Quick Sign In:  

Forum: Old versions

Topic: I have a very specific question on device definition coding.

This topic is old and might contain outdated or incorrect information.

MundetHome userMember since 2016
Hey everyone.

I have a CMD Behringer 4A controller and it is natively supported from VDJ version 7.4.1 and onwards.

However i feel like the device definition is not as efficient as it can be.

If you look at an image of my controller (im new in this forum i dont see tools where i can upload an image of my own) you will notice that theres 2 rows of knobsand buttons labeled FX1 and FX2

These knobs and buttons are defined by default to work as one. (i.e IF i try to map the 2nd knob of FX1 (left deck) to the filter, it will automatically map the 2nd knob of FX2 (right deck) to the 2nd deck filter as well.

Is there any way through which i could declare these 8 knobs and buttons separately as to have 8 separate functions?

Example : Map the 2nd knob in FX1 to the selected deck filter, and the 2nd knob in FX2 to "zooming" in and out on the beatmatcher


The device code of my controller for the FX knobs is the following

<slider cc="0x10" name="KNB_FX1" channel="0" deck="1" />
<slider cc="0x10" name="KNB_FX1" channel="2" deck="3" />
<slider cc="0x11" name="KNB_FX2" channel="0" deck="1" />
<slider cc="0x11" name="KNB_FX2" channel="2" deck="3" />
<slider cc="0x12" name="KNB_FX3" channel="0" deck="1" />
<slider cc="0x12" name="KNB_FX3" channel="2" deck="3" />
<slider cc="0x13" name="KNB_FX4" channel="0" deck="1" />
<slider cc="0x13" name="KNB_FX4" channel="2" deck="3" />
<button note="0x10" name="FX1" channel="0" deck="1" />
<button note="0x10" name="FX1" channel="2" deck="3" />
<button note="0x11" name="FX2" channel="0" deck="1" />
<button note="0x11" name="FX2" channel="2" deck="3" />
<button note="0x12" name="FX3" channel="0" deck="1" />
<button note="0x12" name="FX3" channel="2" deck="3" />
<button note="0x13" name="FX4" channel="0" deck="1" />
<button note="0x13" name="FX4" channel="2" deck="3" />


Also i noticed that if i try to map the hardware without a device code (older versions before VDJ 7.4.1), by the time i press "Key Learn", an address completely different to the MIDI cc will show up

For example if i key learn the 2nd knob in fx1, "0-CC16" shows up.

How can i know what hexadecimal address each knob/button has for device definition coding?


Regards

Roy Flores

 

Posted Fri 22 Jan 16 @ 8:07 am
PachNPRO InfinityMember since 2009
The device file should be fine. What you want to do is changing the mapper file.

You can get different behaviour of the buttons depending on deck with the following actions:

device_side:

device_side 'left' ? actionA : actionB

device_side 1 ? action_deck_1 : device_side 2 ? action_deck_2 : device_side 3 ? action_deck_3 : device_side 4 ? action_deck_4 : device_side 5 ? and so on...

action_deck:

action_deck 1 ? actionA : action_deck 2 ? actionB : action_deck 3 ? actionC ...
 

Posted Fri 22 Jan 16 @ 9:55 am
MundetHome userMember since 2016
Nevermind, solved it modifying the device code, basic trial and error.

Danke dir trotzdem :D
 

Posted Sun 24 Jan 16 @ 6:39 am
SBDJPRO Infinity Member since 2006
For the record the reason the definitions for buttons that exist on multiple decks are combined is to simplify mapping.

It means that you only have to have one mapping for a play button, instead of 4. So when you remap that button, you only have to do it once instead of 4 times.

You can then override that behaviour using the above on the rare circumstances that you want the same button to do different things on different sides.

This is far more optimal and efficient :)
 

Posted Sun 24 Jan 16 @ 10:13 am
MundetHome userMember since 2016
no i solved it by declaring my fx knobs without channel or deck parameter, and only once, not twice like the default setting
 

Posted Wed 27 Jan 16 @ 9:02 am
MundetHome userMember since 2016
and also renaming the knobs that were formerly declared on channel 2 and 3 to knb 5,6,7 and 8 respectively


 

Posted Wed 27 Jan 16 @ 10:06 am
SBDJPRO Infinity Member since 2006
I was explaining why the default mapping method used by us is more efficient and user friendly ;)
 

Posted Wed 27 Jan 16 @ 7:19 pm


(Old topics and forums are automatically closed)