…bumping a rather old topic here, but i think it makes most sense! 
do we have any movement towards custom CC assignment, and/or the possibility of addressing more than one control with either one CC message, or with one physical (Device or ControlChain) control?
I also would like to assign multiple controls to a single MIDI CC! 
(And the ability to merge midi signals would be useful as well!)
superb, thanks
Currently on the dwarf, is it not possible just to use a 3.5 stereo jack cable to loop the mini-midi in/out ports and use a midi pluggin to multiplicate a given CC message into as many as needed ?
@Azza that is possible. But you have another way that saves you the cable and the connectors…the Virtual MIDI Loopback does exactly that.
The multiplication part is what I’m not 100% sure. Why would that be better than the CV method? (honest question, I feel that I’m missing something)
I’m still to catch up on the possibilities offered by CV. And yes, I forgot about the Virtual MIDI loopback (which I knew about actually).
Can anyone suggest a way to map a mid CC ‘inversely’ to a parameter? for instance, on one plugin i want one of my midi expression pedals to simultaneously increase the gain of a dry signal and decrease the gain of a wet signal… another pedal i want to decrease the cutoff frequency of a lowpass filter while also increasing the gain a little bit to maintain overall volume… I get an error if the minumim value is larger than the maximum. Every DAW can handle inverse ranges, surprised the MOD software can’t handle mappings this way. Is there a workaround with the midi utilities?
I disagree with this. All other software I have used allows mapping controls via midi learn to midi CCs already assigned elsewhere. I think it’s more confusing if this is not allowed.
I do it this way:
Control TO CV (translates CV from midi cc)
Then use CV Parameter Modulation has two parameters:
So the output would be *PARAMETER + INPUT . DEPTH
e.g. if parameter (your midi cc value) goes from 0 to 127 and you want an output from 127 to 0 you can set PARAMETER=127 and DEPTH=-100%
If you want an output from 100 to 0 you can set PARAMETER=127 and DEPTH= -0,79 (more or less -100/127)
wow, neat
In know this is an old thread and probably not the best place to barf up the following long post, but I’ll throw my 2 cents in here anyway because I’ve just started looking into MOD after being a seasoned Guitarix user and it simply astounds me how poor the midi implementation is in MOD. Everything is a work-around. I have a midi controller setup in Guitarix that works really well but very little of that can be accomplished in MOD. I’m using a docker version of the desktop implemented in github at raidolo/mod-docker. It has midi turned on and it works astoundingly well. Latency and DSP processing for NAM in Guitarix and Mod-docker is pretty much identical.
In Guitarix I can use an inexpensive but very functional and compact Behringer X-Touch Mini controller and Guitarix has midi feedback so when I change presets all the buttons and knobs reflect the settings in the current preset. If I change something in the GUI it is reflected on the controller. I can’t use this controller very well with MOD because it has no midi feedback to the controller. 8 knobs plus 16 buttons multiplied by 2 layers and I have quite a lot of physical controls to work with. I can run Guitarix with no GUI in headless mode on a fanless CPU this way and have fast control to make adjustments in a live situation.
Here is an example of where the midi implementation of Guitarix is really helpful: For NAM you have an input and output gain and you have to fiddle with both to get the amp model to give the desired amount of breakup at the desired volume level. Turn input up to get more distortion, but turn output down to maintain the same basic volume. You can assign one midi knob to both input and output of NAM in Guitarix, and you can assign a specific range for the input and a different specific inverted range for the output (as opposed to 0-128 being locked to the full range of the control it’s assigned to). Now I can grab one knob and turn it up to give me more amp gain while maintaining the same perceived volume. Doing this in MOD would probably require like a dozen midi tools in a complex setup…
I can also map many different plugin controls to the same midi CC command. While this does create some issues with midi feedback, it can be very handy to control, for example, BPM of delays or other spatial FX. I can turn on bothe a delay and a flanger, for example, and adjust the BPM of both plugins (or many) at the same time on one knob. Very handy.
I came to MOD to see if some of the limitations of Guitarix could be overcome, but honestly, I don’t know if the benefits of MOD overcome the issues. The main issues I have with Guitarix is that it’s basically single threaded, all plugins are in a fixed linear sequence (no routing options) and the plugins available are limited due to the Guitarix requirements for LV2 compatibility (mostly GUI related I think). MOD overcomes these issues but the midi/external control is a limitation and the UI in the browser makes it more difficult to get realtime feedback to the GUI for things like meters. I will work with MOD in parallel with Guitarix for now and do MOD strictly from the GUI with no midi to see how it works. Maybe after this latest phase 2 reboot we’ll see some added midi/control implementation to the desktop version and perhaps some design changes to the GUI to make it more friendly to control MOD directly from the browser using my own hardware.
I hope I don’t sound too critical of MOD. It really is an impressive ecosystem and there are some features that are really smart and exceptionally functional. But I didn’t realize I’d be trading one set of issues for another in order to find a plug-in organizing host to run NAM. Now I’m not sure which way to go. I’ll certainly be learning how to use MOD and waiting for any desktop updates, but at the moment I’m not ready to jump in with both feet.
With CV plugins you can do whatever complex and convoluted setup and automation you may want. Maybe it is not straight out of the box, bit itt will cover far more use cases than a preconfigured one
OTOH I agree that some major improvements to the GUI(s) would seriously be needed to take advanta6drom the flexibility provided. E.g. saving and insertion sub-patches
For me the difference is work flow, being able to quickly map one controller to multiple parameters using the midi learn function would be a lot faster than having to set up a ‘control to cv’ then manage cv out, then map the cv to parameter, then possibly also have to remap whatever you had the controller mapped to in the first place then midi learn the control to cv…
Usually by the time I’ve done this I am completely out of the flow of what I was working on and the patching environment if full of cv plugins that all look exactly the same.
Also, the parameter display in the dwarf itself shows the cv value rather than the parameter value of the pedal its mapped to.