MOTUnation.com

mhschmieder wrote:Ethernet. It's the future and the past all at the same time . Some of the devices Frodo listed are Ethernet-based, not Firewire-based. A separate discussion nonetheless.

True-- but the same additional hardware considerations apply where KVMs come into play where ethernet is coming along but not has arrived yet as the norm. It would be great if MOTU released an ethernet based audio-MIDI interface *as fully featured as* the 2408 in terms of connectivity. Currently, ethernet feels to be more of the convenience exception. I sure hope it gets more attention.

mhschmieder wrote: I seem to recall that Gigastudio didn't start out as a Tascam product, so maybe it's just being sold or spun off.

Yeah, that's what many are saying-- that someone else will step in. There's certainly a strong user base already established, so perhaps a smaller company who has much to gain by providing continuing support for Giga users would benefit more than a company on the order of Tascam.

Maybe Chicken Systems can take over . Wouldn't that boost their existing business? Maybe too much overhead though (probably a small staff).

mhschmieder wrote:Ethernet. It's the future and the past all at the same time . Some of the devices Frodo listed are Ethernet-based, not Firewire-based. A separate discussion nonetheless.

just put a wireless chip in it and be done w/ it.

can't wait for the blind tests of wired vs. wireless interfaces. Will they NULL????

OldTimey wrote:

mhschmieder wrote:Ethernet. It's the future and the past all at the same time . Some of the devices Frodo listed are Ethernet-based, not Firewire-based. A separate discussion nonetheless.

just put a wireless chip in it and be done w/ it.

can't wait for the blind tests of wired vs. wireless interfaces. Will they NULL????

Hahaha!!! If they don't, then they MUST not be any good!

Frodo: don't forget SATA, which does give us more options in our MacPro Towers. It's awfully nice having my samples in the box, and not out there on the Firewire bus. Well, I do have a few libraries on FW, but the ones that require bandwidth are on SATA internal.

You know, if just one other major player in the sample business was to fail, the result just might be a widespread sentiment echoing this thread: a return to hardware that never has to be upgraded, authenticated, or accommodated by hard drives and clogged busses. There's no reason why something like the Garritan instruments or East West, etc. couldn't be sold as stand-alone MIDI hardware units. Then all we'd need would be a universal librarian like Unisyn, plus the controls on the box, and your library is yours forever. They could even be upgradable, and support both hardware and software interfaces.

Anyway, if people get sick enough of the kind of treatment we get from Waves, NI, and all the others (MOTU is not immune), then we might see a massive exodus to hardware again. There's an old saying down in Texas... Fool me once... shame on... shame on... Y'fool me, can't get Waves again!


Shooshie

Shooshie wrote: Frodo: don't forget SATA, which does give us more options in our MacPro Towers.

Where software is concerned, yes, iSATA is great.

But I was trying to address the challenges of hardware connectivity to the MacPro for the sake of audio and MIDI more than just housing samples alone. Interfacing external hardware with the computer itself has been the challenge when so many devices compete for too few ports.

As it is, something like the 2408/PCIe-424 and MTPAV offer a variety of connectivity options where considerations for ethernet and firewire would likewise benefit from additional connectivity hardware.

Ahh... missed that. Sorry.


Shoosh

I agree Shoosh; the writing has been on the wall since day 1 for the Monkster.

The whole VI thing didn't quite pass the MonkeyLabs BS Detector™ test when first run by it, and it still doesn't.
Long-term efficacy is, after all, a requisite characteristic of worthwhile endeavours, IMHO.
"They don't make 'em like they used to".

monkey man wrote:I agree Shoosh; the writing has been on the wall since day 1 for the Monkster.

The whole VI thing didn't quite pass the MonkeyLabs BS Detector™ test when first run by it, and it still doesn't.
Long-term efficacy is, after all, a requisite characteristic of worthwhile endeavours, IMHO.
"They don't make 'em like they used to".

Thing about that is...
A: no hardware sampler has the power and simplicity of a software version.
and the argument rellies on...
B: that we upgrade our OS/ DAW/software/sell our old computers etc.

The main problem with software isn't the software it's the user. We cannot help but want to have the latest greatest, and the price is always just withing reach, so.... bam! there goes some discontinued software or another.

Basically I use a ton of software, and for digital synths and FX that I really don't see the point in hardware versions of, or they don't exist, but I have been guilty of chasing upgrades, and that's ending. The laptop I use for music is staying Leopard unless reports are overwhelmingly positive that whatever cat comes next improves CPU and doesn't screw old software.
Unless a soft synth is broken it remains the way it is now. You do this, and software is no different than hardware, in many ways better.

Analog gear like tube based stuff, analog oscillators, and dedicated compressors though I would agree that software hasn't yet matched, but samplers and digital oscillator/waveform based synths, convolution reverbs, noise removal apps, granular synthesis etc. software is better.

Basically there's nothing like Reactor or Max/MSP in hardware, and if you want to experiment with that sound, there is no alternative. Plus companies like Uh-He who make Zebra are dedicated to preserving the user experience, and I have no doubt that Urs Heckman would code Zebra 2 for whatever system comes out 15+ years from now even if he was coding accounting software then. He's that kind of person.

I agree that they're often way more powerful, Michael, but there's that trust thing.
Urs is probably more the exception than the norm; let's face it, most of these programmers are going to chase the dollars.

FWIW, I've often wondered why we haven't yet seen hardware with built-in hard disks - that'd solve half the problem.
If the hardware could be (optionally) programmed from within a dummy plug shell, that'd solve the other issue, IMHO.

Man, if I could afford to take the potential losses, I'd be a VI guy, no doubt.

monkey man wrote:
FWIW, I've often wondered why we haven't yet seen hardware with built-in hard disks - that'd solve half the problem.

That brings up a good point, MM. Back in the day when outboard gear was not only all the rage but pretty much the only reasonable option, internals were disgustingly expensive-- like RAM, etc. The XV5080 alone listed in the $2500 area when it was introduced. The odd thing is that this same amount of money can get one a very nice Mac that would hold as much RAM in GB as the 5080 held in MB. So, all we're left with is software-- who handles it, who decides on the reigning proprietary format du jour, and which developer will throw in the towel to leave customers hanging out to dry just because it's economically feasible (if unethical) to do so.

monkey man wrote:FWIW, I've often wondered why we haven't yet seen hardware with built-in hard disks - that'd solve half the problem.
If the hardware could be (optionally) programmed from within a dummy plug shell, that'd solve the other issue, IMHO.

The Kurzweil samplers accommodate a built in hard drive (see link below, Sweetwater still sells them). My K2k actually accommodates peripherals via SCSI such as CD drives and remote drives. What is missing is that latter part, the ability to totally control the rig from inside DP or Logic or (insert your fave DAW here) and network everything together easily.

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/HDC25K/


http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/K2661/

Yeah, I had a drive in my EMU back in '94.

The thing is, Billy, that it's not the norm. I'd suggest manufacturers consider removable bays so that users could easily back up their data too.
While I'm at it, I'd also expect them to employ GBs of flash RAM now that its price has plummeted.
This way, instruments could be loaded into said RAM for responsive, glitch-free and HD-friendly (not stressing them) playback.

If there isn't already one (I think there is), I'd settle on a standard for plug-in control of OB MIDI gear via MIDI.
No need to complicate things with new standards here; MIDI's perfectly capable of handling note meta data well enough, IMHO.

I've wondered these things for some years now.
Yanaha's kinda doing it with Cubase, their MIDI gear and mixers, but one has to buy into the MLAN nightmare (it's way too complicated to set up and troubleshoot for my liking), and most of that functionality can be achieved with MIDI and audio interfaces, things which we already have and are proven.

monkey man wrote:Yeah, I had a drive in my EMU back in '94.

The thing is, Billy, that it's not the norm. I'd suggest manufacturers consider removable bays so that users could easily back up their data too.
While I'm at it, I'd also expect them to employ GBs of flash RAM now that its price has plummeted.
This way, instruments could be loaded into said RAM for responsive, glitch-free and HD-friendly (not stressing them) playback.

If there isn't already one (I think there is), I'd settle on a standard for plug-in control of OB MIDI gear via MIDI.
No need to complicate things with new standards here; MIDI's perfectly capable of handling note meta data well enough, IMHO.

I've wondered these things for some years now.
Yanaha's kinda doing it with Cubase, their MIDI gear and mixers, but one has to buy into the MLAN nightmare (it's way too complicated to set up and troubleshoot for my liking), and most of that functionality can be achieved with MIDI and audio interfaces, things which we already have and are proven.

That's true Nicky, it isn't the norm. On the other thread that is the same topic as this thread, I mentioned something about the need for open systems, which is happening in almost every other software sector, except for audio, which seems to be regressing to closed systems (e.g. romplers). That is not a good long term trend IMO, and I won't be surprised to see a user backlash against it. The open question is what will be the tipping point to cause a backlash against rompler-mania?

My guess is it'll be when our hip pockets collectively go down the chute, Billy.

I got there long ago. Just waiting for everyone else to blow and lose enough money to realise they're pissing into the wind.

monkey man wrote:My guess is it'll be when our hip pockets collectively go down the chute, Billy.

I got there long ago. Just waiting for everyone else to blow and lose enough money to realise they're pissing into the wind.

I'm with you Nicky. My two experiences with rompler land have been slightly expensive mistakes that may or may not be usuable again in the near future (see the Symphonic Choirs thread if interested in details). I literally had projects stopped stone cold because I was forced to move from the G5 to the Intel Mac, and said romplers haven't made it to the Intel in a fully usuable manner. To me that is unacceptable. Not only does it take a lot of time to try to find workarounds, but it made me realize that we are all one security OS update away from having our projects made unusable as long as our sample sets are tied up in a proprietary format that only works with a single player.