[Mel Matsuoka]

Crap, that’s annoying. I got the impression from the diagrams in the BMD Config Guide that the Cubix Desktop 4 had 2 of its 4 slots blocked when using double-wide cards!

Not that I don’t love my Cyclone, because I have no complaints about its performance with Resolve (even with just two old GTX285’s), but I’d much prefer the ability to run 3 double-wide GPUs instead of just two 🙁

[Mel Matsuoka]

I went with the Cyclone 2707 chassis instead of the Cubix, since I wanted to run 2x GTX285s (double-wide) and a Rocket card at the same time, and the Cyclone gives you 5 slots, 2 of which can accomodate dual-wide 16x GPU cards. Since the Rocket card is single-wide 8x card, I can have an extra 16x and 8x slot available in the chassis, if I wanted.

The Cubix Desktop 4 only has 4 slots, so I’m not sure if you can stuff 3 double-wide 580s in there, since 2 of the slots get physically blocked by the GPU card itself (at least that’s what the BMD config guide seems to imply)

I had a lot of problems getting the Cyclone to work when I first got it, but it turned out that the problems were caused by some sort if inherent incompatibility with the Cyclone and the 2008 Mac Pro3,1. Since upgrading to a 2010 MacPro, everything works great!

The factory installed fans in the Cyclone are definitely way too loud, and should be replaced. It’s a cheap, $30 fix. I posted more about this here: https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/277/14441

[Mel Matsuoka]

I have an Ultrascope for my Resolve system, and it’s definitely a great value. But I am continually disappointed by the unfulfilled potential and unusual limitations of this product.

The inability to maximize a single scope view doesn’t make sense to me, as well as the inability to use the scrollwheel on the mouse to arbitrarily zoom in on any portion of the Waveform. And for my particular workflow, I dont need the audio metering and video preview visible at all times, so these 2 views are really wasted space, and it would be nice if the interface could accomodate a larger 4-up scope display.

It’d be nice to have an RGB Parade Overlay view as well!

[Mel Matsuoka]

bumping this question…could we please get an official endorsement from BMD which Rocket driver is compatible with the 8.2 betas?

[Mel Matsuoka]

The Tangent Wave definitely has more comprehensive mappings than the EclipseCX, so if that’s of primary importance to your workflow, then the Wave is your best bet for the price.

That said, after demoing the Wave hands on, I just couldn’t see myself being very happy with having to drill down into submenus just to get to frequently used functions. While it’s nice to have more mappings, if it takes me 4 button presses to get to a mapping, then it’s not much of a timesaver, and having to look down at the displays to see which menu you’re in kind of defeats the purpose of having a dedicated control-surface to begin with.

I chose to run with the JLCooper panel primarily for the more direct mappings of frequently used functions, as well as the overall build quality of the unit. The Wave definitely feels cheap, and as someone who tends to have a heavy hand on keyboards and buttons, I worry that the buttons will break after daily usage.

Ironically though, I do prefer the feel of the joyballs on the Wave panel MUCH more than the ones on the Eclipse. Tangent really knows how to make quality controls for panels, and after using the silky smooth trackball/rings on the Tangent CP200 panel set for so many years, the Eclipse ball/rings feel unnaturally tight and rough to me. I thought I’d get used to it, but after 6 months of near daily use, I still hate how the Eclipse feels under my hands. But if you don’t already have experience using a previous control-surface this probably wont matter to you at all.

That said, even though I like the “action” of the Wave panel better, I much prefer the ring-around-trackball layout of the Eclipse, rather than the trackball+rotary knob layout of the Wave. The ball/knob layout may be what old-school DaVinci colorists are used to, but it seems more ergonomically natural to me to have the rings around the trackballs, since you can easily control both offsets with minimal movements of just one hand.

So it should be obvious by now that your choice of 3rd party control surface will ultimately be a compromise in one regard or another. None of these sub-$10,000 panels will do everything you want, exactly the way you want (which is the whole justification for the price of the BMD Resolve Panel). You just have to decide which advantage matters to you most when using a panel, and choose the one that serves that need the best. For me, direct, logical mappings matter the most, because I generally work with a room full of clients looking over my shoulder, and I dont want to be slowing down the creative process by constantly looking down and drilling through menus. I wish I could have the tactile feel of my Tangent CP200 panels, but the amount of compromises that using the Tangent Wave would entail just wasn’t worth “cheaping out” for, in my mind.

[Mel Matsuoka]

Peter,

Does the Mac 8.2b2 update work with the latest release version of the RED Rocket driver & firmware (v1.4.19 / 1.1.16.5)?

The current “approved” version of the Rocket drivers for Resolve 8.1.1 don’t work with REDCINE-X Professional, because it requires the newer Rocket driver and firmware. It’d be great if I could get a thumbs-up from you (or any other 8.2beta users) for the new Rocket drivers.

Thanks!
mel

[Mel Matsuoka]

This is indeed the downside to using the Slingbox. I would have to believe that there are better hardware based options (or using a dedicated computer) that can accomodate for multiple simultaneous users, though.

For us we’ve never had to stream to multiple destinations at once, so it was a no-brainer to just use a dusty old Slingbox that I had in my closet. The ability to stream to a remote iPhone/iPad via the Slingbox Player app is nice bonus, too.

[Mel Matsuoka]

I’ve had a lot of good luck using a Slingbox unit for doing remote offline edit sessions. No software option Ive tried gave me the level of performance and “idiot-proofness” that the Slingbox gave me.

I haven’t tried it for remote grading sessions yet, so I don’t know how accurate it is for judging color, but if all you need is motion preview for window tracking etc, the Slingbox works great because it’s a standalone unit that won’t affect the performance of your workstation when it’s in use.

[Mel Matsuoka]

You’re definitely right about the desktop real-estate. I used to use a 6×11 Intuos3, but had to replace it with a Intuos4 “Small” because the 6×11 threatened to push my former Tangent CP200s off the back edge of my console, since I prefer having the tablet in front of me when I use it, instead of to the side. It’s not as bad now that I use an EclipseCX panel, but having the keyboard and Wacom stacked in front of the Eclipse just doesn’t work, ergonomically speaking, hence my need to use the mouse.

I’ve come to terms with the fact that once I get my PenMoto unit, I’ll have to re-train myself to use the Wacom to the side of my body instead of in front of it.

But really, it’s the lack of scroll-wheel functionality that I miss when using the Wacom stylus. I’ve never been able to warm up to using the “touch strips” on the Intuos tablets as a substitute for the scrollwheel on a mouse. I don’t really know why, but it just doesn’t feel right to invoke scrollwheel actions that way.

[Mel Matsuoka]

For some reason, the only applications that I prefer using a mouse over the Wacom is with grading apps. This is a pain for me, because I loathe mice. But I think using the Wacom with both a color control-surface as well as the keyboard is too awkward because you always have to pick-up/drop the stylus whenever you move your hands off the control-surface and have to interact with the UI.

This is why I donated to the Kickstarter campaign for PenMoto (https://penmoto.com), which looks kinda silly, but may be the answer to my prayers when using the Wacom with Resolve.