MachFive 2 Manual???

needlz1906 · Post by **needlz1906** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:47 pm

Is the MachFive 2 manual available online anywhere?

1nput0utput · Post by **1nput0utput** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:19 pm

Nope. MOTU doesn't have electronic manuals for any of its products.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:28 pm

I assume you should get one when you purchase the upgrade, yes?

sdfalk · Post by **sdfalk** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:56 pm

James Steele wrote:I assume you should get one when you purchase the upgrade, yes?

You do

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:06 pm

That begs the question then, needlz, how is it that you don't have a manual for Mach 2?

needlz1906 · Post by **needlz1906** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 10:18 pm

I don't own MachFive or MachFive2...I'm trying to decide if I should buy it or not...that's all..I use soft-samplers for just to play back and manipulate Rex files...I just wanted to make sure it could do what I needed it to do before I bought it...

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 11:11 pm

needlz1906 wrote:I don't own MachFive or MachFive2...I'm trying to decide if I should buy it or not...that's all..I use soft-samplers for just to play back and manipulate Rex files...I just wanted to make sure it could do what I needed it to do before I bought it...

Gotca... sorry about that man, but I had to ask as we take intellectual property rights seriously around here. Hopefully someone can answer your questions.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:56 pm

James Steele wrote:we take intellectual property rights seriously around here.

Don't be so paranoid and just consider the person on the other end of every transaction. The government or corporations cannot lecture me about being ethical. If I take my cues from them, my ethics belong in the toilet with the other smelly items••¦

If I had the manual I would send it to you. Of course I guess he could always reverse engineer the entire program if he had that.

pbc

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:10 pm

muzak13 wrote:
James Steele wrote:we take intellectual property rights seriously around here.
Don't be so paranoid and just consider the person on the other end of every transaction. The government or corporations cannot lecture me about being ethical. If I take my cues from them, my ethics belong in the toilet with the other smelly items••¦

If I had the manual I would send it to you. Of course I guess he could always reverse engineer the entire program if he had that.

pbc

Chill, muzak. I'm not paranoid and I'll ask anybody who is a member of this board any question I want if that's cool with you. Thanks. If I suspect someone *might* be pirating software, I will check it out and I don't apologize for it. Read the sticky at the top of the DP Forum.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:25 pm

You're right James - you have the right to ask any question you want. I just find it strange that this is what you ask of someone who wants to download a manual - a perfectly reasonable query since most manuals are available online no problem.

I guess the discussion where your "users" were discussing whether or not to share v2 so they could import Spectrasonics files was just "boys will be boys".

Why was that discussion not stopped cold? Surely by the letter of the law it is not "kosher". Sharing v2 is ethical in my opinion. What do you think?

I also have the right to ask questions - at least for now.

pbc

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:05 am

muzak13 wrote:You're right James - you have the right to ask any question you want. I just find it strange that this is what you ask of someone who wants to download a manual - a perfectly reasonable query since most manuals are available online no problem.

Except for MOTU manuals. And anybody who got the upgrade would have the manual. I checked it out and the original person posting the question to less offense then you did.

I guess the discussion where your "users" were discussing whether or not to share v2 so they could import Spectrasonics files was just "boys will be boys".

Why was that discussion not stopped cold? Surely by the letter of the law it is not "kosher". Sharing v2 is ethical in my opinion. What do you think?

Didn't see it. Direct me where it and I'll consider what to do about licensed users getting a hold of a earlier verson of a program that MOTU sent out to said licensed users.

I also have the right to ask questions - at least for now.

It's not a right. This is a privately run board. No shoes, no shirt, no service. If you have more "questions" you can PM me.

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:50 am

muzak13 wrote:I guess the discussion where your "users" were discussing whether or not to share v2 so they could import Spectrasonics files was just "boys will be boys".

Why was that discussion not stopped cold? Surely by the letter of the law it is not "kosher". Sharing v2 is ethical in my opinion. What do you think?

I also have the right to ask questions - at least for now.

pbc

That discussion took place between people who owned both the Spectrasonics disks AND the Mach Five 2 disks. They had upgraded to Mach Five 2.01, which locked out the Spectrasonics disks, and wanted to go back to version 2.0. Some didn't even get the chance to decide whether to upgrade to 2.01.

This was about people who have been locked out of their own software for a long time by a company which -- for reasons perhaps which are beyond their control -- has not been able to provide them with a player in which to use their samples on the Intel machines. Very frustrating when you've paid money for all of it, and MachFive2 almost gives you back the use of your sample library, then it gets taken away again before you know what's happening.

The discussion was not at all about piracy. Everyone who could have benefitted from the actions they were discussing owned a valid serial number. They just had unwittingly installed an update which took back the helping hand they thought they had just received.

I was just an observer to that conversation, since I don't have Spectrasonics samples, but I read it and realized that it was not even a gray area; these were owners talking to owners, asking for help DOWNgrading to the previous version.

Shooshie

RCory · Post by **RCory** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:39 am

James:

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22868

and

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22707

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:02 am

RCory wrote:James:

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22868

and

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22707

Thanks... I don't have time to see every single post on this board. As for this whole issue my gut feeling is that users who NEVER received 2.0 in the mail, but whose first version was 2.01 probably have no right to downgrade and I would discourage users who have 2.0 from burning discs for other users. It's unfortunate that Spectrosonics lack of a UB version has put such a hardship on their users.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:37 pm

Not a question but an observation: I believe this is where ethics comes into play - and I believe it is ethical for someone who legally owns and never received v2 to be able to downgrade to it.

And I believe it is highly unethical of Spectrasonics to leave their users out in the cold just like it was unethical for legal users of MachFive to have to wait years for an upgrade.

That's what I mean about governments and corporations, we are coerced to play by their rules whether they are ethical or not.

And I do feel I have a right to ask questions James, just like you have the right as administrator to terminate my membership, delete any posts you don't like, etc••¦

Ah well - sic transit gloria mundi.

pbc