I Still Don't Get It...

[matts9383]

Hi,

I've been comparing the Command 8 and the Mackie Control for a while now. Everyone around here has been saying a lot of good things about the Command 8, and I can't wait to try one, but from the respective manuals it seems that the Mackie Control has many more features.

For example, it seems the Command 8 can only help you after the fact, that is, you can't assign plugins, inputs, outputs, etc. From what I've read, you can do this on the Mackie Control. Also, the fader and pot quality on the Mackie seems far superior (gotta love those Penny & Giles). So besides the onboard monitoring and the 6 segmented LED meters, why is the Command 8 better? I understand you may say continued support and the fact that it "works better because its a digidesign product", but continued support is useless to me as I'm a digi001 user, and how exactly does it "work better"?

Thank you,
matt

[macr0w]

Mmmmm, Good question.

[martin310]

and no Talk Back feature!!! How the heck am I gonna talk from my bedroom studio to the singer in the bathroom...what's up with that? hehe

[matts9383]

Martin,

You might want to try looking into a samson C-Control. I picked one up for my studio, and it's great. It has three monitor inputs and three monitor outputs as well as talkback functions, and its only $99. Check it out www.samsontech.com (http://www.samsontech.com)

Another reason why the onboard monitoring doesn't really sway me...

[matts9383]

anybody?

[Harry Destin]

Yeah, I wonder!

[dmazurek]

On the Mackie can you flip plugin parameters onto the faders?

[matts9383]

According to the Pro Tools Mackie Control Guide you can...

matt

[decibeljr]

...I think the main thing to look at here, putting features aside, if the fact that boxes like the Mackie, Tascam, whatever; are using MIDI to communicate with Pro Tools. MIDI is too slow, and does not have enough resolution to accomplish certain tasks like riding vocals. I used a Mackie HUI for a bit; tried doing drops on drum tracks, and upon playback, got clicks due to the MIDI latency...it simply isn't pro. On a Pro Control you don't have this problem do to its proprietary, fast, ethernet connection. I am hoping the Command 8 uses a fast USB connection to achieve similar results. The thing I am looking for is fast connectivity, and full fader resolution (not 128 steps). Any comments / corrections welcome...

[matts9383]

Do you have any specs on whether or not digi is using some faster connection because from what i've heard its really just the same info being passed through different means (i.e. midi vs usb). For me, it just doesn't seem worth it because not only is the C8 more than the Mackie Control, I'd also have to buy Panther which means its even more. I'm really trying to be convinced so if you have any good reviews and can give me specific reasons why the C8 is better let me know...

matt

[Sean Halley]

There are a number of obvious reasons (and some not so):

1. Obvious - The Command 8 gives you a 1-in-2-out MIDI interface you can use for any MIDI devices (it uses the USB connection for Pro Tools control) - the Mackie Control only has MIDI connections for its own use. Thus, you don't need an additional MIDI interface to run MIDI gear.

2. Not so Obvious - The Command 8 will do plugin parameter fader flip - a HUI device WILL NOT. You can flip faders and Aux's on a HUI, but not plugin parameters (screwing around with a Virus is hip with flipped faders).

3. Obvious - The Command 8 has a monitor section with multiple inputs - the Mackie Control has no audio path whatsoever...

4. Not so Obvious - The Command 8 works with Avids.

5. Not so Obvious - The Command 8 can control a Digi PRE directly.

6. Not so obvious - from what I can tell (could be wrong, I guess), the Mackie Control only has direct templates made for a bunch of software apps (along with HUI and Mackie Control protocol). It looks like that's all it does (which is still cool). However, the Command 8 can be used as a standalone MIDI controller, so you can make your own templates for any MIDI device...you could even use it live to control a synth, for instance.....

Even though I own a Control 24, I'm also going to pick up a Command 8 eventually - because it can be used as an add-on surface. That way, I'll have personal control of both transport and monitors (without needing a screen) from inside my vocal booth....cooollll....


S..

[matts9383]

good response...

i'm curious to know where you got that info about the mackie control not being able to flip plugin parameters. I've never read anything about it being able to or not being able to?

Thanks,
matt

[A2D D2A]

It's not that the MC can't flip plug control, it's emulating a HUI which had a dedicated section of controls for plug-ins that had V-POTS that could be set for different types of sensitivity levels to help you tweak plug-ins.
This is why the HUI only flips aus sends and such.
Since the MC lacks the plug-in section you lose out on the ability to do what the HUI does.
Mackie actually addressed this with the C4 but the C4 never hit the streets.

[matts9383]

However, don't you get that added feature of being able to initiate plugins on the Command 8, right? Is that just an HUI feature?

[Chris Coleman]

the above post should have read:


However, don't you get that added feature of NOT being able to initiate plugins on the Command 8, right? Is that just an HUI feature?

[artworkjamal]

However, don't you get that added feature of being able to initiate plugins on the Command 8, right? Is that just an HUI feature?




Love My C8!!!!

However thats a question ive been asking myself and the Manual!


Anyone?????

[Sofine]

Just got my Command 8 yesterday - one of the first in Ireland I think! - and I am pretty sure that you can't instantiate a plug-in, or send with the command 8. Maybe this could be added in as an upgrade though.

However, the C8 rocks. It really has already made a difference to my mixing process, ewspecially since this is my first control surface. I will never be without one again. I find it very responsive and I am getting used to controlling plugins very quickly, which really helps the EQ and compression process as you can focus 100% on listening and feeling rather than invloving your brain to use a mouse and look at the screen. World of a difference.

[matts9383]

the above post should have read:


However, don't you get that added feature of NOT being able to initiate plugins on the Command 8, right? Is that just an HUI feature?





Oops... I meant that the Mackie Control allows you to initiate plugins/sends and the C8 does not. Also, the Mackie Control seems to have automation functions built into the control surface, while the C8 does not appear to have any automation enabling features.

[Sofine]

Matts, I was also a bit disappointed that I couldn't auto write a track from my C8.

Are we missing something? I hope so!

Simon,

[matts9383]

Let me say, I've never used, nor do I own either of these two control surfaces. I've just been comparing manuals, and what I've seen of the Mackie Control in stores. I'm looking to purchase one of these two, and since I'm all set in the monitoring and MIDI interface department I'm basing my decision solely on hardware quality, features, and slightly on aesthetic appeal. Based on that, it seems like the Mackie Control takes it hands down, but I'm still awaiting a good arguement, though the point about plugin paramenter flip is a good one.

Matt

[Halfmoon]

Yes, the C8 supports plug-in and send Flip, but no you cannot assign plug-ins, inserts, sends, inputs, or outputs from the unit (nor are there any track or session automation controls). Of all these functions missing on the C8, the only ones I really miss though are the track automation controls that someone else mentioned. THAT would be nice.

IMHO, If you want to never use a mouse or QWERTY again, the C8 is not going to do it for you......
If you're getting your first fader box for PT, though, the C8 might be more than adequate (if, like me, there's some things you just prefer doing via mouse anyway).
If you don't need the monitor system or MIDI ports, then yeah, it might be setting you back a couple bucks for stuff you don't need, making the Mackie a better choice.

Here's something else to consider, I'll just throw it out here - I think I will always be faster at some tasks with a trackball/mouse, using the PT GUI. I know I can learn how to do it (I fly on ProControl - and forced myself to keep using that unit whenver I assigned I/O or plugs or sends). But for me, assigning plug-ins from a surface, even with 6 character LCDs, seems agonizingly slow on some days. I/O is easy, sends and busses are easy, but I am just slow as mud froma control surface with the plugin assigning. I still prefer to grab the trackball and get with the GUI for that..... You may find similar things that you just like doing from the mouse (for speed, accuracy, whatever). I'd rather look like I know what 'm doing with the mouse than fumble and squint with a control surface, in other words.

I fully expected to convert 100% to the control surface, never touching the QWERTY again, but after 5+ years with ProCo, C24s, HUIs, MotorMix, 002, etc., I've developed a few work habits that might not be the most ergonomically correct (according to a sales rep <g>) but still let me get my work done, and let me know what i do or do not need from a control surface.

Hope some of this helps,

Michael

[matts9383]

Thanks Halfmoon,

I'm definitely leaning towards a Mackie Control, because I really want to try to abandon the mouse and keyboard as much as I can. After using the D8B at school this semester I really hate using a mouse and keyboard now. I'm sure I'll use it for certain things like naming tracks, etc. But I'd really like to get away from it as much as I can. I'll wait to see if Digidesign addresses the lack of features with firmware updates in the future though.

Thanks,
matt

[Stuart P.]

Actually, the mackie control uses a cool way of mixing 7 bit midi signals to obtain 10 bit (1024) step resolution with it's P&G optical faders. I personally really like mine, and I use a Procontrol at work so I do know the difference. The Procontrol is a much higher quality instrument, but the Mackie comes in for under a grand. It's a good value in my opinion. There is latency with MIDi, but Mackie seems to have done a good job making the unit very usable.

I haven't even seen a Command 8 yet, so I can't compare the two. But if it's built like the 002 (the one with faders), then I don't want one.

S.

[kmshroom]

I haven't even seen a Command 8 yet, so I can't compare the two. But if it's built like the 002 (the one with faders), then I don't want one.

I too have not actually seen a Command 8, but have first hand experience with the 002, and yeah, I def do not like the faders on the 002.

[madlo]

And no one has mentioned the shuttle wheel on the MC (and absent on the C8). I use this all the time for fine tuning selections. I don't really use the assign features on the MC that much, usually quicker to just grab the mouse.

[aliengroover]

You can also locate on the MC. I usually don't have the locator screen up, so that's a bonus for me. Again for the jog/shuttle wheel. Just between the 002 and the MC, I like the feel of the MC better, from layout to faders. The MIDI thing has not been a problem for me, and I've been able to do drops/mutes with accuracy.
Peace