Old 06-28-2009, 06:58 AM   #1
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default Digidesign Control 24 thoughts

All,
I have used Pro Tools for a few years, and am ready to jump to Reaper (past ready, really). One thing standing in my way is my studio has a Control 24 control surface ( http://digidesign.com/index.cfm?navi...00&itemid=4877 ) that I really don't want to abandon, even though Digi has. If you google for images of the Control 24, you see many studios that have this control surface, so I would imagine there are many out there in the same boat.

Bottom line is I would like to be able to use my Control 24 with Reaper, or at least partially (motorized faders, S, M, R, buttons, etc.). Now for those of you unfamiliar with it, the Control 24 does not use any known standard way of communicating with the DAW; instead it is proprietary and specific to Pro Tools. That said, some initial investigation into the way it communicates leads me to believe there is hope (more on this later).

I see two initial challenges here. One is technical and one is legal. On the technical side, I can tell you a couple of things:

1. The Control 24 is ethernet based. To use it with Pro Tools, you install a protocol driver under your NIC card's properties. In fact you can remove every other protocol if you wish. No IP stack is needed as it's layer 2, for instance.

2. Using the network sniffer program Wireshark, I captured some of the conversation between the computer and the Control 24. What I saw was very encouraging. While I haven't analyzed it all, there are some clear indications of how the protocol works. I can go into more detail if needed.

On the legal side - assuming one could indeed work out the technical, what are the legal ramifications of such a solution? Most likely Digi doesn't want people doing this, but to what extent do they have control over someone developing software that communicates with a piece of their hardware? There does seem to be a couple of different sub-angles as well. If I did this for my own enjoyment, I suppose there would be less concern than if support was built into a commercial product. Another possibility is if middleware was the answer (and that seems to me to be the best answer) - a Control 24 to HUI or MMC translator, if you will. That relieves the DAW maker from any risk, as they are only supporting a generally known protocol.

Back to the technical for a moment. I have done programming in a previous life (Borland C), but I do not consider myself a programmer now. It's been too long. But I do remember enough about it to know this is most likely doable, barring any crazed authentication routines in the Control 24 firmware that aren't readily apparent across the ethernet wire. But I have an opportunity here, as my studio is currently in a construction transition period, so I have no deadlines or other distractions except my normal daytime job (network and telecom manager). My equipment is available for any testing and data gathering it would require to get the job done.

Is anybody else intrigued by this possibility? Your thoughts are welcomed and anticipated. I am definitely interested, and am willing to commit to substantial support for the effort. Not only for myself, but also the hundreds (if not thousands) of Control 24 owners out there.

Brian
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 11:17 AM   #2
FarBeyondMetal
Human being with feelings
 
FarBeyondMetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 373
Default

I'd be willing to try this if it ever came into existence, if only to blow the minds of the people that own the studio I internship at. Honestly though, I don't think very many people with a control 24 want to use it with anything other than pro tools.
FarBeyondMetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 02:48 PM   #3
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

I may be wrong, but I think you'd be surprised at how many would be happier with at least the option to use something else. And there are many folks that feel Digidesign's increasing issues with every version point to a difficult road ahead with that product. The problems have been somewhat incremental, so users who try nothing else do not realize how much they have been putting up with. One trip around something like Reaper, and it becomes quite clear.

But if you look around, many studios have not only invested in the Control 24, they have built their control room around it. Custom console furniture, etc. makes it difficult to start anew, not to mention your alternatives for a 24 track controller are limited if money is a concern. If I had to buy something else today, it would likely be a Mixed Logic MC24, but even then you are looking at almost three thousand bucks. If someone instead gave me the option of just keeping my Control 24, I believe I would jump at it.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2009, 11:16 PM   #4
robg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Atascadero, CA
Posts: 305
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
All,

On the legal side - assuming one could indeed work out the technical, what are the legal ramifications of such a solution?Brian
That is indeed the thorny side. Read your EULA and/or other documentation that came with the 24. This should be where you'll find allowed & disallowed behaviors.

If prohibited, you could always challenge!
robg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2009, 11:47 PM   #5
dub3000
Human being with feelings
 
dub3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,801
Default

the legalities of it will totally depend on what country you're in (at least, at the moment). as far as i know, clean room reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability is usually legal, unless you have to break an encryption scheme to do it (but your mileage may vary, and i am definitely not a lawyer here, this is just my understanding of the situation).

to be watertight, in the past, this sort of work is usually done by two groups of people. one group reverse engineers and documents the system. they then hand that protocol specification document over to other people who develop the emulation. this is how the IBM PC bios was cloned (by compaq?) in the 80's, and there are lots of examples of this sort of thing being cleanly and legally done. so it probably is possible. but the legal aspect of it can get hairy depending on minutae.

on the other hand, reverse engineering the pro tools session file format is possibly not entirely legal, because there's a definite encryption layer there (so it's possibly covered by the DMCA - again, probably country dependent).

if you're doing it for your own use, no one would ever know, though. and everyone implements the MCU protocol, for instance, which is probably the same sort of thing legally.
dub3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2009, 03:57 AM   #6
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Robg, I bought the console on ebay a couple of years back. Let's say for the sake of argument I didn't receive any documentation. I wouldn't know about the EULA, so how could I be bound by it? That's just an academic question, of course. I did receive said docs, and the truth is there is no way I could begin to complete this task without actually installing Pro Tools to enable analysis of the communication protocols. I don't remember it, but I probably clicked on "I agree" somewhere in that installation process. It is an otherwise interesting question though. If I buy a piece of electronics from a garage sale, I don't know that a company could stop me from analyzing it and disseminating my findings, having agreed to nothing with that company.

dub3000, interesting perspective - thanks for the info. Now that you mention it, I do remember reading about the 2-group method used by Compaq back then. And I agree about the encryption issue. Lucky for me I have no intention of dissecting their file format, and the communication between the Control 24 and the PC/application is definitely not encrypted.

On that subject, I have done many captures to understand the protocol. I have been fairly methodical about it to isolate activities, with good results. My initial captures went like this (each one is a separate capture file:

Capture 1. Open the program, do nothing else.
Capture 2. Open new project, do nothing else (this is true each time).
3. Create 1 new track.
4. Press mute button.
5. Press solo button.
(repeat previous for all buttons on that track)
6. Move fader, wait, return to original position.
7. Repeat captures 3-6 with a second track added.
8. Partially repeat for 24 tracks, just for grins.
9. Insert signal generator on a track to create meter movement
10. Cycle transport buttons.

And so on. While I won't go into the details of the findings at this point, I will say the captures clearly indicate the events. These events are repeatable, and are structured in a discernable way (i.e., command code, control ID/address, control state/on/off/position, display text, and so on). There are some parts that are still a mystery to me, but I haven't really spent much time on it yet either.

So it's an interesting exercise at this point. And I plan to continue looking at it, to satisfy my own curiousity if nothing else. :-)
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2009, 04:13 AM   #7
moliere
Human being with feelings
 
moliere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wellington
Posts: 2,153
Default

definitely sounds like fun. I love re-tasking/hacking electronic equipment I buy. Makes you feel like you own it. If I had a control-24 I'd help out, alas I don't.
moliere is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2009, 09:31 AM   #8
plush2
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 1,768
Default

I would think the next step would be to find some software that allows you to capture and rebroadcast the network/lan data for one of the tasks you list (ie. 4. press mute button) and then broadcast it back to the Control 24 to see if you can manipulate it. That could be a brute force way of getting things at least mocked up. Just an idea from someone who also doesn't have a Control 24 but I wholeheartedly support your effort.
__________________
mymusic - http://music.darylpierce.com
mywork - http://production.darylpierce.com
plush2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2009, 02:31 PM   #9
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Agreed, and I have looked into a couple of methods of doing it. One that looks like a good candidate is Winpcap. I wasn't aware of it until I started looking around, but in addition to capturing data Winpcpap also has the ability to transmit data already built in. I may have to brush off my C programming skills and build a little gizmo to utilize it, but they have code examples to do just that on their website.

But before I do that, I want to make sure I don't see any showstoppers in the captures that would prevent this from ever happening. I should be there very soon though. One thing I do see is a fairly large chunk of data being transmitted from the PC as the app comes up, a lot of which is fairly undecypherable so far. Probably an initialization routine. But if it's spits the same thing every time, no problem - just save the data for spitting as required.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 01:50 AM   #10
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Hi,

I think control 24 is a fantastic remote controller, but as I'm more of a midi/score/VSTi-kind of guy I like Cubase better than protools. My dream is to use the c-24 with cubase and my research for that brought me to this thread. I'm a programmer and it is encouraging to hear that it might not be impossible to crack the protocol. Currently I have not access to a c-24/protools system but I have plans to buy a c-24 in the near future. netnoggin: Could it be possible for you to publish the captures you have done so far? I'm willing to do some structural analysis. I have already 'cracked' the HUI midi protocol and programmed a custom display that shows the meter and nameinformation for each track in Cubase. That display is a poor mans display for my brc-2000 :-)

Best regards
/Jocke
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 02:11 AM   #11
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

yes, I certainly can. My regular job has called me out of town for a bit, thus the apparent lack of activity on this. Gotta pay the bills. Give me a week and a half, and I'll be back in the saddle.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 03:37 AM   #12
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,575
Default

When you get a chance to send your work out to indys, could you include me on the distribution list as well please?

I'm currently working on a generic MIDI controller project, and the long term goal is to make it a generic controller project, this would fit nicely into that plan.

Thanks -- Geoff
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 03:38 AM   #13
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FarBeyondMetal View Post
I'd be willing to try this if it ever came into existence, if only to blow the minds of the people that own the studio I internship at. Honestly though, I don't think very many people with a control 24 want to use it with anything other than pro tools.
In my opinion I think that many studio owners that has a control-24 can benefit greatly from the fact that they could offer both Protools and Cubase/Locic to their customers using the control-24 (if we were to succed of course :-)).
I myself have rejected "protools-only" studios from time to time when the focus was more arrangement/composing than tracking/mixing. Often the c-24 is naturally placed in front of sweetspot and rigging an extra table or using c-24 as a table for mouse/keyboard controlling other daws is selldom an optimal solution.
Again, I'll think that a middleware connecting c-24 to any daw using maybe the hui protocol would be a dream come true for many studio owners.

Conversion from Midi to ethernet and back shouldn't be that hard. The easiest way is to use virtual midiports like myokent. The harder way is to make a custom device driver that behaves like a midiport (to advanced for me right now :-().
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 03:40 AM   #14
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
yes, I certainly can. My regular job has called me out of town for a bit, thus the apparent lack of activity on this. Gotta pay the bills. Give me a week and a half, and I'll be back in the saddle.
No problem...
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2009, 02:28 AM   #15
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
All,
I have used Pro Tools for a few years, and am ready to jump to Reaper (past ready, really). One thing standing in my way is my studio has a Control 24 control surface...

Bottom line is I would like to be able to use my Control 24 with Reaper...

Is anybody else intrigued by this possibility? Your thoughts are welcomed and anticipated. I am definitely interested, and am willing to commit to substantial support for the effort. Not only for myself, but also the hundreds (if not thousands) of Control 24 owners out there.

Brian
You'll see mine in my avatar image. I've sat in front of it for 5 years. From my experience with it, it's way over priced junk. I've brought up this same topic here a few years back. Best to offload it and move on in my opinion.

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM

Last edited by Shan; 08-05-2009 at 03:09 AM.
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2009, 04:05 AM   #16
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

C'mon Shane, where's your sense of adventure?

Overpriced for sure, if you paid more than $5K for it, which I didn't. But my point was lots of people have one for whatever reason and maybe "dumping and moving on" is outside of their budget. A bird in the hand, etc. I don't use the pres, and frankly a lot of the functionality is of questionable value. But as a straightforward 24 channel control surface, it does the job. Heck, I think if you could only get automated faders, S-M-R buttons, and transport control, it would be worthwhile.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2009, 05:19 PM   #17
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

It would have to be hacked. You'll need some type of software to read the values coming from Ethernet after a button press or fader move. If it's encrypted, then that would be a major barrier. I did catch wind of one individual who hacked their Digi Icon system.

Mine was used for 3 things. The monitoring system, the talk back, and a foot rest. Other than that, I didnt even use it. One prob after another with that overpriced Digidesign crap.

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2009, 02:41 AM   #18
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Wireshark (formerly Ethereal) does the captures; I have a bunch of them already (see post #6). I'm on the road and don't have them with me at the moment. But they are not encrypted; even the scribble strip data is plain text ascii. But I will say it's not quite as cut and dried as one would like to see. I'll post when I get back.

You must be one of the many that had a problematic Control 24. Stories abound about power supply and harness problems, but mine has never acted up at all.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2009, 09:34 PM   #19
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
Wireshark (formerly Ethereal) does the captures; I have a bunch of them already (see post #6). I'm on the road and don't have them with me at the moment. But they are not encrypted; even the scribble strip data is plain text ascii. But I will say it's not quite as cut and dried as one would like to see. I'll post when I get back.
Keep me posted on this venture of yours then. I posted this same topic a few years back and got no interest at the time. I'll contribute what I can.

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2009, 02:28 PM   #20
Tony
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1
Default Very interesting, but hard work ?

Hi,
this sounds very interesting. By the way Sonar 7 had an update accepting the Euphonix Controler hardware. Euphonix uses an Ethernet protocol,also. This could be an interesting software basis for an universal Control24 software.
Because HUI is MIDI, and the Ethernet protocol could be avaible for other software like Cubase in the next years.
If someone knows how all this will work together, it will be interesting.
Tony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2009, 07:53 PM   #21
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
...the captures clearly indicate the events. These events are repeatable, and are structured in a discernable way (i.e., command code, control ID/address, control state/on/off/position, display text, and so on). There are some parts that are still a mystery to me, but I haven't really spent much time on it yet either.
I guess the next step is probably having some type of conversion app to convert this output data to MIDI or something that REAPER can understand and use. Good job! I ventured into this a few years back but didn't get as far as you.

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 01:37 AM   #22
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony View Post
Hi,
this sounds very interesting. By the way Sonar 7 had an update accepting the Euphonix Controler hardware. Euphonix uses an Ethernet protocol,also. This could be an interesting software basis for an universal Control24 software.
Because HUI is MIDI, and the Ethernet protocol could be avaible for other software like Cubase in the next years.
If someone knows how all this will work together, it will be interesting.
I didn't know about Euphonix protocol. It looks nice!

Conversion between ethernet <-> ethernet or ethernet <-> MIDI shouldn't differ that much in programming when the specs of each protocol is drawned out. The only thing I'm worried about is wether a virtual MIDIport is fast enough to handle the traffic. There will be a lot of ones and zeros when feeding 24 tracks of meterinformation togheter with 24 tracks of fader automation. I have done tests with hui/mackie protocol from cubase to view meterinformation in a separate application communicating through virtual midiports and it worked with 24 channels, but the fact is the hui/mackie control protocol (in cubase) seems to be limited by 8 channels to aviod midi buffer overflow. I got around that by designing my application to connect to several independent midiports with 8 channels each. I hope to get my hands on a control-24 soon. Then I hope it should be clear wheter this is doable or not...

Is there anyone who knows someone capable of programming VSTplugs? If so there might be possible to write a VST-plug that have some ethernetcommunication depending on how public the VST-hosts interface are to the plug :-). VST is a fairly spread technology and even if I'm a Cubase user I recognise that this issue should be handled in a larger scope to fit a broader range of DAW technology. Reaper for instance :-)

Funny, I found this thread, but I have never heard about Reaper before... Downloaded it and I'm surpised that Reaper seems to be a so complete DAW but so unknown to the public. I haven't used it in a project yet but I shurely will play around with it some more. It looks very genuine and flexible.

One question? Does Reaper support VSTi? If not, does anybody know if it will support it in some future release?

/Jocke
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 03:00 AM   #23
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indys View Post
Does Reaper support VSTi?

/Jocke
Yes.

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 03:35 AM   #24
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Guys, I made it back from my road trip. Gotta take care of a few things, then I will be making the captures available along with a document that describes what I have found. Give me a day or two to get the document together. Otherwise the captures won't make a lot of sense to anybody.

Brian
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 04:03 AM   #25
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post
Yes.

Shane
Cool. Then I'm really have to dig in to this :-)
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 11:50 AM   #26
ScottyD
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
Guys, I made it back from my road trip. Gotta take care of a few things, then I will be making the captures available along with a document that describes what I have found. Give me a day or two to get the document together. Otherwise the captures won't make a lot of sense to anybody.

Brian
I use Wireshark almost every day for work, so hopefully I'll be able to provide some insight into what you are seeing...
ScottyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2009, 12:36 PM   #27
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indys
The only thing I'm worried about is wether a virtual MIDIport is fast enough to handle the traffic
Why not just handle the ethernet traffic directly?

The MIDI implementation for control surfaces I'm currently writing ignores the Reaper MIDI, it just uses the WinMM.DLL to talk directly to the MIDI ports for control surface traffic.

I imagine that doing something similar with ethernet sockets would be the way to go, unless I'm missing something?
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2009, 10:54 PM   #28
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington View Post
Why not just handle the ethernet traffic directly?

The MIDI implementation for control surfaces I'm currently writing ignores the Reaper MIDI, it just uses the WinMM.DLL to talk directly to the MIDI ports for control surface traffic.

I imagine that doing something similar with ethernet sockets would be the way to go, unless I'm missing something?
I think that the virtual midiport also use WinMM.dll, thats why it works in every application using midi.

It is of course the MIDI hardware specification and its modest bitrate that I was concerned about. Though communication with c-24 will not enter MIDI hardware I did not know wether daws can handle mididata that is streamed in a much higher bitrate. I have never stressed a daw through a virtual midiport (WinMM.dlls midispec) with a heavy dataload. Does anyone here have the right tools to stress a virtual midiport with say maybe around 1 Mbit/s of 'correct' midi-data?

The problem is not the traffic to the control surfaces but rather the traffic from/to the daws. Is there another 'public well supported' interface between daws and peripherals rather than MIDI that could be used if above test will fail?

Not likely though! (That the test will fail, or that there would be another protocol) :-)

/Jocke

Last edited by indys; 08-18-2009 at 10:57 PM.
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2009, 02:22 AM   #29
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indys
Though communication with c-24 will not enter MIDI hardware I did not know wether daws can handle mididata that is streamed in a much higher bitrate

The problem is not the traffic to the control surfaces but rather the traffic from/to the daws. Is there another 'public well supported' interface between daws and peripherals rather than MIDI that could be used if above test will fail?
Ahhh..... Now I see your point -- no worries, there is another 'public well supported' interface with Reaper.

In Reaper the app<->3rd party DLL communication I have investigated so far is either direct function calls or Windows messages so the MIDI limitation isn't a factor, there's no need to use a virtual midiport at all.

If you're interested the Reaper extensions SDK is available as a download and there are control surface examples supplied:

http://www.reaper.fm/sdk/plugin/plugin.php
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2009, 06:34 AM   #30
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Okay guys, here's what I have so far. I see that the attachment mechanism here is not capable of supporting the filesize (about 5 meg), so I have uploaded them to a corner of my ISP-provided web space.

http://home.centurytel.net/mirage/control24/

I'll caveat it again by saying it's just a start. Plenty more to look into. But I know you guys were chomping at the bit :-)

Let me know if you have any questions,

Brian
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2009, 07:08 AM   #31
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin
Okay guys, here's what I have so far
Thanks man, I've just had a very quick peek -- great work!!
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2009, 03:47 PM   #32
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

You're welcome, and thanks!
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2009, 11:30 PM   #33
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington View Post
Ahhh..... Now I see your point -- no worries, there is another 'public well supported' interface with Reaper.

In Reaper the app<->3rd party DLL communication I have investigated so far is either direct function calls or Windows messages so the MIDI limitation isn't a factor, there's no need to use a virtual midiport at all.

If you're interested the Reaper extensions SDK is available as a download and there are control surface examples supplied:

http://www.reaper.fm/sdk/plugin/plugin.php
Ok, sound intresting.
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2009, 11:41 PM   #34
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
Okay guys, here's what I have so far...
Well done! I'll dig in to the captures this weekend.
/J
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2009, 07:37 PM   #35
Shan
Human being with feelings
 
Shan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by netnoggin View Post
Okay guys, here's what I have so far. I see that the attachment mechanism here is not capable of supporting the filesize (about 5 meg), so I have uploaded them to a corner of my ISP-provided web space.

http://home.centurytel.net/mirage/control24/

I'll caveat it again by saying it's just a start. Plenty more to look into. But I know you guys were chomping at the bit :-)

Let me know if you have any questions,

Brian
Excellent job so far!! Seeing a C/24 control REAPER will be quite the sight!

Shane
__________________
"Music should be performed by the musician not by the engineer."

Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM
Shan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2009, 04:31 AM   #36
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by indys View Post
Well done! I'll dig in to the captures this weekend.
/J
Sorry to say I havn't got the time to check out the captures yet. I was called in for a mini-tour and I'm stuck in rehersals and gigs for a month+. I'll be back as soon as a have time to look into the captures more in detail.

/J
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 11:24 AM   #37
stainlessbrown
Human being with feelings
 
stainlessbrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Left coast
Posts: 14
Default

I am (unfortunately) one of those who bought the Control 24 from Digi- so I've felt locked in for a while- With Apples decision to no longer support the PPC rigs, and Digi's decison to no longer support PPC's because they won't run Snow Leopard leaves me now looking at either selling off the digi rig and starting over, or hope for a way to use the C24 with another platform, such as Reaper which has interested me for a long time, but due to the proprietary Digi hardware...

my Control 24 is one of the last production runs (about 5 + yrears old) and after all the power supply issues- I'm used to it, it works well (at least those functions that work) and to sell it I'm taking a big bath, so some extra mileage would be good... or I stay on Digi 8.0 until something in my set-up fails....

so yes, there's a bunch of us out here with these units that are slowly being left in the dust by Digi (in hopes we'll buy the next latest and greatest)

OSX 10.5.x
stainlessbrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2009, 09:39 AM   #38
indys
Human being with feelings
 
indys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AC, Sweden
Posts: 49
Default Back...

Sorry,I have been busy lately with gigs and all sorts of things. I felt that I should give you some update on my thougths.

First of all Good job with the analyse so far. I have checked the capture files against you're 'humle opinion' and your theories looks good.

As I quickly browsed through the files I realized that I have to have a c-24 and do a debugging filtersession with wireshark to sort out the relevant data when for example pressing a mute button. Whitin 3 weeks I will know if I can get my hands on a unit and then do some realtime analyzing. Without it I'm kind of blind :-(

My early conclusions upon you're capturefiles is that f0 is the start byte of a midi system exlusive message and f7 is its end of message byte. 90 is the byte for 'note on'... If we are lucky digidesign has wrapped its protocol via midi. To be more analyzed though... System exclusive is the way of sending alphanumeric characters to displays via midi and maybe every readable string in the captures is surrounded by f0... f7. That might be of some proof...

It seems that protools is sending a lot of data and a suspect that all the logic is in protools. The reason why there is alot of data might be that protools needs to control all aspects of the c-24ex: when pressing solo on channel 1 protools might send a 'channel 1 solo light on' followed by 'channel 2 mute light off' 'channel 3 mute light off' ...'channel 24 mute light off' aka the c-24 is a 'dead' unit that does not make its own decisions. It sends the button data and receives "all" settings if a change is on the way.

Some other thougths (Not necesary correct but another way of looking on the data)
If you look at the sequence from you're analyse of 25 of 01-open-no-project.pcap:

<-- = my comments


00 a0 7e a2 12 0a destination
00 09 5b 03 e8 20 source
88 5f type
01 2a 3f fb code
00 00 00 03 count
00 00 00 00
00 00 00 5a number of sets
90 04 1c
90 02 1c
90 03 1c
f0 13 01 30 19 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f7 <--- this might be claring of display or something.
90 10 1c
90 0f 5c
90 11 1c
90 07 1c
90 0c 59
90 0d 19
90 0e 19
90 08 1c
90 14 1b
90 21 1b
90 08 1d
<-- from here there could be note on (90) on note 4 (04) with velocity 00 (00). Might be light of mute light for channel 1 (Just an example) No, its not the mutelight but you might get the idea...
90 04 00
90 04 01
90 04 02
90 04 03
90 04 04
90 04 05
90 04 06
90 04 07
90 04 08
90 04 09
90 04 0a
90 04 0b
90 04 0c
90 04 0d
90 04 0e
90 04 0f
90 04 10
90 04 11
90 04 12
90 04 13
90 04 14
90 04 15
90 04 16
90 04 17 <-- and this could be Might be light of mute light for channel 24 (Just an example) 17 is hex for 23 aka channel 0 to 23.

Just a theory

I have only checked for patterns in the capture files. The real analyze will be done with a c-24 if I can get one. I think that with appropriate filtering and knowing the interaction this should'nt be so hard to crack. The thing is to make the c-24 think its hooked up and the core for that seems to be the 'ping' between protools and c-24. To emulate that shouldn't be so difficult.

I'll keep in touch
/Indys
indys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2009, 12:03 PM   #39
ScottyD
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 148
Default

Does the traffic seem to be bidirectional? Like an ack/syn-ack of sorts that lets the host know the unit received the command?
ScottyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2009, 12:25 PM   #40
netnoggin
Human being with feelings
 
netnoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyD View Post
Does the traffic seem to be bidirectional? Like an ack/syn-ack of sorts that lets the host know the unit received the command?
Yes, that's one of the first things I latched on to was the acks going on from the other end. That packet was easiest to identify.
netnoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.