Komplete Kontrol Mk2 keyboard support?

[S K]

Is there full support for this in Cakewalk band Lab?

[John Vere]

 

 

[S K]

Many huge thanks John for your prompt and really helpful link

The only thing is, and please forgive me for being quite thick, I'm not sure I understand that.  I did come across that thread before in searching before asking the Q.

There's a lot of stuff in there I don't understand.

Does it work exactly like it should, (like it does with Ableton, CUbase etc) or is it a partial workaround thing?

I'm about to make huge changes to my studio setup, equipment and workflow and it may well involve buying a new synth and I'm looking at the KK S88 Mk2.  I want to be sure it works well with CBB.  If not I guess I could always switch to cubase but it'll set me back a few quid. 

[John Vere]

I posted that thread thinking there might be someone in there who owns one you can PM directly. Might take a while to get an answer if they are not a regular. 

[S K]

Oh ok got it, thanks,  good idea I will do so.

[azslow3]

17 hours ago, S K said:

Does it work exactly like it should, (like it does with Ableton, CUbase etc) or is it a partial workaround thing?

"Like it should" is relative... they support "Logic Pro X, Ableton Live, Cubase, Nuendo und GarageBand". Cakewalk is not in the list. So, from NI perspective it will work "as it should" in Cakewalk, without all that features ?

You pay NI $500+ for the controller, I think it is better ask NI to support Cakewalk then reversed, since you don't pay Cakewalk.

 

[S K]

1 minute ago, azslow3 said:

"Like it should" is relative... they support "Logic Pro X, Ableton Live, Cubase, Nuendo und GarageBand". Cakewalk is not in the list. So, from NI perspective it will work "as it should" in Cakewalk, without all that features ?

You pay NI $500+ for the controller, I think it is better ask NI to support Cakewalk then reversed, since you don't pay Cakewalk.

 

Yeah mate I agree.

It's not for Cakewalk to fix it, it's for NI.     But I'm not asking Cakewalk to fix it, I'm just asking if anyone has this keyboard and if it works for them as it does with some other DAWs.

[azslow3]

From what I know, no-one has implemented deep integration into Cakewalk for NI keyboards (I don't have the keyboard, but I try to trace reports of deep integration of any surfaces into Cakewalk). So no  "as in some other DAWs" integration.

Originally, MK2 (unlike MK1) had MIDI steering for DAWs disabled (DAWs had to use OSC for the integration). Later NI has enabled MIDI for all S MK2 and A keyboards. Details for used protocol are not public, but interested developers can get them. What I mean:

1.  not only Cakewalk and NI but also anyone with sufficient skills can provide deep solution (f.e. such solutions exist for REAPER)
2.  partial functionality (f.e. transport) is relatively easy to implement, since there are several "generic" plug-ins with MIDI support. So someone is probably using that already (while I have not seen success reports).

[S K]

9 hours ago, azslow3 said:

From what I know, no-one has implemented deep integration into Cakewalk for NI keyboards (I don't have the keyboard, but I try to trace reports of deep integration of any surfaces into Cakewalk). So no  "as in some other DAWs" integration.

Originally, MK2 (unlike MK1) had MIDI steering for DAWs disabled (DAWs had to use OSC for the integration). Later NI has enabled MIDI for all S MK2 and A keyboards. Details for used protocol are not public, but interested developers can get them. What I mean:

1.  not only Cakewalk and NI but also anyone with sufficient skills can provide deep solution (f.e. such solutions exist for REAPER)
2.  partial functionality (f.e. transport) is relatively easy to implement, since there are several "generic" plug-ins with MIDI support. So someone is probably using that already (while I have not seen success reports).

Many thanks azlow, I appreciate your help.

So is the Mk1 version integrated fine?

I am rather surprised that Cakewalk has slipped such that it is no longer considered worthy to programme for.  I'm shocked that NI and others (I think Arturia) programme for toy sequencers like Fruity Loops (!!!!!???) but not incredible ones like Cakewalk.  FL is a kid's toy and I used it to play around and have fun with cute beats, when I was paying good money for Sonar.   Now I'm using CBB and somehow FL has arisen to be above the mighty Cakewalk so peopel prioritise that instead?   

I guess this is the price we pay for it being free now even though I never wanted it to be free.  I'd gladly contribute a bit just to make sure it's treated more seriously by other companies, however that would work.    Developers aren't charities, they can't be expected also to work for free.   And sadly, unless I'm mistaken, as good as a programme it is if it's not considered worthy enough to be supported then it might be time to call it a day and jump to Cubase or something else whatever that may cost because this sort of this is likely to keep happening.

 

 

[Maestro]

35 minutes ago, S K said:

I am rather surprised that Cakewalk has slipped such that it is no longer considered worthy to programme for.  I'm shocked that NI and others (I think Arturia) programme for toy sequencers like Fruity Loops (!!!!!???) but not incredible ones like Cakewalk.  FL is a kid's toy and I used it to play around and have fun with cute beats, when I was paying good money for Sonar.   Now I'm using CBB and somehow FL has arisen to be above the mighty Cakewalk so peopel prioritise that instead?   

 

 

It doesn't surprise me that you're surprised.

FL Studio hasn't been a toy since over a decade ago.  It's development speed is somewhat of a marvel, too.  It grew up VERY fast.

It's also, practically, industry standard in the Trap and Hip Hop production markets.

Not supporting FL Studio pretty much shuts you out of those markets, for the most part... It is a very large market that you are de facto ceding to Nektar, Akai, Arturia, and other competitors.

Not supporting Cakewalk is ignorable because the markets where it was strongest have been completely run over by Studio One and REAPER, among others.  The market share isn't there to justify investing in and maintaining support.  Cakewalk can force itself back into that conversation by increasing its market share.  Perpetuating divisive stances on DAW choice doesn't help, as it forwards this culture of "Must Choose One."  That will not work in Cakewalk's favor, at this particular juncture.

I notice Nektar doesn't cite SONAR/Cakewalk support with the latter product lines, either.  That's a shame.

In any case, most controllers do have HUI support (that likely doesn't apply to Native Instruments, though I may be wrong).

I do, however, find it surprising that you call FL Studio a "Toy Sequencer" and refer to Cakewalk as an "Increrdible One."

The fact that FL Studio is such an amazing Pattern-Based Sequencer and Beat Making Solution - with an incredible Piano Roll - while Cakewalk's Sequencers, etc. feel half-developed is probably why it has been able to be so successful and take over those markets.  FL Studio is used for everything from Trap and Hip Hop to Orchestral and Film Scoring.

The only DAWs even approaching FL Studio in its "concentration" (primary market) areas are Beat Making DAWs like Native Instruments Machine and AKAI MPC 2, and FL Studio usually wins out over them because of Lifetime Free Updates and better plugins/instruments. Cakewalk doesn't even Register in that conversation.  It's great at mixing, and that's why it's worth having both it and FL Studio if you don't mind learning how to use two DAWs.  Produce or Sequence in FL, Arrange and/or Mix in Cakewalk.

FL can be hosted in other DAWs, so instead of poo pooing them, advocate their use so people don't drop Cakewalk wholesale when they realize the deficiencies in its tooling vs. those other DAWs (which, in some cases, specialize in those areas).

This is why VST, ReWire, etc. exists.

So we don't have to fight petty DAW wars.  We can create allies, instead.

Lastly, most people only care about what a DAW can do for them today, not what it couldn't do for them 15 years ago.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Maestro

[S K]

35 minutes ago, Maestro said:

It doesn't surprise me that you're surprised.

FL Studio hasn't been a toy since over a decade ago.  It's development speed is somewhat of a marvel, too.  It grew up VERY fast.

It's also, practically, industry standard in the Trap and Hip Hop production markets.

Not supporting FL Studio pretty much shuts you out of those markets, for the most part... It is a very large market that you are de facto ceding to Nektar, Akai, Arturia, and other competitors.

Not supporting Cakewalk is ignorable because the markets where it was strongest have been completely run over by Studio One and REAPER, among others.  The market share isn't there to justify investing in and maintaining support.  Cakewalk can force itself back into that conversation by increasing its market share.  Perpetuating divisive stances on DAW choice doesn't help, as it forwards this culture of "Must Choose One."  That will not work in Cakewalk's favor, at this particular juncture.

I notice Nektar doesn't cite SONAR/Cakewalk support with the latter product lines, either.  That's a shame.

In any case, most controllers do have HUI support (that likely doesn't apply to Native Instruments, though I may be wrong).

I do, however, find it surprising that you call FL Studio a "Toy Sequencer" and refer to Cakewalk as an "Increrdible One."

The fact that FL Studio is such an amazing Pattern-Based Sequencer and Beat Making Solution - with an incredible Piano Roll - while Cakewalk's Sequencers, etc. feel half-developed is probably why it has been able to be so successful and take over those markets.  FL Studio is used for everything from Trap and Hip Hop to Orchestral and Film Scoring.

The only DAWs even approaching FL Studio in its "concentration" (primary market) areas are Beat Making DAWs like Native Instruments Machine and AKAI MPC 2, and FL Studio usually wins out over them because of Lifetime Free Updates and better plugins/instruments. Cakewalk doesn't even Register in that conversation.  It's great at mixing, and that's why it's worth having both it and FL Studio if you don't mind learning how to use two DAWs.  Produce or Sequence in FL, Arrange and/or Mix in Cakewalk.

FL can be hosted in other DAWs, so instead of poo pooing them, advocate their use so people don't drop Cakewalk wholesale when they realize the deficiencies in its tooling vs. those other DAWs (which, in some cases, specialize in those areas).

This is why VST, ReWire, etc. exists.

So we don't have to fight petty DAW wars.  We can create allies, instead.

Lastly, most people only care about what a DAW can do for them today, not what it couldn't do for them 15 years ago.

Excellent post, thank you.    Helpful for the likes of me who have been out the game for a few years: clearly I am behind the times and I mean no offence to FL or its users. 

As someone who has *also* produces hip-hop, grime etc alongside more traditional (for want of a better word) types of music I can completely understand this. In fact my biggest commercial 'success'  has been through hip hop so I'm no stranger to that.   

Indeed as I say I was using both exactly as you describe.   Cakewalk is a traditional musician's choice, great for recording, mixing etc, whereas FL is what I'd open up and run inside Cakewalk (IIRC) to make beats in a quick, easy way. 

So yeah as nowdays more traditional musicians like me are giving way in terms of proportion to (I need to be careful how I say this!), young and upcoming beatmakers who put together beats as the mainstay of their music (trap and other forms of hip hop ) I can see how the market has shifted.  Cakewalk is awful for that.  That's why I used FL in the past and I've since invested in Maschine to use within Cakewalk. 

To me Cakewalk is still incredible and yes perhaps FL isn't as much of a toy anymore - but it certainly was when I used it. But even now as you suggest it's something you'd use within Cakewalk.  So I can't see what has changed there if I'm honest.  If it was a decent do-it-all production tool in its own right would anyone even entertain that idea in 2020?   I really don't want to be running two separate DAWs. Not in this day and age.  I want to use one and learn it well and invest my time and energy in that hence getting Maschine as I say.    Fine, I can run a fruityloops VSTi in Cakewalk if it exists, but still Cakewalk is the main programme and that's the one I'd expect NI to have support for, not the beatmaking tool. If it's not just a beatmaking tool and it's as fully featured as Cakewalk for putting together other music then I'll look into that as my DAW instead. 

So yeah I'm behind the times, and it is just sad that Cakewalk is no longer considered supportable.   Which is why it's free I guess (or perhaps because it's free?) and which is why I probably need to find a new DAW.   Perhaps it's Reaper, that so many people are talking about.   Or fruityloops.

In truth I call Cakewalk "incredible" out of my respect for what it has done for me in the past, and also to this forum.  My experience tells me if posting on a community's forum you need to be respectful to the software of that community: it is an incredible DAW and I think it needs more respect.  A real shame that market forces means that it won't.    

PS  I'm not quite sure then why the likes of Cubase are getting the attention of NI?  What have Cakewalk done wrong?  I've used both and Cakewalk has always been better to me (or at least just as good, more a matter of opinion than definite dominance). 

 

 

 

[Heinz Hupfer]

HI:)

In the manual  I can see that you can assign the midi Control Numbers to the Knobs and buttons. So it should be no problem to write an AZController Preset for this Keyboard....

If you send me the Midi Controls and what you want to have on these Knobs or Buttons I can write one...

 

Greetz;)

Bassman.

 

[azslow3]

3 hours ago, Heinz Hupfer said:

If you send me the Midi Controls and what you want to have on these Knobs or Buttons I can write one...

If you want try your luck in "deep integration" without having the surface, I can give you required information... Real problem (from experience) is find someone with device and willing to test the result ?

[ptheisen]

If you do a little more searching on this forum, you will find threads where I and others have detailed the "out of the box" level of integration between CbB and KK mk2 or A series keyboards.

To summarize, if you hook them up correctly and use the Mackie MCU surface interface provided by Cakewalk with the handshake disabled, the stop, play and record buttons will work as expected. The "big knob" will let you scroll the time line and change the selected track.\

The encoders and other buttons do work as expected "out of the box" within a Komplete Kontrol instance on a track, so if you're big into that environment, it is still pretty cool.

Anything beyond that, as far as parameters of the DAW itself are concerned, requires the user to program what they want, and I think it is very complicated to do so due to the structure that NI imposed on the way these boards work.

Deeper DAW control seems to be reserved for the DAWs that NI has specifically chosen to work with. Those DAWs somehow awaken a Track mode inside the keyboard that enables much deeper Daw integration. Without access to that Track mode, DAW control is limited to what is available in what they call MIDI mode.

[S K]

14 hours ago, ptheisen said:

If you do a little more searching on this forum, you will find threads where I and others have detailed the "out of the box" level of integration between CbB and KK mk2 or A series keyboards.

To summarize, if you hook them up correctly and use the Mackie MCU surface interface provided by Cakewalk with the handshake disabled, the stop, play and record buttons will work as expected. The "big knob" will let you scroll the time line and change the selected track.\

The encoders and other buttons do work as expected "out of the box" within a Komplete Kontrol instance on a track, so if you're big into that environment, it is still pretty cool.

Anything beyond that, as far as parameters of the DAW itself are concerned, requires the user to program what they want, and I think it is very complicated to do so due to the structure that NI imposed on the way these boards work.

Deeper DAW control seems to be reserved for the DAWs that NI has specifically chosen to work with. Those DAWs somehow awaken a Track mode inside the keyboard that enables much deeper Daw integration. Without access to that Track mode, DAW control is limited to what is available in what they call MIDI mode.

Great info thanks. 

If the knob wheel thing works and the transport stuff works all I need to know is if the knobs work in the mixers

I’m  thinking if a KK can adjust mixer settings as well as the transport controls I can get rid of Mackie control unit!

[Billy86]

1 hour ago, S K said:

I’m  thinking if a KK can adjust mixer settings as well as the transport controls I can get rid of Mackie control unit!

If this is part of the the goal, something like the Korg nanoKontrol Studio may be part of the solution, either in tandem with the keyboard that you can dedicate to other VST/plug-in functions, or on its own. https://www.korg.com/us/products/computergear/nanokontrol_studio/

I’m exploring the world you’re exploring (I’m looking at a NI A series keyboard) and trying to figure out how all this hardware-based tactile control might work. Here’s some great info I got from from @msmcleodhttps://discuss.cakewalk.com/index.php?/profile/162-msmcleod/. 

[ptheisen]

4 hours ago, S K said:

Great info thanks. 

If the knob wheel thing works and the transport stuff works all I need to know is if the knobs work in the mixers

I’m  thinking if a KK can adjust mixer settings as well as the transport controls I can get rid of Mackie control unit!

If by knobs you mean the eight encoders, they do not do anything out of the box as far as DAW control is concerned in CbB. I'll try to explain my understanding of why this is so.

The NI hardware is configured as two separate software midi devices. There's nothing wrong about this, it is common when a piece of hardware is meant to be both a control surface and an "instrument". But this means that a particular midi message has two possible software midi devices to go to, and the overall brain of the hardware decides where each message goes in a particular circumstance.

In the NI models, the messages from the white and black keys, as well as the pitch bend and modulation wheels/strips, are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "instrument".  The messages from the Stop, Play and Record buttons as well as the big knob are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "control surface". The messages from the eight encoders can go to either software device, as determined by the mode the hardware is currently in.

What are the modes? There's plug-in mode, which activates when it senses that the current track has an instance of Komplete Kontrol on it. In that mode, the encoder messages go to the control surface device, and more specifically to the Komplete Kontrol plug-in itself. The encoders are automatically mapped to Komplete Kontrol parameters for the current instance, and this is perhaps the best thing about having an NI keyboard.

There is midi mode, which can be chosen by the user at any time, but in this mode, the encoder messages go to the instrument device. I won't go into details of how to do it, but it is possible for the user to program many presets into the NI hardware, in combination with Cakewalk midi learn, which can then be used to control lots of DAW parameters. The problem with this is that each preset is based on a static midi channel, not a dynamically selected track.  For example, you could set up a preset to use encoder one sending CC22 on midi channel 1, in combination with a midi learn on the slider for a particular CbB track, and this would enable encoder one to control the volume on that track. But even if you did a bunch of this, due to the limitations, it is still nowhere near having tracks one through eight (regardless of how tracks have been added, subtracted or moved over time)  controlled respectively by encoders one through eight, with the ability to shift banks of eight tracks. This amount of sophistication is impossible in CbB, as far as I know, even with tons of work.

Then there is track mode, which can only be chosen when using one of the DAWs that NI has specifically collaborated with: Ableton, Garage Band/Logic, Cubase/Nuendo and most recently, Studio One.  In this mode the encoder messages are sent to the control surface device and some of the other buttons are also activated. Whatever dynamic mapping that is necessary magically takes place, and all of this enables volume, pan, mute, solo and a number of other DAW functions to be triggered from the NI hardware very much as you would expect from a typical control surface such as a Mackie. So the NI keyboards could be a great choice if using one of those DAWs. If not using one of those, and DAW control is of primary importance to you, it is not as good a choice.

[S K]

5 hours ago, Billy86 said:

If this is part of the the goal, something like the Korg nanoKontrol Studio may be part of the solution, either in tandem with the keyboard that you can dedicate to other VST/plug-in functions, or on its own. https://www.korg.com/us/products/computergear/nanokontrol_studio/

I’m exploring the world you’re exploring (I’m looking at a NI A series keyboard) and trying to figure out how all this hardware-based tactile control might work. Here’s some great info I got from from @msmcleodhttps://discuss.cakewalk.com/index.php?/profile/162-msmcleod/. 

Ok so as someone who has a Mackie Control unit working beautifully with CBB, I can recommend something like that for workflow. The ability to mute, arm, solo traks and change their levels with a hardware thing sat on your desk is great, as well as scrub forward and backward.   But a major feature of it for me is the motorised faders, which go up and down as the track moves.  So you can accurately adjust levels.  You open a track and all the faders jump into position.  If they don't I dont see how it can be that useful.  You open a track and let's say lead vocals are on 57/100 but your nano control unit is down at 0 or wherever you left it last.  What are you going to do?  As soon as you touch the korg it'll rewrite the level, so you can't just nudge it up or down a little you basically have to key in a new figure from scratch.    

The beauty with (as I have fantasized it) the possibility of NI Mk2 mixers is that I think it just gets the number and it's probably infinitely turning knobs so you can just nudge up or down a little like if it was motorised faders as it just goes by the value it has.  I'm probably explaining this really badly and someone else may do a better job!

However I like that korg (haev seen it before) because it's so small.  My MCU is great but it's HUGE hence I'll be selling it and would be looking at the Behringer X-touch instead or if I want an even smaller formfactor perhaps the Icon M+.

 

[S K]

1 hour ago, ptheisen said:

If by knobs you mean the eight encoders, they do not do anything out of the box as far as DAW control is concerned in CbB. I'll try to explain my understanding of why this is so.

The NI hardware is configured as two separate software midi devices. There's nothing wrong about this, it is common when a piece of hardware is meant to be both a control surface and an "instrument". But this means that a particular midi message has two possible software midi devices to go to, and the overall brain of the hardware decides where each message goes in a particular circumstance.

In the NI models, the messages from the white and black keys, as well as the pitch bend and modulation wheels/strips, are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "instrument".  The messages from the Stop, Play and Record buttons as well as the big knob are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "control surface". The messages from the eight encoders can go to either software device, as determined by the mode the hardware is currently in.

What are the modes? There's plug-in mode, which activates when it senses that the current track has an instance of Komplete Kontrol on it. In that mode, the encoder messages go to the control surface device, and more specifically to the Komplete Kontrol plug-in itself. The encoders are automatically mapped to Komplete Kontrol parameters for the current instance, and this is perhaps the best thing about having an NI keyboard.

There is midi mode, which can be chosen by the user at any time, but in this mode, the encoder messages go to the instrument device. I won't go into details of how to do it, but it is possible for the user to program many presets into the NI hardware, in combination with Cakewalk midi learn, which can then be used to control lots of DAW parameters. The problem with this is that each preset is based on a static midi channel, not a dynamically selected track.  For example, you could set up a preset to use encoder one sending CC22 on midi channel 1, in combination with a midi learn on the slider for a particular CbB track, and this would enable encoder one to control the volume on that track. But even if you did a bunch of this, due to the limitations, it is still nowhere near having tracks one through eight (regardless of how tracks have been added, subtracted or moved over time)  controlled respectively by encoders one through eight, with the ability to shift banks of eight tracks. This amount of sophistication is impossible in CbB, as far as I know, even with tons of work.

Then there is track mode, which can only be chosen when using one of the DAWs that NI has specifically collaborated with: Ableton, Garage Band/Logic, Cubase/Nuendo and most recently, Studio One.  In this mode the encoder messages are sent to the control surface device and some of the other buttons are also activated. Whatever dynamic mapping that is necessary magically takes place, and all of this enables volume, pan, mute, solo and a number of other DAW functions to be triggered from the NI hardware very much as you would expect from a typical control surface such as a Mackie. So the NI keyboards could be a great choice if using one of those DAWs. If not using one of those, and DAW control is of primary importance to you, it is not as good a choice.

Thanks mate, well explained. 

I'm increasingly getting the impression that CBB is just not going to play ball in the way I'd like without a lot of effort.

As it happens I've had a bit of a crisis of workflow anyway and have been talking to collaborating artists about moving over the Ableton anyway, but that's a whole different discussion!   It'll solve this KK issue as Ableton, crap as a DAW as it is compared to CBB (in my view) is at least for some weird reason supported by NI out the box. 

[Billy86]

20 hours ago, ptheisen said:

If by knobs you mean the eight encoders, they do not do anything out of the box as far as DAW control is concerned in CbB. I'll try to explain my understanding of why this is so.

The NI hardware is configured as two separate software midi devices. There's nothing wrong about this, it is common when a piece of hardware is meant to be both a control surface and an "instrument". But this means that a particular midi message has two possible software midi devices to go to, and the overall brain of the hardware decides where each message goes in a particular circumstance.

In the NI models, the messages from the white and black keys, as well as the pitch bend and modulation wheels/strips, are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "instrument".  The messages from the Stop, Play and Record buttons as well as the big knob are always sent to the software midi device I'll call "control surface". The messages from the eight encoders can go to either software device, as determined by the mode the hardware is currently in.

What are the modes? There's plug-in mode, which activates when it senses that the current track has an instance of Komplete Kontrol on it. In that mode, the encoder messages go to the control surface device, and more specifically to the Komplete Kontrol plug-in itself. The encoders are automatically mapped to Komplete Kontrol parameters for the current instance, and this is perhaps the best thing about having an NI keyboard.

There is midi mode, which can be chosen by the user at any time, but in this mode, the encoder messages go to the instrument device. I won't go into details of how to do it, but it is possible for the user to program many presets into the NI hardware, in combination with Cakewalk midi learn, which can then be used to control lots of DAW parameters. The problem with this is that each preset is based on a static midi channel, not a dynamically selected track.  For example, you could set up a preset to use encoder one sending CC22 on midi channel 1, in combination with a midi learn on the slider for a particular CbB track, and this would enable encoder one to control the volume on that track. But even if you did a bunch of this, due to the limitations, it is still nowhere near having tracks one through eight (regardless of how tracks have been added, subtracted or moved over time)  controlled respectively by encoders one through eight, with the ability to shift banks of eight tracks. This amount of sophistication is impossible in CbB, as far as I know, even with tons of work.

Then there is track mode, which can only be chosen when using one of the DAWs that NI has specifically collaborated with: Ableton, Garage Band/Logic, Cubase/Nuendo and most recently, Studio One.  In this mode the encoder messages are sent to the control surface device and some of the other buttons are also activated. Whatever dynamic mapping that is necessary magically takes place, and all of this enables volume, pan, mute, solo and a number of other DAW functions to be triggered from the NI hardware very much as you would expect from a typical control surface such as a Mackie. So the NI keyboards could be a great choice if using one of those DAWs. If not using one of those, and DAW control is of primary importance to you, it is not as good a choice.

I’m getting more into the NI VST world. Still trying to better understand how  the Kontakt VSTs, Komplete Kontrol software, Komplete Kontrol keyboard, CbB can best work together.  This helps, so thank you. So, it seems as long as one stays in the NI ecosystem i. The “instrument side” (KK keyboard “MIDI-talking” with KK software and KK VSTs) that’s rock solid, and a separate dedicated control surface like the Korg nanoKontrol Studio could handle the DAW control piece. Each would stay in its own mode/lane.