Behringer BCR2000: Good reason controller?

[normen]

This ofcourse is true. But in case of the bcr, theres this small ring of led's indicating an approximate position, and no little white dot on the encoder. In my case i have mapped loads of devices to it in a layout that is analogous to the actual device. This, together with the led position indication means I rarely grab the wrong encoder. Also, moving the dial on screen means the led on the encoder moves with it. Really very intuitive:)

Yes but that isn't the issue I'm talking about. If you were to play a guitar and the frets would move constantly then even if you could visually confirm you're at the right position it would mess with your performance

You hold the knob in your fingers and turn it up to a certain position to e.g. get a wah-like effect on your synth. If halfway through the synth line you suddenly have to turn the knob so far that your wrist hurts thats sure to have the same effect

[Olivier]

This ofcourse is true. But in case of the bcr, theres this small ring of led's indicating an approximate position, and no little white dot on the encoder. In my case i have mapped loads of devices to it in a layout that is analogous to the actual device. This, together with the led position indication means I rarely grab the wrong encoder. Also, moving the dial on screen means the led on the encoder moves with it. Really very intuitive:)

Yes but that isn't the issue I'm talking about. If you were to play a guitar and the frets would move constantly then even if you could visually confirm you're at the right position it would mess with your performance

You hold the knob in your fingers and turn it up to a certain position to e.g. get a wah-like effect on your synth. If halfway through the synth line you suddenly have to turn the knob so far that your wrist hurts thats sure to have the same effect

Ah, yeah ok, I can see how that could be a problem.
However, in my experience, a full turn of an encoder on the bcr is translated into a full turn of a dial on a device in reason... So in that case the there's not really a difference between using a pot or an encoder, right? Also, I've noticed that by rolling the encoder between my thumb and index finger I can easily make it turn multiple complete turns. So I think I understand the issue, but I don't really experience it

[mcatalao]

Personally I don't think thats necessarily true. I prefer fixed pots for tweaking e.g. resonance / cutoff because they always have the same value on a specific position. With continuous encoders the more you tweak the more the positions drift off. For the problem you mention theres "catch" functions where you only change the value when you put the knob to the position the virtual knob is at.

With the BCR I've not experienced a feeling that my encoders positions are off. Their position is indicated (roughly) around the encoder itself. Or maybe i dont understand what you mean by saying "the positions drift off".

Now I am leaning towards the BCR2000 again. I see in Reason's preferences that it is a recognized device, so that's nice. The Launch Control XL isn't (yet). As for remembering which knob does what, the BRC2000 has those white strips below each row of knobs. I wouldn't want to scribble right on the box, but it is an area you could lay a strip of tape over.

I'm kind of running out of desk space, and the Launch Control XL is very compact, but ... I don't know ... Decisions, decisions ...

I would agree with what Norman said, if you only controlled one reason device. However you will use a device such as the BCR2000, to control the ssl channel strip, a compressor, LAB one Recording Red Queen, thor, etc.

But in the case of the BCR2000, the indicators will follow the position in the software. You know that the resonance filter is at the soft spot at the same amount of leds that lit, and the leds do not drift (of course the precision is not much, you only have a certain amount of leds). For me it's more important to start from the position where the pot is at the software (i.e. on the BCF2000, controlling channel 1 pan, if the channel is panned to the left, it's good to start from there).

If you were working with fixed pots, they would have to be motorized (i don't know if they even exist). Imho using a continuous pot with led displays, was an ingenious way to reduce cost and it suits Reason quite well. When you change from a device to another the leds will follow the different control status and you always start where the control is in the device where you changed to.

I think i have my BCF2000*2+BCR2000 arrangement for about 5 years now, and at this point if one died, i would go and get another just the same. They're sturdy, very functional, and very cheap compared to any other device in the market even from Behringer.

[jonheal]

I see the BCR2000 also has a three-year warranty. $150 for even for only three years of service is within my comfort zone. Apparently this is a device that has generated a lot of "custom" interest. Many have created sticky overlays for labeling the knobs for particular synths. There is a Yahoo group dedicated to the device. One guy went to the trouble of building wooden end caps for his BCR2000!

I can see Normen's points, but I think this may be a case of one method working better for one person and another method for another person.

At any rate, hopefully, my local Guitar Center has one on display so I can touch it to see how it feels.

Regarding labeling the knobs, I read a post where a guy mentioned using Post-It 658 tape with his BCR2000.

[mcatalao]

Ah, yeah ok, I can see how that could be a problem.
However, in my experience, a full turn of an encoder on the bcr is translated into a full turn of a dial on a device in reason... So in that case the there's not really a difference between using a pot or an encoder, right? Also, I've noticed that by rolling the encoder between my thumb and index finger I can easily make it turn multiple complete turns. So I think I understand the issue, but I don't really experience it

Yeah, that. The issue is not an issue. I can't remember a single device where that happens in reason (i'm trying to remember a reason device where you have to make a lot of pot turns.). But basically, if the pot in reason doesn't make more than a full turn, you won't need to do it on the BCR/BCF encoders. And you have the added value that if you look to the pot on reason and it is at a given position, you're there, that's it.

The only problem with the BCR (IMHO), is that the pots are all equal. All the same, and you don't have a display, saying what it is controlling. A good solution, would be to be able do define the color for the leds (you can't as they are all red). In my case, i use the BCR2000 a lot to control the mixer channel strip. I made a remote control map myself, dividing BCR2000 in sections. I have it divided in two quadrants, with the same amount of encoders for each side. Left quadrant is EQ, right Quadrant is Dynamics plus gain. Top quadrant is Inserts/Sends. Being push encoders, they not only set the insert/send on/off, and you also control the amount. These encoders toggle Insert and Sends on the BCR2000 program selectors at the right. Then the buttons control what is on and of (HPF, LPF, EQ, E, Notch, etc, Compressor, Gate, and i even have a toggle for the chain order. All things said, this gives me full control over a single channel, except for the stuff i already control with the BCF2000: Faders obviously, mute, solo and pan are the default, with the encoder program selectors, i programmed Wide, Gain, and the channel vu meter.

Other little tricks i did that really help me to make fast mixes with this arrangement either with project control overrides or remote map editing, are changing sequencer tracks up and down with the left BCF2000 learn and exit buttons. Reset the mixer meter and changing meter modes with the same buttons on the second BCF2000. Record enable/disable, Loop on/off, and advancing the mix position (i only control 16 channels with the two BCF2000).

As for the BCR, whilst it's controlling a single channel, i can advance in reason's sequencer, and it will rearrange the leds at each change i do. Still, i give you a little navigating advise, reason has a way of implementing automation that turns the usage of the BCR2000 a bit odd, because it has the potential to control every device. So for midi tracks, you always have to create an additional automation track for the channel of that device, and in the sequencer you will have a midi track for the device, multiple automation tracks for the device, and an automation track for that device's channel. I found that having the sequencer tracks with the same order as the SSL tracks is a good work practice ( you have to remember that when you advance in the sequencer, you have to hit the next track twice if it is a midi device). Mind that this is not a BCR/BCF issue, but a reason implementation issue...

Another nit pick i have with reason and remote devices, is that when you move the base remote channel, reason mixer does not advance in its screen. In big projects this is a drag. In result, you might be a completely different set of tracks than the ones you're seeing. I got to a good point where i can "see" where i am, either toggling to the gain "view" of the BCF encoders, and in the case of the channels and bcr2000, i just toggle back and forth with the track selector. But when starting a mix, i always include some prep'ing because of my controllers. Much as when we worked with big consoles you would write the name of the tracks on gaffe ribbon, and stick it to the base of the mixer, i always work my way on the mix on the first runs, color coding the project, setting remote overrides, if the project wasn't based on one of my templates, order tracks in the sequencer and the mixer, in a logical, tidy manner. Plus defining song structure with blocks, helps a lot for navigating the project. While this might seem too much disregarded, but it's my opinion it saves a lot of time on the long run.

Finally, i also created custom remote maps for Lab One Red Queen, and reviewed a lot of the original remote maps to my own ideal (Thor, NN-XT, Redrum, Alligator, etc...). Something that i advise people to do, as each one has its own idea of control and where in the BCR2000 will the stuff be located for each device.

Good Luck.

[normen]

If you want to try it first hand, use an encoder to do a cutoff automation where the cutoff is moved from being closed completely to say half-open and then back to completely closed - rinse and repeat. If you don't hit the closed mark exactly the encoder will be off after a few turns. I am not saying that its impossible to get to the same value again or that you don't *see* where the value is. I am just saying that your finger has to do something different to get to the same half-open state. On any other instrument that would be considered a deficiency.

[Olivier]

If you want to try it first hand, use an encoder to do a cutoff automation where the cutoff is moved from being closed completely to say half-open and then back to completely closed - rinse and repeat. If you don't hit the closed mark exactly the encoder will be off after a few turns. I am not saying that its impossible to get to the same value again or that you don't *see* where the value is. I am just saying that your finger has to do something different to get to the same half-open state. On any other instrument that would be considered a deficiency.

I think I've noticed this behavior, and I think you are right callin it a deficiency. However, it never turned into a problem for me.

[mcatalao]

If you want to try it first hand, use an encoder to do a cutoff automation where the cutoff is moved from being closed completely to say half-open and then back to completely closed - rinse and repeat. If you don't hit the closed mark exactly the encoder will be off after a few turns. I am not saying that its impossible to get to the same value again or that you don't *see* where the value is. I am just saying that your finger has to do something different to get to the same half-open state. On any other instrument that would be considered a deficiency.

Normen, i'm really not visualizing this as in most cases the closed positions are always at extreme positions (full right or full left). It might be difficult if you're trying to find for example the resonance spot or things that are not at defined positions, but for this example, you'd just rotate the encoder half-fright (or left) and back. Or maybe i'm seeing it wrong.

The only situation i feel a bit awkward behavior is with Red Queen Frequency selectors, that jump from left - mid - right positions when not expected...

Cheers.

[normen]

Normen, i'm really not visualizing this as in most cases the closed positions are always at extreme positions (full right or full left). It might be difficult if you're trying to find for example the resonance spot or things that are not at defined positions, but for this example, you'd just rotate the encoder half-fright (or left) and back. Or maybe i'm seeing it wrong.

The only situation i feel a bit awkward behavior is with Red Queen Frequency selectors, that jump from left - mid - right positions when not expected...

Cheers.

Say the cutoff knob on the device is completely closed. Now you turn the encoder clockwise to 12 o'clock and thats exactly how far you want the filter to open. Now you turn the encoder back, the cutoff is closed but you turn it just a bit further down (with a pot you wouldn't be able to). Now you turn the encoder back up to 12 o'clock but the filter doesn't open as far as it did before - you have to turn it to say 11 o'clock to get the same filter setting. Yes, you see it in the app, yes you see it on the lights of the encoder but the fact remains that the actual physical location is different.

I don't want to dwell on this topic and if you're fine with encoders thats fine with me too - I'm just explaining why I personally (and some people I know) prefer actual pots for performance parameters. You don't need to read or look at the control surface, you don't need to readjust your fingers or "roll" the knob between your fingers. You simply move the pot to exactly where you want the cutoff to land.

[joeyluck]

Except when the patch has cutoff at full open and your pot is sitting at full closed. That's a bit inefficient to deal with in my opinion. I've never had an issue with endless encoders and the representation of their values. But as you say, different strokes for different folks!

[mcatalao]

Say the cutoff knob on the device is completely closed. Now you turn the encoder clockwise to 12 o'clock and thats exactly how far you want the filter to open. Now you turn the encoder back, the cutoff is closed but you turn it just a bit further down (with a pot you wouldn't be able to). Now you turn the encoder back up to 12 o'clock but the filter doesn't open as far as it did before - you have to turn it to say 11 o'clock to get the same filter setting. Yes, you see it in the app, yes you see it on the lights of the encoder but the fact remains that the actual physical location is different.

I don't want to dwell on this topic and if you're fine with encoders thats fine with me too - I'm just explaining why I personally (and some people I know) prefer actual pots for performance parameters. You don't need to read or look at the control surface, you don't need to readjust your fingers or "roll" the knob between your fingers. You simply move the pot to exactly where you want the cutoff to land.

Ah, now i understand. Let me just ask you something but are those pots, motorized?

Anyway, to my knowledge, when you go further than the final position with the encoder, it's not relevant, what is important is what is in the software. Imagine the control goes from 0 to 127. You turn the knob to 0, go to middle, second time, you turn the encoder farther than 0, but the led and the app stays at 0. When you rotate left again, it will start increasing at 1, not -12 because there wasn't representation of -12 for that control.

[normen]

Ah, now i understand. Let me just ask you something but are those pots, motorized?

Anyway, to my knowledge, when you go further than the final position with the encoder, it's not relevant, what is important is what is in the software. Imagine the control goes from 0 to 127. You turn the knob to 0, go to middle, second time, you turn the encoder farther than 0, but the led and the app stays at 0. When you rotate left again, it will start increasing at 1, not -12 because there wasn't representation of -12 for that control.

And thats exactly why you have to turn the encoder less far than you did before. Because as soon as the knob is at zero turning left will do nothing but then you'll immediately start at 1 if you turn right again.

Again, say zero is at 9 o'clock, 64 is at 12 o'clock. You turn from 9 o'clock to 12 o'clock - all fine, value is 64. Now you turn back to 8 o'clock. The value is at 0 again (was already at 9 o'clock) but now when you turn up 64 is already at 11 o'clock.

[Olivier]

Ah, now i understand. Let me just ask you something but are those pots, motorized?

Anyway, to my knowledge, when you go further than the final position with the encoder, it's not relevant, what is important is what is in the software. Imagine the control goes from 0 to 127. You turn the knob to 0, go to middle, second time, you turn the encoder farther than 0, but the led and the app stays at 0. When you rotate left again, it will start increasing at 1, not -12 because there wasn't representation of -12 for that control.

And thats exactly why you have to turn the encoder less far than you did before. Because as soon as the knob is at zero turning left will do nothing but then you'll immediately start at 1 if you turn right again.

Again, say zero is at 9 o'clock, 64 is at 12 o'clock. You turn from 9 o'clock to 12 o'clock - all fine, value is 64. Now you turn back to 8 o'clock. The value is at 0 again (was already at 9 o'clock) but now when you turn up 64 is already at 11 o'clock.

Luckily the BCR Encoders use a much wider range then going from 9 to 3. But yes, this does happen indeed. I find the problem that this causes not at all dificult to deal with. The only time this causes a problem in my experience, is when you absolutely do not want to move your finger on encoder because you have the exact position you came from (and you want to return to) in muscle memory so to speak.. In those cases endless encoders can cause this problem, yes. Not hard to adapt to though...

[jonheal]

Fortunately, I have no muscle memory to speak of, and not much regular memory either.

[mcatalao]

Man i really have to test it because i still don't think that happens. The BCR (whether for the leds, or what it controls) starts always with what is on the software. If you have the software at 0, it will always take 64 to get to the middle. I don't want to be stubborn, and i don't have my BCR at hand, but this has not been an issue till now. And if it does, the fact that i toggle devices and the status is guaranteed is paramount for me and surpasses any little adaptation i have done (consciously or not).

Cheers,
MC

[jonheal]

... Now you turn the encoder clockwise to 12 o'clock and thats exactly how far you want the filter to open. Now you turn the encoder back, the cutoff is closed but you turn it just a bit further down (with a pot you wouldn't be able to). Now you turn the encoder back up to 12 o'clock but the filter doesn't open as far as it did before - you have to turn it to say 11 o'clock to get the same filter setting. Yes, you see it in the app, yes you see it on the lights of the encoder but the fact remains that the actual physical location is different ...

I haven't actually touched one, so this is pure supposition, but I watched a YouTube review. I noticed that when the reviewer turned an encoder to the left, at some point near "7 o'clock" the LEDs that ring the encoder stopped lighting. I'm assuming this darkened state corresponded to the virtual knob reaching its zero point. And you're right, if you kept turning to the left past the virtual knob's zero point, then you'd have to turn to the right a little extra to get back to the mid-point. An extra mount corresponding to the amount of travel below the zero point.

I guess with a fixed pot, you have the physical reference of the pot bottoming out to help you establish where you are without necessarily having to look at the pot. But to me, the ring of LEDs around the encoder does the same thing, although more coarsly. I would have to look at it, but I could see when I had reached (or just passed) the virtual knob's zero point.

For me, it's still a big plus having the encoder knobs automatically "preset" to the values of the device's virtual controls.

But ... I'll stop beating a dead horse now, too.

And I still think it's kind of ugly and it's much bigger and bulkier than Novation Launch Control XL ... so ... I don't know.

[normen]

Man i really have to test it because i still don't think that happens. The BCR (whether for the leds, or what it controls) starts always with what is on the software. If you have the software at 0, it will always take 64 to get to the middle. I don't want to be stubborn, and i don't have my BCR at hand, but this has not been an issue till now. And if it does, the fact that i toggle devices and the status is guaranteed is paramount for me and surpasses any little adaptation i have done (consciously or not).

Cheers,
MC

Geez, I wouldn't have thought its that hard to explain.. So I made a video.. First I am using a pot and then an encoder. When I use the encoder I first do the extreme and rotate way too far back. My fingers end up being twisted to the left to still get the same filter setting. When I put my fingers back to the original position the filter is all the way open instead of half open like it was before. Then I try to do the same steady open/close movement on the encoder and as you might hear its not as steady as when I use the pot later again.You can also see how the leds start to drift upwards although I move my hand the same way - the first LED isn't lit after a few turns.

Again, not trying to convince anybody that he has to use pots instead of encoders but this is why I prefer pots when doing performance movements (filters etc.). And yes, its about muscle memory if you want to see it that way.

Edit: The issue with the encoders is that if you turn them fast they don't send each step as a separate midi command but they send a "delta" value - which can differ in terms of how far you actually turned the knob if you were to turn it slowly, creating a midi command for each step. So the "drifting" happens even if you don't touch the max/min values.

[mcatalao]

Now i got it. Sorry that you had to explain me with a video.

Still, never felt the problem, maybe i don't automate as fast as that. Anyway, those pots, do not allow you to get context from device to device. And in my case, that's more important.
Cheers.

[normen]

Now i got it. Sorry that you had to explain me with a video.

Still, never felt the problem, maybe i don't automate as fast as that. Anyway, those pots, do not allow you to get context from device to device. And in my case, that's more important.
Cheers.

Yes, completely agree encoders are way more convenient when you have things like the mixer, effects parameters, general parameters on a synth etc., especially when you switch between devices a lot.

[joeyluck]

So an ideal controller for you might be something with a set of pots and sets of encoders? Or maybe just a dedicated controller of each type?

I actually like using the faders on my BCF to control cutoff—just to throw another option into the mix
Similar to pots with extremities and similar to LED encoders with recall.
If of course you can part with using a knob for cutoff...but I find it similar to cutoff with a mod wheel which I'm used to—except this recalls settings.

[mcatalao]

Joeyluck, what's good about reason is that if all controllers are in master controller mode, you have a free direct route to the device you are controlling from any controller. I'd say you can use a mix of both, and even do what Normen was doing in his example, toggling controller types when needed.

Oh and a good idea that of using BCF2000 faders for cut off. However i like to have my BCF's fixed on the Mixer.

[jonheal]

I ordered one. Hopefully, I land on the "lucky" side of the Behringer quality curve.

But maybe I should have asked Normen if he wanted to sell me his.

[jonheal]

I didn't expect it to show up until Monday, but the BCR2000 came today. I eagerly took it out of the box. In my case, the build quality is perfectly fine. All of the encoders turn smoothly and feel Identical in quality. No rough turning encoder here and there as I've read some people have experienced. The buttons are hard-surfaced, not my favorite style, but the respond with a fairly light touch. No button cramming required. All in all, I am amazed at the amount of controls Behringer has crammed in for $150.

As for the experience of using it, I must say, I really enjoy it. I have some pots on my Oxygen keyboard, but for me, the BCR2000's encoders are more intuitive and enjoyable. I feel like I am tweaking a hardware synth, and it has put a damper on my envy for one of those new Moog Mother-32s.

My only complaint is that it has hard plastic feet, so it will slide around the surface of your desk if you don't do something about it. But as it turns out, the plastic feet have rectangular indents, designed I'm sure for rubber pads, which Behringer left off to save a few pennies, I guess. To address the issue, I simply cut little rectangles from the scrap self-adhesive rubber surrounding a sheet of round rubber feet. Now it stays put, and I am 100% happy.

As for the experience of excessive encoder rotation confusing muscle memory, it will not be an issue for me. As I wrote before, I have no muscle memory to speak of in the first place. If I turn an encoder to the left past the zero point of the virtual control I am affecting, I simply let go of the knob and grab it again in a position that feels natural me. The final test will be adding the mapping of an RE to its remotemap file to make sure virtual knobs don't jump suddenly when I touch an encoder.

Highly recommended!!!

[jonheal]

One issue ...

I need finer control with the encoders. Does anyone know how to put the encoders in 14-bit mode? I'm having trouble understanding implementing what I've found about it on the Internet. I'm really a MIDI noob and it is all pretty much greek to me.

[jonheal]

Still looking for an answer to my longing for silky smooth 14-bit encoders, but in the meantime, I made a nifty little discovery with the BCR2000.

As you know if you have or have seen one, it has lots of encoders. Counting the four banks to which you can assign the top row of encoders, the BCR2000 gives you 56 encoders. That's a lot. But in some cases, still not enough. A complicated device like Parsec — when you include the modulation matrix has over 100 twisty or slidey controls to which an encoder could be assigned. So the BCR2000 comes up half empty with the Parsec.

Except it doesn't.

Perusing the BCR2000's remotemap file, I noticed some native devices made use of "groups." After I stared at it a while, I saw that this was a method for reusing encoders and buttons on the BCR2000 for more than one function. I decided to try adapting the method to a map for the Parsec, and darned if it didn't work! Below, is my in-progress Parsec remotemap. I still need to add some buttons, but as you can see, I have already used the 56 encoders for way more that 56 functions.

Code: Select all

Scope	Propellerhead Software	se.propellerheads.Parsec
Define Group	Master-Amp-FX	Master-Amp	FX
Define Group	LFO-Env-1-2	LFO-Env-1	LFO-Env-2
Define Group	Sources	Source1	Source2	Source3	Source4	Source5	Source6	Source7	Source8
//	Jon Heal's Parsec mapping.
//	Control Surface Item	Key	Remotable Item	Scale	Mode	Group

//	Group assignments
Map	Top Left User Button		Master-Amp-FX=Master-Amp
Map	Bottom Left User Button		LFO-Env-1-2=LFO-Env-1
Map	Top Right User Button		Master-Amp-FX=FX
Map	Bottom Right User Button		LFO-Env-1-2=LFO-Env-2
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source8			Source1
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source7			Source8
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source6			Source7
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source5			Source6
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source4			Source5
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source3			Source4
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source2			Source3
Map	Preset Left Button		Sources=Source1			Source2
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source1			Source8
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source2			Source1
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source3			Source2
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source4			Source3
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source5			Source4
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source6			Source5
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source7			Source6
Map	Preset Right Button		Sources=Source8			Source7

//	Master, Balance and Amp section 
Map	Push Encoder 1:1		Spread			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:2		Master Level			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:3		Balance			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:4		Gain			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:5		Amp Attack			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:6		Amp Decay			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:7		Amp Sustain			Master-Amp
Map	Push Encoder 1:8		Amp Release			Master-Amp

//	Reverb and Delay
Map	Push Encoder 1:1		Reverb Size			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:2		Reverb Decay			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:3		Reverb Damp			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:4		Reverb Level			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:5		Delay Time			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:6		Delay Feedback			FX
Map	Push Encoder 1:7		Delay DryWet			FX

//	A/B Sound Engine 1/2 X/Y
Map	Top Row Encoder 1		A Mod1 X
Map	Top Row Encoder 2		A Mod1 Y
Map	Top Row Encoder 3		A Mod2 X
Map	Top Row Encoder 4		A Mod2 Y
Map	Top Row Encoder 5		B Mod1 X
Map	Top Row Encoder 6		B Mod1 Y
Map	Top Row Encoder 7		B Mod2 X
Map	Top Row Encoder 8		B Mod2 Y

//	Generator A/B Modulation/Mix, Pitch and Filter
Map	Middle Row Encoder 1		A Gen X
Map	Middle Row Encoder 2		A Oct
Map	Middle Row Encoder 3		A Semi
Map	Middle Row Encoder 4		A Tune
Map	Middle Row Encoder 5		A Pitch Kbd
Map	Middle Row Encoder 6		A Cutoff Slope
Map	Middle Row Encoder 7		A Cutoff Freq
Map	Middle Row Encoder 8		A Cutoff Kbd
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 1		B Gen X
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 2		B Oct
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 3		B Semi
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 4		B Tune
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 5		B Pitch Kbd
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 6		B Cutoff Slope
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 7		B Cutoff Freq
Map	Bottom Row Encoder 8		B Cutoff Kbd

//	Picklists
Map	Push Encoder 2:1		A Mod1 Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:2		A Mod2 Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:3		B Mod1 Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:4		B Mod2 Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:5		A Gen Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:6		B Gen Select
Map	Push Encoder 2:7		LFO1 Wave
Map	Push Encoder 2:8		LFO2 Wave

//	LFOs and Envelopes
Map	Push Encoder 3:1		LFO1 Delay			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:2		LFO1 Rate			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:3		Env1 Attack			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:4		Env1 Decay			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:5		Env1 Sustain			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:6		Env1 Release			LFO-Env-1
Map	Push Encoder 3:1		Env2 Delay			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:2		Env2 Attack			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:3		Env2 Hold			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:4		Env2 Decay			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:5		Env2 Sustain			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:6		Env2 Release			LFO-Env-2
Map	Push Encoder 3:7		LFO2 Rate			LFO-Env-2

//	Modulation Matrix
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 1			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod1 Dest1 Amt			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod1 Dest1			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod1 Dest2 Amt			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod1 Dest2			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod1 Scale Amt			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod1 Scale			Source1
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 2			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod2 Dest1 Amt			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod2 Dest1			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod2 Dest2 Amt			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod2 Dest2			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod2 Scale Amt			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod2 Scale			Source2
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 3			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod3 Dest1 Amt			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod3 Dest1			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod3 Dest2 Amt			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod3 Dest2			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod3 Scale Amt			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod3 Scale			Source3
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 4			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod4 Dest1 Amt			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod4 Dest1			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod4 Dest2 Amt			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod4 Dest2			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod4 Scale Amt			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod4 Scale			Source4
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 5			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod5 Dest1 Amt			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod5 Dest1			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod5 Dest2 Amt			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod5 Dest2			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod5 Scale Amt			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod5 Scale			Source5
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 6			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod6 Dest1 Amt			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod6 Dest1			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod6 Dest2 Amt			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod6 Dest2			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod6 Scale Amt			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod6 Scale			Source6
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 7			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod7 Dest1 Amt			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod7 Dest2			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod7 Dest2 Amt			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod7 Dest1			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod7 Scale Amt			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod7 Scale			Source7
Map	Push Encoder 4:1		Source 8			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:2		Mod8 Dest1 Amt			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:3		Mod8 Dest1			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:4		Mod8 Dest2 Amt			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:5		Mod8 Dest2			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:6		Mod8 Scale Amt			Source8
Map	Push Encoder 4:7		Mod8 Scale			Source8