# SiSi Fader: Working on a simple 3-lane midi CC Fader Controller, currently exploring demand



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

Hello everyone,

my friend (student mechanical engineer) and I have grown frustrated with the lack of simple, affordable, quality midi controllers to drive your CC messages with. He's not a musician nor a composer, but loves anything audio and, of course, especially the mechanics behind it all.

So we are hoping to launch a very simple controller, one that's compact yet sturdy, with three programmable faders. We're not embarking on this project to get rich, there's just a tiny margin for us to be made here. But before we can look into larger orders for casings, print plates, faders, etc. we want to get a bit of a feeling for market demand. 

Below you find an incredibly simple presentation of what we're going for. If this is something you'd be interested in, simply hit the poll. The poll results will provide us with a bit more than just our gut feeling. 






*Questions, remarks, suggestions are MORE than welcome *

As for the name.. CC Fader... Cee-Cee.. SiSi!


----------



## Fox (Mar 25, 2022)

This looks nice, and something I would have been interested in had I not already gone with (the much more expensive) monogram stuff. So I voted "not for me," as I'm already set. I also think there are lots of people selling there versions of this, but usually for a little bit more (around $150 or so). Doing a lot of exploring around here (which maybe you've already done?), you will find several examples. Hopefully people will share there thoughts here so you can get a better sense of how (and whether) to move forward.

Good luck to you!


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

Fox said:


> This looks nice, and something I would have been interested in had I not already gone with (the much more expensive) monogram stuff. So I voted "not for me," as I'm already set. I also think there are lots of people selling there versions of this, but usually for a little bit more (around $150 or so). Doing a lot of exploring around here (which maybe you've already done?), you will find several examples. Hopefully people will share there thoughts here so you can get a better sense of how (and whether) to move forward.
> 
> Good luck to you!


Many thanks, Fox — One thing I noticed with other creators is the lack of steady supply. Meaning that they may build a small batch, then get overwhelmed with the demand and the amount of time it takes to build and send these devices (+ customer care), and then it all kind of vanishes into thin air...

We are trying to get a better feeling of demand out there, so we can do our best to prepare logistics accordingly.


----------



## SupremeFist (Mar 25, 2022)

I currently have one of the two-fader boxes from this guy on eBay:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/224834785024It's really nice and a big step up from the Nanokontrol I was using. However I might still be interested in yours. I like the matt grey finish. Don't think you need the 63 markings. And could it be possible to make the buttons programmable to do something else besides set the CCs? That would add more value...


----------



## Fox (Mar 25, 2022)

gohrev said:


> Many thanks, Fox — One thing I noticed with other creators is the lack of steady supply. Meaning that they may build a small batch, then get overwhelmed with the demand and the amount of time it takes to build and send these devices (+ customer care), and then it all kind of vanishes into thin air...
> 
> We are trying to get a better feeling of demand out there, so we can do our best to prepare logistics accordingly.


Yup, I can well imagine that's the case. Glad you're doing your research! Again, good luck!


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

SupremeFist said:


> Don't think you need the 63 markings. And could it be possible to make the buttons programmable to do something else besides set the CCs? That would add more value...


We aren't sure about the middle marking (63/64) either, maybe just the line without the number in the middle.

What would you have the button do?


----------



## milford59 (Mar 25, 2022)

gohrev said:


> We aren't sure about the middle marking (63/64) either, maybe just the line without the number in the middle.
> 
> What would you have the button do?


I don’t think you need a middle-marking number - you probably haven’t thought about this (if you had, you wouldn’t have proposed the middle number) but the inexpensive controller that I bought ( 3 fader version of the one SupremeFist linked to) has the ability to set minimum and maximum values… so you might decide, for example, that you only wanted a range of 40-127 for a particular CC.


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

We had, indeed, not considered that option. Added to the list of features to consider


----------



## Martin S (Mar 25, 2022)

SupremeFist said:


> I currently have one of the two-fader boxes from this guy on eBay:
> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/224834785024It's really nice and a big step up from the Nanokontrol I was using. However I might still be interested in yours. I like the matt grey finish. Don't think you need the 63 markings. And could it be possible to make the buttons programmable to do something else besides set the CCs? That would add more value...


I have the same fader and although I like it, setting the CC’s on-the-fly is just a wee bit cumbersome and requires some ’fader-wiggling’ (perhaps due to the 60mm fader resolution?) before I actually hit the CC I’m aiming for.

I’d definitely buy @gohrev ’s fader if you decide to make one; especially if you can manage to accurately select the desired CC with the 100mm fader. I really like the design, too. It reminds me a lot of the Nuances controller - function wise, although Pierre’s handbuilt unit is only 60mm and the price is a little too steep for me. If you guys can manage to make your controller within a 100$/€ price range, I’m definitely in


----------



## Leandro Z (Mar 25, 2022)

I would certainly be in for something just nice, simple and professional with that price! Argentinian composer voting for yes and looking forward to updates! Do you think this can become a reality anytime soon? Cheers for your project!


----------



## Martin S (Mar 25, 2022)

A small suggestion: Would it be possible to have both the CC number as well as the CC value visible for each fader simultaneously? Or do you intend to only show the CC number when the button is pressed?


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

Leandro Z said:


> I would certainly be in for something just nice, simple and professional with that price! Argentinian composer voting for yes and looking forward to updates! Do you think this can become a reality anytime soon? Cheers for your project!


Having followed _many _release threads on this forum, I will refrain from mentioning any dates, date ranges, quarters, "soon", etc. 

But thank you for the vote, that's one more vote of confidence for us


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

Martin S said:


> A small suggestion: Would it be possible to have both the CC number as well as the CC value visible for each fader simultaneously? Or do you intend to only show the CC number when the button is pressed?


That's something we are still debating, depending on how often people would really change the CC designation for their faders. We could imagine some people would want to switch between CCs by briefly pressing the button.

That would pose another challenge: We would then have to configure the button in such a way that it can memorise up to, say, 3 CCs per fader; and one would have to press the button for 3 seconds in order to configure the faders. Pressing the button shortly would then act like a cycle navigator, taking you through the 2 or 3 configurations.

The original thought was you could simply assign a CC to a fader (e.g. 1 for the left fader, 11 for the middle, 7 for the one on the right).. and if need be you could re-configure the fader. But earlier today we thought: How cool would it be if you could assign a couple of CCs to a fader? Maybe cool but unnecessary? That's what we're trying to figure out


----------



## gohrev (Mar 25, 2022)

Closing the day with a little mock-up... I'm no photoshop expert, but hopefully this brings our concept a bit more to life


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Mar 25, 2022)

I would think about reconsidering those fader caps and use something more like you see on mixer consoles as they are designed to nestle the finger tips and provide some grip so you can move them up and down with ease with a single finger (instead of needing to pinch the fader cap).


----------



## muk (Mar 26, 2022)

Concur with ALittleNightMusic about the fader caps.

Storing three configurations per fader might seem like a great idea. But I have some concerns about it really being practical. In my opinion it would be preferable to be able to switch the assigned channel easily and quickly. And that means seeing which channel is assigned to the faders. Make that assigning a channel as quick as toggling between three stored states, and it would be the more flexible solution. Toggling might be useful, but it makes assigning a fader more complicated. And you have to remember on which of the three faders you stored a certain cc channel. Easier to quickly assign it to one in a second.

Another thing to consider is resolution. If possible please choose a high enough resolution to be able to draw smooth curves, even on quick movements.

Just some input from my side. Your idea looks great @gohrev.


----------



## gohrev (Mar 26, 2022)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I would think about reconsidering those fader caps and use something more like you see on mixer consoles as they are designed to nestle the finger tips and provide some grip so you can move them up and down with ease with a single finger (instead of needing to pinch the fader cap).


Oh yes, we will be using this one made out of metal:






Once we get to the actual product design stage, we will be able to show a rendering from various angles, so you can see what it will _really_ look like — with proper fader caps and all


----------



## gohrev (Mar 26, 2022)

muk said:


> Storing three configurations per fader might seem like a great idea. But I have some concerns about it really being practical. In my opinion it would be preferable to be able to switch the assigned channel easily and quickly. And that means seeing which channel is assigned to the faders. Make that assigning a channel as quick as toggling between three stored states, and it would be the more flexible solution. Toggling might be useful, but it makes assigning a fader more complicated. And you have to remember on which of the three faders you stored a certain cc channel. Easier to quickly assign it to one in a second.


Yeah, there are pros and cons we need to consider. The original idea of being able to assign a fader with the press of the button still stands. It's easy to implement, the direct control (rather than diving into a midi tool on the computer) feels good… Being able to switch is something we may want to make possible, but it doesn't mean one has to use it. The ability to quickly assign it to whatever channel you want will always be possible, on the fly, at the press of a button.



muk said:


> Another thing to consider is resolution. If possible please choose a high enough resolution to be able to draw smooth curves, even on quick movements.


We are eyeing a 21-bit resolution, as 7-bit generates very visible steps. Even 14 doesn't always cut it, but we will have to go through some trial and error to see if 14 vs 21 makes a significant difference.


----------



## Shredoverdrive (Mar 26, 2022)

gohrev said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> my friend (student mechanical engineer) and I have grown frustrated with the lack of simple, affordable, quality midi controllers to drive your CC messages with. He's not a musician nor a composer, but loves anything audio and, of course, especially the mechanics behind it all.
> 
> ...


Not fond of the name. Sisi? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Elisabeth_of_Austria
It looks good and the price is adequate, though!


----------



## gohrev (Mar 26, 2022)

Shredoverdrive said:


> Not fond of the name. Sisi? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Elisabeth_of_Austria
> It looks good and the price is adequate, though!


From my OP: 



> As for the name.. CC Fader... Cee-Cee.. SiSi!



It's a little pun in two ways, the second being that my friend is Austrian. So yes… _that_ Sisi.
Also, we wanted a name that's more fun than "XYZ-12 Controller".


----------



## Martin S (Mar 26, 2022)

I agree with keeping it simple: press button (currently selected CC number shows in display) -> move fader to desired CC number -> release button. Done. (I change my faders all the time, so this feature is a must-have)

This way it’s easy to press the button of the fader to see which CC is currently set for that fader. Or - if possible - having both CC number and value showing simultaneously, you’d only need to press the button when actively selecting a new CC number.

However, a toggle mode might be handy to store several sets, although I personally probably wouldn’t use such a feature much. But others might. Would be nice to have as an option.


----------



## fakemaxwell (Mar 26, 2022)

I think if you're building from scratch, adding 3 knobs at the top of the faders is an easy way to double the functionality without too much extra space. It always looks like a missed opportunity in all of the DIY builds here.

Also not sure that having the CC number permanently displayed for all three faders is a necessary use of space. Maybe others have a different experience, but I'm rarely looking at precisely what numerical value of CC. If the fader is mapped appropriately the position of the fader is already doing that work for you.


----------



## Martin S (Mar 26, 2022)

fakemaxwell said:


> Also not sure that having the CC number permanently displayed for all three faders is a necessary use of space. Maybe others have a different experience, but I'm rarely looking at precisely what numerical value of CC. If the fader is mapped appropriately the position of the fader is already doing that work for you.


I agree that the CC value isn’t really important (to me, at least).

But showing the CC number for each fader definitely is, especially if you’re changing CC‘s on the fly (like I like to do) it is vital to know at a glance which fader is mapped to what. And as I understand it, on-the-fly CC changing seems to be the backbone of @gohrev ‘s initiative.


----------

