NEW: SSL UC1 controller

Want to talk about music hardware or software that doesn't include Reason?
User avatar
marcuswitt
Posts: 191
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 27 May 2021

https://www.solidstatelogic.com/media/s ... controller

Potentially something for controlling Reason in future? Looks tempting…

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 8612
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 27 May 2021

Aside from missing at least one fader to be most useful, it looks great! I guess it would have to be paired with the UF8 if you want faders...

Image

User avatar
marcuswitt
Posts: 191
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 27 May 2021

joeyluck wrote:
27 May 2021
Aside from missing at least one fader to be most useful, it looks great! I guess it would have to be paired with the UF8 if you want faders...

Image
Yeah, absolutely! The combination of the UC1 and the UF8, well integrated in Reason, would be a no-brainer and an instant buy for me. I simply hope that both companies, RS and SSL will consider these controllers to be working with Reason flawlessly, someday. I’d love that…

User avatar
gullum
Posts: 964
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Faroe Islands

Post 30 May 2021

If that had MU and Reason mapping allowed for focus instead of select so when press a select button on a controller the channel got focus and all devices that were connected to the mixer would be set to that channel this could work with any controller in a dream setup

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1833
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post 30 May 2021

joeyluck wrote:
27 May 2021
Aside from missing at least one fader to be most useful, it looks great! I guess it would have to be paired with the UF8 if you want faders...
Looks more stylish than Console 1 and Console Fader by Softube.
Image

drloop
Posts: 233
Joined: 27 Jan 2015

Post 31 May 2021

I would love to use a controller like the SSL. But I suppose it will work as the Softube Console 1 and that workflow does not work for me. Pity

strangers
Posts: 577
Joined: 06 Mar 2017
Location: NJ

Post 07 Jun 2021

This looks really cool. If I didn't already have Softube's Console 1, I'd jump on this. Console 1 has been a massive enhancement to my workflow. No more clicking and clunking around with a mouse or letting your eyes pretend they're ears because a cut/boost doesn't look quite right.

User avatar
aeox
Posts: 2959
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: mars soon

Post 08 Jun 2021

Impressive appearance!

User avatar
dannyF
Banned user
Posts: 359
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Uranus

Post 08 Jun 2021

BUT, it doesn't fully work in/with Reason. Things I've noticed.

In the 360 software and the UC-1 controller Reason's channel/track names will not appear.

So if you named your track "BASS" all you will see is "Track 1", "Track 2" etc.


That's a downer.

It would also be cool if this could optionally control Reason's SSL / Bus Compressor Modules.
Yah that's likely not to ever happen.

Can't even get the Props/RS to commit to folder tracks in the sequencer.

oh but we have Reason+ and those awesome new packs!!!!

User avatar
mcatalao
Posts: 1508
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jun 2021

This is beautiful, however... I prefer something like the BCR2000 and it's new successor that is coming.

Or something smaller in the likes of midi fighter twister.

The reason is that a controller in reason (and in other daws too) will be useful to control ANY reason device, may it be the full ssl channel, or a compressor or even a synth. And this SSL controller or the Softube controller, though I believe have superior build (and are again, super beautiful), seem to me a bit too much bound to the design of the device they are meant to control and what they were inspired.

What I mean is, while skeumorphism is an important part of reason and devices, for a controller that ideally will work with 300 different devices, you want it to be as "dull" as possible, program the remote configs sot that you go to the right position almost blindfolded, and have the main device design as "unobtrusive" as possible. Specially for an encoder controller.

But of course, this is my opinion. ;)

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 2249
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Norway

Post 08 Jun 2021

Mcatalao, I think this device is meant to only control their plugin. Not anything else. For that, I think it is fantastic. But also think it is way too expensive as it is just a controller that only works on a specific plugin... 🤷‍♂️

It probably Improves workflow though, so I'll keep my eye on this if it makes sense financially to eventually get it.

User avatar
dannyF
Banned user
Posts: 359
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Uranus

Post 08 Jun 2021

Just realise that if you are using Reason with this you will have to look at your screen to figure out what track is what track on the UC-1. Same with the Bus Comp.... AFAIK there is no way to name your tracks in a meaningful way on the SSL 360 mixer ( which in turn will reflect in the UC-1 ).

It does not pick up the track names from Reason.

the 360 mixer / and the UC-1 ( I presume it gets it data from the 360 mixer ) show Track 1, Track 2, Track 3 etc.... Bus Comp 1, Bus Comp 2 etc...

So you would have to name your tracks in Reason to correlate.

I believe in most DAWS the UC-1 / 360 mixer would pick up the track name.
Last edited by dannyF on 08 Jun 2021, edited 1 time in total.

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 2249
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Norway

Post 08 Jun 2021

Yeah. I mix on live though so that would be no issue. Shame that Reason is not always supported...

But some can and do show track names, like Maschine with the MaschineR software, so it is possible, just they don't take the time to get it sorted 🤷‍♂️

User avatar
dannyF
Banned user
Posts: 359
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Uranus

Post 08 Jun 2021

PhillipOrdonez wrote:
08 Jun 2021
Yeah. I mix on live though so that would be no issue. Shame that Reason is not always supported...

But some can and do show track names, like Maschine with the MaschineR software, so it is possible, just they don't take the time to get it sorted 🤷‍♂️
Good to know its possible then..... if they sorted this out I might more seriously consider it.

User avatar
dannyF
Banned user
Posts: 359
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Uranus

Post 08 Jun 2021

I suppose the track names not fully working is only as big of a deal as you want it to be.

Its not hard to name your Reason tracks.... BASS 1, LEAD 2 etc to correlate to Track 1, Track 2 etc.

Still it would be nice if one didn't have to do that.

User avatar
miscend
Posts: 1824
Joined: 09 Feb 2015

Post 08 Jun 2021

If you're only mixing with a console workflow and not doing any production, having a dedicated mixer controller has it's merits. Hopefully someone will be able to mod the 360 software so it can act as a controller for the Reason mixer. The analogue VU meter also looks awesome by the way!


I've never been too happy with generic USB controllers, even for programming synths its usually quicker to use a mouse. I think dedicated controllers with one knob per function have some merit.


Image

User avatar
mcatalao
Posts: 1508
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jun 2021

miscend wrote:
08 Jun 2021
If you're only mixing with a console workflow and not doing any production, having a dedicated mixer controller has it's merits. Hopefully someone will be able to mod the 360 software so it can act as a controller for the Reason mixer. The analogue VU meter also looks awesome by the way!


I've never been too happy with generic USB controllers, even for programming synths its usually quicker to use a mouse. I think dedicated controllers with one knob per function have some merit.


Image
It is beautiful. It will put you down 3000+ eur thought!!! hehehe~

On a side note, my 3 BCF2000 + Bcr2000 setup was a fracktion of that price, works great with reason and can control easilly ANY device.

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 2249
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Norway

Post 08 Jun 2021

I don't like generic midi knobs. Dedicated has merits, but again, too pricey.

A generic controller you can control any parameter on any device in any daw, means that I will just not use it at all. I like consistency. I've had a midi controller with 8 knobs for over a decade and I've almost not used the knobs. Only a few times but that gets boring and useless fast. 🏁

User avatar
jam-s
Posts: 1478
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Location: Aachen, Germany

Post 08 Jun 2021

Pro tip: generic controller + custom overlay plates for your favourite devices is also a nice hybrid way to get a cheap and usable setup.
If you're in Aachen, come and visit us at the Voidspace. ... Pool's closed due to corona.

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 2249
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Norway

Post 08 Jun 2021

jam-s wrote:
08 Jun 2021
Pro tip: generic controller + custom overlay plates for your favourite devices is also a nice hybrid way to get a cheap and usable setup.
Good point, jam-s!

User avatar
mcatalao
Posts: 1508
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jun 2021

jam-s wrote:
08 Jun 2021
Pro tip: generic controller + custom overlay plates for your favourite devices is also a nice hybrid way to get a cheap and usable setup.
In have a custom made overlay with the SSL configuration on top of my BCR2000, but almost never look at it.

IMHO editing your own Remote files when you get a new device, makes you remember where your controls are, and create a logical control matrix in the controller. That allows you to "know" where to put your fingers when controlling a comp or a synth and overlays are secondary.

Another pro tip (as pro as I can be anyway... hehe) is get motorized faders and endless rotators. Any other type of controller is imho useless, because of the initial setup. A motorized fader will position itself where the fader it controls is. An endless rotator (with leds to specify position) gets the position from the daw, and when you change from device a to device b, or channel 1 to 2, it simply follows the new device status. This is of paramount importance on a controller. You don't get the jumps from the current EQ position to the knob position to go again to something "near" the previous position. It's as "natural" as it can get and quite similar to a console/device/analogue experience where you can sweep a frequency or dial or get a fader up and so on.

If you go for the motorized fader, it's good that you get a force feedback one (also known as auto latch). Reason mimicks auto latch, but it only has one mode, as cubase for example has intelligence to record multiple editing instances, and stop recording an automation when the device sends the latch off signal.

The motorized fader is not only important for automation. My mixes don't even have A LOT of automation, but the simple recallability of the fader/knob position from device to device, is a big change on your workflow. As i have 24 faders, i can control channel 1-24 and toggle to 9-32 or 17-40 with a click on the fwd button and the faders reposition themselves in 1 sec. The same for the knob controller, going from chann 1 to 22 all encoders are repositioned on the ssl device knobs. And if you toggle to a synth (and have your remote file configured) you are a happy man, controlling that synth with that controller and every knob you have for that synth repositioned in the controller.

I have these devices for more than 10 years, and they have been a game changer in my workflow (i can control any reason device, any VST with these devices) and i almost mix without using my mouse.

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 2249
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Norway

Post 08 Jun 2021

mcatalao wrote:
08 Jun 2021
jam-s wrote:
08 Jun 2021
Pro tip: generic controller + custom overlay plates for your favourite devices is also a nice hybrid way to get a cheap and usable setup.
In have a custom made overlay with the SSL configuration on top of my BCR2000, but almost never look at it.

IMHO editing your own Remote files when you get a new device, makes you remember where your controls are, and create a logical control matrix in the controller. That allows you to "know" where to put your fingers when controlling a comp or a synth and overlays are secondary.

Another pro tip (as pro as I can be anyway... hehe) is get motorized faders and endless rotators. Any other type of controller is imho useless, because of the initial setup. A motorized fader will position itself where the fader it controls is. An endless rotator (with leds to specify position) gets the position from the daw, and when you change from device a to device b, or channel 1 to 2, it simply follows the new device status. This is of paramount importance on a controller. You don't get the jumps from the current EQ position to the knob position to go again to something "near" the previous position. It's as "natural" as it can get and quite similar to a console/device/analogue experience where you can sweep a frequency or dial or get a fader up and so on.

If you go for the motorized fader, it's good that you get a force feedback one (also known as auto latch). Reason mimicks auto latch, but it only has one mode, as cubase for example has intelligence to record multiple editing instances, and stop recording an automation when the device sends the latch off signal.

The motorized fader is not only important for automation. My mixes don't even have A LOT of automation, but the simple recallability of the fader/knob position from device to device, is a big change on your workflow. As i have 24 faders, i can control channel 1-24 and toggle to 9-32 or 17-40 with a click on the fwd button and the faders reposition themselves in 1 sec. The same for the knob controller, going from chann 1 to 22 all encoders are repositioned on the ssl device knobs. And if you toggle to a synth (and have your remote file configured) you are a happy man, controlling that synth with that controller and every knob you have for that synth repositioned in the controller.

I have these devices for more than 10 years, and they have been a game changer in my workflow (i can control any reason device, any VST with these devices) and i almost mix without using my mouse.
That does sound nice 🤔

User avatar
gullum
Posts: 964
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Faroe Islands

Post 08 Jun 2021

mcatalao wrote:
08 Jun 2021
Another pro tip (as pro as I can be anyway... hehe) is get motorized faders and endless rotators.
anything els is a waist of time
Imagine having to place all faders and knobs in their right place every time just to be able to work on a mix
IMG_8544.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
mcatalao
Posts: 1508
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jun 2021

gullum wrote:
08 Jun 2021

anything els is a waist of time
Imagine having to place all faders and knobs in their right place every time just to be able to work on a mix
Hey nice setup!
I had my share of that (setting up knobs and faders) on an old M-audio Keystation 88 pro.

Here's my setup:
studio mc.jpg
Of course a darker photo is always nicer :) :
studio mc dark.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
gullum
Posts: 964
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Faroe Islands

Post 08 Jun 2021

mcatalao wrote:
08 Jun 2021


Hey nice setup!
I had my share of that (setting up knobs and faders) on an old M-audio Keystation 88 pro.
grate setup too man
I too remember before getting motorised fader it was cool but always ended up just using the mouse.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: deeplink and 0 guests