# Patchboard public release



## Dewdman42

Patchboard finally released to the general public. Anyone biting?

Still too expensive for me, but I'll be very interested to hear results from anyone who tries it.









Patchboard: Your Sounds at Your Fingertips


The ultimate composing workflow and productivity tool.




patchboard.app


----------



## mrmiller

Dewdman42 said:


> Patchboard finally released to the general public. Anyone biting?
> 
> Still too expensive for me, but I'll be very interested to hear results from anyone who tries it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patchboard: Your Sounds at Your Fingertips
> 
> 
> The ultimate composing workflow and productivity tool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patchboard.app


Happy to answer any questions, too!


----------



## rrichard63

While Patchboard itself is browser-based and therefore multi-platform, it only works with DAWs running on macOS. I wonder whether that is temporary (they had to start somewhere) or permanent (there's some technical reason why the inter-process communication involved is harder on Windows).

Also, only works with "any DAW that supports the EUCON protocol". What DAW's does that leave out?


----------



## mrmiller

rrichard63 said:


> While Patchboard itself is browser-based and therefore multi-platform, it only works with DAWs running on macOS. I wonder whether that is temporary (they had to start somewhere) or permanent (there's some technical reason why the inter-process communication involved is harder on Windows).
> 
> Also, only works with "any DAW that supports the EUCON protocol". What DAW's does that leave out?


This release includes the Windows version in addition to macOS! It doesn’t support the custom Pro Tools integration on Windows currently—just Cubase, DP and EUCON (which would work for Pro Tools). 

To do the DAW integration, I wrote a combination of a bunch of custom control surface plug-ins or reverse engineered stuff to make it work. For any DAWs that don’t support EUCON and I haven’t written a custom integration for (e.g. REAPER or Studio One), it’s a matter of finding the time and the motivation to create a new plug-in. That either means a bunch of users on that platform telling me they need it or someone wants to commission the integration directly and then it would be shared with everyone.


----------



## rdd27

What is patchboard? I took a look at the website - is it a touchscreen controller like Metagrid?

The biggest feature of interest on the homepage is the idea of keyswitches automatically following the selected track. That's great. I tried this before in Cubase with Lemur and it took a very long time to set up a generic remote so each track could be tracked on the touchscreen. And if I added a new track it would often mess everything up. Does this app do things a different way and not require that setup?


----------



## zolhof

tl;dr: reliable, transparent and feature packed, with minimal setup or downtime required. M.R. Miller is the man!

Here's a summary of my experience so far, I hope it helps!

My work as an assistant requires a great deal of template maintenance. Modularity is key since I'm responsible for sorting a vast collection of samples (commercial and private), while researching new libraries and rediscovering old ones, in order to keep things fresh for the next project.

I've used Lemur, TouchOSC, OSCulator, and ended up setting up my own controller in Open Stage Control (OSC), which is an awesome application. I had the dynamic articulation grid, Metagrid-like app switching with shortcuts, libraries/instruments navigation and MIDI controller. Having all that working per-patch is a pain in the groin when you are dealing with patches regularly rotating the main template. I still have nightmares about sends transformers and articulation scripts, if you are a Cubase user you probably know what I mean. What at first seemed like a nice DIY solution, became overwhelmingly impractical to maintain.

Patchboard solved all these issues straightaway. You install it, add a remote device in Cubase and done, instant-integration with all projects. That's priceless, IMHO. The only thing you have to do next is right click (or tap and hold) and pick a Patch Preset from an ever-growing list of libraries. Quick and dirty example:



I'm in the process of creating detailed presets for our entire collection and will share them with Mike so he can share them with other Indie/Pro users via app. Metadata, key ranges, colors, switches, faders, zones, notes, the whole shebang meticulously edited so folks can forget Kontakt, Play, Sine, Spitfire, Engine, Falcon, et al and focus on writing music. That's the cool thing about Patchboard, even if you use the DIY version, you get the same features commissioned by Pro users. This is a niche program targeted at working composers that anyone else can benefit from.

Still, the patch editor is a delight to use and create your own presets from scratch. I strongly encourage anyone buying Patchboard to do so, regardless of the tier. It's also possible to import Logic articulation sets and have half the work done for you. Additionally, you can automate the tagging process with a bit of creativity and json editing.

The app itself is very optimized and runs virtually on any device. There are no limits for simultaneous devices, so you can have assistants tweaking your template in real time while working on a cue, each with its own view settings.

And, finally, there's the man behind the app. Mike is a genius and I don't say that lightly. The dude builds robots, was the leading developer for MOTU's Digital Performer and is a ridiculously talented composer. I was Patchboard's first Windows user, so I experienced his support in full glory. There's a reason he's worked for composers like Danny Elfman, Jeff Russo, Austin Wintory and Brian Tyler. Not using Patchboard feels like going back to the dark ages of template building/management, I'm forever hooked hahaha

I barely scratched the surface so please check out the website! If you have any questions from an user perspective, feel free to get in touch, I'd be happy to help. This is a cool thing and I hope it grows into something even more special.


----------



## rdd27

Interesting! I'll definitely give this a try. I attempted something similar in Cubase once before but, as you say, it very quickly became overwhelming and impractical so I abandoned the idea. This sounds like it might be able to help!


----------



## mrmiller

rdd27 said:


> Interesting! I'll definitely give this a try. I attempted something similar in Cubase once before but, as you say, it very quickly became overwhelming and impractical so I abandoned the idea. This sounds like it might be able to help!


To add a little bit more context, Patchboard's core "magic" is the DAW integration. Because Patchboard knows exactly which tracks are in your session at any moment—order, name, type, state like record armed or muted, etc.—it can do all sorts of fun stuff. For example, Patchboard links your patch definitions to the track by name instead of relying on sending specific MIDI messages via MIDI Transformers. That integration means things like bidirectional control: click a patch in Patchboard to enable, scroll to and record arm the track in Cubase; or record arm a track in Cubase and Patchboard will notice and automatically show the dashboard you've linked to that track.

One problem I noticed with a lot of tablet solutions is you always have to remember to record a snapshot of your controls into your track or you risk your articulations and state not recalling correctly. So I built an automatic snapshot function (toggleable) that watches the transport and whenever you hit play or record, transmits a snapshot for you.

In many ways, I see Patchboard as a platform for these workflow tools that are tightly integrated with the DAW. The instrument dashboards for tablets, the patch catalog, etc. are kinda like mini apps built on top of this platform. There are some new "apps" coming down the pipeline I'm excited about too, requested and designed by other composers.

The other goal is to make the thing as stupidly easy to use as possible. I want even the least tech savvy of composers to feel at home. Lemur solutions are great and stuff like Composer Tools Pro is really powerful and cool! It's much more customizable than Patchboard is (though there are lots of things it can't ever do). That customizability comes at a cost. It's a really high technical hurdle for most... or you pay someone a lot to build and maintain it for you.

I want to get rid of as much fiddly nonsense as possible. Everything's automatically laid out for you; there are layouts for creating consistent views across all your instruments; no separate editor application; edit everything inline on whatever device; no complicated networking and MIDI setup; no coding required, etc. I want it to be a turnkey workflow platform with features directed by its community of users.


----------



## musicalweather

This looks interesting, though I'm still a bit unclear about what its main function is. It seems to be focused on finding the right patches for someone who has lots of sample libraries, and it can help someone who has loads of tracks (in the hundreds) -- for finding and editing track parameters. 

Some questions:

Does it provide articulation management? Or are you still recording keyswitches into your instrument track? I was happy to see that the developer had worked for MOTU. DP is my favorite DAW but lacks articulation management.

More crucially, will it work with VE Pro? Most of my libraries are on slave machines. 

Thanks for any info.


----------



## mrmiller

musicalweather said:


> This looks interesting, though I'm still a bit unclear about what its main function is. It seems to be focused on finding the right patches for someone who has lots of sample libraries, and it can help someone who has loads of tracks (in the hundreds) -- for finding and editing track parameters.


Fair! I've had trouble describing what it exactly it is because it's a bunch of different things in one. What you've described is one aspect—quickly and easily navigating large templates. It was built for Brian Tyler initially to work around his Pro Tools template with literally thousands of tracks, before there were any track search features too back in PT 10.



musicalweather said:


> Some questions:
> 
> Does it provide articulation management? Or are you still recording keyswitches into your instrument track? I was happy to see that the developer had worked for MOTU. DP is my favorite DAW but lacks articulation management.


That is another aspect, yes. It supplements any articulation management like Cubase's Expression Maps or Logic's Articulation Sets if available. Otherwise, it's for controlling the instruments directly. The basic gist is you define how to control your instrument along with some metadata and info about the instrument like the library, what types of instruments are in it, etc. You'll enter all the articulations it provides and how to trigger them via some sequence of notes, CCs, program changes, etc:






Once you've done the data entry, it will be part of your catalog and linked to a track in your template based on that track's name. If you click the patch, it will pull up the track in your DAW and record arm it for you. Or if you record arm the track in your DAW, it will pull up the patch in Patchboard. The Dashboard shows you controls for the instrument you entered for easy, unified control of all your instruments:






musicalweather said:


> More crucially, will it work with VE Pro? Most of my libraries are on slave machines.


Yup! It integrates with your DAW but then it talks to your instrument via a virtual MIDI port. When you tap one of those buttons or slide a fader, it sends whatever MIDI you've defined down the port, into your record armed track and onto the instrument itself. It doesn't matter whether it's hosted directly in your DAW or in VEP. It could even be an outboard synth for all Patchboard cares or knows. You've told it the MIDI to control it so as long the MIDI can get there, you're good to go!


----------



## musicalweather

Mrmiller: thanks for answering my questions. Glad to hear it works with VEPro.


----------



## Dewdman42

so are you saying by design Patchboard is supposed to keep track all the keyswitch/channel assignments for articulation maps and that Patchboard will actually send the keyswitches from patchboard to the instrument, bypassing for example, LogicPro's articulation set, or Cubase's Expression Map facilities? If so...then it seems like you're saying that while recording tracks all the keyswitches would be recorded to the track?

How does it interact with LogicPro and Cubase exactly. What I would want is to select an articulation, using patchboard and then record a part...and have the articulationID encoded to the midi region in LogicPro...or in the case of Cubase...have the expression map lane assignment happen.

More info needed here.. I have put off getting a touchpad system at all so far, mainly because of the complexity I hear everyone working through, and so the idea of just getting something that works out of the box is appealing to me...but depends a lot on how it works.


----------



## Hans-Peter

For anyone wondering: I‘ve been using Patchboard for a while now (disclaimer: I bought a pre-release version at full price) and can vouch for it - Patchboard revolutionized my workflow. The ease to work with all my libraries (about 1700 patches) as well as having all articulations displayed on a tablet, always synced to your selected track as well as the great support (actually, the best I‘ve ever experienced) make this one of the best buys I‘ve ever made! And it just works and saved me so much headache after spending years on programming my controllers. 

VERY MUCH RECOMMENDED!


----------



## Hans-Peter

Dewdman42 said:


> What I would want is to select an articulation, using patchboard and then record a part...and have the articulationID encoded to the midi region in LogicPro...or in the case of Cubase...have the expression map lane assignment happen


That‘s exactly how it works!


----------



## mrmiller

Dewdman42 said:


> so are you saying by design Patchboard is supposed to keep track all the keyswitch/channel assignments for articulation maps and that Patchboard will actually send the keyswitches from patchboard to the instrument, bypassing for example, LogicPro's articulation set, or Cubase's Expression Map facilities? If so...then it seems like you're saying that while recording tracks all the keyswitches would be recorded to the track?


Only if you're not using Articulation Sets or Expression Maps. Otherwise, you should set up your patch in Patchboard to trigger the articulation change via its remote control (I forget what Logic calls it).

If you've already got Articulation Sets, you can actually just import them into Patchboard and it will set it up that way for you. You'll still want to do some clean up of the colors and stuff, but here's an example. I picked a random Spitfire patch from the Babylon Waves articulations and imported it. Below is without absolute zero other configuration:











Dewdman42 said:


> How does it interact with LogicPro and Cubase exactly. What I would want is to select an articulation, using patchboard and then record a part...and have the articulationID encoded to the midi region in LogicPro...or in the case of Cubase...have the expression map lane assignment happen.



As long as you've got an articulation set in Logic or expression map in Cubase on that track, and you've told Patchboard to send the MIDI to trigger the remote control, that's exactly what will happen. When it comes to the MIDI side of this equation, Patchboard isn't doing anything magical. It's just a virtual MIDI port that sends MIDI messages so the record enabled track will pick it up and feed it through to the instrument.



Dewdman42 said:


> More info needed here.. I have put off getting a touchpad system at all so far, mainly because of the complexity I hear everyone working through, and so the idea of just getting something that works out of the box is appealing to me...but depends a lot on how it works.


That's the goal! Ask as many questions as you want!


----------



## jbuhler

@mrmiller Can you go over the various levels? I think I understand the difference between Indie and Pro, but the DIY and Indie is not as clear to me. Mostly it's not clear to me what the patch presets might contain.


----------



## Dewdman42

How does it handle the recording process with DP, since DP doesn't have any of its own articulation Management?


----------



## Toecutter

Can I import Cubase expression maps or Logic sets only? Does it convert name, CC, velocity, channel, color? I've been looking for an alternative to X-DAW for moral reasons and this could be it. I totally forgot this existed!! And right before HO Opus... waiting for the walkthrough desperately looking for an excuse to not give EW money also for moral reasons and now this, fu me XD


----------



## mrmiller

jbuhler said:


> @mrmiller Can you go over the various levels? I think I understand the difference between Indie and Pro, but the DIY and Indie is not as clear to me. Mostly it's not clear to me what the patch presets might contain.


The only software feature difference from DIY to Indie and Pro is basically just a bunch of pre-made patches. You'll likely have to adapt them to your workflow anyways, especially if we're talking Kontakt where most instruments let you change how they're controlled and people tend to change them from their defaults. Those pre-made patches can at least save you some typing. I would love to add more patches to the presets too as time goes on. Here's a quick view of the presets:





If all you need is some presets, you could probably get away with the DIY version and buying some existing articulation sets from Babylon Waves or something to import.

The bigger aspects are the ability to commission new features and more hands-on support from me, in case you need it.

I'm pretty adamant about certain development principles:
1. Aside from the presets, no feature differences between the versions, ever.
2. No paid upgrades, ever.
3. No subscription service.
4. Any commissioned features will get rolled into the product for everyone else to use.

It's a kinda weird model but I'm hoping to effectively crowdsource custom software development and have the community dictate the future features and direction based on that.


----------



## mrmiller

Dewdman42 said:


> How does it handle the recording process with DP, since DP doesn't have any of its own articulation Management?


Patchboard would send notes, CCs or program changes that would trigger the articulation or parameter changes on the instrument. Those would get recorded onto the track and would play back properly. That's all that the articulation management in Logic and Cubase is doing under the hood anyways... they're just "meta" events that get converted to MIDI to send to the instruments. (I'm a DP user myself and have been using Patchboard for years for my own writing.)


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> Can I import Cubase expression maps or Logic sets only? Does it convert name, CC, velocity, channel, color? I've been looking for an alternative to X-DAW for moral reasons and this could be it. I totally forgot this existed!! And right before HO Opus... waiting for the walkthrough desperately looking for an excuse to not give EW money also for moral reasons and now this, fu me XD


That reminds me I should add a menu item for Expression Maps! I have all the code for reading them sitting there that I used to import a bunch for a composer client, but just neglected to add a menu item for it. I promise that'll be in the next point update.


----------



## Toecutter

mrmiller said:


> That reminds me I should add a menu item for Expression Maps! I have all the code for reading them sitting there that I used to import a bunch for a composer client, but just neglected to add a menu item for it. I promise that'll be in the next point update.


That would be great, I'm mostly interested in the DIY version atm and have a ton of expression maps to get me started. Can I bulk edit stuff? If I import multiple expression maps from VSL Elite Strings can I tell the app to tag them as VSL, Elite Strings and Strings all in one go? 

Is it possible to upgrade to Indie later on? Is there a limit to how many features I can design? how does that work?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> That would be great, I'm mostly interested in the DIY version atm and have a ton of expression maps to get me started. Can I bulk edit stuff? If I import multiple expression maps from VSL Elite Strings can I tell the app to tag them as VSL, Elite Strings and Strings all in one go?


Bulk editing is on the TODO list but it's not currently possible except for renaming existing metadata. Or unless you want to edit the JSON catalog by hand (not too bad if you've done any sort of coding or web design). You're going to need to make individual changes to each patch anyways. That said, there are a bunch of editing conveniences so once you enter a developer or library, it will autocomplete to save you some typing.



Toecutter said:


> Is it possible to upgrade to Indie later on? Is there a limit to how many features I can design? how does that work?


Sure! I haven't built an upgrade system into the shop but I can do that manually.

There's no limit to the features... it's on a project basis. You'd reach out to me and say "Hey, I would really love it if Patchboard did this!" and then I'd throw together a proposal outlining exactly how it would work, how long it would take to implement and how much the whole project would cost based on that. We'd workshop that until you were happy with it then I'd dive into implementing it. We'd go back and forth with it and make sure it was to your liking. Then it would get rolled into the shipping version of Patchboard.

As an example, the Logic integration was a commission. So were the unified layouts, view scaling and XY pads. I've got another commission currently to build a context-aware commands dashboard, so you could show a panel of buttons if you have an audio track selected and then another panel for MIDI tracks, or based on the window showing, etc.

Some small features are so easy I'll just add them, like the patch notes that allows you to add a little textual reminder to yourself about how to play a certain patch.


----------



## Toecutter

@mrmiller color me impressed, this is night and day difference from a certain "DAW Toolkit" developer that has zero interpersonal skills, weak documentation and told me to watch a poorly recorded tutorial that left me even more confused. Just to confirm, the communication between daw and Patchboard is direct? I don't need to assign unique continuous controllers for every track in Cubase?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> @mrmiller color me impressed, this is night and day difference from a certain "DAW Toolkit" developer that has zero interpersonal skills, weak documentation and told me to watch a poorly recorded tutorial that left me even more confused. Just to confirm, the communication between daw and Patchboard is direct? I don't need to assign unique continuous controllers for every track in Cubase?


Yes, it's direct. In Cubase, it works via a custom Device plug-in I wrote. The only setup required is go to Devices > Device Setup... then press + and add Patchboard. After that, Patchboard will be talking with Cubase.

To link a patch in your catalog to a track in your template, you just tell it the name of the track in your template. And once you've done that, you never need to change it again as long as the track name doesn't change.

Patchboard just sits alongside... you'll never need to edit your Cubase template to make it work. One composer is actually using the exact same configuration in Cubase and Digital Performer at the same time and able to switch between them. Kinda cool though definitely unusual!

Here's the relevant documentation if you're curious:
Cubase Setup: https://patchboard.app/knowledge-base/cubase-nuendo/
Linking a Patch: https://patchboard.app/knowledge-base/linking-a-patch-to-a-track/


----------



## zolhof

Here's a quick and dirty look at the initial setup in Cubase, as promised:



Hope it helps!


----------



## mrmiller

zolhof said:


> Here's a quick and dirty look at the initial setup in Cubase, as promised:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope it helps!



Hah—I love it! And honestly way better and more entertaining than any of the videos I have ever made about it.


----------



## wst3

If I made my living solely from composition and production work I'd buy this in a heartbeat. Even without I'm sorely tempted. I will be even more tempted when Studio One is supported - I think DAW integration is the "special sauce" here. The database aspect is well done, but not - for me - worth the investment.

To MrMiller - the design is beautiful! Clearly well thought out, I don't want to imagine the time spent, or the iterations cast aside. Just a really cool product that addresses specific issues!

And, I love your business model. I sincerely hope it is successful (wildly successful seldom happens in our little world).

I will be keeping an eye on development, and will have to reconsider the value when Studio One is supported.

Well done sir! Well done!!

(aside: for sound designers, think of this as an analog to sound effect library catalogs that (a) catalog all your sounds, (b) allow you to audition them, and (c) place sounds in your DAW or audio editor - some even offer rudimentary editing. A serious time saver! You can do the same work without, but not as quickly!)


----------



## Toecutter

zolhof said:


> Here's a quick and dirty look at the initial setup in Cubase, as promised:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope it helps!



Thanks Cesar, this cleared many of my misconceptions. Voodoo magic indeed! XD I'm always paranoid about breaking articulations and avoid messing too much with my template, which is a perfect example of tech getting in the way of productivity. The other dev told me to keep a spreadsheet, suggesting it was my fault or lack of organization that broke stuff when I was simply adding new tracks 

I had no clue a thrid party dev could integrate an app to this level. There's always some midi workaround or wrapper involved. @mrmiller what happens if two instruments have the same name? The "track name in DAW" is the one that needs to be unique so I can safely set and forget patches? Can you also show me how to import expression maps? This is essential to my workflow, I have way too many custom maps that I would like to use. Appreciate your time!


----------



## Cuelist

This looks very impressive. I have a page in Lemur with buttons that can be assigned to groups, and I use that page to show/hide them. Is Patchboard able do that as well?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> I had no clue a thrid party dev could integrate an app to this level. There's always some midi workaround or wrapper involved.


That's the secret sauce and it's a high technical hurdle. There's no common standard here so it takes a lot of work to make an integration for each platform. None of them directly support this sort of integration so it's really a long series of complex workarounds.


Toecutter said:


> @mrmiller what happens if two instruments have the same name? The "track name in DAW" is the one that needs to be unique so I can safely set and forget patches? Can you also show me how to import expression maps? This is essential to my workflow, I have way too many custom maps that I would like to use. Appreciate your time!


Yes, the track name needs to be unique-ish. If two tracks have the same name, they'll both show the same dashboard. There's also a preference to match the beginning of the name instead of exact matches. That way, you can have a track name like "Spf Vln 1" link to both and "Spf Vln 1" "Spf Vln 1 - Alt version".

When two tracks are linked to the same patch, it's unspecified which one will get record armed if you tap it in the Catalog view (which is the database of all the patches)... I think currently Patchboard just chooses whichever one appears first in the project. In the Project view, though, you'll have access to both of them because that shows all the tracks in the session.


----------



## mrmiller

Cuelist said:


> This looks very impressive. I have a page in Lemur with buttons that can be assigned to groups, and I use that page to show/hide them. Is Patchboard able do that as well?


Thanks! Not at the moment but I'm working on a commissioned feature to add just that.


----------



## rdd27

Will there be an option in the future for the preset patches without the additional expense of custom development? Or is the custom development required to make the presets work?


----------



## mrmiller

wst3 said:


> If I made my living solely from composition and production work I'd buy this in a heartbeat. Even without I'm sorely tempted. I will be even more tempted when Studio One is supported - I think DAW integration is the "special sauce" here. The database aspect is well done, but not - for me - worth the investment.


Perfectly understandable! Everyone's workflow and wants are different and the trick is to be able to adapt to support their needs. There's one composer who's not even using the UI or patches at all... they're just using the DAW integration engine to relay OSC messages when a track becomes record enabled to their existing Lemur setup. It was simply used to replace



wst3 said:


> To MrMiller - the design is beautiful! Clearly well thought out, I don't want to imagine the time spent, or the iterations cast aside. Just a really cool product that addresses specific issues!


Thanks! 



wst3 said:


> I will be keeping an eye on development, and will have to reconsider the value when Studio One is supported.


I've done a little bit of digging into Studio One support but haven't really formulated a plan there. It really depends on the amount of demand at this point. I've yet to find a DAW where it hasn't been possible but some (Pro Tools and Cubase) have certainly been trickier than others.


----------



## mrmiller

rdd27 said:


> Will there be an option in the future for the preset patches without the additional expense of custom development? Or is the custom development required to make the presets work?


There's no technical requirement there. The presets are just an additional patch database living on a server. There is a small server cost associated with hosting the presets, but that's it. This was just the best way I could think of to provide an additional service and bonus to a mid-tier with the commissioned features. The software itself is otherwise identical across all tiers and I plan to keep it that way. I see the real differentiator as the custom features and the additional support from me that entails.

There are import and export options for patches, and you can import Logic articulation sets and next update, Cubase expression maps. The presets are a minor convenience at the end of the day—they're something anyone can make. You'll likely have to tailor them to your setup anyways, so it just saves a little bit of data entry at the end of the day. If you've already bought into something like Babylon Waves, you should use that to bootstrap your setup anyways!

There's no reason the community couldn't come together to share their own sets of patches. That'd far outdo any of the presets I've thrown together on my end. I'm more interested in building the software than building presets for it. I'd love to provide tools to help make the sharing easier too.

Community is an important aspect of this whole experimental business model. Some of my early thoughts involved things like a site to propose and vote on features and crowdfund them, and features to share your patches publicly so others could import them. On my end, I've only got so much time and energy so I want to make sure I'm spending it working on features that the community wants!


----------



## lucor

If I'd still be using Expression Maps I'd buy this in a heartbeat! So great and convenient. 
Just thinking about all the hours I sank into trying to make something like this with Lemur or Open Stage Control makes me shiver.... 500$ is a bargain just for all the hours you'll save with this.

But even for my 'One-track-per-articulation' template this looks really useful, especially the faders and the little keyrange indicator.

How 'advanced' are the MIDI CC controls at the moment? Is it just simple faders, or could you, for example, build a sort of mixer for each instrument, where you not only have the individual mic faders, but also a 'Pan Knob', and buttons for 'Solo', 'Mute' and 'Purge' for each mic position (for libraries that support this, like OT and Performance Samples)?


----------



## mrmiller

lucor said:


> If I'd still be using Expression Maps I'd buy this in a heartbeat! So great and convenient.
> Just thinking about all the hours I sank into trying to make something like this with Lemur or Open Stage Control makes me shiver.... 500$ is a bargain just for all the hours you'll save with this.


I hope so! It really should save a ton of time and headaches and make the whole concept more accessible.


lucor said:


> But even for my 'One-track-per-articulation' template this looks really useful, especially the faders and the little keyrange indicator.


I've also got some planned features for one-track-per-articulation-style templates as well. I want to create patches that span multiple tracks. You'd get a dashboard with pads for articulations just like a normal articulation switching track. Then, since Patchboard can manipulate the tracks in your DAW, instead of sending MIDI, tapping one of those pads would record enable that track. I think it'd be pretty slick and would allow you to approach the sets of tracks as a single instrument from a control aspect while having the lower complexity and layering possibilities of the single track approach.


lucor said:


> How 'advanced' are the MIDI CC controls at the moment? Is it just simple faders, or could you, for example, build a sort of mixer for each instrument, where you not only have the individual mic faders, but also a 'Pan Knob', and buttons for 'Solo', 'Mute' and 'Purge' for each mic position (for libraries that support this, like OT and Performance Samples)?



There are 4 kinds of "widgets" at the moment:
1) Articulation grid, which is the main articulation switching for instruments that use it
2) Mode switches, for things like Legato On/Off. You could use this for the mic positions as well. These can be displayed horizontally, vertically, or in a drop down menu.
3) Vertical faders (you can modify the ranges to a subset of the full 0-127 range)
4) XY pads (modifiable ranges as well)

In all cases, the widgets can emit any sequence of MIDI and OSC you want, so you can spit out multiple CCs or a combo of notes and CCs.

Here's an example showing all the different widgets, including some mic positions. You could easily add the controls for the individual mic mute, solo, purge, though they wouldn't be listed next to the fader itself. Patchboard intentionally doesn't let you place things wherever, in the interest of simplifying the creation process, keeping things consistent for you and adapting to different screen sizes automatically.


----------



## studioj

This is extremely awesome and something I’ve been dreaming about for a long time. I’ve had various incarnations of it going with Lemur with Logic and Cubase but it is cumbersome to say the least. This looks like an amazing solution.

One question comes to mind: do you foresee any problems as Mac users transition to M1 machines? Sounds like it’s mostly web/ network based so perhaps that means easy compatibility updates (or none needed) but I worry about spending this kind of $ and this new processor architecture creating a problem in the near future. Have you tested it with Logic on an M1 machine? Thx!


----------



## mrmiller

studioj said:


> One question comes to mind: do you foresee any problems as Mac users transition to M1 machines? Sounds like it’s mostly web/ network based so perhaps that means easy compatibility updates (or none needed) but I worry about spending this kind of $ and this new processor architecture creating a problem in the near future. Have you tested it with Logic on an M1 machine? Thx!


I don't foresee any problems but I haven't tested with it yet either! I actually just picked up an M1 MacBook Air 3 hours ago for my mom so I can give it a test and see how it all works. Most of the components are web-based as you say and the underlying application framework (Electron) works on ARM.

The only thing that could possibly be an issue would be the DAW integrations for Logic and Cubase. The former I've actually already ported to ARM in anticipation of this but haven't been able to test it. The latter will depend on what Cubase's ARM version will look like before I can say for certain.

TL;DR: I don't know for certain but I expect to be able to solve anything that comes up. I also have a lot of experience porting software, having dealt with the PowerPC transition on Mac and porting Digital Performer to 64-bit, as well as porting to different game console CPU architectures.


----------



## Toecutter

mrmiller said:


> I don't foresee any problems but I haven't tested with it yet either! I actually just picked up an M1 MacBook Air 3 hours ago for my mom so I can give it a test and see how it all works. Most of the components are web-based as you say and the underlying application framework (Electron) works on ARM.


That would be my next question, I bought an M1 back in February and by now most if not all stuff I use is supported. Keep us posted when you have more info. Just confirming, non-M1 mac and windows are fully supported?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> Just confirming, non-M1 mac and windows are fully supported?


For sure!

The ARM Macs will most definitely be fully supported and may already be working thanks to Rosetta, I just haven’t tested yet. I would be aiming for a native fat executable with both ARM and Intel support as well. Will report back once I’ve got an update on either front.


----------



## rdd27

I've been looking at this more and was hoping to try out a demo (there isn't one sadly). That's when I noticed the price, which is too expensive for me to justify as a hobbyist/semi-pro. Having spoken to a lot of my composer friends, they've all said the same too. 

For those people who are already using this software - has it offered you any kind of return on investment with your work? Specifically compared to the other touchscreen apps that already exist. 

I was viewing this as just a fun and enjoyable way to work with keyswitches, not something that really offers a return on investment as such. However, given the large cost (which is more expensive than my DAW, plus I'd need to buy an iPad), I'd need to justify it financially before purchasing.

I think this product really demonstrates where articulation management is going in the next few years and that looks really promising! I'd love to see it be successful and will keep watching its development. Hopefully there will be a cut-down, cheaper version (eg just for Cubase) in the future for those who don't require any custom development or are just composing for hobby/part-time. I look forward to seeing what happens next!


----------



## Kent

rdd27 said:


> plus I'd need to buy an iPad


Only if you wanted to:


----------



## rdd27

kmaster said:


> Only if you wanted to:


That's good to know. I'd still need to buy a touchscreen display to make the most of it - but good that it isn't a requirement to use a tablet!


----------



## robgb

$500. To start. Wow. While I can appreciate the work that has gone into this, that price tag seems excessive. You can probably (and I say probably because I haven't used patchboard) do all of these things with Open Stage Control, and it's free.

https://openstagecontrol.ammd.net/docs/getting-started/introduction/


----------



## jbuhler

robgb said:


> $500. To start. Wow. While I can appreciate the work that has gone into this, that price tag seems excessive. You can probably (and I say probably because I haven't used patchboard) do all of these things with Open Stage Control, and it's free.
> 
> https://openstagecontrol.ammd.net/docs/getting-started/introduction/


I've tried a number of these solutions, and they always end up being quite kludgy, and they require quite a lot of work by the user to set up and maintain. From what I've seen of Patchboard so far, the set up and maintenance is much more straightforward, even in the DIY version. And it also offers quite a lot more DAW integration/feedback that makes the whole system very slick, the opposite of kludgy. $500 is a lot on the one hand, but on the other hand how many hours would it take to get OSC up and running well for a large template? I'm not yet to the point of having convinced myself that I need to get this at this price, but I can definitely see the value.


----------



## rdd27

jbuhler said:


> I've tried a number of these solutions, and they always end up being quite kludgy, and they require quite a lot of work by the user to set up and maintain. From what I've seen of Patchboard so far, the set up and maintenance is much more straightforward, even in the DIY version. And it also offers quite a lot more DAW integration/feedback that makes the whole system very slick, the opposite of kludgy. $500 is a lot on the one hand, but on the other hand how many hours would it take to get OSC up and running well for a large template? I'm not yet to the point of having convinced myself that I need to get this at this price, but I can definitely see the value.


There will still be a certain amount of setting up with the $500 version as it doesn't include templates. The preset templates only come in at the $999 version (unless I'm mistaken).

I have a similar opinion as you. Having used other software, I can appreciate the value and improved integration with the DAW. That's why I'm very interested. However, I am also struggling to see past the price. If it very obviously saved me $500 in time or expenses, then it would be a no-brainer but I don't see that happening.


----------



## jbuhler

rdd27 said:


> There will still be a certain amount of setting up with the $500 version as it doesn't include templates. The preset templates only come in at the $999 version (unless I'm mistaken).
> 
> I have a similar opinion as you. Having used other software, I can appreciate the value and improved integration with the DAW. That's why I'm very interested. However, I am also struggling to see past the price. If it very obviously saved me $500 in time or expenses, then it would be a no-brainer but I don't see that happening.


Yes, I didn't mean to imply there would be no setup time. It's just watching the videos for Patchboard and seeing how the setup works, and since I do have the Babylon Waves articulation sets, the set up seems very straightforward. Whereas my attempts to set up various OSC, TouchOSC, Lemur schemes have always ended up being most unpleasant and required quite a lot of time to update every time I got a new library. Patchboard seems most straightforward on that count. I mean, I haven't yet ordered it, so I don't know yet that it works any better in practice, but looking over the website and watching some of the videos, it seems to work much better. Like you, I'm not certain about the value. When summer hits and I have a bit of time, I may do it so I can test it hard during the money back guarantee period.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

@mrmiller This is brilliant! I have been using my own DIY solution similar to the earlier mentioned MidiKinetics iPad app. In spite of the steep entry price I would pull the trigger within a heartbeat ...

The thing is: My home-brew-version is in many ways a lot more flexible and feature-rich! This app seems pretty basic in comparison, but it offers one feature that I will never be able to figure out (not being a programmer) unless Steinberg would offer it on a silver plate, which is highly unlikely ... That is the aspect of your app "seeing" which track you selected or record-enabled in Cubase. I had to do some trickery with midi sends in Cubase and - as you already said it: it has some disadvantages and is a nightmare to set up!

Now, I would be happy to buy this app and forget about the endless time spent in making my own version, but at the same time I would be pretty sad to give up all the good stuff I did accomplish! The true reason I ever put so much work into learning and programming Lemur, Max MSP and all of those helpful apps for people without real programming background is that I could finally have it MY way (well, except for the few things that Cubase or those apps wouldn't allow me ...)! It would mean winning one (admittedly pretty cool) thing at the price of losing a bunch of other fantastic features I don't wanna live without.

But there is a way we can have bot! Couldn't the Patchboard App, that is able to interface with Cubase to know which track is enabled also tell that to another OSC or Midi target? I would just need the same information your app is gathering from Cubase forwarded in some way.

Let's make an example to avoid confusion: I am assuming that Patchapp is able to tell which instrument to apply by the name of the track inside cubase, right? So, upon selecting (or record enabling) a track in Cubase Patchapp gets the info: 'Track number 483 <OT BS Celli Short Notes> is selected' (plus probably another bunch of additional information). I assume it would be not to complicated to simply add a feature to Patchboard that would offer the option of just forwarding the same info to a designated midi (maybe SYSEX?) or OSC target? This way, I could use the app for what I like it (wich is probably the keyswitches plus the track searching) and still keep using my home-brew with Lemur, hardware controllers and Max MSP to get stuff Patchboard at this point does not offer like feedback of CCs and so on ...

I suppose, I could go Indy or Pro and add a couple of bucks to that bill to commission that feature. Let me tell you in advance: my recent income through composing hasn't been good enough to justify that cost.  But maybe it is already possible, so, I thought I would ask! Anyway, thank you for doing this. It looks like a true passion project and I wish you well this this endeavor.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

kmaster said:


> Only if you wanted to:


The font is a little bit small for my glasses ...


----------



## gst98

rdd27 said:


> I've been looking at this more and was hoping to try out a demo (there isn't one sadly). That's when I noticed the price, which is too expensive for me to justify as a hobbyist/semi-pro. Having spoken to a lot of my composer friends, they've all said the same too.
> 
> For those people who are already using this software - has it offered you any kind of return on investment with your work? Specifically compared to the other touchscreen apps that already exist.
> 
> I was viewing this as just a fun and enjoyable way to work with keyswitches, not something that really offers a return on investment as such. However, given the large cost (which is more expensive than my DAW, plus I'd need to buy an iPad), I'd need to justify it financially before purchasing.
> 
> I think this product really demonstrates where articulation management is going in the next few years and that looks really promising! I'd love to see it be successful and will keep watching its development. Hopefully there will be a cut-down, cheaper version (eg just for Cubase) in the future for those who don't require any custom development or are just composing for hobby/part-time. I look forward to seeing what happens next!


Are you aware this was made for a AAA composer and is now is having a public release? It doesn't get more boutique than this. I imagine a large percentage of customers will be attracted to the possibility of commissioning new features.

In the UK, $500 is half a day's salary of a highly skilled dev, even worse if you compare to someone in silicon valley. IS $500 is objectively a large amount of money? Yes, but is it expensive? Well, it's boutique and nothing on the market does this. $500 is already the cut-down version.

For a Logic user, this adds track searchability, which for a pro could save them $500 in time very quickly if they run a big template. Until Apple adds that themselves, you have no choice but to wait or commission software like this.



robgb said:


> $500. To start. Wow. While I can appreciate the work that has gone into this, that price tag seems excessive. You can probably (and I say probably because I haven't used patchboard) do all of these things with Open Stage Control, and it's free.
> 
> https://openstagecontrol.ammd.net/docs/getting-started/introduction/


No, you can't. This appears to be the first piece of 3rd party software that integrates with the DAW, other than Apple's own remote app and the Presonus one.

As a logic user, I'm wary because Apple has already half integrated the 'smart controls' to the remote app, which is the same sort of art switching this does. It wouldn't take much for them to add it, but so far the smart controls integration that Apple has done is not nearly as elegant as patchboard. That is as high a praise as it gets. 

Studio One's app appears to do a lot of this from the last update.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

robgb said:


> $500. To start. Wow. While I can appreciate the work that has gone into this, that price tag seems excessive. You can probably (and I say probably because I haven't used patchboard) do all of these things with Open Stage Control, and it's free.
> 
> https://openstagecontrol.ammd.net/docs/getting-started/introduction/


You have to understand that there is a big difference between a mass market and a niche software product. Also, with all of the DAWs supported, it is way more complicated than having to offer your plugin as VST and AU. Lastly, I think you are missing a little bit the point of what this software can do which NO other software could do before. Read my previous post for details.


----------



## Kent

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> The font is a little bit small for my glasses ...


sorry?


----------



## Hans-Peter

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> You have to understand that there is a big difference between a mass market and a niche software product. Also, with all of the DAWs supported, it is way more complicated than having to offer your plugin as VST and AU. Lastly, I think you are missing a little bit the point of what this software can do which NO other software could do before. Read my previous post for details.


You just will run into Logics' 128 track CR limit with any other solution. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about ... there truly is no other alternative. And thank god it's Patchboard.


----------



## Hans-Peter

gst98 said:


> In the UK, $500 is half a day's salary of a highly skilled dev, even worse if you compare to someone in silicon valley. IS $500 is objectively a large amount of money? Yes, but is it expensive? Well, it's boutique and nothing on the market does this. $500 is already the cut-down version.


Well, at the time I bought it, I was a student. And it was worth it, nevertheless. You cannot imagine how much time Patchboard saved me. So, no matter how look at it, it's a bargain. The time it saved me, I could spend for other endeavours ... and ... guess what ... it worked .


----------



## robgb

jbuhler said:


> I've tried a number of these solutions, and they always end up being quite kludgy, and they require quite a lot of work by the user to set up and maintain. From what I've seen of Patchboard so far, the set up and maintenance is much more straightforward, even in the DIY version. And it also offers quite a lot more DAW integration/feedback that makes the whole system very slick, the opposite of kludgy. $500 is a lot on the one hand, but on the other hand how many hours would it take to get OSC up and running well for a large template? I'm not yet to the point of having convinced myself that I need to get this at this price, but I can definitely see the value.


It does take time with OSC. It took me a full day.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

kmaster said:


> sorry?


That was a joke ...


----------



## zolhof

robgb said:


> $500. To start. Wow. While I can appreciate the work that has gone into this, that price tag seems excessive. You can probably (and I say probably because I haven't used patchboard) do all of these things with Open Stage Control, and it's free.
> 
> https://openstagecontrol.ammd.net/docs/getting-started/introduction/


This was my OSC app before I moved to Patchboard:

View attachment SVID_20210419_140108_1.mp4


I've shared my experience with it in the first page of this thread, it's a long post about Patchboard and others, very hard to miss. Notice that I said "others" and not "similar" or "alternatives". Truth it, there are no alternatives to Patchboard.

And, by the way, I thought you could set up something similar in a couple of hours with TouchOSC and OSCulator, now OSC too?



robgb said:


> $2500 for this thing? $500 at the low end?
> I'm sorry, that's outrageous. I've set up something similar to this with TouchOSC and OSCulator, which cost me a total of about $25 and a couple hours.


At least it takes you a full day now!


----------



## robgb

zolhof said:


> At least it takes you a full day now!


That was using TouchOSC and OSCulator, which is easier to set up (if used as a combo) but doesn't have the power of Open Stage Control. With Open Stage Control, however, you do have to go through the process of learning HOW to set it up, which is the most time consuming part. Once you understand how it works, it's just a matter of adding buttons, faders, etc. You can do it all in a web browser. From learning to setting up it took me about a day.


----------



## jbuhler

robgb said:


> It does take time with OSC. It took me a full day.


Assuming Patchboard takes three hours to set up, and you took eight to set up your OSC, that means you are paying yourself about $100/hour comparatively, for which you get something perhaps a bit more tailored to your workflow but also likely with things that occasionally don't work right because that's in the nature of how these things go. Patchboard likely won't be quite tailored to your workflow to the same extent, but it will likely work far more smoothly overall and offer some features and functionality you hadn't even thought of. Is it worth it? It depends on whether Patchboard delivers, yes, but also how you value your time.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

robgb said:


> It does take time with OSC. It took me a full day.


Can your Open Stage Control DIY solution do this?

You click to a track within Cubase and - Boom! - just based on the name that track has (maybe CSB 'Trumpet section' your touch-screen magically displays the labeled key switches and CC-faders as you set them up before? Also, if you just create a new track and give it the same name (without typos, of course!), the Patchboard App will do the same.

To my knowledge, it is pretty difficult to set this up in any DAW. In Reaper it might be possible, in Logic it is possible - that I know! But for other reasons, I happen to use Cubase and there this is a standalone feature in that exact way. It is ONE feature and I would agree with you, that some of the other features of Patchboard app are not where I would like them to be, as far as I understand the given information. But that one feature is priceless IMO and I somehow got the feeling that you simply don't quite get that.


----------



## robgb

jbuhler said:


> Assuming Patchboard takes three hours to set up, and you took eight to set up your OSC, that means you are paying yourself about $100/hour comparatively, for which you get something perhaps a bit more tailored to your workflow but also likely with things that occasionally don't work right because that's in the nature of how these things go. Patchboard likely won't be quite tailored to your workflow to the same extent, but it will likely work far more smoothly overall and offer some features and functionality you hadn't even thought of. Is it worth it? It depends on whether Patchboard delivers, yes, but also how you value your time.


As I said, having not used patchwork (a demo would be nice), it's hard for me to say for sure that the same functions could be set up with Open Stage Control, but I'd say what I've set up for myself is pretty powerful. For those of you willing to shell out $500 to find out if it improves your workflow, by all means, go for it.


----------



## jbuhler

robgb said:


> As I said, having not used patchwork (a demo would be nice), it's hard for me to say for sure that the same functions could be set up with Open Stage Control, but I'd say what I've set up for myself is pretty powerful. For those of you willing to shell out $500 to find out if it improves your workflow, by all means, go for it.


There's a 30 day no questions asked money back guarantee in lieu of a demo.


----------



## robgb

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> You click to a track within Cubase and - Boom! - just based on the name that track has (maybe CSB 'Trumpet section' your touch-screen magically displays the labeled key switches and CC-faders as you set them up before?


Yes. I use Reaper. Track templates make life easy. Plus I've created my own Reaper scripts so that all the proper reverb sends are automatically connected. And all it takes is a single button on my touch screen to open this track.


----------



## robgb

jbuhler said:


> There's a 30 day no questions asked money back guarantee in lieu of a demo.


Ahh. Fair enough. It's nice to see someone offering a refund.


----------



## zolhof

robgb said:


> That was using TouchOSC and OSCulator, which is easier to set up but doesn't have the power of Open Stage Control. With Open Stage Control, however, you do have to go through the process of learning HOW to set it up, which is the most time consuming part. Once you understand how it works, it's just a matter of adding buttons, faders, etc. You can do it all in a web browser.


I'm talking about managing thousands of tracks with unique articulations and controllers. Being modular on the spot. OSC is an awesome piece of software but you will never be able to do that. The best use of OSC I've seen is Flow+, and still, it's too much hassle to be used in a serious, cut-throat, time-sensitive scenario.


----------



## rdd27

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> Can your Open Stage DIY do this?
> 
> You click to a track within Cubase and - Boom! - just based on the name that track has (maybe CSB 'Trumpet section' your touch-screen magically displays the labeled key switches and CC-faders as you set them up before? Also, if you just create a new track and give it the same name (without typos, of course!), the Patchboard App will do the same.
> 
> To my knowledge, it is pretty difficult to set this up in any DAW. In Reaper it might be possible, in Logic it is possible - that I know! But for other reasons, I happen to use Cubase and there this is a standalone feature in that exact way. It is ONE feature and I would agree with you, that some of the other features of Patchboard app are not where I would like them to be, as far as I understand the given information. But that one feature is priceless IMO and I somehow got the feeling that you simply don't quite get that.


It's possible to do something similar in Cubase using generic remote, but that takes a while to set up. Patchboard offers an easier and more powerful way of doing it (from what I can see, I haven't used it). 
ut is that worth $500 compared to other apps? Not for me, but it might be for some people. 

I feel like this is priced for those who are at the top of the industry or making a reasonable income from their work. I can't justify spending that money on the luxury of having slightly more convenient articulation switching unfortunately but that's not to disapprove the product - it looks good on paper.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

rdd27 said:


> It's possible to do something similar in Cubase using generic remote, but that takes a while to set up. Patchboard offers an easier and more powerful way of doing it. But is that worth $500 compared to other apps? Not for me, but it might be for some people. I feel like this is priced for those who are at the top of the industry or making a reasonable income from their work. I can't justify spending that money on the luxury of having slightly more convenient articulation switching unfortunately.


I know! I have done that myself with my own version. If you read my lengthier initial post, you will read that I mentioned the Cubase midi sends per track (not generic remote, but that is the other thing needed, of course).

I understand that the price might be a bit steep, if you don't earn any money from making music. I do - I am having a hard time right now, but that might end at some point. Apart from that, I wonder myself: What is more valuable: buying tons of libraries plug-ins and software updates for several thousands of dollars or buying the one tool for the price of two average libraries to manage all those sounds and articulations in a proper way? To me, it seems like a no-brainer to spend that kind of money on a tool that really works the way I want it to. My only reservation is regarding the limits of what Patchboard app can not do at this point. I hope Mike will answer my earlier question. If combining this app with my own stuff is possible, this app will certainly be worth 500 bucks to me! It will save me a lot of life-time and that should be the most valuable thing asset!


----------



## rdd27

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> What is more valuable: buying tons of libraries plug-ins and software updates for several thousands of dollars or buying the one tool for the price of two average libraries to manage all those sounds and articulations in a proper way?


I agree - this is the way I think too  if I was making a very good living from my music and saw this as a quick and easy way to manage my articulations without losing a whole day's work, it would be much more attractive. In my current situation, the cost is more than the benefit and I would get more benefit from spending the money/time on marketing, hardware or my education.

In that view, I think the price is targeting it at the upper end of the market - established professionals who can afford it - compared to the wider range of hobbyists/semi-pros who might not make music full time. So the audience is limited. I hope the smaller audience doesn't hurt sales much as I think this looks to be an interesting product with lots of potential.


----------



## stigc56

Well we still need the ability to import Vst Expression maps from Nuendo/Cubase. If that works I will certainly try the app for the 30 days. The problem a lot of us share - I think - is that because of the Corona, our income has been a little more unsecure, anyway that's the case in Denmark. I don't know when Theatres will open again.


----------



## zolhof

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> To me, it seems like a no-brainer to spend that kind of money on a tool that really works the way I want it to.


My only regret is to not have migrated sooner! I truly think this is something that could positively impact people's lives. I know from experience how time consuming a template can become. Life is too short to be wasted editing MIDI transformers or keeping track of every single variation of the same articulation (think UIST). And the imminent danger of screwing it all up because I overlooked something in this one-billion line script. No, brother, it's a deadline-driven environment and I can't bother with any of this tech-madness anymore. $500 suddenly feels like pocket change once you realize what Patchboard is doing for you under the hood.

It certainly isn't trying to do everything though, but what it does, there's nothing else like it!



Giovanni dall Camera said:


> My only reservation is regarding the limits of what Patchboard app can not do at this point.



I still use the Stream Deck, for example, it's a great combo and covers everything I will ever need! 

Feature-wise, Patchboard's only limitation is set by commissions. Mike went in great detail here:



mrmiller said:


> There's no limit to the features... it's on a project basis. You'd reach out to me and say "Hey, I would really love it if Patchboard did this!" and then I'd throw together a proposal outlining exactly how it would work, how long it would take to implement and how much the whole project would cost based on that. We'd workshop that until you were happy with it then I'd dive into implementing it. We'd go back and forth with it and make sure it was to your liking. Then it would get rolled into the shipping version of Patchboard.
> 
> As an example, the Logic integration was a commission. So were the unified layouts, view scaling and XY pads. I've got another commission currently to build a context-aware commands dashboard, so you could show a panel of buttons if you have an audio track selected and then another panel for MIDI tracks, or based on the window showing, etc.
> 
> Some small features are so easy I'll just add them, like the patch notes that allows you to add a little textual reminder to yourself about how to play a certain patch.


And this is why it could become something even more special: 



mrmiller said:


> Community is an important aspect of this whole experimental business model. Some of my early thoughts involved things like a site to propose and vote on features and crowdfund them, and features to share your patches publicly so others could import them. On my end, I've only got so much time and energy so I want to make sure I'm spending it working on features that the community wants!


----------



## Dewdman42

Regarding the price point...it is a lot. I'm having a hard time justifying it in my own mind...I can't justify VideoSlave either for the same reason.

That being said...I've paid people to fix stuff around my house for double or triple that price without blinking an eye. I've spent more than that on things like a nice flat screen monitor or desk to sit at...or a chair to sit on, etc... if we compared this price to other music related software we are used to using...it seems a heavy price...but bear in mind this is a very specialized software with a very limited market...written to solve a very particular custom problem... The guys who paid him to write this stuff paid many thousands to commission this work I am quite sure.

The fact that its even publicly available at all is nice. 

I paid 10x that much to put a hot tub into my back yard, that I probably use less then I would use this if I got it...so everything needs to be kept in perspective.


----------



## Markrs

zolhof said:


> This was my OSC app before I moved to Patchboard:
> 
> View attachment SVID_20210419_140108_1.mp4
> 
> 
> I've shared my experience with it in the first page of this thread, it's a long post about Patchboard and others, very hard to miss. Notice that I said "others" and not "similar" or "alternatives". Truth it, there are no alternatives to Patchboard.
> 
> And, by the way, I thought you could set up something similar in a couple of hours with TouchOSC and OSCulator, now OSC too?
> 
> 
> At least it takes you a full day now!


You OSC app looks amazing. Speaks volumes that you now use Patchboard.

As to the price, it is a lot of money and it isn't. It really depends on whether you need this and if you have the time to build your own version in OSC. Given how much we all go on about workflow and how much people spend on libraries they don't use, I personally don't see it as expensive. It is not something a beginner like me needs, but those looking for more efficiency, and less frustration it looks like a good price.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

@zolhof Thanks for your feedback! If you finde the time: could you check out my first post in this thread and tell me wether something like this is already possible? In short: can Patchboard App forward the information which track is selected or record enabled to yet another program like Max MSP or Lemur via midi or OSC?

One aspect I appreciate about my own solution is the flexibility to create a layout how I like to have it per patch. But on the other hand, it is also quite solid features like midi feedback that Patchboard App does not have, as it looks. By midi feedback I mean, not only does my tablet reflect all controllers and articulations of the track I selected automatically. It also reflects all values of these CCs depending where I move my locator in the time line. This, of course, is only possible by using some behind the scene programming and Cubase Track sends. But it is a feature I really strive for, since I know it is possible and not even to complicated. I would like to combine that with the ease of use that Patchboard App has.


----------



## Dewdman42

he already said he has at least one customer doing exactly that. his custom controller device is basically a controller device that instead of connecting to a real Mackie or whatever controller...it connects over OSC/midi to software...his software....using midi and OSC protocol. So you can use Lemur or touchOSC or whatever you want to build whatever you want....and basically will get access to the same "integration"...ie...select a track and send some OSC...that his custom controller device can already do for his software.


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

Dewdman42 said:


> he already said he has at least one customer doing exactly that. his custom controller device is basically a controller device that instead of connecting to a real Mackie or whatever controller...it connects over OSC/midi to software...his software....using midi and OSC protocol. So you can use Lemur or touchOSC or whatever you want to build whatever you want....and basically will get access to the same "integration"...ie...select a track and send some OSC...that his custom controller device can already do for his software.


Who said it? Mike Miller to zolhof? Could you point me to the post?


----------



## zolhof

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> In short: can Patchboard App forward the information which track is selected or record enabled to yet another program like Max MSP or Lemur via midi or OSC?


Yes, it can.  Patchboard sends the following OSC messages when I change tracks:


----------



## Giovanni dall Camera

zolhof said:


> Yes, it can.  Patchboard sends the following OSC messages when I change tracks:



Thanks! That sounds great and just like what I am looking for! So, by "teaching" my Max MSP patch the names my template tracks have, I can also create any add-ons of automatically response, like custom Lemur Pages that change based on that track name received, right?

Having seen your own version of a custom controller and how far you have gone ... I am sure you are making use of that yourself, don't you?


----------



## zolhof

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> Thanks! That sounds great and just like what I am looking for! So, by "teaching" my Max MSP patch the names my template tracks have, I can also create any add-ons of automatically response, like custom Lemur Pages that change based on that track name received, right?







Giovanni dall Camera said:


> Having seen your own version of a custom controller and how far you have gone ... I am sure you are making use of that yourself, don't you?


Not really, I don't like scripting at all, it was fun in the beginning and I'm proud of what I accomplished, but Patchboard gives me enough control over my template (including external gear) to not lose focus. I prefer a cleaner, simplified approach. For everything else, like Cubase/Dorico macros, I use Metagrid or the Stream Deck.

That's not to say you can't go a bit crazy with PB, there are features not publicly documented like CLI, regular expressions, OSC API, etc so if you have any specific needs, shoot Mike a message and I'm sure he'll sort you out.


----------



## Toecutter

stigc56 said:


> Well we still need the ability to import Vst Expression maps from Nuendo/Cubase. If that works I will certainly try the app for the 30 days.


Same. @mrmiller told me it will be in the next update. ETA? 



zolhof said:


>



I had no idea it could send track information, very interesting... I'm even more inclined to give this a try  Is this a Pro only feature? Do you need to configure unique channels or CC per track?


----------



## mrmiller

Apologies for being AWOL—had a busy day!


Toecutter said:


> Same. @mrmiller told me it will be in the next update. ETA?


Likely this week but would want to release it as a private beta first so people can play with it and see if it needs tweaks. If you wanted to dive in, I would send you that pre-release version to get feedback.


Toecutter said:


> I had no idea it could send track information, very interesting... I'm even more inclined to give this a try  Is this a Pro only feature? Do you need to configure unique channels or CC per track?


Nope, it's there in all versions. It was added as a feature for a composer who wanted to use Patchboard's DAW integration as a simple relay to their existing Lemur setup because the MIDI sends in Cubase were a pain to maintain and being flaky. You don't need to set up anything in any of your projects or tracks. It will send OSC messages like /track/record or /track/selected with the track name as the first argument and the value (1 for on, 0 for off) for the second.

You can also tell Patchboard to record arm or select tracks by sending it messages. The API currently is /track/set with the track name, property and value as the arguments, so something like /track/set "Spf Vln 1" recordEnable 1 would record enable a track named "Spf Vln 1" if it exists in your session. You can also talk to the patches using /patch/set to do the same thing but using the name of the patch, which will then look up the linked track for you. There's also a command line interface as an alternative to OSC:



Code:


% ./Patchboard.app/Contents/MacOS/Patchboard --help
Run Patchboard commands without the UI.
Usage: Patchboard <command>

Commands:
  Patchboard                                       default command                                                                                                                                                                                                [default]
  Patchboard record <type> <name> [state]          Record enable/disable a track or patch with a given name
  Patchboard set <type> <name> <property> <value>  Set a property on a track with a given name to the specified value

Options:
      --version  Show version number                                                                                                                                                                                                                              [boolean]
  -h, --help     Show help                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        [boolean]

Examples:
  Patchboard record track "CS Violin 1" enable   Record enable a track named "CS Violin 1"
  Patchboard set track "CS Violin 1" selected 1  Select a track named "CS Violin 1"


----------



## mrmiller

Giovanni dall Camera said:


> @zolhof Thanks for your feedback! If you finde the time: could you check out my first post in this thread and tell me wether something like this is already possible? In short: can Patchboard App forward the information which track is selected or record enabled to yet another program like Max MSP or Lemur via midi or OSC?
> 
> One aspect I appreciate about my own solution is the flexibility to create a layout how I like to have it per patch.


Yup, you absolutely get more flexibility in laying things out with tools like Open Stage Control, Lemur, TouchOSC, etc. It's outside of the scope of what Patchboard is even trying to do. You can't place buttons or faders in arbitrary places, for example. I'm trying to vastly simplify things for people who don't want to or can't build such tools, or aren't interested in the long-term maintenance. The upside to this approach is I can provide tools that try to give you elegant layouts automatically.



Giovanni dall Camera said:


> But on the other hand, it is also quite solid features like midi feedback that Patchboard App does not have, as it looks. By midi feedback I mean, not only does my tablet reflect all controllers and articulations of the track I selected automatically. It also reflects all values of these CCs depending where I move my locator in the time line. This, of course, is only possible by using some behind the scene programming and Cubase Track sends. But it is a feature I really strive for, since I know it is possible and not even to complicated. I would like to combine that with the ease of use that Patchboard App has.


I so wish there were a general purpose, easy way to do that which worked in all DAWs. The "best" I've come up with would be an instrument wrapper like Komplete Kontrol. That said, I'm really against the idea of asking people to modify their templates like that and replace all their instruments with this wrapper which hosts the actual instrument.

My compromise solution is the auto-transmit feature which will send a snapshot of how your controls are set whenever you hit play or record in the DAW. That way, whatever is on your dashboard is what you'll get. You'll never forget to record it into your track and have it not restore properly later.


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> Same. @mrmiller told me it will be in the next update. ETA?






Done. This is using the attached CineBrass Pro expression map. Feel free to send me some expression maps to try out (along with screenshots of what they look like in Cubase, if possible, just to save me some time).


----------



## Toecutter

mrmiller said:


> Likely this week but would want to release it as a private beta first so people can play with it and see if it needs tweaks. If you wanted to dive in, I would send you that pre-release version to get feedback.


No worries, do the beta thing XD I'm too busy to fuss with this, as long as it's working I'm fine! The images looked good, is it possible to import multiple exp. maps at one go?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> No worries, do the beta thing XD I'm too busy to fuss with this, as long as it's working I'm fine! The images looked good, is it possible to import multiple exp. maps at one go?


Yup, select as many as you want and it'll throw up a little progress bar for you (it goes very quick). Same with Logic's articulation sets or the built-in patch import.


----------



## jbuhler

This is all very slick, and seems to do well what I could only ever manage to do very clumsily. And Patchboard has lots of additional features that I hadn't even thought to try. I wish I had time to try it out now. But I'll have time in June.


----------



## dylanmixer

Man I've been waiting so long for this. It IS really expensive, so I'd likely only afford the DIY version. Does anybody have the Pro version and can tell me if it is worth investing in? Or should I stick with the DIY?


----------



## Kent

dylanmixer said:


> Man I've been waiting so long for this. It IS really expensive, so I'd likely only afford the DIY version. Does anybody have the Pro version and can tell me if it is worth investing in? Or should I stick with the DIY?


Mike can clarify but as I understand it there is no difference in functionality between the levels. You just get more presets and more personalized attention the higher you go.


----------



## mrmiller

kmaster said:


> Mike can clarify but as I understand it there is no difference in functionality between the levels. You just get more presets and more personalized attention the higher you go.


@dylanmixer: exactly as @kmaster said. Aside from the presets feature that comes in at the Indie tier, the software itself is and always will be exactly the same between the versions. I don't like gating software features. It felt wrong to me to artificially limit what the software can do just to segment price tiers.

The only difference is the level of support from me and the option of commissioning features. In the latter case, I'm fine with people upgrading if and when they want to head down that path for the difference in price. I don't have an upgrade system in place on the website but can do it manually, so just reach out.


----------



## dylanmixer

mrmiller said:


> @dylanmixer: exactly as @kmaster said. Aside from the presets feature that comes in at the Indie tier, the software itself is and always will be exactly the same between the versions. I don't like gating software features. It felt wrong to me to artificially limit what the software can do just to segment price tiers.
> 
> The only difference is the level of support from me and the option of commissioning features. In the latter case, I'm fine with people upgrading if and when they want to head down that path for the difference in price. I don't have an upgrade system in place on the website but can do it manually, so just reach out.


Based off of your openness and communication on this forum in general, I can already tell that this is a worthy investment. Thanks 👍 Can't wait to pick it up.


----------



## Toecutter

dylanmixer said:


> Based off of your openness and communication on this forum in general, I can already tell that this is a worthy investment. Thanks 👍 Can't wait to pick it up.


yep I'm very impressed with the communication so far. It's sorta sad that it even needs to be mentioned but some devs act like divas and I always wondered if that doesn't hurt their business 

@mrmiller a couple of questions that came to mind, 1- can I use your app with Logic (mac) and Cubase (windows) at the same time or do I need two licenses? 2- I have about 700 disabled tracks in my template and a bunch of PLE commands to hide or show tracks. Are they still searchable on Patchboard? Can I select a hidden track and activate it with a key command?


----------



## lucor

mrmiller said:


> I've also got some planned features for one-track-per-articulation-style templates as well...


Thanks, sounds and looks fantastic!
A few more questions:

I work with a disabled instrument track template in Cubase 11. How does Patchboard fare with that? I'm asking because disabled tracks can't be 'record enabled', which you say is the way Patchboard recognizes the tracks. Will it still recognize the track once it's activated, or do you first have to select another track and then reselect the track you just activated? Also, if you use Patchboard to find and select tracks, will that feature work if the track is disabled?
Can you hide the Keyswitch page, in case you'd want only a big wall of faders for an instrument (looking at you Infinite Series and Sample Modeling)?
Does Patchboard receive any MIDI Input, so that the keys on the Keyrange Indicator light up when pressed?
Thanks!


----------



## zolhof

Hi Lucor,

I had very similar questions when I was researching Patchboard, so I will try to give a bit of user feedback here:



lucor said:


> I work with a disabled instrument track template in Cubase 11. How does Patchboard fare with that? I'm asking because disabled tracks can't be 'record enabled', which you say is the way Patchboard recognizes the tracks. Will it still recognize the track once it's activated, or do you first have to select another track and then reselect the track you just activated? Also, if you use Patchboard to find and select tracks, will that feature work if the track is disabled?


I work with a disabled track template in Cubase 11, and Patchboard detects disabled tracks like any other track. One cool feature is that it auto-enables the track for you as soon as you select it, so you can jump to it immediately and start working with it.



lucor said:


> Can you hide the Keyswitch page, in case you'd want only a big wall of faders for an instrument (looking at you Infinite Series and Sample Modeling)?


Yes, you can. There's a "show/hide" menu at the top left where you can select what you want to see. It's also possible to set custom faders options, including in relation to XY pads. Preferences are saved per device, so you you can have different Dashboard views across multiple devices. Here's an example of BBCSO, which has a massive number of microphone positions:





lucor said:


> Does Patchboard receive any MIDI Input, so that the keys on the Keyrange Indicator light up when pressed?


Yes. You get visual feedback on the virtual keyboard. In my opinion, after you finish customizing your patches, there's really no need to ever open Kontakt or other GUIs again. I have one tablet permanently on Project view for DAW navigation, and the other on Dashboard view for patch-control.


----------



## lucor

zolhof said:


> Hi Lucor,
> 
> I had very similar questions when I was researching Patchboard, so I will try to give a bit of user feedback here:
> 
> 
> I work with a disabled track template in Cubase 11, and Patchboard detects disabled tracks like any other track. One cool feature is that it auto-enables the track for you as soon as you select it, so you can jump to it immediately and start working with it.
> 
> 
> Yes, you can. There's a "show/hide" menu at the top left where you can select what you want to see. It's also possible to set custom faders options, including in relation to XY pads. Preferences are saved per device, so you you can have different Dashboard views across multiple devices. Here's an example of BBCSO, which has a massive number of microphone positions:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. You get visual feedback on the virtual keyboard. In my opinion, after you finish customizing your patches, there's really no need to ever open Kontakt or other GUIs again. I have one tablet permanently on Project view for DAW navigation, and the other on Dashboard view for patch-control.



Beautiful, thanks! What a great piece of software.

I will definitely get this in the near future, should be much more worthwhile then yet another strings library....
First I'll need to buy a good touchscreen monitor though. I do have an iPad, but I'd like to keep things as uncomplicated as possible (plus you can never have enough monitors ).


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> @mrmiller a couple of questions that came to mind, 1- can I use your app with Logic (mac) and Cubase (windows) at the same time or do I need two licenses?


Yup, that's perfectly fine! The license is super-permissive. Install it on as many of your devices as you want, home, work, laptops, whatever, and have it open and running at the same time on all of them. Fair game for an assistant too if you've got one. The only thing I ask is that you don't share your license with others outside your (conceptual) studio, even if you collaborate with them extensively.



Toecutter said:


> 2- I have about 700 disabled tracks in my template and a bunch of PLE commands to hide or show tracks. Are they still searchable on Patchboard? Can I select a hidden track and activate it with a key command?


Yup. Exactly as @zolhof described. It sees even hidden tracks, will reveal it, scroll to it and even activate it for you.


----------



## mrmiller

lucor said:


> Can you hide the Keyswitch page, in case you'd want only a big wall of faders for an instrument (looking at you Infinite Series and Sample Modeling)?


To add onto the great (and accurate!) answer from @zolhof, you can hide entire sections of controls. If you don't have any articulations or mode toggles for a patch, the faders will actually expand to fill up the entire screen.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK

Dewdman42 said:


> I paid 10x that much to put a hot tub into my back yard, that I probably use less then I would use this if I got it...so everything needs to be kept in perspective.


That certainly provides perspective... I imagine chilling in the hot tub while controlling your EWHO on your shiny OpenCore Mac Pro would be something. Perhaps not a conversation starter though

After all it is web-based so you can do it from your phone outside!


----------



## stigc56

I’m still not quite sure about the import of articulation maps in Logic, and how to assign the specific map to a certain instrument. Is it all by done by the identic name?


----------



## Begfred

I’m so tempted. I’ve put so many hours in the past to build a Lemur solution that don’t even come close to this. I may jump in the boat eventually. But I wonder how Patchboard deals with hidden tracks and closed stacks in Logic?


----------



## Toecutter

Begfred said:


> I’m so tempted. I’ve put so many hours in the past to build a Lemur solution that don’t even come close to this. I may jump in the boat eventually. But I wonder how Patchboard deals with hidden tracks and closed stacks in Logic?


Same, wasted too much time troubleshooting **paid** stuff and dealing with crappy customer support that slowly took the joy out of me. mrmiller is evidently in a different league, knows his stuff, open and bs free


----------



## stigc56

Well I jumped onboard and bought the DIY version. The Patchboard is easily installed for both Cubase and Logic, but then there are the set-up. In the Logic version Patchboard will not find tracks inside folders INSIDE FOLDERS. So a Woodwind folder with another folder - holding VSL WW ex. - will not be found. That is okay. 
But PB will not find hidden tracks either, and that is more serious, because will that mean that I have to have all 400 tracks visible all the time?
I have asked a couple of questions regarding some other stuff, so I will sit back and wait, impatiently.


----------



## Toecutter

stigc56 said:


> Well I jumped onboard and bought the DIY version. The Patchboard is easily installed for both Cubase and Logic, but then there are the set-up. In the Logic version Patchboard will not find tracks inside folders INSIDE FOLDERS. So a Woodwind folder with another folder - holding VSL WW ex. - will not be found. That is okay.
> But PB will not find hidden tracks either, and that is more serious, because will that mean that I have to have all 400 tracks visible all the time?
> I have asked a couple of questions regarding some other stuff, so I will sit back and wait, impatiently.


That worries me, how about Cubase? @zolhof showed disabled tracks, @mrmiller confirmed hidden track works but nothing about folders. Folders are essential to me...


----------



## stigc56

It works in Cubase.


----------



## jbuhler

So no hidden tracks in Logic? If that proves to be the case, it's disappointing and I hope there is a fix on the way.


stigc56 said:


> In the Logic version Patchboard will not find tracks inside folders INSIDE FOLDERS.


So folders are ok, it's just folders within folders that don't seem to work properly?


----------



## zolhof

Toecutter said:


> That worries me, how about Cubase? @zolhof showed disabled tracks, @mrmiller confirmed hidden track works but nothing about folders. Folders are essential to me...


Yes, like @stigc56 said, hidden disabled tracks and folders within folders work in Cubase:




We have Logic in the studio but I only use Patchboard in my computer that runs Windows and Cubase, I'm sorry I can't be more helpful.


----------



## Dewdman42

jbuhler said:


> So no hidden tracks in Logic? If that proves to be the case, it's disappointing and I hope there is a fix on the way.
> 
> So folders are ok, it's just folders within folders that don't seem to work properly?



I’m reasonably certain these are a factor of what logicpro can do and quit probably can’t be changed. It depends on what can be done with the controller interface of logicpro. If hidden tracks can’t be activated by a controller, then it’s unlikely patchboard can do anything about that. It’s also unlikely that apple will change it +-|

Folders within folders, same thing; that is not an officially supported feature of logicpro.


----------



## jbuhler

Dewdman42 said:


> I’m reasonably certain these are a factor of what logicpro can do and quit probably can’t be changed. It depends on what can be done with the controller interface of logicpro. If hidden tracks can’t be activated by a controller, then it’s unlikely patchboard can do anything about that. It’s also unlikely that apple will change it +-|
> 
> Folders within folders, same thing; that is not an officially supported feature of logicpro.


Yeah, I'm not worried about the folders within folders so long as it works with the top level folders, which I'm pretty sure it does.


----------



## stigc56

jbuhler said:


> So no hidden tracks in Logic? If that proves to be the case, it's disappointing and I hope there is a fix on the way.
> 
> So folders are ok, it's just folders within folders that don't seem to work properly?


Yes. And hey I'm NOT an expert! It could be me fooling around!


----------



## Toecutter

jbuhler said:


> Yeah, I'm not worried about the folders within folders so long as it works with the top level folders, which I'm pretty sure it does.


yea Logic doesn't worry me too much, I don't think that's even supported unless @mrmiller found another way around it?


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> yea Logic doesn't worry me too much, I don't think that's even supported unless @mrmiller found another way around it?



Correct... unfortunately, Logic doesn't support this. I spent some time digging around just to confirm what I remember from when I first looked into it.



stigc56 said:


> Well I jumped onboard and bought the DIY version. The Patchboard is easily installed for both Cubase and Logic, but then there are the set-up. In the Logic version Patchboard will not find tracks inside folders INSIDE FOLDERS. So a Woodwind folder with another folder - holding VSL WW ex. - will not be found. That is okay.
> But PB will not find hidden tracks either, and that is more serious, because will that mean that I have to have all 400 tracks visible all the time?
> I have asked a couple of questions regarding some other stuff, so I will sit back and wait, impatiently.


Patchboard's talking to Logic as if it were a control surface. Unfortunately, Logic treats the insides of folders as hidden from control surfaces. I've actually got a similar issue with Pro Tools, where collapsed folders are completely opaque. That's not the case with either DP or Cubase, thankfully. And Logic is the only one where hidden tracks are fully hidden.

I've got a few ideas for ways to work around this but... they're not pretty. Since Patchboard can't get that information unless those things are open and not hidden, one thing I could maybe do is unhide and unfurl all the folders when you first open your project. That way, I'd be able to see all the tracks for a moment. I'd hide them again and close the folders that were previously closed. And then I'd have to tell Patchboard to basically pretend that those things still existed even though Logic basically tells me they've been deleted.

I'm going to take stock of how much work this would actually be because it sounds pretty hairy on paper. But I really want the different DAW integrations to have as much parity as possible. There are some subtle differences between them already but for the most part, they work equivalently well.


----------



## lucor

Ok, I just pulled the trigger (if you're like me and don't have a credit card/would like to use Paypal for payment you can just shoot Mike an email).

I've been playing around with it for hours now, and I still can't stop shaking my head in disbelief of how smooth and instantly everything "just works". Voodoo magic is almost an understatement haha.

The only issue I've found so far is that the way the keys light up on the keyrange indicator is VERY laggy. The very first note is always very snappy, but as soon as you play more than one note or even chords it falls completely apart (ranging from notes lighting up 1-2 seconds later to not showing up at all), which almost makes me think there could be a problem on my end with some sort of feedback loop/overload?!

Gonna experiment a bit more, but is anyone else experiencing this?

Other than that I can already tell that this will be among the $500 I've spent on anything music related.


----------



## mrmiller

lucor said:


> The only issue I've found so far is that the way the keys light up on the keyrange indicator is VERY laggy. The very first note is always very snappy, but as soon as you play more than one note or even chords it falls completely apart (ranging from notes lighting up 1-2 seconds later to not showing up at all), which almost makes me think there could be a problem on my end with some sort of feedback loop/overload?!


Actually, I'm intentionally throttling the UI updates for the MIDI input. Patchboard ignores any MIDI that it sends so there shouldn't be any sort of feedback loops (unless you create one yourself, which I've accidentally done to myself while testing... lol). A previous version was getting bogged down by too much MIDI input so that was my quick and dirty fix at the time. I have better ways to do it now so this is a great reminder that I can fix that up!



lucor said:


> Gonna experiment a bit more, but is anyone else experiencing this?
> 
> Other than that I can already tell that this will be among the $500 I've spent on anything music related.


So glad to hear you're loving it so far!


----------



## Bender-offender

I recently bought this as well and so far it’s really impressive! Thank you @mrmiller for a great piece of software and for spending time here answering questions. 

Concerning Patchboard, I love that you can edit stuff on your main computer and then it automatically updates everywhere else. I haaaaaaaate typing in a bazillion patch names in an iPad. My biggest beef with creating tracks for patches with keyswitches has always been how freakin’ long it takes to begin using it after all the setting up. It seems like double the work when you create an Expression Map for that instrument, THEN needing to do it all over again in an tablet or other remote device just so you can trigger the instrument. Using Patchboard is definitely quicker to input all the articulations, and I love that there’s the option to import Logic Articulation Sets and also how the Triggers respond to external MIDI. Wonderful!
If I may, will it be possible to import Cubase’s Expression Maps in the future? I’ve created thousands of Expression Maps over the years and it’d be so much quicker to just drop them into Patchboard. Alternatively, would it be possible to export from Patchboard to Expression Maps (or as a Logic Articulation Set)? In case one creates articulations in Patchboard first, then you could easily drop that file into Cubase.

Also, will there be batching editing of the instrument sets? There’s been several times where I messed up a keyswitch or color scheme and had already duplicated and linked to many tracks in Cubase. I needed to go through each dashboard to fix the keyswitch or color.

Thanks again!


----------



## Toecutter

Bender-offender said:


> If I may, will it be possible to import Cubase’s Expression Maps in the future? I’ve created thousands of Expression Maps over the years and it’d be so much quicker to just drop them into Patchboard.


It's already implemented and being tested according to mrmiller, he posted a few images somewhere in the thread. Anxiously waiting for it too


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> It's already implemented and being tested according to mrmiller, he posted a few images somewhere in the thread. Anxiously waiting for it too





Bender-offender said:


> If I may, will it be possible to import Cubase’s Expression Maps in the future? I’ve created thousands of Expression Maps over the years and it’d be so much quicker to just drop them into Patchboard.


Shoot me an email via support AT patchboard.app (or on the website) and I'll send you the beta build with Expression Map importing!



Bender-offender said:


> Alternatively, would it be possible to export from Patchboard to Expression Maps (or as a Logic Articulation Set)? In case one creates articulations in Patchboard first, then you could easily drop that file into Cubase.


It's definitely something I've thought about. There are some cool automation things I could do there but it's a little more complicated than just exporting because you need to update how the articulations trigger to use the remote trigger instead of talking directly to the instrument. So instead of a simple export, it actually needs to change your patch too. That would make it a one time conversion operation unless I allowed you to specify the remotes too and tell patches to switch into that mode when it's targeting a track with an expression map.

It could even be something fancy like automatically creating a bunch of expression maps in the Cubase expression map directory that mirror Patchboard's database. I could probably watch Cubase to see if one of those gets assigned to a track and then switch Patchboard to use the remotes internally. That would certainly be pretty slick but of course more work than an export-and-convert-to-use-remotes command. I also am not sure if expression maps are saved in the project or if updating them on the drive to keep them in sync would also update them in all your projects using them. (I could test this but I bet a Cubase user could tell me off the top of their head  the latter would be convenient but I suspect the former...).

And maybe I would be able to automatically assign the expression maps from Patchboard. If so, I could add a button to assign them for every track in the current project if they're not already set, and... anyways, this is what I mean by the DAW integration opens up a lot of fun possibilities!


----------



## dylanmixer

Has anyone tried implementing both Patchboard and Metagrid in to their workflow? Do you switch back and forth between apps on iPad? Have two iPads? One iPad with Metagrid and Patchboard on screen?


----------



## Bender-offender

mrmiller said:


> Shoot me an email via support AT patchboard.app (or on the website) and I'll send you the beta build with Expression Map importing!
> 
> 
> It's definitely something I've thought about. There are some cool automation things I could do there but it's a little more complicated than just exporting because you need to update how the articulations trigger to use the remote trigger instead of talking directly to the instrument. So instead of a simple export, it actually needs to change your patch too. That would make it a one time conversion operation unless I allowed you to specify the remotes too and tell patches to switch into that mode when it's targeting a track with an expression map.
> 
> It could even be something fancy like automatically creating a bunch of expression maps in the Cubase expression map directory that mirror Patchboard's database. I could probably watch Cubase to see if one of those gets assigned to a track and then switch Patchboard to use the remotes internally. That would certainly be pretty slick but of course more work than an export-and-convert-to-use-remotes command. I also am not sure if expression maps are saved in the project or if updating them on the drive to keep them in sync would also update them in all your projects using them. (I could test this but I bet a Cubase user could tell me off the top of their head  the latter would be convenient but I suspect the former...).
> 
> And maybe I would be able to automatically assign the expression maps from Patchboard. If so, I could add a button to assign them for every track in the current project if they're not already set, and... anyways, this is what I mean by the DAW integration opens up a lot of fun possibilities!


Thanks for the swift reply! Cubase’s Exp Maps could be better designed on Steinberg’s behalf. There are some dumb ways it works.

Concerning the saving aspect, they do (sadly) save with the project itself _unless _manually export each Map individually. Though, I’m unsure if they get updated when edited outside Cubase as I’ve never used an external editor of any kind.

I’ll email you now for the beta version. Thanks!


----------



## mrmiller

dylanmixer said:


> Has anyone tried implementing both Patchboard and Metagrid in to their workflow? Do you switch back and forth between apps on iPad? Have two iPads? One iPad with Metagrid and Patchboard on screen?


I don't know specifically if anyone has a setup with both of them side-by-side, but I suspect you'd want them on separate devices, whether that's your desktop and a tablet or two tablets or all three. Switching back and forth would probably get tiresome, if I had to guess.

What kind of features are you using in Metagrid at the moment, by the way? I'm currently working on adding command/macro dashboards to Patchboard as a feature commission so would love to hear what's useful!


----------



## dylanmixer

mrmiller said:


> I don't know specifically if anyone has a setup with both of them side-by-side, but I suspect you'd want them on separate devices, whether that's your desktop and a tablet or two tablets or all three. Switching back and forth would probably get tiresome, if I had to guess.
> 
> What kind of features are you using in Metagrid at the moment, by the way? I'm currently working on adding command/macro dashboards to Patchboard as a feature commission so would love to hear what's useful!


Macros and other commands would definitely set me over the edge on getting this, as an all in 1 companion. 

Personally I use Metagrid for controlling different channel visibility settings, quick render, quick reverse, quantize settings, etc. I don't get to deep in to developing macros so even basic implementation could be HUGE.


----------



## mrmiller

dylanmixer said:


> Personally I use Metagrid for controlling different channel visibility settings, quick render, quick reverse, quantize settings, etc. I don't get to deep in to developing macros so even basic implementation could be HUGE.


Any pain points with setting things up in Metagrid? Things it could do better? I haven't used it before but should probably take a look at what they're doing given I know a lot of people do.


----------



## gst98

mrmiller said:


> Any pain points with setting things up in Metagrid? Things it could do better? I haven't used it before but should probably take a look at what they're doing given I know a lot of people do.


One of the most annoying parts is setting it up on the iPad. The fact the patchboard can be set up on mac/pc is very attractive. If you have a look at Metagrid's forum they have a trello board of requests and things he's working on. 

The most highly requesting things are to make it much more like patchboard ironically! People really want two-way communication, advanced articulation switching, CC controls.

I use Metagrid to hide/reveal groups in logic. Would it be possible for patchboard to sync to hide status to the DAW, so that hidden groups icons on the app would be greyed out? It's been requested for metagrid but he wasn't sure how feasible it would be

One thing I do love (but I don't know what to call it) is that metagrid sees all of logic's key commands and shortcuts directly, rather than having to set up a key command shortcut and having metagrid send that shortcut out. Also, although I don't use it, lots of people like it for integrating with keyboard maestro.


----------



## markit

This is amazing and I am seriously considering the investment. :D

@mrmiller Would it be possible to see how Patchboard handles _huge_ sets of articulations such as the VSL’s ones?


----------



## stigc56

Hi
I’ll be back in my studio monday and I have a long experience with Metagrid and mail you.


----------



## mrmiller

markit said:


> This is amazing and I am seriously considering the investment. :D
> 
> @mrmiller Would it be possible to see how Patchboard handles _huge_ sets of articulations such as the VSL’s ones?


I actually just had a user asking about this. I'm not super familiar with the new stuff but it sounds like they rely on context-sensitive articulation switching? Like, some controls are only available in certain articulations? I've seen one of the expression maps for it and that was certainly a harrowing mess...

Ignoring the context-sensitive thing for a sec because it's currently unsupported, Patchboard does have a model for N-dimensional articulation switching via what I call "Modes". If the articulation is the playing style, modes are ways of altering the instrument that apply to all the articulations, like changing from soft to hard mallets on a drum or playing with a mute. All the same articulations you had are still available, but you've altered the entire instrument in some way.

Here's a kinda silly example using a harp, because all the pedals are controllable independently of one another, and then the articulation controls the plucking style:




The modes can be displayed as vertical or horizontal selectors or as a dropdown menu.

That said, there's nothing stopping you from shoving conceptual articulations into a mode. That way you could have a lot of independent axes of control rather than the standard 1-dimensional articulation switching.

Anyways, hopefully that kinda answers your question about how I'd probably approach it given the current state of things? But I've got some tentative ideas for showing specific articulations depending on the specific mode, perhaps. It'll share a lot of DNA with what I decide to do for single-track-per-articulation tracks, in case one of those tracks has special controls.


----------



## markit

mrmiller said:


> Anyways, hopefully that kinda answers your question about how I'd probably approach it given the current state of things? But I've got some tentative ideas for showing specific articulations depending on the specific mode, perhaps. It'll share a lot of DNA with what I decide to do for single-track-per-articulation tracks, in case one of those tracks has special controls.


A few months ago I tried to flatten VSL’s keyswitches structure down to a one-level hierarchy, but there were too many patches and the experiment didn’t work out well.

There are some options that could be covered as modes such as _Release_ and _Attack_. With some creativity some sustains and legato ones could be treated as modes too. Still, the vast majority of the keyswitches are nested into each other.

I will keep an eye on this thread and I hope you’ll make this part of your roadmap at some point, as 90% of my libraries are from VSL!


----------



## mrmiller

markit said:


> A few months ago I tried to flatten VSL’s keyswitches structure down to a one-level hierarchy, but there were too many patches and the experiment didn’t work out well.
> 
> There are some options that could be covered as modes such as _Release_ and _Attack_. With some creativity some sustains and legato ones could be treated as modes too. Still, the vast majority of the keyswitches are nested into each other.
> 
> I will keep an eye on this thread and I hope you’ll make this part of your roadmap at some point, as 90% of my libraries are from VSL!


Out of curiosity, how does this play with Expression Maps and Articulation Sets, since they only support flat lists? Sounds like an organizational nightmare with that many articulations in a single instrument...


----------



## Dewdman42

I think he's talking about the keyswitches sent to VSL are almost never a single keyswitch...you need to use some combination of keyswitches to reach each exact articulation.

That can still be managed from a flat Articulation set list.. Expression maps are capable of actually 4 dimensions using their groups feature, though hardly anyone does because its a PITA to setup expression maps that way.

But in any case...a flat representation in the artset or expression map is not always the most intuitive way for sure, and it can lead to flat-list-bloat, trying to a account for every combination. But that can still be used to manage different combinations of keyswitches for each destination.


----------



## mrmiller

> I think he's talking about the keyswitches sent to VSL are almost never a single keyswitch...you need to use some combination of keyswitches to reach each exact articulation.
> ...
> But in any case...a flat representation in the artset or expression map is not always the most intuitive way for sure, and it can lead to flat-list-bloat, trying to a account for every combination. But that can still be used to manage different combinations of keyswitches for each destination.



To clarify in case I've caused any confusion, Patchboard already supports as many triggers as you want for a given articulation. So you could do the flat version and use a layout to group them into zones for better organization. Then you could use some mode selectors too so you don't need to account for every permutation in a flat list. The only thing it can't do currently is conditionally show or hide some of the buttons based on your currently selected articulation.


----------



## Camus

markit said:


> @mrmiller Would it be possible to see how Patchboard handles _huge_ sets of articulations such as the VSL’s ones?


Hi, let me chime in here: I have PB now for 4 days and I´m really happy how easy it is to set up your articulations for each patch. Thanks to Mike Miller, who constantly is there to help and to answer every question within a day!!!! 
I now have my first VSL Patch up and running. Those VSL patches are quite complicated since you have the 3 to 4 to 5 Dimensions - dimensions that change in function with every Dimension A or Dimension B you change. But most of the time the structure is like:
Dimension A via KSW: basic Articulation charakter (short/long/trem)
Dimension B via KSW: more specific Articulation detail
Dimension C / D mostly are KSW for Release / Attack - sometimes some very specific functions

The best way seems to controll Dim A & B by setting up 2 KSW on one tab so you get C0=Short & C1 = Stacc Short.
Then I used the Modes for setting up the Dimension Controls that work with multiple Articulations all the same way: e.G. Attacks: soft/normal/fast/sfz

attached a screenshot of the PB Dashboard view for Elite Violins & excerp of the Editor. There you can see at the last a Tab that sends 4 Dimension controls to exactly match the last articulation in a 4 dimensional VSL-Patch


----------



## Camus

....... and what´s cool also, that you can "favourite" the most usable basic Arts. So when in Switch mode (heart on the left side) it will hide all other patches to get a better overview.


----------



## Camus

regarding the problem, that PB can´t see tracks in Folder: Yes Logic is sometimes a pain.... 
But what is working is, that the tracks inside a folder/trackstack can be seen in dashboard view, when the track names are set correct for every instrument. it works for me, that my UACC patchboard Setup changes to the correct patch when moving from track to track in logic (even in folders). 

Until now I was using Touch OSC for that with a lot of pages of art-settings. But Touch OSC does not change the page to the right set when I change my track. I couldn´t figure out how to make Touch OSC work like that.
PB does this already with less time I spent to learn how to do it.

And one main point: Mike Miller is really very helpful and he´s working on it. Touch OSC hasn´t been developed further for years now AFAIK. I´m really enthusiastic, that Mike will develop this software further and maybe he finds ways to overcome logic´s system-immanent-restrictions.

Thank you Mike


----------



## tabulius

Very useful looking software! Now only if Studio One would support Eucon, I would give this a try.


----------



## stigc56

Well as for now Metagrid and Patchboard is like ebony and ivory, and I don't think they will overlap in my set-up. Metagrid is just about to be updated to ver. 2 and allegedly it will support faders. I doubt that it will be two-way communication though. Metagrid is such an indispensable tool, I use it all the time, and together with Keyboard Maestro it's very powerful.


----------



## stigc56

Camus said:


> ....... and what´s cool also, that you can "favourite" the most usable basic Arts. So when in Switch mode (heart on the left side) it will hide all other patches to get a better overview.


This look amazing. I'm in the same spot, trying to accomplish finishing a cue and at the same time making PB working with VSL Synchron Elite. Any chance you wanna share the patch with me?

What I think is also of major importance is that as far as I know you have to record the music AND KS at the same time in Logic Pro X, where as in Cubase you can do you KS in additional recordings on the same track. This makes it more interesting to be able to use buttons for more secondary KS in Cubase where you might do additional KS editing the track in LPX.


----------



## Camus

stigc56 said:


> Any chance you wanna share the patch with me?


DONE - see your PM


----------



## stigc56

I'm having trouble finding information how to select an articulation to be in the "Switch"/heart group.


----------



## Begfred

stigc56 said:


> I'm having trouble finding information how to select an articulation to be in the "Switch"/heart group.


Right click (or long push on tablet I guest) - favorite


stigc56 said:


> I'm having trouble finding information how to select an articulation to be in the "Switch"/heart group.


Or in Catalog view, you press show switches (the folder icon)


----------



## mrmiller

stigc56 said:


> I'm having trouble finding information how to select an articulation to be in the "Switch"/heart group.


It’s become more and more hidden over time, but long-press or right-click. I should bring back some more visibility to it.

(It will be renamed ❤️ Articulation in the next release. Switch was the old name for articulations and I must’ve missed that one!)


----------



## stigc56

Okay I will try that.


----------



## Toecutter

Do I really need to edit patches one by one after expression maps are imported? I finished setting up my Jade template on Cubase using Art Conductor, from what I can tell it's not possible to bulk edit attributes on Patchboard?


----------



## zolhof

Toecutter said:


> I finished setting up my Jade template on Cubase using Art Conductor, from what I can tell it's not possible to bulk edit attributes on Patchboard?


No, it's not possible to select multiple patches and tag them in one go. I use a json editor called XiMpLe for that, it opens files on a table grid view, and offers a lot of useful copy+paste and find+replace features that speed up the editing process.






XiMpLe - XML Editor - Homepage


XiMpLe - simple XML and JSON grid view editor, XML comparator, XML splitter and XML joiner, XSD validation and generation - one file, no installation (portable), freeware for non-commercial use



ximple.cz





Here's a quick example of Jade (timestamps on video description), it took me about 10 minutes to do the whole library. I wish more developers would include the key ranges on the manual!




It's pretty straight forward once you get the gist of it. Make sure to backup your database first, in case something goes wrong. On Windows, patches.json is located in C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Patchboard

I would love to hear how folks are doing this?


----------



## robgb

zolhof said:


> I'm talking about managing thousands of tracks with unique articulations and controllers. Being modular on the spot. OSC is an awesome piece of software but you will never be able to do that. The best use of OSC I've seen is Flow+, and still, it's too much hassle to be used in a serious, cut-throat, time-sensitive scenario.


No offense, but if you have thousands of tracks, you're doing something wrong. My opinion, of course.


----------



## Toecutter

robgb said:


> No offense, but if you have thousands of tracks, you're doing something wrong. My opinion, of course.


No offense, but you are such a troll. You have no idea what you are talking about, go check some pros templates like John Powell, Trevor Morris, Jeff Russo, Jason Graves, Alan Silvestri, Hans Zimmer... they can have thousands of tracks ready to go.


----------



## Bender-offender

Toecutter said:


> Do I really need to edit patches one by one after expression maps are imported? I finished setting up my Jade template on Cubase using Art Conductor, from what I can tell it's not possible to bulk edit attributes on Patchboard?


I recently started using Patchboard and this is one of the things that has been troubling. In my case, I’ll create a Patch for something like Cinematic Studio Brass (which uses the exact same custom keyswitches for all instruments), duplicate and link each CSB instrument, then later I’ll realize I forgot to create a Mode or something I’d like on each CSB instrument. I then need to delete all Patches for CSB except one, then duplicate and relink all over again. So bulk editing would be awesome. Or, an alternative would be being able to copy certain modules from other Patches, such as Triggers, colors, Modes, etc. 

Another, easier way to make editing Patches quicker is to make the right-click menu options have key commands. It’s kind of a pain needing to right-click on each Patch to do anything to it.


----------



## Toecutter

zolhof said:


> I use a json editor called XiMpLe for that, it opens files on a table grid view, and offers a lot of useful copy+paste and find+replace features that speed up the editing process.


I'm checking out this program, the nested data manipulation is awesome but how do you open the table view to replace key switches? I'm pressing control T and nothing happens.

nvm I was clicking in the wrong place  Dude thanks for the tip, fantastic little program!


----------



## Toecutter

Bender-offender said:


> I recently started using Patchboard and this is one of the things that has been troubling. In my case, I’ll create a Patch for something like Cinematic Studio Brass (which uses the exact same custom keyswitches for all instruments), duplicate and link each CSB instrument, then later I’ll realize I forgot to create a Mode or something I’d like on each CSB instrument. I then need to delete all Patches for CSB except one, then duplicate and relink all over again. So bulk editing would be awesome. Or, an alternative would be being able to copy certain modules from other Patches, such as Triggers, colors, Modes, etc.
> 
> Another, easier way to make editing Patches quicker is to make the right-click menu options have key commands. It’s kind of a pain needing to right-click on each Patch to do anything to it.


Yep I would like to see that too but I think that would require some major rewrite to Patchboard? maybe @mrmiller could chime in. Why are you deleting all patches? Wouldn't be easier to just add the missing stuff? I'm testing Ximple and it's ridiculously fast to do this sort of edit, not even annoyed anymore XD


----------



## Bender-offender

Toecutter said:


> Yep I would like to see that too but I think that would require some major rewrite to Patchboard? maybe @mrmiller could chime in. Why are you deleting all patches? Wouldn't be easier to just add the missing stuff? I'm testing Ximple and it's ridiculously fast to do this sort of edit, not even annoyed anymore XD


I guess it depends on the patch. If there’s one thing to fix, then I of course do it for each patch. If I add a bunch of things, it’s usually quicker to delete all the others and start over.


----------



## mrmiller

Bender-offender said:


> I guess it depends on the patch. If there’s one thing to fix, then I of course do it for each patch. If I add a bunch of things, it’s usually quicker to delete all the others and start over.


There are some features in the works that will make this part easier to start with, basically being able to select things in the Catalog or Project views. That's the first barrier for any sort of bulk editing, to even be able to select _N_ patches and then click edit or delete or whatever. Once the selection model is there, I can add conveniences like keyboard shortcuts like there are in the patch editor itself.

If you're starting fully from scratch with a blank slate, I'd recommend just trashing the database itself (patches.json) that's mentioned above.



Toecutter said:


> Yep I would like to see that too but I think that would require some major rewrite to Patchboard? maybe @mrmiller could chime in.


Not a major rewrite but it's an entirely new editor view. The concept of batch editing is kinda complicated, because you need to be able to maintain and display differences without overwriting them. It's not as simple as just adding batch editing to the existing one. It would be a lot easier if it's simple data like the metadta for the library and developer or the color: I can just show the value if it's the same or if it's different, display "These are different". And in either case allow you to select a value. See something like iTunes and the way it handles bulk editing MP3 metadata.

For something like the articulations, faders and modes, that's much more complicated... you probably want to be able to bulk edit any that are identical. But what if they're in a different order? And how to display and edit different lists of articulations? We also need fine granularity, because you might want to bulk change the name even if the key ranges are different.

I definitely encourage playing with the raw JSON database. I chose the format in part so it would be human-readable and editable with existing tools, both for myself and others. But it's too tech-oriented in the long-term for what's striving to be a tool for people of all technical skill levels.

All this is to say I've thought a lot about it and it's near the top of my wishlist. I've started laying the groundwork internally with the aforementioned ability to select things, though I haven't enabled it publicly yet.

And then the next step is building an elegant UX for the batch editing. If anyone has any favorite examples of software that does that, I'd love some inspiration. I haven't seen any I'm particularly blown away by, because it really is a kinda thorny problem.


----------



## dylanmixer

@mrmiller Are you guys planning to release any walkthrough videos or such? All I can find is the 2 minute trailer from 2 years ago.


----------



## robgb

Toecutter said:


> No offense, but you are such a troll. You have no idea what you are talking about, go check some pros templates like John Powell, Trevor Morris, Jeff Russo, Jason Graves, Alan Silvestri, Hans Zimmer... they can have thousands of tracks ready to go.


And they're John Powell and Trevor Morris, etc. My point is that if you really think you need thousands of tracks to make great film music, then, to my mind, you're approaching it the wrong way. But you do you.


----------



## mrmiller

dylanmixer said:


> @mrmiller Are you guys planning to release any walkthrough videos or such? All I can find is the 2 minute trailer from 2 years ago.


The guys are just me  Walkthrough videos are a great idea! They're unfortunately a bit out of my wheelhouse and thus would take me a lot of time to plan and execute on. I'm really short on spare time at the moment so I've been prioritizing features and fixes instead. I don't have any immediate plans to put any video walkthroughs together but I could be swayed.


----------



## dylanmixer

mrmiller said:


> The guys are just me  Walkthrough videos are a great idea! They're unfortunately a bit out of my wheelhouse and thus would take me a lot of time to plan and execute on. I'm really short on spare time at the moment so I've been prioritizing features and fixes instead. I don't have any immediate plans to put any video walkthroughs together but I could be swayed.


Holy crap! Well thanks for the transparency. I feel like your app is going to generate a lot of buzz considering it offers a lot that no other can at the moment. I know people like me enjoy watching walkthroughs before investing $500-$1K. But that's as good a reason to not to do it as any! You must be swamped. Maybe another kind soul who has already purchased could make a video demonstrating some of the things it could do.


----------



## mrmiller

dylanmixer said:


> Holy crap! Well thanks for the transparency. I feel like your app is going to generate a lot of buzz considering it offers a lot that no other can at the moment. I know people like me enjoy watching walkthroughs before investing $500-$1K. But that's as good a reason to not to do it as any! You must be swamped. Maybe another kind soul who has already purchased could make a video demonstrating some of the things it could do.


Absolutely! One of the interesting aspects of the people who have had been working with Patchboard for the past 3 years is they're almost all full-time professional composers. It's been great because they've supported Patchboard's development. Their various workflows and needs require me to add new features and options. It's not so helpful for things like community or demonstration videos, though.

I'd be delighted to see people sharing patches and videos and stuff and will do whatever I can to facilitate that. This thread has been great already in that regard. I had no idea about XiMple, for instance! And I've gotten some great feedback about the latest VSL instruments I wasn't aware of. And that I should block off some time to make some walkthrough videos


----------



## zolhof

robgb said:


> No offense, but if you have thousands of tracks, you're doing something wrong. My opinion, of course.


No worries. Let me offer you some insight on why we do things the way we do. Most instruments are very project specific, that's why we use track archives and VEPro unpreserved for everything not in the main template, which comprises a small fraction of the catalog. I still need quick access to all libraries at any given moment. It's a hybrid of multis and one articulation per track, for layering purposes. To give you some perspective, the Berlin series alone can go over 2000 tracks, not counting time machine patches. Gravity, Damage, UIST, are true behemoths, and when you enter the sound design territory, things get unbearably laborious.

Back on topic, that's where Patchboard comes in, offering a very streamlined workflow. It's a one stop shop where I can have each patch indexed, unified controls (one Dashboard to rule them all!) and seamlessly recall a track archive or hidden track. I can't give enough praise to Mike for his work and outstanding support!


----------



## robgb

zolhof said:


> Back on topic, that's where Patchboard comes in, offering a very streamlined workflow. It's a one stop shop where I can have each patch indexed, unified controls (one Dashboard to rule them all!) and seamlessly recall a track archive or hidden track. I can't give enough praise to Mike for his work and outstanding support!


Ahhh. Okay. I guess because I can already do all this in Reaper and with Open Stage Control, it isn't an issue for me. But I get it now.


----------



## Toecutter

robgb said:


> And they're John Powell and Trevor Morris, etc. My point is that if you really think you need thousands of tracks to make great film music, then, to my mind, you're approaching it the wrong way. But you do you.


So you are suggesting those A list composers are approaching it the wrong way? Jason Graves, one of videogame top composers, has more than 3000 tracks in his template, that's what is visible not considering unloaded stuff. Are you suggesting he's approaching it the wrong way too?



robgb said:


> Ahhh. Okay. I guess because I can already do all this in Reaper and with Open Stage Control, it isn't an issue for me. But I get it now.


Sorry but I call bullshit. I use a paid OSC template and there's no way to do that. I get it, you work with a small set of sounds but I'm talking big templates here, under minutes, not years. Unless you still have no clue what patchboard is capable of and are talking out of your arse or trolling.


----------



## Bender-offender

mrmiller said:


> There are some features in the works that will make this part easier to start with, basically being able to select things in the Catalog or Project views. That's the first barrier for any sort of bulk editing, to even be able to select _N_ patches and then click edit or delete or whatever. Once the selection model is there, I can add conveniences like keyboard shortcuts like there are in the patch editor itself.
> 
> If you're starting fully from scratch with a blank slate, I'd recommend just trashing the database itself (patches.json) that's mentioned above.
> 
> 
> Not a major rewrite but it's an entirely new editor view. The concept of batch editing is kinda complicated, because you need to be able to maintain and display differences without overwriting them. It's not as simple as just adding batch editing to the existing one. It would be a lot easier if it's simple data like the metadta for the library and developer or the color: I can just show the value if it's the same or if it's different, display "These are different". And in either case allow you to select a value. See something like iTunes and the way it handles bulk editing MP3 metadata.
> 
> For something like the articulations, faders and modes, that's much more complicated... you probably want to be able to bulk edit any that are identical. But what if they're in a different order? And how to display and edit different lists of articulations? We also need fine granularity, because you might want to bulk change the name even if the key ranges are different.
> 
> I definitely encourage playing with the raw JSON database. I chose the format in part so it would be human-readable and editable with existing tools, both for myself and others. But it's too tech-oriented in the long-term for what's striving to be a tool for people of all technical skill levels.
> 
> All this is to say I've thought a lot about it and it's near the top of my wishlist. I've started laying the groundwork internally with the aforementioned ability to select things, though I haven't enabled it publicly yet.
> 
> And then the next step is building an elegant UX for the batch editing. If anyone has any favorite examples of software that does that, I'd love some inspiration. I haven't seen any I'm particularly blown away by, because it really is a kinda thorny problem.


Thanks for the detailed reply! What would help editing Patches quick for the time being would be to have most things accessible by key commands such as all the Patch editing options when you right-click on a patch; importing Logic or Cubase Articulations; “Save and Close” after editing a Patch (and/or “Canceling”); anything else that’s easy to add. For me, this is highly important because I have RSI in my hands and I try to avoid as much mouse-clicking as possible.

As for a bulk editing, some examples that come to mind are the way Pro Tools has batch editing of clip names; the way Cubase/Logic have batch export and how you can select different “aspects” to be in the file names; Logic’s Import Project Setting and the way you can import only certain settings such as Tranform Sets, Environment Layers, specific track types with or without the data, etc; VE Pro’s “Merge Project” is a simple but good one; also VE Pro’s Channel Sets and the way you can save and recall from one instance to another. I’m sure there’s more cool things in other software as well.


----------



## Bender-offender

Bender-offender said:


> Thanks for the detailed reply! What would help editing Patches quick for the time being would be to have most things accessible by key commands such as all the Patch editing options when you right-click on a patch; importing Logic or Cubase Articulations; “Save and Close” after editing a Patch (and/or “Canceling”); anything else that’s easy to add. For me, this is highly important because I have RSI in my hands and I try to avoid as much mouse-clicking as possible.
> 
> As for a bulk editing, some examples that come to mind are the way Pro Tools has batch editing of clip names; the way Cubase/Logic have batch export and how you can select different “aspects” to be in the file names; Logic’s Import Project Setting and the way you can import only certain settings such as Tranform Sets, Environment Layers, specific track types with or without the data, etc; VE Pro’s “Merge Project” is a simple but good one; also VE Pro’s Channel Sets and the way you can save and recall from one instance to another. I’m sure there’s more cool things in other software as well.


I should mention I mean none of what I've said to be criticism of Patchboard. I feel it's definitely worth it's price _because_ how much quicker I can put together a new multi-instrument. When I'd purchase a new library, I'd _dreeeeeeeeeead_ creating it's Expression Map and keyswitches. I knew I'd lose an entire day doing just that. Patchboard, along with the ability to import Expression Maps, has made this repugnant process much more tolerable. So thanks @mrmiller!


----------



## mrmiller

Bender-offender said:


> Thanks for the detailed reply! What would help editing Patches quick for the time being would be to have most things accessible by key commands such as all the Patch editing options when you right-click on a patch; importing Logic or Cubase Articulations; “Save and Close” after editing a Patch (and/or “Canceling”); anything else that’s easy to add. For me, this is highly important because I have RSI in my hands and I try to avoid as much mouse-clicking as possible.


Fortunately, many of these are already available! There definitely need to be more though and I should add some default bindings.
Save: ⌘S
Save and Close: ⌘Return
Import: assign a key binding in System Preferences > Keyboard > Shortcuts > App Shortcuts:







Bender-offender said:


> As for a bulk editing, some examples that come to mind are the way Pro Tools has batch editing of clip names; the way Cubase/Logic have batch export and how you can select different “aspects” to be in the file names; Logic’s Import Project Setting and the way you can import only certain settings such as Tranform Sets, Environment Layers, specific track types with or without the data, etc; VE Pro’s “Merge Project” is a simple but good one; also VE Pro’s Channel Sets and the way you can save and recall from one instance to another. I’m sure there’s more cool things in other software as well.


This sounds like two seperate concepts: (1) batch editing and (2) merging / partial importing into an existing patch. The batch editing of lists of things like the articulations is the only thing that gives me pause. I can't recall a good example of a program that does that with lists of items that could be vastly different between the _N_ things being edited together. I've got some ideas but I'm not sure they're brilliant. They'll definitely be workable though.


Bender-offender said:


> I should mention I mean none of what I've said to be criticism of Patchboard. I feel it's definitely worth it's price _because_ how much quicker I can put together a new multi-instrument. When I'd purchase a new library, I'd _dreeeeeeeeeead_ creating it's Expression Map and keyswitches. I knew I'd lose an entire day doing just that. Patchboard, along with the ability to import Expression Maps, has made this repugnant process much more tolerable. So thanks @mrmiller!


I definitely didn't take it that way! Now how cool would it be if that Expression Map export I described earlier was a thing so you could avoid the clunky Cubase editor almost altogether... Too many ideas, too little right now


----------



## G.Poncelet

Hi @mrmiller, Patchboard looks great !
Since a few weeks I’m looking for a way to use custom names for the different CC’s I use to control virtual instruments in Logic Pro X.
For example, instead of CC02 « Breath » I’d like to see «Vibrato » in the piano roll, for some tracks.
Smart Controls doesn’t work all the time for that.
Could Patchboard be a solution for that issue, or could you find a way to program it ?
If so, I’d be really interested to get a licence.
Thx !


----------



## Begfred

G.Poncelet said:


> Hi @mrmiller, Patchboard looks great !
> Since a few weeks I’m looking for a way to use custom names for the different CC’s I use to control virtual instruments in Logic Pro X.
> For example, instead of CC02 « Breath » I’d like to see «Vibrato » in the piano roll, for some tracks.
> Smart Controls doesn’t work all the time for that.
> Could Patchboard be a solution for that issue, or could you find a way to program it ?
> If so, I’d be really interested to get a licence.
> Thx !


Patchboard can’t change how Logic displays Cc’s. But You can do it with scripter like this https://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=133902&start=20


----------



## G.Poncelet

Thanks a lot for your suggestion, it's working great.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Toecutter said:


> No offense, but you are such a troll. You have no idea what you are talking about, go check some pros templates like John Powell, Trevor Morris, Jeff Russo, Jason Graves, Alan Silvestri, Hans Zimmer... they can have thousands of tracks ready to go.


Absolutely. Rob is an irritated Reaper fanatic with a chip on his shoulder for some odd reason...


----------



## unstruck

I’m very interested in patchboard- curious if there is an eta with regard to ‘metagrid-like functionality’.

I’d love to just use one app and I’m eager to dump my lemur / metagrid setup for patchboard!


----------



## mrmiller

unstruck said:


> I’m very interested in patchboard- curious if there is an eta with regard to ‘metagrid-like functionality’.
> 
> I’d love to just use one app and I’m eager to dump my lemur / metagrid setup for patchboard!


Working on it. Still a ways to go, though...


----------



## unstruck

mrmiller said:


> Working on it. Still a ways to go, though...


Appreciate the reply! Looking forward to using it when it’s ready to go. Thanks!


----------



## Toecutter

mrmiller said:


> Working on it. Still a ways to go, though...


Looks interesting! Does it detect the program or window in focus and automatically display the proper macros?


----------



## dylanmixer

mrmiller said:


> Working on it. Still a ways to go, though...


Awesome. If it's able to replace my Metagrid setup, it'll be insta-buy for me. I'll happily wait!


----------



## lucor

lucor said:


> The only issue I've found so far is that the way the keys light up on the keyrange indicator is VERY laggy.


This one's already fixed btw! Working great now, thanks Mike!


----------



## mrmiller

Toecutter said:


> Looks interesting! Does it detect the program or window in focus and automatically display the proper macros?


That's the plan! Plus contextual within the DAW, so show a certain panel if you've got a MIDI track selected vs an audio track.


----------



## mrmiller

lucor said:


> This one's already fixed btw! Working great now, thanks Mike!


Thanks for bringing it up so I could fix it!


----------



## unstruck

I'm about to buy this. Curious if anyone is running Patchboard on a Windows touch screen display or android tablet and what their experience has been. I love ipads but they are expensive for a dedicated touch screen to be used for a single piece of software. Any one out there using alternatives?


----------



## zolhof

unstruck said:


> I'm about to buy this. Curious if anyone is running Patchboard on a Windows touch screen display or android tablet and what their experience has been. I love ipads but they are expensive for a dedicated touch screen to be used for a single piece of software. Any one out there using alternatives?


Windows, Android and iOS here, no issues.  I use a Dell P2418HT touchscreen on Windows, a 10.8" Huawei M5 Pro on Android Pie and a 9.7" iPad Air 1st gen stuck on iOS 12. The main difference is how the controllers scale depending on the size of your device's screen:

Windows






Android






iPad Air






This is an extreme example, I usually have layouts and filters set to only show what I need. Another minor difference between iOS and Android is that on Android you get scroll bars when things are too crowded. Older cheaper iPads are perfect for Patchboard, I have no performance issues with mine.


----------



## unstruck

zolhof said:


> Windows, Android and iOS here, no issues.  I use a Dell P2418HT touchscreen on Windows, a 10.8" Huawei M5 Pro on Android Pie and a 9.7" iPad Air 1st gen stuck on iOS 12. The main difference is how the controllers scale depending on the size of your device's screen:
> 
> Windows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Android
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iPad Air
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is an extreme example, I usually have layouts and filters set to only show what I need. Another minor difference between iOS and Android is that on Android you get scroll bars when things are too crowded. Older cheaper iPads are perfect for Patchboard, I have no performance issues with mine.


Thanks for reply! Good to know it'll run on older ipads without trouble. When you use the dell touchscreen does it move your mouse to whatever position you're touching? Or does it not influence mouse position, like using an ipad for touch? Forgive me if that's a stupid question! I'm switching to windows and I don't quite understand how multitouch monitors work...


----------



## zolhof

unstruck said:


> Thanks for reply! Good to know it'll run on older ipads without trouble. When you use the dell touchscreen does it move your mouse to whatever position you're touching? Or does it not influence mouse position, like using an ipad for touch? Forgive me if that's a stupid question! I'm switching to windows and I don't quite understand how multitouch monitors work...


The cursor does not move or jump around. I personally prefer to use the tablets only due to the better ergonomics—the Dell is just too big for this. I also tested the 12.9" iPad Pro and found it to be the ideal size for the Dashboard view. It's worth keeping an eye on the used market, 1st gen prices are already dropping due to the new M1 chips.


----------



## rdd27

Is Patchboard able to set the volume of other (non-selected channels) based on the selected MIDI track? 

What I mean is, if I select the flute MIDI track, it would be great to instantly adjust the volume or reverb send etc on it's relative VEPro audio track(s). Usually I have to go searching for it within the Cubase mixer window. Thanks


----------



## mrmiller

rdd27 said:


> Is Patchboard able to set the volume of other (non-selected channels) based on the selected MIDI track?
> 
> What I mean is, if I select the flute MIDI track, it would be great to instantly adjust the volume or reverb send etc on it's relative VEPro audio track(s). Usually I have to go searching for it within the Cubase mixer window. Thanks


Patchboard is capable of setting the volume on any track in the session but currently only uses it for the record enabled track. It's certainly a feature that could be commissioned and added but it's not on my immediate roadmap. With multi-out instruments, there's no way to automatically associate a MIDI track with its related returns and auxes, so those would need additional user input in Patchboard.


----------



## unstruck

zolhof said:


> The cursor does not move or jump around. I personally prefer to use the tablets only due to the better ergonomics—the Dell is just too big for this. I also tested the 12.9" iPad Pro and found it to be the ideal size for the Dashboard view. It's worth keeping an eye on the used market, 1st gen prices are already dropping due to the new M1 chips.


Good to know- this is exactly the info I was hoping to learn - thank you!


----------



## unstruck

Purchased patchboard this week! By using the expression map import feature I was able to pull in a lot of my template in little time. However, I find myself wishing for selective copy/paste for certain patch data - there were some things that I had to resort to XiMpLe for. 

On an unrelated note, would it be possible to have patchboard receive a snapshot of the midi cc data wherever the playback head is? Or could patchboard send midi cc data to a hardware fader controller for a more 'hands on' experience?


----------



## mrmiller

unstruck said:


> Purchased patchboard this week! By using the expression map import feature I was able to pull in a lot of my template in little time. However, I find myself wishing for selective copy/paste for certain patch data - there were some things that I had to resort to XiMpLe for.


For sure. Copy/paste or some sort of selective merge is on my todo list along with batch editing. 


unstruck said:


> On an unrelated note, would it be possible to have patchboard receive a snapshot of the midi cc data wherever the playback head is? Or could patchboard send midi cc data to a hardware fader controller for a more 'hands on' experience?


There’s no generic way for Patchboard to chase the data in the track, unfortunately. It’s likely to be very DAW-specific, perhaps with per-track setup in your template or require something like a custom VST/AU/AAX instrument plug-in wrapper. Any method I’ve come up with would be super invasive unfortunately. I wish I had a good solution here.

Sending MIDI to a control surface is a much more feasible proposition. Can you describe more what you’d want to do with that and how you’d want that to work?


----------



## unstruck

mrmiller said:


> For sure. Copy/paste or some sort of selective merge is on my todo list along with batch editing.
> 
> There’s no generic way for Patchboard to chase the data in the track, unfortunately. It’s likely to be very DAW-specific, perhaps with per-track setup in your template or require something like a custom VST/AU/AAX instrument plug-in wrapper. Any method I’ve come up with would be super invasive unfortunately. I wish I had a good solution here.
> 
> Sending MIDI to a control surface is a much more feasible proposition. Can you describe more what you’d want to do with that and how you’d want that to work?


My 'sending MIDI to a control surface' idea is this: Ideally I'd like a JL Cooper (or similar) to mirror the CC faders that are displayed on the pathboard patch. So if I clicked on Spitfire Chamber Strings Vln 1 in Cubase, in patchboard I would see CC1, CC7, CC11, CC21, CC22, CC23 and on the JL Cooper the first 6 faders would also become those CCs. Then if I switched to a library with totally different CC assignments, the JL Cooper would change with patchboard. It's probably not worth it to set up (if it's even possible) - but I thought it was worth asking! Really what I want is MIDI CC faders that follow the automation like audio faders do and that doesn't seem possible with the current MIDI protocol. Do you think MIDI 2.0 will solve some of these issues?


----------



## Cuelist

A little while back in this thread there was a short discussion about being able to use Patchboard to hide/show groups in Logic Pro. Is this feature now available?


----------



## mrmiller

unstruck said:


> My 'sending MIDI to a control surface' idea is this: Ideally I'd like a JL Cooper (or similar) to mirror the CC faders that are displayed on the pathboard patch. So if I clicked on Spitfire Chamber Strings Vln 1 in Cubase, in patchboard I would see CC1, CC7, CC11, CC21, CC22, CC23 and on the JL Cooper the first 6 faders would also become those CCs. Then if I switched to a library with totally different CC assignments, the JL Cooper would change with patchboard. It's probably not worth it to set up (if it's even possible) - but I thought it was worth asking! Really what I want is MIDI CC faders that follow the automation like audio faders do and that doesn't seem possible with the current MIDI protocol. Do you think MIDI 2.0 will solve some of these issues?


Ah neat idea! So Patchboard would basically act as a control surface host and remap the CCs on the fly. If I could get access to the MIDI data on the current track, that would enable so many cool things. Combined with control surface hosting, I could finally drive a motorized control surface but with MIDI CCs spread across the faders chasing the current track. I’ve wanted that for so long and it’s actually impossible with any DAW’s control surface API, sadly…


----------



## mrmiller

Cuelist said:


> A little while back in this thread there was a short discussion about being able to use Patchboard to hide/show groups in Logic Pro. Is this feature now available?


Hmm I don’t remember talking about that but it’s been a while! No, that’s not available unfortunately. The track showing and hiding is a little bit complicated in Logic compared to some of the other DAWs. I could make something like that work in Cubase, DP or Pro Tools but it would be very tricky in Logic. I could do it but it would involve occasionally showing all the tracks, selecting the specified tracks and running the hide command… sounds simple when I type it out but kinda tricky to make it reliable.


----------



## Dewdman42

@mrmiller any update in the works regarding the recent DP11 update with Articulation Maps?


----------



## mrmiller

Dewdman42 said:


> @mrmiller any update in the works regarding the recent DP11 update with Articulation Maps?


It's on my short term to-do list! Also considering adding some features for exporting Patchboard's metadata into articluation maps for whichever target DAW.


----------



## Dewdman42

glad to hear it. With the addition of Articulation Maps I am now strongly considering a move to DP as my primary DAW, mainly because of chunks support. But I will be wanting to setup a good remote touchpad for it at some point...curious about the pros/cons of DP vs the other two big ones that everyone is always talking about (Cubase and LogicPro). Seems like DP's OSC protocol is a little more robust then what is present for Logic/Cubase, but I could be wrong... not sure what other issues or advantages there might be for DP regarding remote control.


----------



## Bender-offender

Anyone else experiencing issues with Cubase (or other DAWs) and Patchboard? 

What's happening is when I hit "record" then press an articulation in Patchboard on my iPad, play in the notes on the keyboard, hit "stop", and then Cubase crashes. This is a daily occurrence for me. I need to delete the "Patchboard.bundle" file in the Steinberg "Components" folder, quit Patchboard and reopen everything.

Also, I'm unsure if this is related, but it seems to mostly happen when "Auto-transmit" is turned on. Although, it could be happening with it off.


----------



## mrmiller

Bender-offender said:


> Anyone else experiencing issues with Cubase (or other DAWs) and Patchboard?
> 
> What's happening is when I hit "record" then press an articulation in Patchboard on my iPad, play in the notes on the keyboard, hit "stop", and then Cubase crashes. This is a daily occurrence for me. I need to delete the "Patchboard.bundle" file in the Steinberg "Components" folder, quit Patchboard and reopen everything.
> 
> Also, I'm unsure if this is related, but it seems to mostly happen when "Auto-transmit" is turned on. Although, it could be happening with it off.


Hmm... that's not good! Can you send me a macOS crash log? Which version are you on currently?


----------



## Bender-offender

mrmiller said:


> Hmm... that's not good! Can you send me a macOS crash log? Which version are you on currently?


Thanks for the reply! I'll email it to you.


----------



## dts_marin

mrmiller said:


> Ah neat idea! So Patchboard would basically act as a control surface host and remap the CCs on the fly. If I could get access to the MIDI data on the current track, that would enable so many cool things. Combined with control surface hosting, I could finally drive a motorized control surface but with MIDI CCs spread across the faders chasing the current track. I’ve wanted that for so long and it’s actually impossible with any DAW’s control surface API, sadly…



EDIT2: I got a few things wrong so I had to rethink this more carefully.

I understand this might go against your philosophy of keeping DAW integrations as similar as possible. I know DP gives you most of what you need to create a solution for VEP users. (not the most practical maybe) Maybe the same is possible with Cubase & Logic too.

If Patchboard could link internally a MIDI CC input to a VEP parameter then it could be possible to have some kind of MIDI feedback to Patchboard. e.g. MIDI CC1 sets the value of Param1 in VEP (map it to some empty parameter in Kontakt) and then maybe read this value? I don't know how well that would work, if there is latency etc. Also what happens when you are doing fast movements and you override what is sent back? 

i'd test this personally but I can't for the life of me understand which TCP port is DP sending OSC data to..


----------



## eakwarren

Hi @mrmiller,

Odd question, but with Logic Pro 10.7 dropping, have you found a method to _simultaneously_ arm multiple tracks for recording?

I use @Nextmidi's Divisimate to send program change messages and have set a controller assignment in Logic which responds by selecting a rec group (effectively arming the track). This works for individual tracks. However, the Divisimate triggers execute sequentially, so it just switches and selects the last group (track) triggered. Do you know if there's a way to arm _multiple_ instrument tracks?






I tried manually arming all the tracks in my orchestral template, but there seems to be some issue in 10.7 where arming more than 18 (yes 18 not 16, weird huh) tracks causes midi to drop in other tracks. Perhaps it's a bug.


----------



## jneebz

@mrmiller Any plans for Black Friday discounts?  Also, do you have a PayPal purchase option on your website?


----------



## justthere

@mrmiller I asked this question privately but thought you might see it here too, or any other user - if I used a touchscreen connected to my main sequencing Mac as a second screen, would it be the case that when I tapped on the touchscreen it would bring the mouse over from wherever it was on the main screen?

And is it possible to have persistent key commands on the dashboard regardless of the track selected or does one need to switch panels?


----------



## Dewdman42

does anyone know if Patchboard can import DP11 articulation maps yet? I know it can import Cubase Expression maps, but I have the Babylon Waves DP set...and wondering if I will be able to get up and running with Patchboard DIY by importing those somehow.


----------



## justthere

Dewdman42 said:


> does anyone know if Patchboard can import DP11 articulation maps yet? I know it can import Cubase Expression maps, but I have the Babylon Waves DP set...and wondering if I will be able to get up and running with Patchboard DIY by importing those somehow.


I’m curious about this too for a composer I work with.


----------



## dylanmixer

It seems @mrmiller has returned to the batcave, which is fine, because I'm sure he'll come out with plenty of improvements 😁


----------



## stigc56

Hi
I just bought Patchboard "again". Can anyone tell me if the import Cubase expression map works?


----------



## dgburns

stigc56 said:


> Hi
> I just bought Patchboard "again". Can anyone tell me if the import Cubase expression map works?


I tried importing Logic expression maps, but was not able to. I did not investigate further, and did not try Cubase maps. I’d send the dev an email, he has been responsive in respect of other questions I had.


----------



## Hans-Peter

stigc56 said:


> Hi
> I just bought Patchboard "again". Can anyone tell me if the import Cubase expression map works?


Yes, it works (at least for me). There is just an issue with Patchboard sometimes stopping to display track articulations in Cubase. Haven‘t been in touch with the dev about it, but right now removing and adding the control device fixes the issue for me.

In any case, I can wholeheartedly recommend Patchboard!


----------



## jcrosby

The price for this is absurd. It appears the developer's also been AWOL since August(?) and the site still says_ ©2021_ which seems strange for an app with the same entry price as many flagship DAWs, and a top tier price point of $2500. No offense intended, but after seeing video and checking the pricing I was sticker shocked to say the least.


----------



## Hans-Peter

Yes, it is expensive but it works well and the support is stellar. The developer, when contacted by email, responds within max. 1h and is super helpful. My ONLY critique applies to two issues: I wish the developer would add new features proactively without any additional incentives from outside. Some of that seems to have happened earlier last year (layout feature) and I applaud that. Another sometimes annoying issue is the engine that Patchboard is built on. Large maps can take quite a while to open when editing remotes. Note, this does not apply to actual usage where articulation pages switch immediately when selecting a track!

For me, it was the best music-related purchase of the decade (!). Patchboard saved me a lot of time (ca. 500 custom Expression Maps - go figure, how long it takes to create the remotes for that). At the time when I bought it (i.e. when it was still in a very solid "beta") I paid 500 USD for the entry tier and I was a PhD student. So, it depends on your priorities.


----------



## rdd27

I've being trying to understand the pricing for a while now, and think I finally get why it's so expensive. Rather than buying an app, it's seems like you're buying into a developer. Almost like group-hiring a freelance programmer - something I guess most of us aren't really used to. Particularly as the upper tiers appear to offer custom development, which is cool. I guess the end result is a small customer-base and a much more personal service.

If you look at it like that, the customer reviews seem to be great. The developer appears to be nice and offer great support so I'd like to think the product will be around for a while. However, I've seen many one-man-developer apps stop development after just a few years. Even Lemur appeared to go on hiatus for a long while (but was considerably cheaper, so I wasn't bothered).

The price frustrates me too (especially as music is currently a side thing and not my day job). I can already do half of these things with Open Stage Control/Metagrid, so the improvement isn't going to 10x my workflow (it'll just be a little more enjoyable). And since I'd want to buy a touchscreen monitor to get the most from it, that takes the total cost to nearly half a month's average take-home salary (UK). That's not including the time to set up because the lower tier doesn't include presets.

I'll keep watching development with a keen eye. I'm really interested to see where this app goes with further development. There’s clearly a desire for this type of workflow, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we even see the bigger DAW developers creating similar apps in the future too.


----------



## zolhof

jcrosby said:


> The price for this is absurd. It appears the developer's also been AWOL since August(?) and the site still says_ ©2021_ which seems strange for an app with the same entry price as many flagship DAWs, and a top tier price point of $2500. No offense intended, but after seeing video and checking the pricing I was sticker shocked to say the least.


Hi Justin, hope you are doing great! The developer isn't AWOL, their support is the best in the business, bar none. VI-Control is a user discussion forum, not an official support group for audio developers, save a few exceptions. Whenever I have an inquiry or bug report, my first reaction is to contact the developer by email. In Patchboard's case, Mike always follows through and finds the optimal solution. Courteous and efficient. There's life outside VI-Control, you know... blasphemy!  

Mike's also an audio programmer at Naughty Dogs, having just released the new Uncharted title, and helped Cinesamples implement their new cloud platform, MUSIO. Oh, he's also a beast of a composer himself. I like to think of him as some advanced alien lifeform, but he's still a fellow human with family and kids. I'll cut the guy some slack for not changing a number on a website. 

Unless you want to design your own features, the DYI version priced at $499 will do the exact same thing as the Indie and PRO tiers. Money-back guarantee, by the way.

ps. Expression Maps import function works for me as well (Cubase 11). Anyone having Logic issues, shoot support an email.


----------



## Dewdman42

I am going to buy it soon. I am quite sure that if I try to roll my own with open stage control I would spend hundreds of hours doing that and it would not be as good.


----------



## jbuhler

Dewdman42 said:


> I am going to buy it soon. I am quite sure that if I try to roll my own with open stage control I would spend hundreds of hours doing that and it would not be as good.


This is really the key, right? It's sort of how I feel about the Babylon Waves articulation sets. If I look at the price compared to a plugin or a virtual instrument, it can seem rather high. But when I look at it as labor savings—how long it would take me to do the work of first inputting all the articulation sets for existing instruments and then creating new ones every time a new instrument comes out, then it suddenly looks very cheap—especially since many articulation sets are not straightforward to implement. Patchboard seems similar, but with even more robust improvements to workflow. Incidentally, that also makes me see plugins and sample libraries in a new light: any of them that are of sufficient quality that you can use them for production—that is, where they are substituting for labor you would otherwise have to hire—are in fact ridiculously cheap.

In any case, I've been on the verge of testing patchboard on several occasions but I've always had something come up that meant I wouldn't have time to set it up and properly evaluate it during the trial period. Now I'm hoping I can do it when the semester ends.


----------



## Dewdman42

There is a strange perception of value that people have for sample libraries compared to a tool like this. Lots of people spend hundreds of dollars on synth presets too. It’s like sample libraries and synth presets are magic fairy dust that will make them sound like a real respectable musician, but utilitarian tools like this which might even require MORE effort to create and maintain just don’t seem to get buyers to come running for it.

So many people here have spent thousands of dollars on various sample libraries in pursuit of the ultimate legatos but scoff at this tool which most likely they would use on a daily basis to make themselves more productive.


----------



## stigc56

Hans-Peter said:


> Yes, it works (at least for me). There is just an issue with Patchboard sometimes stopping to display track articulations in Cubase. Haven‘t been in touch with the dev about it, but right now removing and adding the control device fixes the issue for me.
> 
> In any case, I can wholeheartedly recommend Patchboard!


I contacted support, and Mike answered me within few hours, the support is outstanding. And I do agree that the time I save with this system is worth the prize. I have been into creating my own system with Lemur and spend endless hours trying to program things my self, I just had to stop.


----------



## arafaratanran

I also did lots of DIYing with Lemur and Cubase. It surely is some work you have to put into it, but on the other hand, you can get some things more to your liking doing it yourself compared to the fixed system you get here. 

But the one feature that cannot be done without serious programming skills (vs just scripting in Lemur) is the integration in Cubase. Unfortunely, Cubase has a very aged control protocol that doesn't allow what works here by a hack of the Eucon protocol: patchboard knows your track selection simply by the name you give to each track. That does not work with Generic Remote or any other control protocol available for Cubase. 

That does however work with Logic and probably other DAWs out of the box (which is why Patchboard does not need any Eucon hack for Logic)! That track recognition is the only feature that really interests me, as I rather prefer doing the rest myself exactly to the specs I desire.

But as we all know, Cubase 12 is coming soon and it is gonna have a new Control API. That is why I am waiting for that new version to hit the shelves. If it allows for a similar control integration without any Eucon hacks, I will save some money and just upgrade. If it doesn't, I will have to swallow the patchboard pill and get the basic version just in order to get that one functionality, that is indeed a game changer, so far ...

To anyone who does not have the patience of skill to put lots of work into scripting to make the ideal version for himself, I think this is the best tool that is currently available, judging from the information available and my experience.


----------



## Bender-offender

Hans-Peter said:


> Yes, it works (at least for me). There is just an issue with Patchboard sometimes stopping to display track articulations in Cubase. Haven‘t been in touch with the dev about it, but right now removing and adding the control device fixes the issue for me.
> 
> In any case, I can wholeheartedly recommend Patchboard!


I *think* this is what I’ve been experiencing as well as of recently. When I select a track in Cubase, Patchboard (on my iPad) switches to the correct track but the articulations don’t show up. They do show up, however, inside the Patchboard app on my computer in the Dashboard tab. Some times this happens, other times it works as it should. I’m unsure what is causing it. Testing this in other DAWs has been 100% reliable. It’s only with Cubase for some reason.


----------



## dts_marin

All I can say is for a software with such a low volume of sales and such complexity, the price is a steal. He has developed custom controllers for 3? DAWs. That alone is *a lot* of work. Mike is a class act. I don't have Patchboard yet but he was kind enough to help me figure out how to create the OSC connection with DP for my own DIY app.


----------



## dgburns

stigc56 said:


> I contacted support, and Mike answered me within few hours, the support is outstanding. And I do agree that the time I save with this system is worth the prize. I have been into creating my own system with Lemur and spend endless hours trying to program things my self, I just had to stop.


FYI, with Mike’s help, I was able to figure out how to send osc from Lemur to both LPX and Cubase- both will select the track specified in the osc message, Patchboard happily follows and shows the articulations etc for that track on one of my ipads running Patchboard. I’m so used to my own Lemur template layout, it’s faster for me to select the track from Lemur. I won’t make Lemur bi-directional, it would require too much scripting, but it would be possible to do. I would imagine Open Stage Control could replace Lemur in this respect.
I still use some custom control layouts in Lemur as well. Both Patchboard and Lemur play nicely together.

This Patchboard app is a transcendental shift in my ‘workflow’ ( I hate using that overused word ), I did not quite ‘get it’ prior to buying it, so I can understand the price tag seems high to some ppl here. My take on it since purchasing, is that it simplifies an aspect of working with libraries that was overlooked by every daw out there, I struggled for years trying to get on top of managing articulatons. Patchboard makes me feel like I gained control over articulation management again. It also made me re-think how I name my tracks as well, and gives a new perspective on tracks I seldom use, but should use more often.


----------



## jbuhler

dgburns said:


> This Patchboard app is a transcendental shift in my ‘workflow’ ( I hate using that overused word ), I did not quite ‘get it’ prior to buying it, so I can understand the price tag seems high to some ppl here. My take on it since purchasing, is that it simplifies an aspect of working with libraries that was overlooked by every daw out there, I struggled for years trying to get on top of managing articulatons. Patchboard makes me feel like I gained control over articulation management again. It also made me re-think how I name my tracks as well, and gives a new perspective on tracks I seldom use, but should use more often.


Workflow might seem overused but it speaks to something very real and something that is often overlooked. Workflow frictions build up gradually and just make work tedious and awkward when it doesn’t have to be. There’s lots of labor wasted in overcoming these frictions and something that permanently eliminates them extremely is valuable and worth paying for. The main questions are the start up costs: how long does it take to get up to speed with the software? The trial money back period should answer that. Does the new workflow introduce new unanticipated frictions? This will be harder to fully evaluate in the trial period since it will likely take several months to establish the new muscle memory to the point that it is fully habitual. The other question is investing in the developer. As far as I am aware Patchboard is one guy doing this so what happens if something happens to Mike or he loses interest. All software has these sorts of issues of course but they are more acute in one person shops.


----------



## dgburns

jbuhler said:


> Workflow might seem overused but it speaks to something very real and something that is often overlooked. Workflow frictions build up gradually and just make work tedious and awkward when it doesn’t have to be. There’s lots of labor wasted in overcoming these frictions and something that permanently eliminates them extremely is valuable and worth paying for. The main questions are the start up costs: how long does it take to get up to speed with the software? The trial money back period should answer that. Does the new workflow introduce new unanticipated frictions? This will be harder to fully evaluate in the trial period since it will likely take several months to establish the new muscle memory to the point that it is fully habitual. The other question is investing in the developer. As far as I am aware Patchboard is one guy doing this so what happens if something happens to Mike or he loses interest. All software has these sorts of issues of course but they are more acute in one person shops.


 As the app is essentially browser based, as well as a controller plugin in the DAW, it is fairly well insulated from getting EOL'd - even if the dev goes away - but not 100 % certain I guess. As far as new user frictions, none that I can speak to.

The big item will be setting up all your articulations if you go the DIY app. But I think you'll find once set up, it just runs and stays out of the way.

It's probably better to go the DIY way anyway, that way you learn how to use the app. One of the important things to grasp is the use of tagging. I included a screenshot. Here what I did is replicated the approach the dev uses, at least as far as I can see. The columns for Longs / Leg / Short / Fx Run / other are populated by the tags given to the individual articulations. In other words, the columns self populate by how you tag them if you set this up per instrument. I therefore use one template for each library. I find it re-organizes the arctic's in a smart way. You have control in any case.I also like the fact you can enter the ranges for the instrument and see it right there at the top. You can hide the little text pointing to the keys btw.
Anyway, I'm sure smarter ppl than me have better implementations, I'm just showing you an example here.


----------



## eakwarren

dgburns said:


> FYI, with Mike’s help, I was able to figure out how to send osc from Lemur to both LPX and Cubase- both will select the track specified in the osc message


@dgburns Would you be so kind as to share your knowledge?  I've been messing around with automation of rec-arming tracks in LPX and knowing how to select them via OSC may be helpful. There's also this thread with a template for BBCSO OSC various CC controls, articulation switching, and microphone mixing, if anyone is interested.


----------



## dts_marin

dgburns said:


> The big item will be setting up all your articulations if you go the DIY app. But I think you'll find once set up, it just runs and stays out of the way.


That's the biggest issue for me with all current tools including PB to some extent. A lot of manual work inside annoying editing environments. That's why I'm trying to create my own solution but it is a lot of work and I'd rather not have to do it.. And part of the blame are DAW manufacturers that don't make the most wise choices or don't provide well accessible/documented tools to create such things.

I considered commissioning Mike to add the features I want but I can't afford the pro tier plus the cost of his work for those features (yes I said the price is a steal and I stand by that). 

The neat thing about DP's implementation of articulation maps is they are stored in JSON files. My ideal app would parse those files directly so that the changes done inside DP transfer to the touch interface automatically and vice versa. Maybe it can work like that in Logic & Cubase too.

That would alleviate a lot of pain.

Personally I don't use huge fixed templates. I constantly change things and I want my tools to be flexible and reactive. That's why I use VEP with an instance for each track because I don't want to waste time calculating how many damn MIDI ports I need. I built as I go.


----------



## dgburns

eakwarren said:


> @dgburns Would you be so kind as to share your knowledge?  I've been messing around with automation of rec-arming tracks in LPX and knowing how to select them via OSC may be helpful. There's also this thread with a template for BBCSO OSC various CC controls, articulation switching, and microphone mixing, if anyone is interested.


I can speak to Lemur OSC scripting, and that Patchboard has a limited set of commands it will respond to, record arming tracks being one of them. You should visit the Support page on the Patchboard site, it is open to everyone to view. I'll show you the scripting in Lemur for a multipad object to select a track. Record arming should follow the same syntax ( ? )

You could use single pads as well, with one script per pad, I guess. Just make sure you send the OSC message to the right Port that Patchboard is expecting, This you can edit in Patchboard Pref's to your liking.

Because the target track names ( for me in LPX ) are distinct, I don't think you can script it any other way, but maybe there is ? This is the way that worked for me. ( for Lemur multipad object you first have to define x for all pads in order to make a script per pad )

I know it might be tedious to do this for all tracks, especially after first setting up your template in Patchboard. I might not do this for all tracks, just the main ones I want to access from within Lemur. For me this is a one way Lemur >> LPX/Patchboard message, I'm not intending on implementing having Lemur be bi-directional OSC. Not likely enough memory in Lemur to do that, and I don't see the point anyway.

So the big take-away in all this is - the value is in the Patchboard controller plugin doing the hard work here from inside LPX. ( or Cubase/DP ) I would be otherwise happy just to use Patchboard and not use Lemur, but I like the way Lemur looks ( lol )


----------



## eakwarren

dgburns said:


> I can speak to Lemur OSC scripting, and that Patchboard has a limited set of commands it will respond to, record arming tracks being one of them. You should visit the Support page on the Patchboard site, it is open to everyone to view. I'll show you the scripting in Lemur for a multipad object to select a track. Record arming should follow the same syntax ( ? )
> 
> You could use single pads as well, with one script per pad, I guess. Just make sure you send the OSC message to the right Port that Patchboard is expecting, This you can edit in Patchboard Pref's to your liking.
> 
> Because the target track names ( for me in LPX ) are distinct, I don't think you can script it any other way, but maybe there is ? This is the way that worked for me. ( for Lemur multipad object you first have to define x for all pads in order to make a script per pad )
> 
> I know it might be tedious to do this for all tracks, especially after first setting up your template in Patchboard. I might not do this for all tracks, just the main ones I want to access from within Lemur. For me this is a one way Lemur >> LPX/Patchboard message, I'm not intending on implementing having Lemur be bi-directional OSC. Not likely enough memory in Lemur to do that, and I don't see the point anyway.
> 
> So the big take-away in all this is - the value is in the Patchboard controller plugin doing the hard work here from inside LPX. ( or Cubase/DP ) I would be otherwise happy just to use Patchboard and not use Lemur, but I like the way Lemur looks ( lol )


Thx! I'll chew on this for a while.


----------



## Begfred

May I suggest a small improvement?
It would be nice if Layout Zones only be displayed when there is articulation in it. So when empty=hidden
Ex. I have a Violin patch that does not contains legato, so there's no legato column. So we don't need to create a specific layout setup for it


----------



## dylanmixer

If I had to guess, he probably stopped posting here as to not encourage free suggestions, since implementing new features is part of the "pro" tier.


----------



## mrmiller

dylanmixer said:


> If I had to guess, he probably stopped posting here as to not encourage free suggestions, since implementing new features is part of the "pro" tier.


Nope—I'm always open to suggestions and I do implement features on either personal whim or by request. The new features is mostly targeting the larger stuff, like the macros stuff I've been working on for the last little bit.

Sorry for not being so present. As mentioned, this is a solo passion project. When my time gets tied up with life, my kids or other work, Patchboard's development tends to slow down temporarily. That said, I never stop responding to emails and I do my best to provide direct and detailed support, as many here have attested to. I'm not an active VI-Control user; I only noticed this thread again because @Hans-Peter mentioned people were having issues.



rdd27 said:


> I've being trying to understand the pricing for a while now, and think I finally get why it's so expensive. Rather than buying an app, it's seems like you're buying into a developer. Almost like group-hiring a freelance programmer - something I guess most of us aren't really used to. Particularly as the upper tiers appear to offer custom development, which is cool. I guess the end result is a small customer-base and a much more personal service.
> 
> If you look at it like that, the customer reviews seem to be great. The developer appears to be nice and offer great support so I'd like to think the product will be around for a while. However, I've seen many one-man-developer apps stop development after just a few years. Even Lemur appeared to go on hiatus for a long while (but was considerably cheaper, so I wasn't bothered).
> 
> The price frustrates me too (especially as music is currently a side thing and not my day job). I can already do half of these things with Open Stage Control/Metagrid, so the improvement isn't going to 10x my workflow (it'll just be a little more enjoyable). And since I'd want to buy a touchscreen monitor to get the most from it, that takes the total cost to nearly half a month's average take-home salary (UK). That's not including the time to set up because the lower tier doesn't include presets.
> 
> I'll keep watching development with a keen eye. I'm really interested to see where this app goes with further development. There’s clearly a desire for this type of workflow, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we even see the bigger DAW developers creating similar apps in the future too.


You've hit the nail on the head for what I intended. Honestly, I would love to reduce the price substantially. The price frustrates me too. I want people who are just starting out or even hobbyists to have access to these kind of tools. I've been mulling over potentially a feature-limited entry tier or free version, perhaps. The only thing that gives me pause, though: I don't believe I'd be able to support the community well if it ballooned in size.

To some extent, the price is high to artificially limit the user base. That way, I can support everyone fully. The highest tier is effectively a dedicated support contract. The people who paid for that have my personal cell. I received a phone call just last week first thing in the morning to fix an issue. I was screen sharing this week into another composer's rig on Saturday at midnight to fix some strange network issues they were having. Not a Patchboard problem, it turns out, but it was preventing it from working.

I suspect I could double the number of users by halving the price, but I'm not sure I could do much more than 2x users. Then I'd be supporting 2x the number of people, for basically the same pay.

As you said, what people are really paying for is me and the ability to influence the future direction and development of Patchboard. In an ideal world, it's like having a in-house developer shared between everyone who's bought in.



Begfred said:


> May I suggest a small improvement?
> It would be nice if Layout Zones only be displayed when there is articulation in it. So when empty=hidden
> Ex. I have a Violin patch that does not contains legato, so there's no legato column. So we don't need to create a specific layout setup for it


This is a good idea and would be really easy to add as a preference! The reason the empty column sticks around is because the Layouts were added originally to make it so things didn't move around on screen and you could rely on muscle memory. If an empty column disappeared, the visual layout on screen might change. I agree it's a nice to have option, though, and would probably be how I'd personally choose to work.



arafaratanran said:


> But the one feature that cannot be done without serious programming skills (vs just scripting in Lemur) is the integration in Cubase. Unfortunely, Cubase has a very aged control protocol that doesn't allow what works here by a hack of the Eucon protocol: patchboard knows your track selection simply by the name you give to each track. That does not work with Generic Remote or any other control protocol available for Cubase.
> 
> But as we all know, Cubase 12 is coming soon and it is gonna have a new Control API. That is why I am waiting for that new version to hit the shelves. If it allows for a similar control integration without any Eucon hacks, I will save some money and just upgrade. If it doesn't, I will have to swallow the patchboard pill and get the basic version just in order to get that one functionality, that is indeed a game changer, so far ...


For what it's worth, the Cubase support is no longer based on Eucon and hasn't been for a couple of years now. I wrote a custom Remote plug-in for Cubase that functions like the Logic plug-in. I'm very curious about this new Control API. Embarrassingly, it's the first I've heard of it!



dgburns said:


> As the app is essentially browser based, as well as a controller plugin in the DAW, it is fairly well insulated from getting EOL'd - even if the dev goes away - but not 100 % certain I guess. As far as new user frictions, none that I can speak to.


There's no real certainty there, unfortunately. If I get hit by a bus, eventually things will break. Maybe Cubase updates and the plug-in no longer works. Same thing with Pro Tools. Browsers change and all of a sudden the UI doesn't look right. (This actually just happened with Chrome on Android, perhaps. Still need to test but got a report that something is amiss there.) Since the software around it keeps changing, it needs to be kept alive as well.



jcrosby said:


> The price for this is absurd. It appears the developer's also been AWOL since August(?) and the site still says_ ©2021_ which seems strange for an app with the same entry price as many flagship DAWs, and a top tier price point of $2500. No offense intended, but after seeing video and checking the pricing I was sticker shocked to say the least.


No offense taken! The price is absurd. That $2500 comes with free hugs and emotional support at all hours of the day over the phone. I even would swing by LA studios in person in the before times. It's really intended for a small subset of people. I should probably retire that highest tier because I don't want to be doing that level of hands-on support these days.

The copyright isn't updated because I'm lazy and I didn't know anyone actually noticed or cared. But I will update it now as a symbol of my devotion to you and the cause.


----------



## mrmiller

dgburns said:


> I tried importing Logic expression maps, but was not able to. I did not investigate further, and did not try Cubase maps. I’d send the dev an email, he has been responsive in respect of other questions I had.


Hmm! That's not cool! Can you shoot me an email with the Logic Articulation Set that didn't import properly? As far as I know, Cubase, Logic and DP11 maps are all importing properly.


justthere said:


> I’m curious about this too for a composer I work with.


Yes, it does support DP11 maps. It's in a "beta" version because I didn't push the release button last year before I got swamped with other work. I make the betas available to anyone who asks. I've got a hefty release coming up, though.


----------



## stigc56

Do you plan to support Studio One?


----------



## mrmiller

stigc56 said:


> Do you plan to support Studio One?


Not currently? I looked into it a few years back but their control surface API was severely limited. The bigger issue is I haven't had many requests for either Studio One or Reaper support and developing a new integration is a major undertaking.

(For background, Patchboard was initially only the Pro Tools integration, which I developed for Brian Tyler. I then added Digital Performer integration for myself. Another composer commissioned the Logic integration. The Eucon implementation was just for fun and to practice reverse engineering. Cubase I developed because I expected a lot of potential users would want it.)

EDIT: To clarify, this doesn't mean that I won't, just that I haven't felt a strong pressure or urge to nor has anyone come to me with a commission. The Presonus devs were very open when I approached them for more info, which is always a great sign.


----------



## stigc56

While we all are waiting for Cubase 12, I think a lot of us are contemplating if Studio One could be a candidate with a better perspective for the future. Steinberg really needs to move forward!


----------



## justthere

stigc56 said:


> While we all are waiting for Cubase 12, I think a lot of us are contemplating if Studio One could be a candidate with a better perspective for the future. Steinberg really needs to move forward!


Maybe that's a conversation for another thread - if you started one that was essentially "Lots of us are contemplating switching to Studio One because Steinberg aren't looking to the future" I imagine you'd get lots of responses. Why don't you? And go into detail in it.


----------



## Dewdman42

StudioOne is a very long ways behind Cubase and it will be many years, if ever, that it catches up. Despite some dumb decisions from Steinberg lately about VST3 licensing, Cubase is still an industrial grade application with decades of development ahead of S1. S1 is like a toy in comparison. I doubt that very many serious players..the kind that would actually pay for and use Patchboard, are really using StudioOne actively as their primary orchestration DAW.


----------



## studioj

Dewdman42 said:


> StudioOne is a very long ways behind Cubase and it will be many years, if ever, that it catches up. Despite some dumb decisions from Steinberg lately about VST3 licensing, Cubase and Dorico are still industrial grade applications. StudioOne is like a toy in comparison. I doubt that very many serious players..the kind that would actually pay for and use Patchboard, are really using StudioOne actively as their primary orchestration DAW.


I disagree - I'm giving Studio One a serious look right now and I would consider myself a candidate for Patchboard. It's a really powerful DAW, perhaps not quite as feature rich as Cubase but IMO has a much more streamlined workflow and lots of smart functionally...and I love the whole macro system they've put together. I predict we'll see lots of movement over to this program over the next couple of years. I haven't found anything in it yet that I -can't- do, that I really need.. although there are some video functions where it could use some improvement. It has been stable for me over a handful of projects this year so far. but anyway, I have been eyeing patchboard, and one reason I haven't jumped in yet is the Studio One compatibility .


----------



## Dewdman42

well I'm sure that when enough of you make the switch and ask MrMiller to support it he will when there are enough of you. This is the wrong thread to argue about whether StudioOne is as good as Cubase.


----------



## stigc56

Dewdman42 said:


> StudioOne is a very long ways behind Cubase and it will be many years, if ever, that it catches up. Despite some dumb decisions from Steinberg lately about VST3 licensing, Cubase and Dorico are still industrial grade applications. StudioOne is like a toy in comparison. I doubt that very many serious players..the kind that would actually pay for and use Patchboard, are really using StudioOne actively as their primary orchestration DAW.


You really pick your words!  We have talked - peacefully - many times before, and you have been very helpful.
Patchboard which I have bought to use with Cubase is the kind of application that simply makes your life easier, - okay after the initial setup work -, and it would be very handy in the S1 environment, thats why I brought it up. And when @mrmiller replied that he was not aware of any interest, I wrote that we were quite a few guys - according to the Steinberg forum - who experience the development of Cubase is taking a turn away from the user group that I and many more here is a part of. S1 is - especially driven by the efforts of @Lukas - moving in the right direction I think, and we are still - as I wrote earlier - waiting for Cubase 12. I fail to see how that can contribute to any discussion.


----------



## justthere

Sounds like a great topic for another thread.


----------



## arafaratanran

mrmiller said:


> For what it's worth, the Cubase support is no longer based on Eucon and hasn't been for a couple of years now. I wrote a custom Remote plug-in for Cubase that functions like the Logic plug-in. I'm very curious about this new Control API. Embarrassingly, it's the first I've heard of it!


Hey MR! 

What about Cubase 12, now? I can see that the whole "device setup" is still there, but is labled "legacy" (including the generic remote, that I have been using for my own setup). In Steinbergs forum I read they want you to move everything to the new midi remote system, as at some point generic remote and device setup will be removed from Cubase. The new API includes custom scripts in Java. Looking into the documantation (which is not in the manual, but browser-based and accessible in Cubase), at a first glance I cannot find anything to recall a track name from the project. 

I was considering buying Patchboard only for your device script to recall the full names of tracks being activated or record enabled, but have been waiting exactly for this reason that this functionality might break with the new API for future Cubase-versions. Now, it seems clear that sooner or later you will have to write a different script and see, if the functionality is even possible. As soon as you figured it out, I would be glad to hear back from you in order to make up my mind about buying patchboard. Thanks!


----------



## mrmiller

arafaratanran said:


> Hey MR!
> 
> What about Cubase 12, now? I can see that the whole "device setup" is still there, but is labled "legacy" (including the generic remote, that I have been using for my own setup). In Steinbergs forum I read they want you to move everything to the new midi remote system, as at some point generic remote and device setup will be removed from Cubase. The new API includes custom scripts in Java. Looking into the documantation (which is not in the manual, but browser-based and accessible in Cubase), at a first glance I cannot find anything to recall a track name from the project.
> 
> I was considering buying Patchboard only for your device script to recall the full names of tracks being activated or record enabled, but have been waiting exactly for this reason that this functionality might break with the new API for future Cubase-versions. Now, it seems clear that sooner or later you will have to write a different script and see, if the functionality is even possible. As soon as you figured it out, I would be glad to hear back from you in order to make up my mind about buying patchboard. Thanks!


Good question! I don’t know the answer as I haven’t upgraded yet and the API documentation is only available from the application itself (these things should really just be made available online). I’ll try to upgrade soon so I can take a look. If anyone already has upgraded and could send me the PDF or whatever then I can take a look (https://steinberg.help/cubase_pro/v12/en/cubase_nuendo/topics/midi_remote/midi_remote_api_c.html) now.

That said, I haven’t yet found a DAW that I haven’t been able to hack around in one form or another. Worst case, I can always fallback to my EuCon emulation assuming (I think safely) they have no plans of removing that support. It’s not ideal in that you need extra software but it would keep most of the functionality.


----------



## mrmiller

arafaratanran said:


> Hey MR!
> 
> What about Cubase 12, now? I can see that the whole "device setup" is still there, but is labled "legacy" (including the generic remote, that I have been using for my own setup). In Steinbergs forum I read they want you to move everything to the new midi remote system, as at some point generic remote and device setup will be removed from Cubase. The new API includes custom scripts in Java. Looking into the documantation (which is not in the manual, but browser-based and accessible in Cubase), at a first glance I cannot find anything to recall a track name from the project.


Alright, so I upgraded and took some time to poke around the new API. It's fine and I could probably make it work if needed but I'd lose some features I currently support like the ability to activate disabled tracks from Patchboard.

First off, the good news is Patchboard works just fine with Cubase 12. No compatibility issues I've found yet.

As for your concern, it's not clear to me that Steinberg is actually planning to remove their Remote Device plug-in support any time in the foreseeable future. If you try adding the EuCon plug-in, for instance, it's listed under "Remote Devices", not "Remote Devices (Legacy)".

The new MIDI Remotes are a more powerful replacement for Generic Remotes and there's a JavaScript-based plug-in API for it. It's still very much limited though, and targeted squarely at replacing simple traditional control surfaces that communicate over MIDI. If I had to guess, it's written as a layer on top of their existing Remote Device API. They would not be able to support the EuCon control surfaces with the new API, for example, because that needs a whole bunch of network communication.

It's interesting to contrast this to the new control surface API Logic added which is Lua-based but is quite similar. That supports OSC in addition to MIDI, however.


----------



## Petter Rong

I'm very much a non-template (or at least non-super-big-everything-already-loaded-template) guy, and mostly utilize the DAW's built-in patch system (currently Logic). Quite a few shortcomings though, and I saw this recommended in a thread as a better patch system. But looking through the website and this thread, it seems to me that this only connects to an open session and sorts through what's already loaded and doesn't hold non-loaded patches in a patch system. Of course amazing in it's own right, but would be different than what I'm looking for. Could someone confirm this?


----------



## mrmiller

Petter Rong said:


> I'm very much a non-template (or at least non-super-big-everything-already-loaded-template) guy, and mostly utilize the DAW's built-in patch system (currently Logic). Quite a few shortcomings though, and I saw this recommended in a thread as a better patch system. But looking through the website and this thread, it seems to me that this only connects to an open session and sorts through what's already loaded and doesn't hold non-loaded patches in a patch system. Of course amazing in it's own right, but would be different than what I'm looking for. Could someone confirm this?


Yes, that is correct. It keeps the definitions around in its DB but you won’t be able to load the patch into Logic from Patchboard. I’ve had ambitions for a long time of enabling that but it would be a fairly major undertaking and require a wrapper plug-in in the DAW (along the lines of Komplete Kontrol) or another clever workaround.


----------



## justthere

mrmiller said:


> Alright, so I upgraded and took some time to poke around the new API. It's fine and I could probably make it work if needed but I'd lose some features I currently support like the ability to activate disabled tracks from Patchboard.
> 
> First off, the good news is Patchboard works just fine with Cubase 12. No compatibility issues I've found yet.
> 
> As for your concern, it's not clear to me that Steinberg is actually planning to remove their Remote Device plug-in support any time in the foreseeable future. If you try adding the EuCon plug-in, for instance, it's listed under "Remote Devices", not "Remote Devices (Legacy)".
> 
> The new MIDI Remotes are a more powerful replacement for Generic Remotes and there's a JavaScript-based plug-in API for it. It's still very much limited though, and targeted squarely at replacing simple traditional control surfaces that communicate over MIDI. If I had to guess, it's written as a layer on top of their existing Remote Device API. They would not be able to support the EuCon control surfaces with the new API, for example, because that needs a whole bunch of network communication.
> 
> It's interesting to contrast this to the new control surface API Logic added which is Lua-based but is quite similar. That supports OSC in addition to MIDI, however.


Man, it’s VERY limited. And they left so many things out, to me. At this point it’s as if DAW makers are just painfully unaware of the need for contextual control. Cubase has quick controls - but only eight of them - and no way to send a simple command to tell an external controller that has multiple screens/pages to change to something germane to what one is looking at - which you have gotten around, of course, and you ought to be lionized for having done so.

What I was hoping for in this new Cubase version was the ability to poke TouchOSC with a program change or something, anything, to get it to change pages when a track is selected. Nope. 

And also - I’d set up a TouchOSC controller that I thought I would recreate/define in the Cubase remote system, and discovered that in the automatic editor that lets you grab a controller or press a button on your controller to define it, one message it doesn’t receive and respond to is… program changes. What?! Why not?

Anyway, agreed that it looks like a tack-on over existing code. It’s not deep - it’s like they hired UX people instead of programmers. Not really new features so much as new packaging. And JS does seem to be a strange choice that they are a bit defensive about. Seriously feels like they have staffing problems. 

What the.


----------



## mrmiller

justthere said:


> Man, it’s VERY limited. And they left so many things out, to me. At this point it’s as if DAW makers are just painfully unaware of the need for contextual control. Cubase has quick controls - but only eight of them - and no way to send a simple command to tell an external controller that has multiple screens/pages to change to something germane to what one is looking at - which you have gotten around, of course, and you ought to be lionized for having done so.


Yeah, it’s disappointing but not surprising in many ways. Digital Performer has the most full featured control surface API at this point, still, and it’s well over a decade old now. Even what I did with Cubase is very much non-kosher. I had to reverse engineer a bunch of stuff in Cubase to get it to work at all because Steinberg’s public API definitely doesn’t support what I’m doing. It’s frustrating because the EuCon driver needs that functionality. Why not expose it?


----------



## justthere

mrmiller said:


> Yeah, it’s disappointing but not surprising in many ways. Digital Performer has the most full featured control surface API at this point, still, and it’s well over a decade old now. Even what I did with Cubase is very much non-kosher. I had to reverse engineer a bunch of stuff in Cubase to get it to work at all because Steinberg’s public API definitely doesn’t support what I’m doing. It’s frustrating because the EuCon driver needs that functionality. Why not expose it?


Avid license restrictions, perhaps? I can't imagine how you got track names out of Cubase. I mean, kind of, but that should be a standard part of this scenario; it's far more sensible and flexible than having, say, 8 fixed "favorite" controls. To use something like SampleModeling Strings I have 12 faders in my ComposerTools in addition to 17 key switches, and when that track is selected I want to be able to see whatever I want. (And of course Patchwork does that.)

Frustrating that Logic's scripting is centered on the track you are working on but can't communicate with the outside world without Environment misery. And absolutely frustrating that Cubase's other "scripting", in the logical editors, is so limited. It doesn't recognize articulation switches, for one thing. Has no idea what they are. And I do miss DP - about to do an upgrade because nothing else comes even close to its hit points-to-likely-tempi functionality. It's amazing. And great strides in articulation management - if every dev gets on board with providing the hooks, as they already ought to have. Why is there no VI standard spec like MIDI? Doesn't have to be about what an articulation is called (like the self-limiting UACC), just a method of providing named hooks.


----------



## studioj

With the announced discontinuation of Lemur and Composer Tools Pro, I decided to give Patchboard an official look. Was up and running with Pro Tools in under an hour with a few patches, and had most of my main libraries going with new patches in just a few hours. Feels very robust and does what it says it does! Expensive sure, but seems worth the price of admission for a pro. I considered trying to script something functionally similar with Soundflow, but it would have taken too long, and it wouldn't be near as flexible or dynamic. I will it put it through it's paces this week, but so far very happy with the experience. I love the "auto transmit" mode/ feature... it automatically drops in the articulation switch when going into record in PT, I don't have to manually think about recording it if I do the switch before recording anything. Great feature.


----------



## mrmiller

Begfred said:


> May I suggest a small improvement?
> It would be nice if Layout Zones only be displayed when there is articulation in it. So when empty=hidden
> Ex. I have a Violin patch that does not contains legato, so there's no legato column. So we don't need to create a specific layout setup for it


Good idea! I thought I added a preference for that but maybe not. For some people, they want the layout to be absolutely consistent, even if a column would be empty.


dylanmixer said:


> If I had to guess, he probably stopped posting here as to not encourage free suggestions, since implementing new features is part of the "pro" tier.


Nope, nothing intentional… just apparently didn’t get a notification or simply missed it.


----------



## Vonk

I have been exploring the Patchboard elements shown on the website, to gain a better understanding of how it operates. It looks impressive. However I couldn't find much information or any example of preset templates, although the inclusion of templates is the main differential bewtween low tier and mid tier versions. Can you expand a little on what a template/presets consists of, and what ones are included in the indie version? How much adaptation is still going to be necessary if one uses a preset and ones own template? I'm trying to guage the workload involved in switching over from a fully functioning, but eventually obsolete, Composer Tools, setup of approx 700 tracks.
Thanks for any advice.


----------



## studioj

Vonk said:


> I have been exploring the Patchboard elements shown on the website, to gain a better understanding of how it operates. It looks impressive. However I couldn't find much information or any example of preset templates, although the inclusion of templates is the main differential bewtween low tier and mid tier versions. Can you expand a little on what a template/presets consists of, and what ones are included in the indie version? How much adaptation is still going to be necessary if one uses a preset and ones own template? I'm trying to guage the workload involved in switching over from a fully functioning, but eventually obsolete, Composer Tools, setup of approx 700 tracks.
> Thanks for any advice.


I had this same consideration and chose the DIY tier in the end. Creating patches is VERY easy, much easier than in CTP actually, and I used my Composer Tools Pro template to teach each patchboard articulation the right command as there is a MIDI learn function in Patchboard. This is the list sent of the presets in the Indie tier. But again I went DIY and am satisfied I didn't spring for the extra, even though time is $. How many CTP presets would you be looking to replace? I had a system where ONE preset covered a multitude of sections within a single library, so I only had about 20 to move over. I used Logic Articulation Sets I had for some of the more complex ones, to get the names in. But in reality it wouldn't have taken that long to type those out again. 

preset list from Indie Tier:

_8DIO: Adagio, Anthology, Insolidus, Lacrimosa, Majestica

AudioBro LASS

Cinematic Strings: CS 1, CS 2, Cinematic Studio Strings, Cinematic Studio Strings Solo

CineSamples: CineBrass, CineStrings, CineWinds

East West: HW Brass, HW Cello Solo, HW Harp, HW Strings, HW Violin Solo, HW Woodwinds, Ra, Silk, EWQL Symphonic Brass, Choirs, Strings, Woodwinds, Voices of Passion

Embertone: Blakus Cello, Chapman Trumpet and Tuba, Friedlander Violin, Joshua Bell Violin

Heavyocity: NOVO

NI: Session Horns Pro, Symphonic Essentials, Symphony Series, VSL Brass, Strings, Woods

Orchestral Tools: Berlin Brass, Berlin Strings, Berlin Woods, Metropolis Ark 1-3

ProjectSAM: Symphobia 1-3

Spitfire Audio: Albion Iceni, Albion One, Albion Tundra, BML Brass, Mural, Phalanx, Sable, Winds, Bernard Herrmann, Chamber Strings, Hans Zimmer Strings, LCO Strings, Masse, Orchestral Swarm, Sacconi Quartet, Skaila Kanga Harp, Symphonic Strings, Brass, Winds_


----------



## Vonk

@studioj That's a useful perspective, thank you.


----------



## Dewdman42

Those of you that have been working with Patchboard for a while....still using it and happy with it?


----------



## studioj

Dewdman42 said:


> Those of you that have been working with Patchboard for a while....still using it and happy with it?


Yeah I'm loving it still... and I've kind of tried everything - Lemur (composer tools pro), metagrid, touch OSC....

I use it with Pro Tools, and it just works. I import the tracks from different templates I've set up and patchboard recognizes the track names and pops up the interface for the patch on my iPad as soon as the track is armed to record. That's how I'm using it mostly. Patches are very easy to build, even for complex instruments. fyi, the iPad control system uses a web interface, not an app, so you use safari on the iPad to access it. Which in many ways makes it better than other apps too...as I would sometimes have connectivity issues and always restarting things to get them to connect properly. Doesn't happen with Patchboard.


----------



## dgburns

Loving PB, it’s the secret sauce. But I run it where Lemur ( currently porting template to Touchosc ) is where I select the track by name, and LPX follows. Touchosc has a better scripting approach, and it’s turning out to be a better fit for me than Lemur was for this one thing.


----------



## Dewdman42

is that because Patchboard does not provide a way to select a track by name while TouchOSC does or just because you got used to working that way?


----------



## dgburns

Dewdman42 said:


> is that because Patchboard does not provide a way to select a track by name while TouchOSC does or just because you got used to working that way?


Got used to working my way. And btw, it’s PB that hears the touchosc osc message and passes it on to the daw. You can absolutely just select the patch in PB and it selects the track in the daw. If you set up your catalog in a good way, you can view filter patches by Orchestra section, Dev, Library, or instrument type. So in PB you are never more than a few clicks from selecting the track you want. You may likely view and use your template/ catalog in new ways because of it.


----------



## ErwinVos

Cubase is not responding to key commands made in Patchboard, is anyone having this same issue?
I have also an Avid Dock and Avid S3 and on key commands made with the Dock Cubase response is good

Thanks,

Erwin


----------



## lokotus

mrmiller said:


> This release includes the Windows version in addition to macOS! It doesn’t support the custom Pro Tools integration on Windows currently—just Cubase, DP and EUCON (which would work for Pro Tools).
> 
> To do the DAW integration, I wrote a combination of a bunch of custom control surface plug-ins or reverse engineered stuff to make it work. For any DAWs that don’t support EUCON and I haven’t written a custom integration for (e.g. REAPER or Studio One), it’s a matter of finding the time and the motivation to create a new plug-in. That either means a bunch of users on that platform telling me they need it or someone wants to commission the integration directly and then it would be shared with everyone.


that sounds nice, are there any updates on further integration inside reaper or studio one for this app? thanks, lokotus


----------



## lokotus

ErwinVos said:


> Cubase is not responding to key commands made in Patchboard, is anyone having this same issue?
> I have also an Avid Dock and Avid S3 and on key commands made with the Dock Cubase response is good
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Erwin


yes same here, that feature is not featured on the website and still in beta... if some users could get together to put some additional feature request money into the pot, he probably would be faster implementing a bug release...but its only a one man show (a good one though ...)

its correctly responding to program changes though, so you might find a way with cub or nuendo 12 to program a custom midi controller which receives program changes that are tied to key commands... havent tried it out yet... at least you would have 128 options to set up key commands with program changes if you don´t use program changes for anthing else...


----------



## ErwinVos

lokotus said:


> yes same here, that feature is not featured on the website and still in beta... if some users could get together to put some additional feature request money into the pot, he probably would be faster implementing a bug release...but its only a one man show (a good one though ...)
> 
> its correctly responding to program changes though, so you might find a way with cub or nuendo 12 to program a custom midi controller which receives program changes that are tied to key commands... havent tried it out yet... at least you would have 128 options to set up key commands with program changes if you don´t use program changes for anthing else...


I contacted Mike but he's currently very busy, asked him if he could implement the possibility to ad a certain Macro into a Group or Library in Patchboard so one can then, with the right Macros in the PLE from Cubase use these to switch the visibility (for example a certain Group or Library)

At this moment I managed to switch certain visibility settings via a Macro in Patchboard with the new Midi Remote Editor in Cubase by using a CC change in the Patchboard Macro.

But it would be great if one could select a certain Group or Library in Patchboard and Cubase would automatically Synchronise its visibility. It takes a lot of programming in the PLE but it would be possible and without the need of a Generic Remote.


----------



## mrmiller

lokotus said:


> that sounds nice, are there any updates on further integration inside reaper or studio one for this app? thanks, lokotus


Nope, no updates there yet. I've had a couple of requests for Studio One but none really for REAPER oddly. The one new thing is native Apple Silicon support for Logic.


ErwinVos said:


> Cubase is not responding to key commands made in Patchboard, is anyone having this same issue?
> I have also an Avid Dock and Avid S3 and on key commands made with the Dock Cubase response is good
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Erwin


This is the next bug on my list!


----------



## Camus

Dewdman42 said:


> Those of you that have been working with Patchboard for a while....still using it and happy with it?


It is one of the best investments I made! Just a great tool!


----------



## PhilipJohnston

Enthusiastic thumbs up here too—Patchboard was my single best purchase of 2022. 
Thoughtful and intuitive design, with uncommonly fast, clear and expert support from a developer who radiates attention to detail. Has given Logic new (and long overdue) template-management and remote articulation switching superpowers; cannot begin to calculate how much time it saves me.


----------



## MeloKeyz

I personally think that we're going to see this voodoo tool in Zimmer's studio. I wonder if you're going to offer a summer sale. Gonna buy the DIY version right away if so.


----------



## wlinart

Not many videos on youtube about this, but i found someone talking about it: 

He's using a different workflow from mine though (i'm more a 1 instrument = 1 track kinda guy), but i'm still sure patchboard can speed up my workflow too. Now trying to find the money for this.


----------

