Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

A forum for comparing two or more synths against each other. Also known as "versus" threads.

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby NotASpeckOfCereal » Sun Apr 02, 2017 2:09 am

Just a word about "corporate greed" in respect to software upgrades as opposed to hardware.

All of those beloved hardware companies, Korg, Roland, Yamaha, Clavia, [insert the rest here] all upgrade their hardware product line-ups on a regular basis. It's not greed, it is profits for them so they can stay in business. And that's good for us because that means their hardware platforms continue to evolve to the requested needs of the users, whether it's one of us holed up in a personal studio or a touring musician with hardcore performance needs.

It's called progress. I wouldn't have it any other way.

As for the software (corporate greed with updates):

Windows 98 (which I believe jxalex mentioned as still being used in his studio): released in 1998 (duh), mainstream support ended in 2002, total support ended in 2006. It's a 16/32-bit hybrid operating system (really a 20-bit segmented architecture, totally a PITA to code for), one of the last on top of the DOS layer. It would be certain folly to stay on this system an expect drivers for modern hardware to exist today.

So I doubt (or at least hope) that you're not using it for more than the old FM7.

It is a pity that Microsoft and IBM chose the architecture they did when they started up the Intel platform (compared to the more reasonable approach Apple took with the Motorola chip), but we are finally done with it. The world at large says "good riddance"!

My main point: while it would absolutely anyone's right to keep older computer and operating system platforms, it is totally silly to expect that the rest of us wouldn't have moved on. THAT INCLUDES that companies that foisted updates on you, because the entire personal computer paradigm changed when they finally killed the old beast.

New systems with 64-bit OSs aren't just faster, they can access fast amounts of memory and run multi-threaded processes. This is a production house dream (whether it be music, video, photography, or anything else).

If that's greed, then please bring more.

Image

Speck
NotASpeckOfCereal
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:56 pm
Gear: Roland JV80
Roland JV1080
Korg Wavestation
Claivia Nord Lead 2

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby madtheory » Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:58 pm

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:Just a word about "corporate greed" in respect to software upgrades as opposed to hardware.

Agreed. Well said. It's really a bit paranoid to regard it as greed. Extending to 64 bit facilitates so much, it's progress not greed. As a music creator, it's really amazing that I can have a bunch of my old synths running entirely ITB. If I can't get the synth, then (thanks to 64 bit architecture) it's very easy to have several GB of samples of an old synth that capture its essence. I can get the same sounds plus total control and recall. It means I can flit from project to project without having to worry about keeping the studio on lockdown because you can't touch the mixing desk. Easy to make small changes when necessary. I for one am glad those days are gone. I get more projects finished this way!
User avatar
madtheory
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
 
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 12:45 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland
Real name: Tomas Mulcahy
Gear: Novation KSR, PT12, VCZ, Redmatica, MIDIQuest, Casio FZ, SK5, Komplete, M1, Theremin, Digi Vocalist, Quadravrb+, Kaoss Pad, JV, SPD, Cyclone, Drummer.
Band: madtheory

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 4:20 pm

The difference between 8...64 bit platform is obvious, but what about what for it is actually used about its function and the software usability to user?
Do not be too proud about the "progress" when it comes about the computers.
Nowadays they do the software in a way like they hate it, its customers and ... computers (planned obsolence, the customization is very limited, lack of support). So it almost means that these MB/s speeds and GHz speeds does not mean anything if just needing the just one function.
For example what about those who make 2005 year the CNC software not for Win XP with GHz CPU, but for DOS with 80MHz CPU instead and it works fine and gives the same function and usability? :)
It can show that the MB and GHz hungry software and hardware is not at all progress always.
Also as a tracker I am ok if it is FastTracker under DOS, until I have soundcards and MIDI port which works with that.

And what is the point if the software and hardware progress results in getting several computers if not to sacrifice some programs or expansion cards (as there wont be enough slots or drivers wont work in a new system).
Whereas it shows that some programs still can be accomodated to the ONE computer if just those would have
.... compiled for older system to be compatible.
OR
.... the new computer system would have drivers for older platform
.... the new computer has enough expansion buses.

but now well did the latest trend is that they drpped LPT port upport? too bad.
there are many who say that they cant use MOTU Midi Express XT LPT port version just becouse their new computer does not support it....
Last edited by jxalex on Sun Apr 02, 2017 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 4:23 pm

Compared to software company releases... The hardware synthesizers does not have such problem as the software does and having already other synths does not resist adding one more! If I get another piece of synthesizer then it fits perfectly with current setup whatever if the sequencer software is older than synthesizer or younger than synthesizer also all can co-exist with existing other units. Whatever if it is 30 years old. And Korg Roland Yamaha lineups does not interfere with other synthesizers in the setup or their connecticity!
With software and latest software "trends" it is unthinkable to have such compatibility and longevity!


Windows 98 (which I believe jxalex mentioned as still being used in his studio): released in 1998 (duh), mainstream support ended in 2002, total support ended in 2006.


Looks good by numbers, but It was actually much worse when trying to use something and/or install some new piece of hardware/software. Neither their programming tools installed properly with WIN98SE at 2002 already (Borland Delphi 6?). Mostly the newest hardware almost always required pre-latest M$ windows version atleast and there has been during that time 3..4 windows version releases by 2003! So far it has always been the trouble that You get stuck between the M$ time machine wheels after 2..3 years already.

(In fact I took that WIN98SE in use only after 2005). But still the best DOS programs I got 2003...

oh yeah and talk about windows programming, I got very often BSOD from win2000 too, whereas other said that "no that BSOD never happens". So I had to keep the reset button close to me all times anyway when I made some device access programming routines.

Lucky enough...
All that development did not stopped when M$ declared to be discontinued and not supported this or that platform -- there is non-official support as well, and people who compile programs for older systems -- just like making a statement "it CAN be done if to use the brain!" and are proud of the product, which is opposite attitude to the lazy programmers who say "get a new, everything" -- and those were the most programmers.
Also another example of ongoing non-official development -- the USB support for DOS came long time after the DOS was discontinued! (which was always needed when installing or maintaining the system on the 32bit platforms with its utilities despite those programs mainly were with NTFS partitions. ALl these Norton Ghost utilities used DOS with USB support!)

So I doubt (or at least hope) that you're not using it for more than the old FM7


I use that 98SE as a DAW too (currently with 3 soundcards, 2x MOTU which is 18x18 port MIDI IN/OUT , some 32bit VST synths other than FM7 too, delay/reverb effects, 10 channel multichannel audio with 336 samples buffer and 44.1 .. 96kHz). ;-) Firewire, USB support, BluRay writer, SSD. Gigabit ethernet.... etc. all there and at the 3.4GHz Pentium IV with 1GB RAM (official win98 version support only up to 512MB).

Still, I find it more usable to use other machine with DOS and Fasttracker 2 after I really discovered the MOTU midi routing engine.


GOod for others that their all-in-box does wonders and works, but I find frustrating that then something again does not work anymore or is left out what used to work in old setup or program.

And so that sometimes it makes me to think that less is more after getting another machine with Linux, several GBs memory and so on.

(Those who are interested I would help to set up the retro system too, and also I would be interested about hearing and seeing others who use the PC system with atleast 15..20 year old software (preferably under DOS)).

Well, perhaps with this post I am in a wrong thread and I should be writing that last 2 lines in the oldschooldaw forum? :)
Last edited by jxalex on Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby NotASpeckOfCereal » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:26 pm

Well, it's clear where your biases lie and I am not trying to talk you out of them. If you're happy with what you have and it works for you, then play on.

[Definition of BSOD for readers: Blue Screen Of Death. Where a Windows machine crashes suddenly and hard, gives up a screen dump, then reboots your machine.]

But for the record, personal anecdotes about BSODs on more modern operating systems to prove any kind of point about flaws in advancements / upgrades, well, just doesn't cut it for the following reasons:

One thing was clear about application and device-driver flaws that were exposed when Microsoft abandoned the old Windows/DOS paradigm: a lot of software / hardware-driver developers were cheating. Those are the real 'lazy programmers', but not just because the made use of / exploited undocumented tricks in the operating system, but because they were slow or non-responsive in fixing them when the doors closed.

In other words, those cheater doors were closed after Win98 / ME and their code was not prepared for that. People like you and me that used them can simply say "oops" and move on.

Unfortunately, a lot major hardware manufacturers also exploited those cheats. MOTU was a HUGE offender and many of us that used their first generations of audio and MIDI interfaces know that. The drivers were written, in the words of people I know that saw the code, "just horribly".

So someone like you who likes to cling to older / legacy technology (and drivers), getting a lot of BSODs when trying new operating systems it is of no surprise to me. Stating that others didn't experience the same BSODs just proves the point more -- their systems were cleaner because they were okay with updates.

Some will say that Microsoft shares some of the guilt for not handling some of those problems more gracefully. That is, when they closed those cheater doors, they should have not allowed the system to crash. Maybe so.

Others will tell you "THEY DID THE RIGHT THING". When the system detected improper calls and things like direct memory access, they respond with plenty of exception messaging to the calling code. But if the app / driver has already VIOLATED and CORRUPTED system memory (or continued on a disastrous path after ignoring the error messages given), the OS really has little recourse.

If they allow the computer to continue to run with ALL running apps having potentially UNPREDICTABLE results and behavior, lose and corruption of user data, actual damage and loss of HARDWARE due to memory pointers run amok, it's all an even greater nightmare scenario. Nope, the best thing is to shut down with a memory dump so that the hardware manufactures can see what their drivers did that was so horrible.

Outside of our personal studios, things like this means that lives could be lost. That's why in a corporate, government, or military environment when computers are used to run critical systems, things like hardware drivers have to pass a LOT of muster before actual live use. [lengthy descriptions of that not included because it's well out of scope of this discussion].

So if you managed over a period of time to groom your system, keep several things from tipping over, and now have a balance that works for you ... AS LONG AS YOU DON'T DO ANYTHING SILLY AND TRY TO CHANGE or UPDATE ANYTHING ... then play on.

Speck

PS: how much memory can your DAW on your Win98 machine access?
NotASpeckOfCereal
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:56 pm
Gear: Roland JV80
Roland JV1080
Korg Wavestation
Claivia Nord Lead 2

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:50 pm

I always put stability before the performance when I test or make things. But I try absolutely EVERYTHING, even
the stress limits, that if the system is on the edge of stability or it has very good margin, so that it wont be just "it works" only. ;) So is also with my DAW. I have tested and tried several expansion cards and then seeing that what works and what does not work along with other cards. all these updates are choosed, compared. Every trial-error trick done. But I still after all that would NEVER EVER consider microsoft windows to use for recording dying mans last words!!! If the redundancy is not required then my choice would be DOS.

when the factory needed program then I choosed for platform without thought DOS and not WIN2000 like the rivals did. It was a program which was not so critical or lifethreatening but still... ATEX II environment.
THe program was use as production line quality surveillance in use 10 years, users happy, factory still running,

The same thing is when I put together computer for myself or the system. Also it has to be lightweight with
its user interface and comfortable to me.

Outside of our personal studios, things like this means that lives could be lost. That's why in a corporate, government, or military environment when computers are used to run critical systems, things like hardware drivers have to pass a LOT of muster before actual live use. [lengthy descriptions of that not included because it's well out of scope of this discussion].


The Intel and M$ does not give lightly any permission to use in areas like space/aeronautics/ or any moving machinery, including for nuclear powerplant use.
I think they really does not use windows for a missile server or any piece of M$ code :P

Also in such situations like banks those chains who use M$ code sometimes are out of function more than the NCR.


But the most conservative with technology is the space/satellites, perhaps?


PS: how much memory can your DAW on your Win98 machine access?



And how I should test that, would be tricky? Not my program.
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby NotASpeckOfCereal » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:55 pm

jxalex wrote:
PS: how much memory can your DAW on your Win98 machine access?


And how I should test that, would be tricky? Not my program.


The limit on Win98SE is 2GB, but good luck actually accessing anywhere near that much after the system is up and running.

Speck.
NotASpeckOfCereal
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:56 pm
Gear: Roland JV80
Roland JV1080
Korg Wavestation
Claivia Nord Lead 2

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby ItsMeOnly » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:08 pm

desmond wrote:I've programmed the WS extensively, including some fairly complex stuff, and never come across problems of this type. Nor have I seen any online complaints of this over the years, your post is the first report I've seen of this...

Knock yourself out. Stuff that brings WS to its knees:
- Back 2 Eldorado (missing wavesequences),
- Plinky-Ploinky2 (wacky LFOs, play chord on upper)
- The Big Solina (playing lower octaves while playing chords on upper will audibly slow down LFOs)
User avatar
ItsMeOnly
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Warszawa, Poland
Gear: Wavestation, K3m, TG77, MOXF6, VZ-10m, D-550, S2000, DeepMind 12;
Broken: DX100, 01R/W

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:28 pm

@NotASpeckOfCereal
Thanks.
I have installed 1GB, but even the 512MB would be more than enough for this work what I do (mainly MIDI). (swap file turned off).


@ItsMeOnly:

hellou... I remember Your stuff. I was really glad to see back on 2006 that oldfashioned way of sharing music on the site as ftp.
What is Your Wavestation model and the firmware version which You are using with that sysex?

"Broken: DX100. 01R/W"
What is the problem with these?
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby ItsMeOnly » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:47 pm

jxalex wrote:What is Your Wavestation model and the firmware version which You are using with that sysex?

Classic
"Broken: DX100. 01R/W"
What is the problem with these?

DX100: I can speculate that somebody removed isolation screen between panel board and mainboard, it eventually shorted and it's now dead.
01R/W: dreaded caps, very common for these - haven't got time to desolder and replace.
User avatar
ItsMeOnly
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Warszawa, Poland
Gear: Wavestation, K3m, TG77, MOXF6, VZ-10m, D-550, S2000, DeepMind 12;
Broken: DX100, 01R/W

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:55 pm

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:Well, it's clear where your biases lie and I am not trying to talk you out of them. If you're happy with what you have and it works for you, then play on.
'


I am much more talkative if it would be question how to hook the synthesizers with FastTracker 2 or Madtracker 2 or other things about these old systems.


Well... it is just like "Pentium I may have but 486 I must have in order to keep running all the latest modern machines" thinking as it has really very practical uses as a tool when it is about the hardware or programming the debug tools or diagnosing the other systems.

Yep it seems like I am against the latest and trendiest things, perhaps, :D But still...
I took the BluRay discs in use in my old platforms immediately and have the CD-DVD writing software under DOS too.

Good to read these long descriptions though.
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby NotASpeckOfCereal » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:57 pm

ItsMeOnly wrote:01R/W: dreaded caps, very common for these - haven't got time to desolder and replace.


I'm really hoping that they come out with an 01R plug that has "blown capacitor" emulation.

Said nobody.

Ever.
NotASpeckOfCereal
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:56 pm
Gear: Roland JV80
Roland JV1080
Korg Wavestation
Claivia Nord Lead 2

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby jxalex » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:01 pm

ItsMeOnly wrote:
jxalex wrote:What is Your Wavestation model and the firmware version which You are using with that sysex?

Classic


but when updating to last firmware, still the same issue with these sequences?

DX100: I can speculate that somebody removed isolation screen between panel board and mainboard, it eventually shorted and it's now dead.


IF you open the box and check power supply rails --- those got overloaded, but everything else is still fine?
jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Location: Sweden
Gear: enough

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby ItsMeOnly » Sun Apr 02, 2017 8:14 pm

jxalex wrote:but when updating to last firmware, still the same issue with these sequences?

I have the latest firmware: yes, these persist.
IF you open the box and check power supply rails --- those got overloaded, but everything else is still fine?

As in: the synth is responsive and you can actually control it, yes.
User avatar
ItsMeOnly
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Warszawa, Poland
Gear: Wavestation, K3m, TG77, MOXF6, VZ-10m, D-550, S2000, DeepMind 12;
Broken: DX100, 01R/W

Re: Wavestation Hardware vs. Wavestation Software Synths

Postby desmond » Sun Apr 02, 2017 9:54 pm

ItsMeOnly wrote:Knock yourself out[/url]. Stuff that brings WS to its knees:


Cool, will have a look a those, thanks. I have done perfs with 8 multiple-osc patches, all running wave sequences, both synced to MIDI clock and slow crossfades, with vector animation across multiple patches, without any problems, so I'm interested to check this out a bit...
User avatar
desmond
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Synth Shootouts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests