DIY DAW Controller Part 1: Choosing a MIDI Interface March 19, 2012 17:39 27 Comments
While wrapping up a mammoth "in-the-box" (computer-based) mixing session the other week, I vowed that I would not mix another project without some real faders under my fingers. Around this same time, an email subscriber tipped me off to the amazing open-source MIDI controller projects happening at midibox.org. Usually when people think MIDI they think of sequencers, keyboards, synth controllers, etc., but basically anything we do within a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation: ProTools, Cubase, Logic, etc.) can be controlled via MIDI. Indeed, many commercial control surfaces such as the Behringer BCF2000 are MIDI controllers. So, I've got the itch to make my own DAW controller. Great! Right now that's about all I've got. I know next-to-nothing about MIDI (or anything digital for that matter), and the MIDIbox website makes about as much sense as Greek Alphabet soup after a couple hours of browsing. I do know, however, that I've been through this before--I couldn't have told you whether audio signals were AC or DC when I built my first preamp. This time around, I'm going to document every step of my climb up the MIDI learning curve in hopes that it will take some of the mystery out of building your own DAW controller for those standing on the sidelines.
The Grand Vision
Since this is my first foray into MIDI, I'm planning on doing something fairly simple that would nonetheless break me out of the box for most of my mixing needs. There are 16 channels with pan, volume, mute, solo, and two aux sends each. That's 64 potentiometers total (16 slide + 48 rotary) and 32 switches.
I'm still debating whether to use motorized or normal faders. It would be great to bring up a session in my DAW and have all of the faders snap to the corresponding positions. But motor faders are at least 5x more expensive than the normal ones. At this point, I'm leaning towards regular faders to keep the cost low. What do you think, will I regret this down the road? I've never mixed a project on a console or control surface without motorized faders before, is it a huge workflow problem not to be able to see where your levels are by looking at the faders?
Choosing a MIDI Interface
After a bit of research, the two MIDI platforms I'm looking at are Doepfer "Pocket Electronic," Doepfer USB64, MIDIbox 64, and MIDIbox LC.Doepfer MIDI Interfaces
The Doepfer products are appealing because they come as assembled, pre-programmed analog/MIDI interfaces. The Pocket Electronic puts out up to 16 channels via MIDI jack, while the USB64 can do up to 64 via USB. The Pocket Electronic seems like a great solution for a simple 8 faders + pan pots setup, but is decidedly short on channels for what I want to do. The USB64 offers enough channels and the option for digital inputs, which can be used for solo/mute switches. However, as far as I can tell, the USB64 can operate only in digital or analog mode, not both. Meaning I can have pots or switches, but not pots and switches. So, while the Doepfer units look very appealing from a digital newbie's perspective, they're not quite right for what I want to achieve.
The MIDIbox Platform
MIDIbox is an open source, modular MIDI platform that, while it's pretty confusing to me still, appears to be extremely flexible and scalable. Basically, there is a core "brain" circuit board that takes inputs from different modules (analog input module, digital input module, etc.) and turns them into MIDI I/O. People configure these modules in all sorts of ways with different firmware to create things like sequencers, DJ control stations, synth controllers, and of course DAW controllers. I'm sure that is a gross simplification of the MIDIbox system, but it's what I've been able to figure out so far. (Please feel free to correct or englighten me in the comments.) Circuit board layouts and firmware downloads are available at ucapps.de, and PCBs/kits are available from the MIDIbox shop. Of the many MIDIbox permutaions available, those that seem most applicable are the MIDIbox LC and the MIDIbox 64. The LC emulates the performance of the Logic Control / Mackie Control surfaces. If I were building the Ultimate DAW Controller, I would probably go with this as it allows for motorized faders, but since it uses the LC (or MCU) format, I'm not sure it's compatible with my DAW of choice, Reaper MIDIbox 64 is an older project, which appears to have been replaced by the MIDIO128, but since the Midibox Store stocks only the 64 PCBs at the moment I think I'll go with that. The 64 allows for up to 64 pots/faders, 64 switches, and 64 LEDs. More than enough to realize my "Grand Vision." There is also support for an LC-display and other stuff, but I'm going to ignore those for this project in the interest of keeping things simple.
What's Next
Right now I'm leaning towards the MIDIbox 64, but I'm going to continue reading about the MIDIbox platform until I start involuntarily piecing together interfaces in my head as a I fall asleep (usually a good sign I've reached a critical level of obsessiveness with a project). Once I settle on a configuration, I should be able to assemble a rough bill of materials and price out the project in Part 2. Until then, if you have any experience with MIDI DAW controllers, I'd love to get your feedback on which/how many controls you feel are essential for mixing, especially how you work with or without motorized faders.
Comments
Reuven Amiel on January 8, 2015 02:46
I want a plug in controller for Pro tools
I have no idea why somebody do not create a small desktop plug in controller for Pro Tools with 7 columns of 3 rows (Freq, Gain, Q… rotary Knobs) and 2 knobs each side for HPF and LPF and another 5 knobs for other mapping at the bottom plus a LCD screen that reads the name of the parameters of the knobs row every time you touch a knob and you can see the value ..I am in if somebody can make it
Dirk on December 18, 2014 14:45
The Doepfer allows for both, pots & switches, in analog mode.
It might be a good idea doing some research before posting an article, but that’s maybe only my opinion.
Kevin on November 12, 2014 18:01
Quite interesting, I’ll certainly be looking forward to updates.
Rodney on November 12, 2014 18:01
I’ve been running a behringer bcf2000 for a coupe years now. Even though they’re noisy, the motorized faders are worth it… I’ve disassembled the unit a number of times, and the fader motor is a simple DC servo type. It wouldn’t be hard to craft yourself, to save quite a few bucks in the end…
Grummy on November 12, 2014 18:01
To me this would be something I would be very interested in if it had motorized faders superior to the Behringer BCF. Otherwise for the money the BCF would be the easiest way. Although off the top of my head I’m not sure if the BCF does a HUI emulation or Logic for that matter.
I’m running Pro Tools so that’s a must. I’d also be very interested if it could have a joystick control for decent surround panning use. But something along the quality of the Avid (Euphonix) Artist series for under $800 with a joystick for surround panning would be choice.
Another slick move would be to have an intuitive channel strip looking knob and button bank for some of the most used plugin layouts. For example, say you find yourself tossing the waves SSL channel on most of your tracks, a controller set up that is aligned similarly might come in handy. If you are a plugin whore and use a different comp/EQ every channel I suppose it’d be counter productive.
All the best to you. I’ll be watching hopeful. :)
Grummy on November 12, 2014 18:01
Oh also, are you sure you can’t use an analog signal for buttons? If wired properly wouldn’t the value read the same either 0 for closed or 127 for open?
Perhaps I’m missing something.
Zak on November 12, 2014 18:01
This is a really cool project, but way over my head for the stage I’m at. So, thank you for tackling this and sorting everything out for those of us who’ll want to do something similar… eventually!
alex on November 12, 2014 18:01
I like this project a lot.
I’d be all over a kit, or partial kit in the future. Keep it up!
Matty on November 12, 2014 18:01
I look forward to seeing your progress on this. Thank you for setting up such a great website!
Esteban on November 12, 2014 18:01
Wow this is awesome! I would totally be all about this kit and can’t wait to see how your project develops. Keep up the good work!
By the way – loving the Line2Amp kit!
AbeLincolnStudios on November 12, 2014 18:01
I would have to say, no motor faders would mean no box for me. There are a lot of old controllers on the used used market that infrastructurally suck, but have motor faders in them you can salvage. I think Roland used to make a control surface that never went anywhere, but you can find them used for relatively cheap and salvage the faders.
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:01
Hey “Abe,” that’s a cool idea I hadn’t considered before. Here’s what I’m thinking with the motorized vs. passive faders thing though: it seems to me that motorized faders are mostly important for editing automation and for when you have more channels than faders and need to switch between banks. I’m fine with drawing automation on the screen, so we’re good there.
And it would be a lot cheaper and easier to build a controller with, say, 64 passive faders at $1/pc than 16 motor faders + functionality to switch banks, etc. With the DAW set to read the fader movements as relative (ie. the volume doesn’t snap up or down to the positon of the fader when it’s moved but rather adjusts the volume the amount the fader was moved) I don’t see how I’d be missing a lot without motorized faders.
Am I missing something? In theory, it’s a lot more appealing to me to have a long row of faders each dedicated to one track, than switching between banks with motorized faders.
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:01
Lots of great ideas! But for this controller I’m going to follow the Keep It Simple, Stupid! school of thought. Otherwise I know it’s bound to end in tears and bankruptcy.
Stephan Gauch on November 12, 2014 18:01
did you check if your project might work with an Arduino + MidiShield? If you add WiFi it might even try multiple implementation of both Midi and OSC and both via wire and wireless.
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:01
Hi Stephan, cool idea. I hadn’t looked into using OSC before, but it might be more powerful than MIDI in the long run. Agh so much to think about!
Yves on November 12, 2014 18:01
I was looking into the Midibox MF V3 for a while now. It only does motorfader control, up to 8 faders per module, linkable for more faders too. There’s no more options on the board, the Pic is onboard, so you don’t need anything else! I’ll report as soon as I have the kit.
Andrew on November 12, 2014 18:01
Peterson, your workflow may vary but I’ve found it to be really annoying to work with non-touch sensitive, non-motorized faders. Pass through automation, (which is what ProTools is set up for using non-motorized faders), was not conducive to working efficiently in my experience.
I haven’t found the bank issue to be much of a problem, seeing as how with a 16 fader bank, you can cover 32 faders by simply pressing 1 bank nudge button, and 48 by pressing it 2×. If you do use banks though, you’d want an LED scribble strip to display the name of each track as the banks change.
For me, having touch-sensitive motorized faders is part of the advantage of having a control surface to mix with. If you’re using it more for virtual instruments or MIDI programming, than of course that’s a different story. Just my 2¢ from my experience. Either way you go I look forward to seeing your final product. This is a great website, especially for a neophyte builder like myself and I really appreciate all the work you put into it!
Yves on November 12, 2014 18:01
I too think that Motorized faders are the way to go. I grew up in an industry of moving faders, so I couldn’t do without. Bourns sells dual Unit (Audio/Linear) motorized faders around $17,99. So you can run audio through them at the same time you have them configured as a midi controller. That way you can keep the sound analogue, but the control digital! For encoders I would go for the Alps led encoder, that should look great!!
Travis Funk on November 12, 2014 18:01
This is an interesting project. If you decide to go with non-motorized faders, I’m wondering how hard it might be to incorporate/retrofit this project into an existing console? Replacing the faders, pan pots, and various switches in an existing chassis to get something like the Allen & Heath Zed-R16 could be very cool. Keep the analog side functional, and add automation to your board. This could be a huge improvement on say a Toft or other all analog board.
Finally, you should consider adding a transport control and possibly a shuttle/jog wheel. I have a Mackie Control and all I use are those plus the ‘save’ button.
Dave Boulden on November 12, 2014 18:01
Your other option for the controller board would be a Hale Micro UMC32+M – http://www.halemicro.com/UMC32_M/UMC32_M.html. It has 32 channels of I/O inidividualy selectable between digital and analog and 2 boards can be linked for 64 channels. I used one on my dedicated EQ plugin MIDI controller project – http://www.daveboulden.co.uk/index.php/2010/03/16/self-built-midi-controller/
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:01
Cool, thanks for the tip. I hadn’t seen those before, something else to consider.
Matthew Campbell on November 12, 2014 18:01
This sounds awesome. Would love to get kit when you’re finished!
thegalagakid on November 12, 2014 18:01
Motorized, without a doubt. You’ll get frustrated with the non-motorized ones after about the 4th time you load the project and everything resets back to where the sliders are set.
Miroslav on November 12, 2014 18:01
Hello, sorry for my english. Ihave the same great idea many years… Many of hour with internet and here is summary: motorised faders – use from Penny and Giles company – you need MCU with 16 PWM chanels for driving linear servo motors. For button you can use multiplexers. You can adress with one MCU more chanels. For rotary encoders, you can use external ADC wia MCU SPI port or serial wire interface – I2C. with this interface can you connect more devices and each device can have as example 16chanel ADC. 3 devices = 3 × 16 rotary encoders for control. As connection with computer is possible use circuit FT232 – It is USB – seriál port converter… OR MCU with USB port, but here is necesary more programming…
Peterson Goodwyn on November 12, 2014 18:01
Great info! Thanks a lot for your advice.
Adrian on November 12, 2014 18:01
same faith… looking forward to part 2
Phil Costanzo on November 12, 2014 18:01
Use Normal faders! Most of us just want to have the slider control with Pan for mixing and playback – thanks! Keeping the cost down is a plus – the Korg Nano control has 8 sliders – great concept – just wish they had 16 sliders
Comments are closed for this post.