Unisyn: a Great MIDI Librarian for OS X

[Shooshie]

As much as a combination Unisyn/sample and loop librarian would be amazing to see, I'd salivate at the even the thought of a "dumbed-down" version of Unisyn which could not edit synths, but would at least publish their patchlists to DP. This would require us "hardware holdouts" to program our synths using the hardware interface or a manufacturer's editor software, but at least we would have SOME means of integrating our old dusty boxes into DP.

How ironic it is that we have so many phenomenal softsynths and sample libraries currently available, and at the same time modular synthesizers seem to be all the rage right now!

Somewhere upthread, the programmer MOTU hired to fix Unisyn offers his testimony to the fact that somewhere, Unisyn exists in a state that actually works, actually is compatible with DP's patch lists, and is even more Mac-like. It was ready for release one December, upon which time the programmer's duties were complete, so he left. The version never made it out the door, and he has no idea why.

That is a travesty and a tragedy. Some of us really wanted that version. I used to check the downloads postings religiously every few months, for YEARS afterward, hoping to see a Unisyn update. It existed; it was squashed.

Crazy world.

Shoosh

[stubbsonic]

Does anyone have any sense of how possible it would be for MOTU to find some way of doing a special as-is release of that version for Unisyn owners? Or perhaps, as we've discussed, creating an open-source port with a group of volunteer developers (a la Muse Score or Rockbox) to provide maintenance updates and help with profiles.

[magicd]

A few Unisyn facts:

Unisyn 2.11 will run on Mac OS up to 10.6.8. Unisyn will not run on OS 10.7 or later.

The most common cause of Unisyn not being able to run on OS 10.6 is a corrupt preference. Go to the user directory>Library>Preferences folder. Find and trash the Unisyn prefs and Unisyn setup prefs. Unisyn will now run, but you'll need to set up the devices again.

Unisyn can get and send user banks for the supported synths. With a few specific exceptions , Unisyn does not get or send ROM banks. This means that for most synths that can use expansion ROM banks, Unisyn is of no use for getting those expansion bank patchlists. Therefore in terms of patch lists, Unisyn is only useful for customized user banks.

In order for Unisyn to publish any patch list under OSX, a series of specific conditions must be met. As far as I know, only MOTU and Digidesign ever took advantage of the OSX patch list system, and Apple doesn't provide any patch lists or patch list management tools. Because of all this, getting useable patchlists from Unisyn can be hit or miss. In a number of cases, I've been able to make modifications, either to the Unisyn profile or to OSX patch list documents that allow for proper publishing. If you have a Unisyn profile that is not publishing user banks to DP, let me know directly and I may be able to help with that.

magicd@motu.com

I am not in a position to comment on the future of Unisyn as a product. I can tell you that the last update for Unisyn was 2004. Even when Unisyn was current, it was a specialized product. Many people purchased Unisyn just for patch list management, and that made much more sense with older hardware synths that had primarily user editable memories.

Writing a device profile for Unisyn is fiendishly difficult. In the past, MOTU had sent out developer kits for Unisyn profiles. We never saw a single working profile come back as a result. From my own experience programming for Unisyn, I can tell you that there is very little standardization of sysex protocols, and even within the same device, I've seen different styles of sysex programming used. Documentation for a device is usually written before the device is fully developed, so a great deal of the documentation I've seen from manufacturers is inaccurate. Developing a Unisyn profile is typically a tedious process of reverse-engineering the device, parameter by parameter.

Several years ago I spent two weeks to write a device profile for my Korg MS2000 synth. I posted all over the Korg boards asking of anyone was interested in an editor for that device. I didn't get a single reply.

So, if you are running up to Mac OS 10.6.8, I may be able to help you with Unisyn questions regarding the included profiles. As far as future updates or new profiles go, I can't make any promises on that. I don't check in on this board regularly, but I'll post back if asked. Again, my direct email is magicd@motu.com

Dave

[James Steele]

Thanks so much for chiming in, Magic Dave! Is there any way you know of to authorize under 10.6.8? I had mine working in SL when I had authorized under Leopard. I can't authorize under 10.6.8 however.

It is a shame it can't be updated to run on newer OS versions. I hate it when useful tools die out. I've got an Alpha Track that won't work with DP in 64 bit.

[Michael Canavan]

Just an FYI, there is MIDIQuest.
http://www.squest.com/index.html

Expensive, but pretty huge library of synths and FX.

[bayswater]

That is a travesty and a tragedy. Some of us really wanted that version. I used to check the downloads postings religiously every few months, for YEARS afterward, hoping to see a Unisyn update. It existed; it was squashed.

The departure of the programmer wouldn't have helped. Sounds like he put some new code in it. Selling software, or deploying it to offer a service is a risky proposition if you don't have anyone around that knows the code, unless you're one of those companies that buys up obsolete code and flogs it cheap "as is". Along with Dave's comments above, (not one synth maker on the planet interested in providing a template) I can see why MOTU would be reluctant to do it.

It would be nice to get some sort of minimal Intel port if that was possible, but there could be a lot of 68000 stuff in there.

[magicd]

Thanks so much for chiming in, Magic Dave! Is there any way you know of to authorize under 10.6.8? I had mine working in SL when I had authorized under Leopard. I can't authorize under 10.6.8 however.

It is a shame it can't be updated to run on newer OS versions. I hate it when useful tools die out. I've got an Alpha Track that won't work with DP in 64 bit.

James,

Authorization works the same under OS10.6 as it does earlier versions. It's OS10.7 that broke the authorization.

You need the installer disk in the computer and the keycode. If the authorizer accepts the key code but then comes back again, there may be an old Unisyn authorization on the hard drive that needs to be flushed out. Do a search for invisible items with the word Unisyn. Select the Unisyn auth file and trash it. Empty the trash and run repair permissions, then run the authorizer again.

Dave

[James Steele]

Thanks so much for chiming in, Magic Dave! Is there any way you know of to authorize under 10.6.8? I had mine working in SL when I had authorized under Leopard. I can't authorize under 10.6.8 however.

It is a shame it can't be updated to run on newer OS versions. I hate it when useful tools die out. I've got an Alpha Track that won't work with DP in 64 bit.

James,

Authorization works the same under OS10.6 as it does earlier versions. It's OS10.7 that broke the authorization.

You need the installer disk in the computer and the keycode. If the authorizer accepts the key code but then comes back again, there may be an old Unisyn authorization on the hard drive that needs to be flushed out. Do a search for invisible items with the word Unisyn. Select the Unisyn auth file and trash it. Empty the trash and run repair permissions, then run the authorizer again.

Dave

I'll give that a shot! Thanks!

[nk_e]

Just an FYI, there is MIDIQuest.
http://www.squest.com/index.html

Expensive, but pretty huge library of synths and FX.

FWIW

This thread got me off my keister to pull out MidiQuest XL. I can report back the following:

--Works on OSX 10.8.3
--So far has pulled the info from most of the HW modules I've tried thus far (microwave2, microQ, Korg 03RW, emu Morpheus), unsuccessful with supernova2 (but may be a settings issue).
--I can edit and save the patches back to the unit.

MQXL also has some funky VST plugin wrapper thing that lets you integrate your hardware into a sequence supposedly. To quote:

MIDI Quest XL features its own VST, AU, Studio Connections, and MFX plug-in versions that integrate virtual versions of your hardware into your sequencer. Your MIDI synthesizer or effect unit still creates all of the sound but you create a virtual version of the instrument's interface and integrate it right into your sequencer. After installation, you can audition sounds, organize a bank, edit a patch, record sound changes into a sequence, or do just about anything else that you would do with a soft-synth. You get all of the advantages of working on the computer without sacrificing that great hardware sound. Everything is handled from the comfort of your computer screen and in the digital audio sequencer of your choice. When you're done, all of your settings are saved with your song for immediate recall, just like a soft-synth.

This seems to me to be ungodly complicated and fraught with peril, but I'll give it a try and let folks know.

Cheers.

[miket]

Well, I'd prefer that MotU resumed Unisyn instead.
Several years ago, being an Opcode Galaxy+ user, when I bought a Roland JV-2080 realized that MidiQuest was the generic editor librarian to have.
Unfortunately, although being still under Mac OS9.2 it was a wrong choice because of serial MTP-II. While under MacOS9.2 and 10.4.11 MPP-II went like a charm with Digital Performer and all the other MIDI softwares, they were useless with MidiQuest. So I was told by Michael Lambie to move to USB MIDI Interfaces. It was an effort to buy 2 MIDI Express 128 hoping to solve those annoying communicating problems among my synthesizers and MQ. But again I was wrong, because the behaviour of the software was absolutely the same. Nothing changed through the versions. Although I have latest version, to me is an uselessand harmful program.
MidiQuest was capable of erasing/locking completely 2 Korg Wavestation A/D, scrambling all the patches inside Emu Proteus 2000, Morpheus; being completely lifeless with Korg 03R/W, M1R, Yamaha TG77, Roland JV-2080, M-GS64

When I read of people that state MidiQuest is a good piece of software, I shiver!

In my humble opinion, softwares that are made to help musicians keep track of their patches, don't have to drive them crazy. Softwares for musicians are for musicians, not sound engineers or computer nerds.
I think it's absurd that a musician must finely tailor a memory buffer of an editor, just to accomplish bulk dumps from and to a MIDI instrument. If I buy a generic Editor Librarian that supports tons of gear, I expect that every Editor librarian module works.
Musicians must act as musicians, music software engineers must do responsibly their job.

All that said, I don't recommend MidiQuest because it's only a money waste.

Just an FYI, there is MIDIQuest.
http://www.squest.com/index.html

Expensive, but pretty huge library of synths and FX.

FWIW

This thread got me off my keister to pull out MidiQuest XL. I can report back the following:

--Works on OSX 10.8.3
--So far has pulled the info from most of the HW modules I've tried thus far (microwave2, microQ, Korg 03RW, emu Morpheus), unsuccessful with supernova2 (but may be a settings issue).
--I can edit and save the patches back to the unit.

MQXL also has some funky VST plugin wrapper thing that lets you integrate your hardware into a sequence supposedly. To quote:

MIDI Quest XL features its own VST, AU, Studio Connections, and MFX plug-in versions that integrate virtual versions of your hardware into your sequencer. Your MIDI synthesizer or effect unit still creates all of the sound but you create a virtual version of the instrument's interface and integrate it right into your sequencer. After installation, you can audition sounds, organize a bank, edit a patch, record sound changes into a sequence, or do just about anything else that you would do with a soft-synth. You get all of the advantages of working on the computer without sacrificing that great hardware sound. Everything is handled from the comfort of your computer screen and in the digital audio sequencer of your choice. When you're done, all of your settings are saved with your song for immediate recall, just like a soft-synth.

This seems to me to be ungodly complicated and fraught with peril, but I'll give it a try and let folks know.

Cheers.

[nk_e]

Well...I didn't say it was "a good piece of software". I was just reporting on what it does so far for me. It's finicky as hell, but I don't know of anything else out there - finicky or not - that does this stuff anymore.

Ideally we could all maintain a legacy system that runs Galaxy, Unisyn, sounddiver, what have you.

I've used all of those btw. Galaxy is still my favorite.

[dewdman42]

I would definitely buy Unisyn if development was continued and up to date profiles added.

I doubt it will be though, mainly because the effort to create and maintain profiles for specific hardware is very laborious and hard to justify.

I bought Galaxy in the past. I bought Sounddiver in the past. I almost bought unisyn at some point. If any one of those, particularly sounddiver, were to get development again I would absolutely buy it. Unisyn even more so because of integration with DP.

However, as hard as it was for those products to make enough money 10 years ago to continue development, it would be even worse today with more and more people using virtual instruments.

Midiquest has some good ideas, their VST plugin, etc...all great ideas, but I've been hard pressed to spend money for it due to endless bad reviews from people who never really got it to work right.

On the other hand, perhaps if the process for creating new profiles was easier somehow, and the product was reliable like Unisysn (compared to say midiquest), maybe more people would use the product and more people would create new profiles, etc.. hard to say. But I can say if MOTU tried again, I would buy it.