Mach Five version 2 Free Upgrade as Promised DRINKS PARTY :)

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:49 pm

Actually v1 worked pretty well for me - it was when they tried to solve Tiger with 1.2.3 that it became very unstable.

After 30 months without a solution to the Intel Mac problem they should reward the folks who believed in them in the first place. I'm all for a cheaper upgrade for all who need it.

Want something for free? How about want something that works with current hardware/software in a timely fashion? How about investing $400 in a piece of software that was not updated for nearly 3 years? Unheard of.

It leads me to believe that they don't have their heart in this sampler.

pbc

RCory · Post by **RCory** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:59 pm

Ahh - well I run a pretty underpowered CPU anyway, so performance is always an issue with me -

Hopefully then MV2 will get some user responses in the next few weeks. I know I can't wait.

RCory · Post by **RCory** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:03 pm

muzak13 wrote: It leads me to believe that they don't have their heart in this sampler.

wow imagine the features in the v2 if they really cared!

Frodo · Post by **Frodo** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:04 pm

There are usually some issues when an app makes its debut. M5v1.0 didn't stream, as I recall, which is why I passed it over until later.

But subsequent updates offered critical improvements. My biggest hurdle was the sometimes unpredictable UVI extraction, but M5 worked well enough to sustain user interest during its hiatus. And where v1 may not have gone the distance, we now have v2 on the way if it's needed.

macguitarman · Post by **macguitarman** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:06 pm

Only 2.5 years of waiting

since they announced it at NAMM in 2005

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:36 pm

macguitarman wrote:come on it is no secret there were huge performance and stability issues when M5 first came out and still remain in version 1

Oh... okay... whatever you say then.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:42 pm

macguitarman wrote:Only 2.5 years of waiting

since they announced it at NAMM in 2005

Yes, we're all well aware of this. Good thing is that MachFive version 1 continued to work great and it's tardiness, although a monumental gaff on the part of MOTU, didn't truly become as acute a problem until Intel macs were availablel and it wouldn't run on them. I'm still on a G5 dual 2.3, so MachFive 1 stlll runs great.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:52 pm

It reminds one of Quark, although the big difference is that Quark was an industry standard. Through their hubris they have managed to allow InDesign to eat away at their market share - now it's just a matter of time.

If a company is going to be serious about a product, then they have to develop it in a timely fashion with current hardware/software trends. They have to spend the money for R&D. The stiffing of all MacIntel users by MOTU with this sampler is going to cost them, as many on this board have stated they have already moved on to Kontakt.

Now that Structure is also a contender, I don't see why a ProTools user would bother. So there goes another really popular platform.

I'm done now you will all be relieved to hear - but I do have one last statement - I don't know why I should trust MOTU to develop this anymore - they certainly dropped the ball already. And Leopard is just around the corner. That version should be ready in like what - 2009?

pbc

billf · Post by **billf** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:08 pm

muzak13 wrote:If a company is going to be serious about a product, then they have to develop it in a timely fashion with current hardware/software trends. They have to spend the money for R&D. The stiffing of all MacIntel users by MOTU with this sampler is going to cost them, as many on this board have stated they have already moved on to Kontakt

All true. However, what we do not know, and probably will never know, is what really happened behind the scenes to cause this delay. The v2 app was announced in Jan. 05 and was supposed to be released in Q2 of that year. So it seems to me that MOTU was serious about, but something very serious happened to cause this massive delay. The fact that they have released it tells me they are committed to the product, and hopefully it also means that they have rectified whatever the cause was for the internal operational problems that delayed the release of V2.

muzak13 wrote:Now that Structure is also a contender, I don't see why a ProTools user would bother.

Structure is Pro Tools only, correct? A true cross platform sampler will work the same in any DAW on any OS, so that's why Pro Tools users might bother. Logic users have a similar issue. The EXS24 sampler works great... in Logic. Go outside of Logic, and suddenly the EXS24 doesn't scale.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:25 pm

I know I said I was done but - it doesn't matter what happened behind the scenes. My boss would not accept that excuse and neither would any of my clients. Would yours?

Structure is ProTools only and that is fine for me. It's optimized for PT and I don't need any other DAW.

To end this on a positive note - I hope it really does work out for those of you who are fans ( I was once) and I hope they come up with a better scheme for releasing timely upgrades for the sake of those who use this sampler.

Perhaps what happened behind the scenes is that their design brief was too wide. Trying to design a sampler that works on all DAWs and imports all sample formats is indeed daunting.

pbc

RCory · Post by **RCory** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 pm

yeah okay - still it looks pretty kick ass - and I personally haven't been kept from using v1 in work all this time

billf · Post by **billf** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:28 pm

muzak13 wrote:I know I said I was done but - it doesn't matter what happened behind the scenes. My boss would not accept that excuse and neither would any of my clients. Would yours?

Structure is ProTools only and that is fine for me. It's optimized for PT and I don't need any other DAW.

To end this on a positive note - I hope it really does work out for those of you who are fans ( I was once) and I hope they come up with a better scheme for releasing timely upgrades for the sake of those who use this sampler.

Perhaps what happened behind the scenes is that their design brief was too wide. Trying to design a sampler that works on all DAWs and imports all sample formats is indeed daunting.

pbc

Each of us as customers has to make a decision as to where our breaking point is with any given company. For me, Waves with its WUP program and broken DP5 promises were enough for me to leave the fold.

With MOTU, their silence regarding progress (or lack thereof) is troubling, but not enough to cause me to not give version 2 a go in my production studio. My attitude might be different if MOTU takes four years to update M5 v2 and keep it current.

The issue I see is that none of the major players in the audio software space are perfect. So it's a matter of picking your poison and moving forward with the least amount of obstacles for your situation.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:54 pm

billf - I couldn't agree more. Audio is just my hobby now and frankly I am appalled at the state of it.

Adobe's graphics programs just work without too much twiddling around - of course it's a different animal but they deliver timely upgrades that are real (i.e. many new features) and any maintenance upgrades are always free. They have an 18 month development cycle and nobody complains because what they deliver is state of the art. Everytime.

Audio seems much flakier in general and immature in comparison.

There are not nearly as many users so I suppose that audio software companies cannot afford the kind of engineers that Adobe can - that's probably one good reason.

As for ProTools - I certainly have my share of complaints about them - but coming from an analog engineering background it's the program that makes the most sense to me so I use it.

Am I hallucinating or have all these programs gotten flakier the more they try to do? That is my perception at least. I feel the same way about operating systems.

I am not a fan of any company, they have to win my loyalty. I am, however, a fan of the fact that now users are empowered to make music the way they want on a professional level.

I just wish it was less iffy. I spent the early part of my life twiddling around with 24-track Studers and Trident, API boards, etc••¦

If you cleaned the heads and kept them aligned they worked perfectly - for years. You might have to change out a channel strip once in a while or spray some electronic cleaner into a patch bay but this stuff was rock solid more or less, as were the hardware effects.

I miss that in a certain way. All this technology gets in the way of making music and it seems like it's getting to the point that musicians might have to go back to just being musicians and let others run studios - the technical part takes so much time and effort that it impedes creativity. Engineering is very creative but in a very different way than the act of playing or writing music. Either that or my patience is just running out••¦

pbc

billf · Post by **billf** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:40 pm

muzak13 wrote:Adobe's graphics programs just work without too much twiddling around - of course it's a different animal but they deliver timely upgrades that are real (i.e. many new features) and any maintenance upgrades are always free. They have an 18 month development cycle and nobody complains because what they deliver is state of the art. Everytime.

Audio seems much flakier in general and immature in comparison.

There are not nearly as many users so I suppose that audio software companies cannot afford the kind of engineers that Adobe can - that's probably one good reason

Graphics are a different beast. There is Photoshop, and everyone conforms to it. Period. And as long as Adobe stays on top of camera raw drivers, all is well.

Audio seems far more fragmented and raucous. There is the complexity of audio, MIDI, external devices, samples, legacy systems, syncing to video applications, etc to deal with, so it seems to me that it is a much more difficult area for any one company to tackle. And while Pro Tools might be an industry standard in audio, it doesn't strike me as being the 800 pound audio gorilla equivalent of Photoshop. Quite simply, Digidesign doesn't drive the direction and discussion of audio solutions, at least nothing like Adobe does with graphics and imaging.

We'll see how Adobe does with audio, since they have Audition and Soundbooth. But I won't be surprised if they face the same sort of hurdles in the audio space that everyone else has to endure.

muzak13 · Post by **muzak13** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:50 pm

Maybe there needs to be some consolidation in the audio world. That's what Adobe did in graphics. They bought companies and incorporated their technology into their products. It's almost getting to a scary point where they need some serious competition but so far it has been good for all us designers.

pbc

MOTUnation.com

Mach Five version 2 Free Upgrade as Promised DRINKS PARTY :)

Only 2.5 years of waiting

Re: come on it is no secret....

Re: Only 2.5 years of waiting