised for this kind of workflow, - if you have some complex hw controler with many many knobs and you want map most (if not all) plugin parametees for complete plugin controll by HW knibs - then this is not ideal solution - maybe in future some way for this use case will be developed, few users already requested this..

  • I honestly doubt the need for more than eight knobs plus XY in most applications. But then again I can be just a grumpy old man. :p

  • Ok, thanks for your insights. Yes, most of the times the parametes are enough, but it would be cool if there could be more virtual knobs that can be assigned than there are on the AUM instrument interface.

  • thanks Dendy for describtion... i hope later on we get an software solution for this ...
    sorry for bad English, i´m German

  • @TEas08
    sorry for bad English, i´m German

    not needed to apologize, lot of use here are non-native speakers .. mine english isn't perfect too :)) Important is that we at least approximately understand each other :))

  • I don’t think anyone should have to apologize for being able to express themselves in a foreign language.

  • edited September 20

    @anickt said:
    I honestly doubt the need for more than eight knobs plus XY in most applications. But then again I can be just a grumpy old man. :p

    hehe, speak for yourself :)

    I've brought it up elsewhere, but I really think that all cc's should be mappable to external midi. I agree that 10 automatable parameters is likely enough. But I personally want to map all useful parameters to external hardware.

    I like to map plugins to control via midi so that I'm fiddling with the screen as little as possible. If I map two ADSR's, Filter Cutoff and Resonance, then that's already 10 parameters. My midi controller has hundreds of mappable knobs. How wonderful to have to option to map them!

    I think as long as the automation mapping and the midi controller mappings are seperate, this will not be confusing. It will only open NS2 up as a performance instrument.

    If it ever gets this as well as Program Change, then I will be using it in my live sets.

  • edited September 20

    @palm yeah i see wht you want to do..

    if there would be possibility to directly map all obsidian knobs zo midi he controller, i would build for myself diy midi comtroller optimalisef for Obsidian :-)

  • @dendy said:
    @palm yeah i see wht you want to do..

    if there would be possibility to directly map all obsidian knobs zo midi he controller, i would build for myself diy midi comtroller optimalisef for Obsidian :-)

    oh man! no kidding.
    that would be the dream.

  • it's not thaz unrealistic and not that complicated if you have some experience with soldering iron... i've made few controllers based on this project http://ucapps.de - it was quite fun :-)

  • @anickt said:
    I honestly doubt the need for more than eight knobs plus XY in most applications. But then again I can be just a grumpy old man. :p

    It’s true— the macro controllers in NS2 are more than enough for most uses. But I have a musical style that involves tweaking/warping sounds extensively as a song progresses (think 303 acid on steroids). If I could automate ALL the parameters of an instrument, I would. 🙂

    Since no iOS app really handles automation the way i’d like, I usually record my performance as audio; that way I capture every last tweak of both the instrument and any FX on it. Then I edit it down to the best chunks. Hopefully when NS2 gets audio tracks I’ll be able to use this technique, and that for me will mitigate the limits on automation.

  • There are so many approaches to making music! That makes writing s/w for making music particularly difficult.

    PS @TEas08 your English is plenty good enough :smile: and it's great to have people from all over the world here. We all need to get along better, and music is a great thing to share across oceans and borders...

  • @Shabudua said:
    Since no iOS app really handles automation the way i’d like, I usually record my performance as audio; that way I capture every last tweak of both the instrument and any FX on it. Then I edit it down to the best chunks. Hopefully when NS2 gets audio tracks I’ll be able to use this technique, and that for me will mitigate the limits on automation.

    You can always record NS’s output through Audiobus or something.

  • edited October 26

    I think with Multitrack AU this problem is solved isn't it ?(at least as best temporary workaround until real audio tracks)

    For recording other AU instruments it works just perfect...

  • @dendy said:
    I think with Multitrack AU this problem is solved isn't it ?(at least as best temporary workaround until real audio tracks)

    For recording other AU instruments it works just perfect...

    You mean pop one on the Master and use that to record? Yeah, sounds good!

Sign In or Register to comment.