Your feedback on CC121

[Stefan Schreiber]

We´d like to thank you all for your comments and suggestions about our new hardware. I´d like to point out that we appreciate this very much.
We´re currently carrying out a first review since the release and would be very much interested in further feedback from you.

I´d like to encourage you to post all your opinions and experiences on CC121 here. This could be for example driver stabilty, workflow, integration in Cubase etc.

Thanks a lot again.

Stefan Schreiber
Product Marketing Hardware
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH

[pwmspeed]

Hi Stefan,

actually. i like the CC121 a lot. The OSX driver on a Dual 2,7 GHz PPC is absolutely great, no worries there.

The only problem (an its pretty huge for me) is the already mentioned scaling of the EQ-knobs, especially the frequency knob. It is way different from an "analog" knob. You simply can´t make filter sweeps across the spectrum (for finding ressonance frequencies etc..) I stopped using the EQ knobs entirely because of this and I am back to the mouse there. As I work professionally with Cubase, I wanted to have less mouse action as before... but... hope a firmware update will solve it. And of course, the sooner the better. Any clues when this will happen????

For a future revision upgrade it would be cool if the AI knob would have a joystick feature to skip vertically or horizontally from parameter to parameter (eq in a plugin).

And it does not belong entirely here... but why is the automation in Cubase shown below the track and not overlaying on the track? Such a waste of screenspace. When working with the CC121 and automation a lot, this also becomes an issue...

Thanks for listening.

BTW. Thanks so much for the high quality built in EQs and Comps. They are amongst the very best on the market and to me they have been the reason why i changed from Logic to Cubase. The sound of Cubase is so much better. I guess thats the input from the audiocube people. Please keep them on board!!!

Greets from Berlin

Mark

[wehurlbert]

Hi Stefan,

I like my cc121 very much; I would purchase it again without hesitation. However, there are
three very significant shortcomings which, if addressed would put it through the roof for me.

1. As mentioned here and elsewhere, the EQ knob scaling - the controls are just much more
difficult to use than they should be; either too little or too much, depending on how much
acceleration you give, but very hard to find the middle ground.

2. The AI knob's dedication to pre-programmed objects, rather than acting as a mouse wheel.
I've been told that the reason for this is better resolution than a mouse wheel gives. If this
is the case, why not an option to act as a mouse wheel, and/or auto switching to become
a mouse wheel when the object is not supported? As it is, the AI knob is of very limited use
for those who have third party plugins.

3. Dedicated Cubase support. We should have the ability to use it with other applications. This
could, of course, be easily handled in the driver, giving us the ability to map each switch and
knob to a controller or note event. Combined with AI knob mouse wheel support, this would
be an excellent capability, and would likely result in more sales. It baffles my why this wasn't
done.

-Wayne
_________________
Cubase 5, RME Fireface 800, Mac Pro 8-core 2.8GHz.

[assinger]

Here are my impressions of the CC121:

Pros:
- uncomplicated installation
- solid driver
- great integration in Cubase
- nice fader, overall good built quality
- just one function per knob/button

Cons:
- no VST2 support (AI knob)
- scaling of EQ, AI and PAN knobs should be adjustable
- design of the AI knob - I wish it would be more like a typical jog-wheel - flat, with a bigger diameter and a cut-out so you can use one finger to move it (sorry for my bad english, hope you understand, what I mean)

[Drew Buchan]

I too am very pleased with my CC121

PROs
- the build quality is superb
- the travel and feel of the buttons is just right

Suggestions
- the AI knob needs to work with all parameters, VST2 and VST3. This should be very, very easy ... The Novation Nocturn has a SPeed Knob that does this .... a mouse wheel can do this ... at the moment the AI is a step backward.
- I had to fix the registry off too many USB reisgtrations before it would work.

- NOt so much a suggestion for CC121, but could Steinberg offer a choice of EQ engines in the standard DAW package ... perhaps license some high end EQ emulations that could be chosen to replace the standard out-of-the-box EQ. This would then improve the CC121 integration, and offer unique differentiator for Cubase.

[Steve Kenzo]

Great piece of equipment! great quality and easy of use.

too bad it doesn't support VST2 plug-ins. Most of my plug-ins are those kind. I hope they will support that in the furture.

[playz123]

Yes, if I have any, that's my most serious 'beef'.... that some features of the CC121 work only with VST 3 plug-ins. It's a design 'flaw' that I hope can be addressed by software updates............playz
_________________
Cubase 5.5, Halion 3.1, Wavelab 6, Virtual Guitarist 2, Symphobia, LASS, Requiem Pro, Philharmonik, Superior Drummer 2, EZDrummer, NI Komplete 6, RealGuitar 2, RealStrat, Strum Electric, Symphonic Choirs, Gypsy, VOP, Fab Four, Silk, RA, SD2, Goliath, QL Pianos, Chris Hein Horns, Omnisphere, Trilian, Stylus RMX, etc., CC121, MIDISport 4x4, 2.8 GHz MacPro, OS X 10.6.4, 10 GB RAM, RME Multiface II + HDSP PCIe.

[n00b Dogg]

VERY happy with the CC121

only one dissapointment

I was a bit shocked to notice that I couldn't use the fader to edit automation tracks....!!!

I SERIOUSLY hope that this will be fixed later since this was me prime reason to buy the thing.

I had been looking forward to ride my delay sends with the fader, but that, surprisingly, is not possible.

PLEASE tell me that this is coming soon !!!!

OR even better, that it IS possible and I'm just too thickheaded to know how....

[analographi]

Basically I like it, built quality is very good and finally somebody gave all eq controls knobs! THis is really great!
AI function is very smart concept!
Works flawless in osx so far - no huge testing so far though.
Channel controls choosen wisely.


Some things I find a bit weird, that they are not in the concept already:

- EQ Scaling.. make it simply analog, please cc 121 ONE TO ONE. make the feel of the knobs ONE TO ONE..
- please give us an option to use the "start" - "end" buttons as "left - right - locator" buttons. how often somebody jumps to the end and start of a song? how often to left right locator?
- All buttons should have little light at all times and get brighter when selected. (making music in the dark.)

- it's a pitty that the fader can be used for volume only. but I understand, that this would defeat the "one-to-one" concept...

As for the hardware:
- too few user assignable keys. eight would have been great, or several banks at least.
- AI knob too small - not much fun to use it.
- Transport buttons have no good feel to them and are too small and to "short"

I hope I could inspire you.
_________________
Cubase 4.5, 5.1, OctaCore Mac Pro, Osx 10.5, 10GB Ram, BootCamp Win XP Pro SP2, 2x RME Fireface 800, Virus TI, 2xUAD-1e

[analographi]

Forgot something:

AI features for the EQ knobs in terms of they automatically detect an EQ plugin in slot 1/2 and assgin the available controls to cc121. I believe with some creativity in coding there would be a lot possible, even if its only a selected list of eqs who works, or the user has to setup his eqs on his own.
_________________
Cubase 4.5, 5.1, OctaCore Mac Pro, Osx 10.5, 10GB Ram, BootCamp Win XP Pro SP2, 2x RME Fireface 800, Virus TI, 2xUAD-1e

[shelter]

We are quite happy with the CC121. After only a few minutes of use it was apparent that it was going to be of
great benefit to the workflow. No more of that dragging mice around and trying to hit the right parts of the GUI
on time in a 48 track mix.

In the music production area we tried operating it in parallel with the DM4800 without any negative side effects,
with the exception of one obvious user error. You don't operate multiple sliders on the desk with one of them
being the active track on the CC121. I've never seen a slider wriggle about quite like that! :-)

I've read a lot of opinions concerning the pricing and the quality of the CC121 but can't subscribe to them. Given
that the CC121 is not trying to compete with the Dexter or the MCS3000X it is right on the money and is a great
helping hand for the already overworked engineer.

The CC121 can't do everything yet but given time and a little more coding it should mature nicely.

Richard.

SHELTER STUDIOS.

[analographi]

[shelter]

I knew someone was going to ask that but, not quite so quickly.

Just our first impressions albeit early in the lifecycle of and our use of the product:

1) Power supplies belong in the box. If we get any more wallwarts we'll have to seek medical attention.
2) Apart from the already included VST3 implementation, we'd like to see functionality for other plugins and outboard gear.
3) A cursor function to enable skipping across areas of the GUI and avoid having to use the mouse for focus.
4) Better resolution on the EQ section. It takes a while for the controls to respond and is not as smooth as we would like.
5) The possibility to assign the slider to RX, TX or bidiectional control.

Not all of the above are coding related issues and might be going beyond the functional intent of the CC121 but they would
be helpful in the real world.

Richard.

SHELTER STUDIOS

[Alphacodex]

Already mentioned but one more vote here for:

- VST2 Support for the AI Knob. 70% of the plugs and VSTis I use are still VST2. So PLEASE find a workaround to use the AI knob for those plugs, otherwise the use of this nice knob ist very limited for me
- Scaling for some of the controls (panning, eq, AI-knob) so we can find a good balance between accuracy and speed

Apart from that I do not regret my decision...

Greetz
Alphacodex

[Stefan Schreiber]

Thanks to you all for your feedback and your thoughts. We´re under investigation now which of the mentioned points can be changed and improved on the CC121. As soon as we have concrete information about enhancements and updates I will let you all now. Until then please keep going on giving us your opinions.

Stefan Schreiber
Product Marketing Hardware
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH

[Alphacodex]

... oh one more thing that could be improved:

A lot of people use multitimbral VST samplers such as Kontakt 3,
that means we have mutliple MIDI tracks that go into that VST instrument
and multiple VST-channels that come back of it.

Luckily we can assign a specific VST channel to a MIDI channel,
so we can quickly jump to the vst-track settings from within the MIDI-track inspector


BUT...


unluckily I couldn't find a way to make this channel selected in the mixer-window (so we can edit it with the cc121)
(other then going into the mixer window an selecting it by mouse,
or by changing to the "real" vst-track that comes from the VST instrument)
That's quite odd, because we can actually "see" the vst fader in the inspector of the MIDI track, however we can't select the track from here...

A simple way to select the associated VST-channel from within the inspector of a MIDI channel would be a great workflow optimizer for me!!



Thanx
Codex

[hugonaut]

I hav'nt a controller yet, but I'm tempted..I guess hanging out to see if there are any further Yamaha/Steinberg hardware integration products - I really like the direction this is heading with the recent mixers and hardware. Also I must agree with another post in that:" NOt so much a suggestion for CC121, but could Steinberg offer a choice of EQ engines in the standard DAW package ... perhaps license some high end EQ emulations that could be chosen to replace the standard out-of-the-box EQ. This would then improve the CC121 integration, and offer unique differentiator for Cubase." I'm not a great fan of the Cubase EQ - if the CC121 could control a Waves or Sonnox EQ etc then that would make the package really attractive...and you'd sell more of everything! The cost of the unit is something of an issue, as by the time it goes thru currency conversion to Australian dollars it gets really expensive.Cheers.
_________________
Custom built Intel P4 fsb 3.0 Ghz, Single Core, 4g Corsair DDR Ram,Dual head Graphics ati9600se, two 160g SATA 7200rpm hd's, XP Home SP2. Interface: ESI Maxio XD 8000 PCI system,( also Digi 002rack). Software: Cubase4, FXp GURU, Drumcore, YT Majestic, Melodyne Uno, Sampletank.

[pwmspeed]

it was mentioned in the press that there will be a firmware update to tackle the EQ-scaling. any clues when it will happen...? after months of work here with the cc121 its still the main downside...

personally i dont mind the eq´s to be only for he great cubase onboard eqs. they are superb - maybe its because of the look that people dont like them so much. whenever customers here were in doubt about their quality i did the same setting on waves renaissance and/or sony oxford. in blind tests nobody ever selected them over the cubase eqs.
_________________
Mac Pro, 3 GB RAM, OSX 10.6.x
Cubase 5.1.x, RME Multiface (4x), Apogee Rosetta AD, Lavry DA10, Studer 962 Mixer, 2x API 8200 Summing Modules, Studer Revox PR99 1/4", Steinberg CC121 + selected analog outboard (API, UREI, Telefunken, Lexicon...)

[hugonaut]

Hmm..maybe it is a cosmetic thing with the onboard Steinberg eq's.. plus I find then less intuitive..but I'll give them more of a go if you reckon they're the equivalent of the higher end stuff. It is central to the funtionality of the cc121 to have control over a good eq...otherwise you've got all those wasted knobs. Plus I agree with another post that the go to start/end buttons should be for locators, or optioned for that. I like the fact that the build quality is said to be high. Thats a big factor attracting me to the unit. Cheers.
_________________
Custom built Intel P4 fsb 3.0 Ghz, Single Core, 4g Corsair DDR Ram,Dual head Graphics ati9600se, two 160g SATA 7200rpm hd's, XP Home SP2. Interface: ESI Maxio XD 8000 PCI system,( also Digi 002rack). Software: Cubase4, FXp GURU, Drumcore, YT Majestic, Melodyne Uno, Sampletank.

[RichardKC6]

I'm currently using a CC121 as part of a review. I don't have space in that article to fully cover my impressions of it, but here is a quick, canned version of things so far:

1: First, regardless of whatever I say here as critique, I am delighted with the CC121 as a device to work with. I've come back to Cubase for this article from several years of attempting to use Logic, and having the hardware control work straight away has resulted in me being very, very comfortable with the environment and making very fast progress.

So onto the criticisms/changes I'd like to see.

First of all, I really want it to do more. I use a lot of MIDI stuff - Virus, Moog etc - and would like to be able to record CC data for sweeps and changes in an automatiion track using the EQ dials as controllers. That alone would add at least another £40 of value (the costs of the cheapest "MIDI thing with knbos on") to the product. A simple mapping application would be nice, though something akin to the Novation Nocturne's pop-up display with learning function would be the ideal.

Second, let's make more use of environment variables, and give some visual feedback. See that space below the four keys and assignable knob? How about an OLED display or similar that can simply display which "preset" is in place - Monitoring, Studio, or (if other changes are implemented) MIDI control. I like intuitive behaviour, too, and I think that remapping these buttons is not really that logical. Just like the channel up-down controls, a preset skip control would be good - allowing the function of the four buttons and knob to be altered on the fly. Maybe there are more functions in Cubase 5 I haven't seen to do this. Track specific presets, perhaps, so when looking at the overall project they function as zoom controls, when looking at an audio track they turn off effects inserts, when looking at a VSTi they skip presets.

You could implement some sort of preset changing by having a chording trick - perhaps if you press the button below the knob and turn the assignable knob it could change preset? May be easier with the fourth. For Macs, a menu-bar display showing which preset is selected would save on screen real estate whilst allowing visual feedback.

Third, the AI Knob. Out of the box it's a jog wheel. This... well, it seems a bit redundant, HALion 3 doesn't seem to respond to it, GrooveAgent doesn't. What's the point of it? I actually thought it was something similar to a joystick when I'd read about it at first, so as a hardware challenge for a version 2, how about making it directionally sensitive with a "lock direction" button. Make it so the knob can be pressed in any direction (with some force) like a thumbstick on a laptop to give you mouse control, either skipping from parameter to parameter or just moving normally.

As another "could be implemented now" function; is it my imagination, or do the LEDs light up in stages when I power up the device. If so, could we have the lights slightly illuminated all the time? In the dark/dimly lit environments (what can I say, my synths glow nicely) it would be nice to have the transport keys slightly visible, then full intensity when engaged. Also, it would look cool.

And finally, cost. It really is very expensive for what it does - many companies will sell you an entire synth for that much. It's beautifully made and does work so well with Cubase, but surely it can be brought down to around the £150ish mark? Perhaps with a mail-in rebate scheme or something, or by bundling it with Cubase? (Rather than bundling the cut-down Cubase with it - most people wanting it are surely pro users and already have the high-end versions).

(And if bundled with Cubase, how about building the licence key INTO it or providing a recessed, protected USB socket underneath or behind it to put the key in, just saving on USB port usage and protecting the valuable licence key?).

[snakenewton]

HAND TO EYE...

I love it in many ways but hat 2 things... the way the eq works - non linear in the extreme, but I know this is an issue with many people and has been mentioned many times.

But also.....

The Gain is at the top and the Q is at the bottom on the channel editor view>>> IT IS THE OTHER WAY AROUND on the hardware. Is this or is it not suposed to be a dedicated hardware controller for Cubase? Why has no one paid any attention to the hand to eye correlation here? It is most offputting.

[pwmspeed]

i agree.
_________________
Mac Pro, 3 GB RAM, OSX 10.6.x
Cubase 5.1.x, RME Multiface (4x), Apogee Rosetta AD, Lavry DA10, Studer 962 Mixer, 2x API 8200 Summing Modules, Studer Revox PR99 1/4", Steinberg CC121 + selected analog outboard (API, UREI, Telefunken, Lexicon...)

[mlampert]

Here are my feelings so far:

Pros:
+ Overall a nice control surface. Good build quality and layout. I like the feel of the buttons.
+ set up for Nuendo without too much trouble, though I shouldn't have had to go into the registry and manually fix things.
+ great response time from buttons and knobs.
+ solid driver.

Cons:
- AI knob should work like a mouse wheel (as others have mentioned).
- transport buttons should have been twice the size. They'll be used the most.
- the motorized fader only controls volume. This should be allowed to also control (write) automation.
- more buttons on the unit should be programmable for any use. Some have mentioned being able to use the project start/end buttons to go between markers, as an example. I definitely second this.
- EQ scaling should be an option. I personally like the non-linear feel because it allows very precise tweaks (intended, no doubt!). Just provide a software-controllable scale or option and most folks would probably be satisfied.
- channel select would be much improved if it only selected between active or shown channels. Again, an option within the software could fix this, including an option to select tracks only and not automation tracks.
- the four function buttons and value knob should be assignable to anything, as well as having different 'sets' available (like the monitor and studio control sets). Allow me to create 'set A', 'set B', 'set C', etc., where I can create basically limitless uses for these buttons. They're there -- let's use them!
- overall layout feels a little larger than it needs to be. It seems there's a lot of wasted space, but perhaps there's a good reason for this.
- allow me to control the illumination level of all buttons! You've made a great-looking control surface, so let's show it off!

Summary:
Overall I really like this control surface, despite my comparatively long list of 'cons'. There are definitely a few things hardware- and layout-wise that I wish had been a bit different, but the bulk of the improvements could still be made through software-available options within Cubase/Nuendo. I strongly believe that you guys could really make this thing fantastic by incorporating users' wishes into a software update. You're on the right track.

Cheers,

Mark

[n00b Dogg]

to me, the most important improvement would be to be able to write automation with the fader.

I think this is a surprising flaw to an otherwise very nice controller.

Will it be able to do this in a near future ?
_________________
Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q9450@ 2.66GHz/8Gb RAM/ASUS P5E3 Premium/Cubase 5.01/Wavelab 6/CC121/UAD-1/UAD-2 Quad/RME Fireface 800/ Windows Vista 64 bit SP1/

[frankymusic]

... as no answer until now to the separate subject "Q- and G-knobs swapped..." here my question and wishes again:


Why do the Q-knobs reside on the upper raw (but the G-knobs at the lower one) while the layout of the EQ inside Cubase is contrary?

It's confusing when looking at the Cubase graphical design (the numbers below the EQ curve) while moving the "false" knobs at the CC121...

Is there any chance to configure Cubase in that way that it matches the layout of the CC121 knobs, please??? But this should be an option (and should be selectable for CC121 users only...).

Frank

[project71beats]

Being able to program buttons to taste is essential. I have my keyboard fully customized to cubase. I use almost none of the preset keycommands. I would rush out and buy the cc121 if I could "own" the buttons.
also
could a few more faders be considered. One seems unprofessional, even cheap and tacky. 5 or more would be more usefull and professional, IMO.

ps I love Cubase, even though it crashes so much :)

[philmarone]

Dear Steinberg Team,

I am new to this forum. I recently purchased the CC121 and I am really happy with it. Excellent product in general.

There are two design things that I'd like to point out:

The first - but in my opinion really annoying - design problem is that the order of the EQ parameter knobs on the hardware do not match with the EQ parameter order you have/see in Cubase or Nuendo. Is there a reason for that?

At least on my CC121 hardware...('')...it goes from top to button - starting with Q, frequency, then gain (gain is above the transport keys).

When you look in the Cubase mixer GUI - opening the channel EQ, you see it in the complete opposite way. Is that by intention?

Another thing is that I really miss, is a small display above the fader showing me which track I've currently selected. I just know it when I look in the mixer, which makes it not so intuitive in my opinion.


Thanks for reading. I hope to hear from you...

Cheers
Phil

[frankymusic]

@philmarone

I mentioned that (see http://www.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=113762 or three rows above inside this subject), but nobody else answered...

So I guess that nobody is using these knobs for controlling the EQs of Cubase

I hope that there will be an option to swap the displayed parameters in Cubase. Maybe there is nobody interested in doing so, but now I know that we are TWO.

BTW this forum isn't the right way to ask Steinberg guys directly. It's only created to contact other Steinberg users and to help each other. Maybe we should contact the support by using the so called "Support Request Form"

Frank

[philmarone]

Hi Frank and all,

I thought there would probably be an official moderator from Steinberg...
But yes, contacting Support and see what these guys say about our phenomenon - let's call it like that - would be interesting to know.

Actually, when I noticed it for the 1st time, I was kind of surprised...

I must say that I did not read every thread of the CC121 forum and since I could not find an entry regarding that issue ad hoc, I'd thought I may post a new thread.

Anyway, thanks for your response...let's see what the Steinberg guys say about it!

Cheers
Phil

[philmarone]

Hi Frank,

I think I've addressed the Steinberg guys directly since the originally thread was started by the Product Marketing Manager, I believe...

Stefan Schreiber
Product Marketing Hardware
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH

Best
Phil