What's new

Patchboard public release

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
 
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!
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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 :).
 
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.
 
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! o_O 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.
 
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!
 
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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
Top Bottom