Hands-on with iControl for GB
I have found the absence of any real reviews of the iControl to be rather vexing. I now own an iControl and would be happy to clear up any confusion there remains about this product. I am convinced that what is hurting this product the most are the few pseudo-reviews out there. It is past time for the record to be set straight.
A large part of the problem is that this item has been reviewed and discussed by people who, a) don?t use GB as their primary DAW, or b) are not happy with GB and wish it would do something more than what it does. The iControl is a single-purpose device. It is designed for GB, nothing more. Whether or not it can control other software programs is immaterial. It is a midi device. It is bound to do something in other programs that it was not necessarily designed to do. It is made for GB and only GB. Unless you use GB as your primary DAW, or at least use it on a very frequent basis, go away. Run, don?t walk. This is the wrong product for you and you are the wrong market for it. Far too many people in this category have written about the iControl. My advice is to ignore anything written by such a person, no matter how good the intentions were.
The second category of people who should stay well away from this is the one who wishes GB had other functions. The iControl is a control surface. It is not a DAW or an enhancement to a DAW. It is not a software plug-in. It is not an effects module, a synthesizer or a sample bank. It is a control surface for a free, entry-level piece of recording software. It can never be more than that. If you do not like what GB does, then you will not like what iControl does. For the record, GB does not have real time parameter recording. I am amazed at how much print has been wasted on this silly expectation of iC. The iC can?t give GB anything it does not already have.
Perhaps it would help to think of iC as a simple mixer. Now, consider a basic analogue audio workstation. In addition to the mixer, you need a multi-track recorder, a compressor/limiter, an effects module, and some type of instrument. Even if the mixer comes with phantom power, you will probably want a mic preamp. I have listed five separate units you will need in addition to your mixer. All of which are necessary for giving your mixer purpose. By itself, the mixer is worthless. It is only as good as the content you pass through it. As the content passes through, the mixer can control the output volume, the input gain of one or two auxiliaries, and the stereo pan. For the most part, that?s it. You certainly shouldn?t expect you mixer to exceed the functions of the inputs. GB takes the place of most of those boxes. Because I use the Snowball mic by Blue, I don?t even need a preamp. It is all contained within the software. Still, the mixer (iC) is still just a mixer. Now that I have expounded on what it isn?t, let?s focus on what it is.
The iC is a control surface specifically designed for GB. It does in real space what GB does in virtual space. This is a rather tall order for any piece of hardware. Therefore, a few concessions have to be made for the sake of practicality. Perhaps the best example of this would be the fact that GB has (depending on your HD) unlimited number of potential tracks. Good luck making a hardware device that has a billion, thousand, or even 32 channels for a price that mere mortals could afford, let alone drag into their house. The iC is a portable device ideal for use with a notebook inspired DAW. It has no need for external power. The computer into which it is plugged powers it. Therefore, eight channels have to represent and control the unlimited number of tracks produced in GB. This all seems pretty obvious accept I see a lot of whining about the use of endless rotary knobs instead of faders. The only way to have channel strip represent two or three tracks is to have expensive motorized controls or to do what M-Audio did. It was the only way and it was implemented brilliantly. Their knob solution is in no way an impediment to productivity.
GB has a real interface problem in that the track parameter buttons are way too small. It can be a tricky interface to manage with a mouse. Also, it is difficult to make fine, precision changes to parameters. The control surface brings those small buttons into very manageable real-world buttons. You will never realize how much time you have been wasting clicking solo and adjusting pan with a mouse until you do it with a control surface. The dedicated jog wheel is an even bigger time saver. When you are deep into the graphic EQ and you are trying to here the affects of your tinkering on a particular passage, the wheel makes it easy to just jog back a bit or forward into the song to hear the next chorus. The transport buttons also give you a much bigger target to aim at when trying to punch in and out. Small things, I know. But, if you spend a lot of time working in GB, the time and frustration you save with iC is more than worth the price of admission. But there?s more?
As I mentioned before, most all mixers give you some control over effects levels. iC goes much deeper. With iC, you can control the individual parameters of each effect as well as the level of gate, compression, echo, and reverb on every track. Try fooling with that graphic EQ with a mouse and you will soon appreciate tactical control. It even allows you to do some things in a much simpler way. With iC, it is much easier to set beginning and end points for loop playback and recording. Want to find exact center of the stereo field after fooling around a bit with the pan? Good luck with the mouse. That, and every other adjustment is simple with the iC.
Finally, it is extremely well made. The pictures you see online make it look like a toy. Ironically, that is how Apple?s consumer computers look. Tactically, though, it is a pleasure to use. You get a solid kathunk when pressing the buttons. The knobs give audible and tactile feedback when turned. And the size is perfect. The pictures online make it look huge. I am six foot even. From the heel of my hand to the fingertip of my middle finger plus about a half inch is the length and width of the box. It is no more than an inch tall. It is nicely weighted and has rubber feet so it will not slide about on your desk. If I had a notebook, I would definitely feel comfortable taking it along for recording on location.
It is very nearly perfect for what it is. The only thing I would add to it is a headphone jack. I have a make-shift sound booth that is a few feet away from my computer. I can drag the iC to that area to record my vocals. Without a headphone jack in the iC, I have to use a headphone extender cable. The more obvious omission is inputs. Other than a single midi instrument, you cannot rout instruments directly through the iC hardware. GB allows for eight tracks to be simultaneously recorded. You need a special interface to be able to do that, however. It seems they could have thrown a couple of quarter inch jacks on it just for kicks. For those needing a multiple input device, this would be a deal breaker. If you don?t need it, no problem.
I have tried to cover most of the questions and misconceptions I have seen people tossing out there. I will post this on a couple of boards that I visit since I seem to be one of the only regular guys who have one of these and is willing to write about it. I will check periodically for questions that I can answer. Otherwise, hope this helps.
Enjoy.
A large part of the problem is that this item has been reviewed and discussed by people who, a) don?t use GB as their primary DAW, or b) are not happy with GB and wish it would do something more than what it does. The iControl is a single-purpose device. It is designed for GB, nothing more. Whether or not it can control other software programs is immaterial. It is a midi device. It is bound to do something in other programs that it was not necessarily designed to do. It is made for GB and only GB. Unless you use GB as your primary DAW, or at least use it on a very frequent basis, go away. Run, don?t walk. This is the wrong product for you and you are the wrong market for it. Far too many people in this category have written about the iControl. My advice is to ignore anything written by such a person, no matter how good the intentions were.
The second category of people who should stay well away from this is the one who wishes GB had other functions. The iControl is a control surface. It is not a DAW or an enhancement to a DAW. It is not a software plug-in. It is not an effects module, a synthesizer or a sample bank. It is a control surface for a free, entry-level piece of recording software. It can never be more than that. If you do not like what GB does, then you will not like what iControl does. For the record, GB does not have real time parameter recording. I am amazed at how much print has been wasted on this silly expectation of iC. The iC can?t give GB anything it does not already have.
Perhaps it would help to think of iC as a simple mixer. Now, consider a basic analogue audio workstation. In addition to the mixer, you need a multi-track recorder, a compressor/limiter, an effects module, and some type of instrument. Even if the mixer comes with phantom power, you will probably want a mic preamp. I have listed five separate units you will need in addition to your mixer. All of which are necessary for giving your mixer purpose. By itself, the mixer is worthless. It is only as good as the content you pass through it. As the content passes through, the mixer can control the output volume, the input gain of one or two auxiliaries, and the stereo pan. For the most part, that?s it. You certainly shouldn?t expect you mixer to exceed the functions of the inputs. GB takes the place of most of those boxes. Because I use the Snowball mic by Blue, I don?t even need a preamp. It is all contained within the software. Still, the mixer (iC) is still just a mixer. Now that I have expounded on what it isn?t, let?s focus on what it is.
The iC is a control surface specifically designed for GB. It does in real space what GB does in virtual space. This is a rather tall order for any piece of hardware. Therefore, a few concessions have to be made for the sake of practicality. Perhaps the best example of this would be the fact that GB has (depending on your HD) unlimited number of potential tracks. Good luck making a hardware device that has a billion, thousand, or even 32 channels for a price that mere mortals could afford, let alone drag into their house. The iC is a portable device ideal for use with a notebook inspired DAW. It has no need for external power. The computer into which it is plugged powers it. Therefore, eight channels have to represent and control the unlimited number of tracks produced in GB. This all seems pretty obvious accept I see a lot of whining about the use of endless rotary knobs instead of faders. The only way to have channel strip represent two or three tracks is to have expensive motorized controls or to do what M-Audio did. It was the only way and it was implemented brilliantly. Their knob solution is in no way an impediment to productivity.
GB has a real interface problem in that the track parameter buttons are way too small. It can be a tricky interface to manage with a mouse. Also, it is difficult to make fine, precision changes to parameters. The control surface brings those small buttons into very manageable real-world buttons. You will never realize how much time you have been wasting clicking solo and adjusting pan with a mouse until you do it with a control surface. The dedicated jog wheel is an even bigger time saver. When you are deep into the graphic EQ and you are trying to here the affects of your tinkering on a particular passage, the wheel makes it easy to just jog back a bit or forward into the song to hear the next chorus. The transport buttons also give you a much bigger target to aim at when trying to punch in and out. Small things, I know. But, if you spend a lot of time working in GB, the time and frustration you save with iC is more than worth the price of admission. But there?s more?
As I mentioned before, most all mixers give you some control over effects levels. iC goes much deeper. With iC, you can control the individual parameters of each effect as well as the level of gate, compression, echo, and reverb on every track. Try fooling with that graphic EQ with a mouse and you will soon appreciate tactical control. It even allows you to do some things in a much simpler way. With iC, it is much easier to set beginning and end points for loop playback and recording. Want to find exact center of the stereo field after fooling around a bit with the pan? Good luck with the mouse. That, and every other adjustment is simple with the iC.
Finally, it is extremely well made. The pictures you see online make it look like a toy. Ironically, that is how Apple?s consumer computers look. Tactically, though, it is a pleasure to use. You get a solid kathunk when pressing the buttons. The knobs give audible and tactile feedback when turned. And the size is perfect. The pictures online make it look huge. I am six foot even. From the heel of my hand to the fingertip of my middle finger plus about a half inch is the length and width of the box. It is no more than an inch tall. It is nicely weighted and has rubber feet so it will not slide about on your desk. If I had a notebook, I would definitely feel comfortable taking it along for recording on location.
It is very nearly perfect for what it is. The only thing I would add to it is a headphone jack. I have a make-shift sound booth that is a few feet away from my computer. I can drag the iC to that area to record my vocals. Without a headphone jack in the iC, I have to use a headphone extender cable. The more obvious omission is inputs. Other than a single midi instrument, you cannot rout instruments directly through the iC hardware. GB allows for eight tracks to be simultaneously recorded. You need a special interface to be able to do that, however. It seems they could have thrown a couple of quarter inch jacks on it just for kicks. For those needing a multiple input device, this would be a deal breaker. If you don?t need it, no problem.
I have tried to cover most of the questions and misconceptions I have seen people tossing out there. I will post this on a couple of boards that I visit since I seem to be one of the only regular guys who have one of these and is willing to write about it. I will check periodically for questions that I can answer. Otherwise, hope this helps.
Enjoy.