Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Pulling out your hair? Don't know what to do or where to go? Ask in here.
Forum rules
READ: VSE Board-Wide Rules and Guidelines

If your Help request has been solved, please edit your first post in order to select the Image Topic Icon to let others know your topic has been solved.
User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by Solderman » Fri Feb 24, 2017 6:30 pm

jxalex wrote:I found Fairlight sample library which was in a Kontakt format, but DirectWave does not recognize that at all, even if it claims to be able to play .NKI extension instruments. Requirement what I need is support for win98SE and less than 1GB RAM.
Afraid I can't help, as I have Kontakt 4, and even that I can't upgrade to the latest version without an OS of Win7 or later, so I understand where you're coming from. Older libraries I have used CDXtract for converting to other formats.
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Gear: enough
Location: Sweden

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by jxalex » Mon Feb 27, 2017 10:31 am

it looks like a dream come true when reading the DAW spec (whatever they are or have been the last 10 years), but it makes gray hairs when really trying to use it even 10% to the spec! Crashes, incompatibility issues between old and new versions. :(

My projects are using stock VSTs which were coming along with the sequencer, and the rest is the hardware MIDI ports and... I still occassionally get my projects into some weird configuration which makes BSOD or the crash on the Cubase. Well how the midi project can crash the computer with 3.4GHz CPU machine with 1GB RAM escapes my mind.

At first I hear the stock suggestion -- upgrade -- but the entire internet is full of the Cubase 5..6..7.5 8.5 crashes (so which are much newer systems, and with operating systems like Windows 7..8..10). So it points -- the upgrade is solution neither! The same guys with the same hardware one points out that it crashes, to another one works fine.
And then what I find is that the VST3 has already known issues.

However it is tedious to work with some other tools -- trackers (MadTracker 2.6), but it does not crash atleast, but I would with those make again a big complex projects meant to be re-arranged on and on.

I would be eternally thankful if someone would build a Fairlight CMI alike system on a PC architecture which would support more than just contemporary-pre-latest hardware. Then I would never again buy any computer hardware. Not a single piece.

User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by Solderman » Mon Feb 27, 2017 10:51 pm

I'm also finding it hard to justify upgrading now, the more I think about it. Once you get a stable system and workflow, it's a precious thing. Almost am glad they canceled my laptop order.

Funny to mention a legacy Cubase setup, I still have an old Atari ST with 1 MB of memory, a monochrome monitor and no hard drive expansion. I still have Cubase version 1 on dual-density floppies and the dongle cartridge. It got use until about late 1999, when I still recorded to ADAT. But the last time I used the Atari computer, it would randomly freeze and crash. Mouse was in pretty sad shape too. Basically worthless for productivity.

I can't recall a single worthwhile version of Cubase for PC until about 2002. Just terrible midi timing and tons of bugs. Never had a Mac, so never tried Logic or DP. As a hobbyist PC user, I've not been too worried about changing my DAW setup in the past 20 years.
But I don't blame anyone for not wanting to be forced to upgrade. Dropping everything and basically starting over is such a dreary(and potentially expensive) process. People who make a career of this I am often impressed with how they have coped.

I think I might be happy if I could just compose chiptunes and everything else would be aimless noodling on analogue synths.
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

User avatar
meatballfulton
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5786
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:29 pm
Gear: Live 9, Logic Pro X

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by meatballfulton » Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:31 am

jxalex wrote:Well how the midi project can crash the computer with 3.4GHz CPU machine with 1GB RAM escapes my mind.
It's just bugs in the software. I could quickly whip up a program that would crash almost any computer pretty easily :lol:

Complex software is difficult to debug but as engineers like to put it: The bugs you were never able to find while testing will be found by the users as soon as they launch the program :help:
I listened to Hatfield and the North at Rainbow. They were very wonderful and they made my heart a prisoner.

jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Gear: enough
Location: Sweden

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by jxalex » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:52 pm

Well, thats becouse they develop the software what they really do not use really. It seems like the programmers do it like they hate the product, the users and computers.
What the professionals use, I really have no idea, becouse everything crashes whatever I use when it comes to windows, or is somewhat tedious and inspiration killing.

Even Pet Shop Boys bought the Fairlight back again at 1999 after completing the album with ProTools. HOw the workflow is now would be interesting to know and do they still use the Fairlight. Back then I read they had the extra personal who choose the sounds and do all the less creative sides of the work.



I am looking whats new, but once again the upgrade is that it was not really upgrade, but I just got cheated again by manufacturers.
And I am currently STILL SEEKING the setup which would work for me. It is very troublesome if I have to fight with user interface, something is missing, etc... well, I still does not have a suitable sequencer software and control over my computer!


The setup 1:
ASUS P5P800S
3.4GHz CPU single core, nVidia 6800LE videocard (have tried others too, does not matter)
1GB RAM
WIN98SE (with all un-official support packs with support for USB and 1GB RAM)
MOTU Midi Express XT (LPT port version) with 8x8 MIDI
SB Live
M-audio Delta 1010LT (in use just 1 stereo track for output)

How this acts with Cubase VST 32?
When I just have LoopAzoid VST as a sampler (NO effects!), and the rest of it are the MIDI tracks only, and no other VSTs, then its audio get crackling when the 5 MIDI tracks hit chords note at the same time... unless the ASIO buffer on the card is bigger than 1056 samples. With 16 MIDI tracks, the ASIO buffer size 1600 samples would be preferred.
So, MIDI tracks with MOTU make the cubase to crackle.'
However some other projects with 8 MIDI tracks and 3 VSTs does not make crackling noise, but can crash at random points! Now THATS what really makes me to hate windows and to prefer FastTracker 2 like tool. And all this at 44kHz. The crackling is the same, not worse, if the sampling rate is 96kHz.


How it reacts with Madtracker 2.6.1 ?
the same hardware there are no problems to run with Madtracker ca >16 MIDI tracks plus 2 VSTs, effects, and all with a 336..528 sample buffer at 44.1kHz! But the software is kind of buggy and raw and it makes the production more exponentially energy consuming as the project size grows. No quantize, note-off messages are not recorded to right tracks, etc. However I use it.


That for one program it is enough, and for another one there are big trouble.

However I use it becouse that system is under my control atleast.

under winXP all is much more tedious as the user interface is SLOW (on whatever hardware compared to the earlier versions). ANd oh yeah I hate all that M$ way of "organizing" with "my documents" and such (hey, there is Midnight Commander).

The setup 3:
486 100MHz CPU, 32MB RAM, SCSI, 100Mbit ethernet
Fasttracker 2.06...2.09 versions under DOS7.1
Soundblaster MIDI port for MIDI channels and 1 stereo track. No problem to have all running with
16 channels MIDI through one port.

Now thats weird. Never had problem with that "poor-mans-wavetable". That sampler tracker and
is usable as a MIDI sequencer works, however as a tracker. Not a delay and timing is tight between MIDI and audio. But THE SAME workload makes the Cubase sequencer to make crackling noises!

I would use FT2 every day only if it would have some sense to MIDI interfaces (multiple MIDI ports) and several audio outputs. As I have quite huge studio with 26 synths, it makes tedious to use for many things while being limited to one MIDI output port.

User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by Solderman » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:56 pm

I think I can steer this thread back on topic while commenting, so bear with me:
jxalex wrote:setup 1:
ASUS P5P800S 3.4GHz CPU single core, 1GB RAM, WIN98SE, MOTU Midi Express XT, SB Live, M-audio Delta 1010LT
running Cubase VST
setup 2: same hardware as 1, but running Madtracker 2.6.1
setup 3: 486 100MHz, 32MB RAM, SCSI, Soundblaster(16???) running Fasttracker 2.06...2.09 versions under DOS7.1
What I see there for setup 1 and 2 is in not upgrading to Windows XP, the latest WDM features in the sound blaster ASIO driver could not be used. Win98SE did have WDM as well as VXD, but Cubase likely was going to take full advantage of ASIO, whereas other audio software at the time when these were new would not. ASIO for Soundblaster Live did not even readily mature until the mid 2000's anyway, if I recall. I personally switched to Echo audio interfaces well before 2003. If you were using MME, well I can certainly see why you'd get clicking and glitching without a ridiculously high sample buffer setting. I'm going to wager Cubase was written in C++ and the others in Assembly, or were just generally more efficient.

The unfortunate thing is of course that Windows 2000 and XP have higher system requirements than 98, so this seems to me that music software in general could not be very sophisticated for PC well until the mid 2000's, hence why so many around that time were still using Macs.
In your DOS setup though, what other choices were there besides Opcode Vision, and even then you still have to record to ADAT or 4 track? Pro Tools it is not.

This brings me to my original thread proposal: Trying to keep up with the latest changes. I already would lose my MotU 828 mkII interface if I upgraded everything to a brand new desktop, because there is no driver for Windows 10. So I already can relate to your woes in that sense. The Portable DAW idea was meant to act as an auxiliary setup alongside with my existing 32-bit DAW machine. Now I'm thinking it would be better to wait until I absolutely have no choice but to upgrade.

So that converges the two ideas: "Why should we have to upgrade at all?" I don't really follow the idea that software vendors hate their users and see them only as "consumers". But the fact remains, if they wish to stay in business, they both must keep up with changing technology and continue selling new product. This despite rampant piracy, plenty of competition that is sometimes freeware and in what is essentially a niche in the overall software market. And we can't help or deny the fact that software technology is changing at such a rapid pace. But the question is should we upgrade? Or maybe what incentive is there to upgrade?
In my case, I didn't care all that much until I starting using U-He Diva with some regularity. But this makes one start to wonder how long will it be before most audio software goes the physical modeling route, not just in electronic circuitry but acoustic instruments, and sampling goes the way of extinction. This will now happen on home computers before DSP technology can mature enough to do it all and do it as well and as tightly integrated. That prospect I find very exciting, and I'd like to be on the cutting edge when it happens. Windows 10 also has, for the first time in a Microsoft OS, made specific kernel level enhancements to lower latency and improve performance specifically for audio and midi.

But not everyone will feel this way, and you are correct in observing that most DAW software is tedious and kills inspiration. Not to mention what level of trial and error or research is required to get a sound that isn't flat, dull, harsh and insipidly dreary after weeks of working exclusively "in-the-box". I would venture to propose that it is only this way for some, but it also depends greatly on how devoted and committed to the idea of music-making with computers one is. With enough determination, it is surprising what one will endure to reach their vision. There is the possibility that one day, in the distant future, the process will be refined to the degree that the user is in tune with the interface to some degree more than any instrument ever invented, but we are certainly nowhere near that yet. That aspect in itself is something I'd like to witness and participate in its maturing stages. Imagine the evolution from flat-screen display, keyboard and mouse, to some kind of HUD or hologram you control with brain waves, and all the steps in between.

I would venture to say software is getting easier to use, that the vendors are listening to their customers instead of second-guessing them, and the greater problem instead now is that there are too many choices: Too many directions to be tempted to go in at once. But again discipline and determination prevails, and must be the key to the future of composing on computers.

I just wish I had more time to devote to any of it. :?
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Gear: enough
Location: Sweden

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by jxalex » Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:24 am

Solderman wrote:I think I can steer this thread back on topic while commenting, so bear with me:
jxalex wrote:setup 1:
ASUS P5P800S 3.4GHz CPU single core, 1GB RAM, WIN98SE, MOTU Midi Express XT, SB Live, M-audio Delta 1010LT
running Cubase VST
setup 2: same hardware as 1, but running Madtracker 2.6.1
setup 3: 486 100MHz, 32MB RAM, SCSI, Soundblaster(16???) running Fasttracker 2.06...2.09 versions under DOS7.1
What I see there for setup 1 and 2 is in not upgrading to Windows XP, the latest WDM features in the sound blaster ASIO driver could not be used. Win98SE did have WDM as well as VXD, but Cubase likely was going to take full advantage of ASIO, whereas other audio software at the time when these were new would not. ASIO for Soundblaster Live did not even readily mature until the mid 2000's anyway, if I recall. I personally switched to Echo audio interfaces well before 2003. If you were using MME, well I can certainly see why you'd get clicking and glitching without a ridiculously high sample buffer setting.
The m-Audio ASIO driver was used for both Cubase and Madtracker. They used the 336 sample buffer if all works.
The only difference I see was that in XP it could use 256 sample buffer, what it had to offer. MME driver was NOT used.
In the WIN98SE most of it was already unofficial in my setup due to extra patches and packages (the original does not support more than 512MB RAM, neither there is USB support etc.)
SB Live 1024 I used only for its wavetable capability (so, driving it via MIDI) after loading up the samples to its memory, waveOut, DirectX, MME driver was NOT in use.
So full capability for ASIO was in use in fact, but only with M-audio and SB was left for MIDI only. However when I had the crackling issue then only MOTU midi interface was in use and m-Audio with ASIO buffer 336 samples (with 800..1056 samples was it fixed when I had just 3..4 MIDI tracks).
MIDI driving makes a system hog?
In your DOS setup though, what other choices were there besides Opcode Vision, and even then you still have to record to ADAT or 4 track? Pro Tools it is not.
I havent used Opcode VIsion however I would like to try such one. In dos still I had for my MIDI sequencers FastTracker 2. I just mapped the samples to MIDI channels, synths were mixed and recorded with another computer.
I use it sometimes with Gravis Ultrasound MAX and PnP Interwave, other days with SB Awe 64Gold.
This brings me to my original thread proposal: Trying to keep up with the latest changes. I already would lose my MotU 828 mkII interface if I upgraded everything to a brand new desktop, because there is no driver for Windows 10.
welcome. Thats why I despise all this. They render obsolete the whole line useful expensive hardware just becouse
they think not to support it.


Their thoughts are entirely different from engineering or development. It is more about organizing and marketing, how to keep customers on the hook. Which means that I just keep the old machine TOO with the existing system (so thats why the Fasttracker with DOS system and in other machine Cubase with pentium 4), both I can use with hardware synths.

About upgrades I see that every time it is expensive, it costs hardware, software, introduces again the blues with trial-error with drivers, and being beta tester again for a software company. I say that they certainly launch the program and begin fixing bugs afterwards. I have heard that several times as a software developer and I quit becouse of that.
So that converges the two ideas: "Why should we have to upgrade at all?" I don't really follow the idea that software vendors hate their users and see them only as "consumers". But the fact remains, if they wish to stay in business, they both must keep up with changing technology and continue selling new product. This despite rampant piracy, plenty of
Well, how long they can develop a WORD PROCESSOR? ;) For basic functions the version from 1994 is more than enough for 99.995% people!!! ;)
That was in my mind. But with sequencer -- most functions are with Cubase certainly in a Cubase SX, if not even Cubase VST (so more than 10 years back). But the most basic functions in some versions work, in others not working again etc. if JUST to want to use MIDI then I am in trouble.

What escapes my mind is that how arrogant the software company can be, saying that they do not support this or that nowadays. So, if I pay for the next version there is NO GUARANTEE that I get what was advertised!
On 1998 when I asked from a Plextor a software for WIN3.x (at the year 1998 !!), by mentioning that TEAC supports WIN3.x then they sent extra software with floppy disc right away! However it was NOT the standard package, they included it anyway. And I was individual, not institution. I got my wish. Those were the times.
But there is no such support anymore and companies just ignore if the customer is not a big institution. Neither from the shareware and smaller developers who have very narrow circle of users (like a tracker for chiptune making, which is extreme and must say that certainly no way that they should exclude some gentlemen who like to use some retro system, whereas there are just 250 users max), but still... nothing. They go too the big-corporation-mentality like it is a M$ text editor software sold for governments.

I see that perhaps the software developers get the main income not from the individual users, but from the studios and such institutions (ProTools ?). Thats how is their price sticker. Still, if it needs to be top notch software, I really have no idea why they do not do it from the scratch -- as a separate single-tasking system with support for soundcards.
exciting, and I'd like to be on the cutting edge when it happens. Windows 10 also has, for the first time in a Microsoft OS, made specific kernel level enhancements to lower latency and improve performance specifically for audio and midi.


I do not think so, as they have made some things broken in order to fix them. What are they up to now?
Yet we still read many troubles about the win10 with the cubase. The privacy intrusion in win10 which is left alone if you register as a corporate user.

Between 1996...2006...
It has been long time that at first the item comes to market with good features for a latest OS, if I wait longer then another product will come with support for older OS and older hardware too which sometimes goes beyond expectations. So some CAN do. And thats why I see no point of changing machine. However most people do not do this way as I do.
But result somewhat is that I am happy that I have still kept machine for DOS, other older machines. Only the latest OS systems are those who do not get use. Perhaps after some years I do not use XP, which get replaced by Linux, but I still use 98SE and DOS.


And well, EVERY time these "upgrade" processes are downtime to me. Where I can do nothing. If the system will crash, then ok, I restore it from backup, but THIS process is nowhere near to straight install-and-use where all clicks in place. And it costs money, but I never do that again when it comes to M$ system. And hey, how many times man has to buy such expensive software packages just "becouse" some greedy corporations think that this or that is morally outdated?!
more than any instrument ever invented, but we are certainly nowhere near that yet. That aspect in itself is something I'd like to witness and participate in its maturing stages. Imagine the evolution from flat-screen display, keyboard and mouse, to some kind of HUD or hologram you control with brain waves, and all the steps in between.


many things are nowadays, but to me it is unusable becouse of...
...they still are full of bugs
...they are not under my control
...and they cheat when they develop it. Just like they do with M$ office, in this version there is assistant, in the next version its gone, and so on.


I have.. or trying to have ... open mind for a new versions and systems too, but so far from now to just get some pleasure I use what works -- DOS with Fasttracker, and Cubase VST32 with 98SE. Atleast both of them I can use with my hardware synthesizers.
And if just having some time, then I can digest into the new computers, but I doubt it as I am a way too good beta tester.

But it can happen that I would get old Fairlight CMIII instead of the next computers with VST3 hosts.
BECOUSE I do not want to spend time for guessing and betatesting lazy corporations software, I want to use it for music creating, and that I buy it once and use it always. Thats why I love also hardware becouse of its longevity and usability. With computers I already know whats waiting, with Fairlight I dont. Not yet.

User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by Solderman » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:16 pm

jxalex wrote:when I had the crackling issue then only MOTU midi interface was in use and m-Audio with ASIO buffer 336 samples (with 800..1056 samples was it fixed when I had just 3..4 MIDI tracks).
MIDI driving makes a system hog?
Sounds like the MotU driver is at fault, but I couldn't begin to speculate why. Until 2006, I used a Midiman Biport 2X4 attached to the serial port. Never gave me any grief in Cubase SX. My audio interface at that time was an Echo Darla24 PCI with breakout box.
jxalex wrote:Thats why I despise all this. They render obsolete the whole line useful expensive hardware just because they think not to support it.
I'm not giving up on it just yet, rather I am waiting to see if they design one for Windows 10. They have drivers for Windows 7 and 8, and even these took some time to get released.
jxalex wrote:Their thoughts are entirely different from engineering or development. It is more about organizing and marketing, how to keep customers on the hook.
But isn't this necessary for a business to survive? If it's only about the design, you are competing with freeware, some of which is updated regularly by developers who actually listen to their user base. The difference is a freeware developer can fix bugs and make updates at his own discretion since no one is paying for it. In other words, the freeware developer doesn't need a gimmick. I guess there are no free DAW suites, but then the effort to develop them is astronomically larger. Since they all require massive engineering and development efforts, they can't use this aspect to market their product.
jxalex wrote:About upgrades I see that every time it is expensive, it costs hardware, software, introduces again the blues with trial-error with drivers, and being beta tester again for a software company. I say that they certainly launch the program and begin fixing bugs afterwards. I have heard that several times as a software developer and I quit becouse of that.
Then as a software developer, certainly you must know that if you have a PC user base of tens of thousands or more, you potentially have that many permutations of setups and a thousand things you likely will not find locally during alpha and beta testing. This might explain why Mac software users did not have these woes for a long time, since hardware configurations were more controlled and limited in how they could be expanded.
I definitely agree upgrading is a huge drag in almost every aspect. That's why it's so important to be sure all that effort and expense will be worth it. In both our cases, I don't think it is. Not yet for me, for sure.
jxalex wrote:Well, how long they can develop a WORD PROCESSOR? For basic functions the version from 1994 is more than enough for 99.995% people!!!
Ah yes, feature creep. Eventually the product must evolve to be more than whatever it fundamentally was when it was first introduced, in order for it to be worthy of purchase. So many things to consider and I agree if the changes are minimal between versions, it is up to us the consumer to stay informed of this. When I think about Feature Creep, I think less about Steinberg's latest monstrosity, and more of what the latest VST plugins have to offer. For instance, I see no need yet to upgrade from Native Instruments Komplete 7 I purchased over 6 years ago.

As far as new versions breaking features that used to work that never get fixed, that's a clear sign to me to jump ship and change brands. This is a sign they are moving to different technologies for whatever reason, and you are going to experience h**l in a hand basket if you try and stay loyal to them.
jxalex wrote:What escapes my mind is that how arrogant the software company can be, saying that they do not support this or that nowadays. So, if I pay for the next version there is NO GUARANTEE that I get what was advertised!
Only thing I can think of is now they get their profits without having a need to help their customers so generously, as in the past. It's up to us the consumers to demand these things or refuse to continue buying their product.
jxalex wrote:I see that perhaps the software developers get the main income not from the individual users, but from the studios and such institutions...
I have no facts to back up this in support or against, so I would guess that if the software vendors can successfully market to those high-powered clientelle, I'm sure they will reap the benefits. I suspect that only a fraction of the Pro-Audio software market can do this, however. If it is true the studios and institutions tend to apply brand loyalty to vendors they trust, this is an opportunity for "the little guy" to make a better product to compete, and we the individuals will benefit, not the big spenders.
jxalex wrote:many things are nowadays, but to me it is unusable because of...
...they still are full of bugs
...they are not under my control
...and they cheat when they develop it.
And that is unfortunately the status quo as long as people put up with it. In any free market, all it takes is for someone new to come along and offer a better product, with less hassle, for lower cost and the consumers will flock to it instead, changing the industry standard of quality, if only temporarily. At least in theory. But I'm with you on not upgrading until that next greatest thing makes it absolutely worth it.
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

jxalex
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:05 am
Gear: enough
Location: Sweden

Re: Portable DAW upgrade from 10 yr old laptop

Post by jxalex » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:34 pm

Solderman wrote:
jxalex wrote:when I had the crackling issue then only MOTU midi interface was in use and m-Audio with ASIO buffer 336 samples (with 800..1056 samples was it fixed when I had just 3..4 MIDI tracks).
MIDI driving makes a system hog?
Sounds like the MotU driver is at fault, but I couldn't begin to speculate why. Until 2006, I used a Midiman Biport 2X4 attached to the serial port. Never gave me any grief in Cubase SX. My audio interface at that time was an Echo Darla24 PCI with breakout box.
well, I dont know either if it is becouse of MOTU (LPT port version). I can check it with other interface setups as I have many other USB equipment too.

jxalex wrote:Thats why I despise all this. They render obsolete the whole line useful expensive hardware just because they think not to support it.
I'm not giving up on it just yet, rather I am waiting to see if they design one for Windows 10. They have drivers for Windows 7 and 8, and even these took some time to get released.
Thats the spirit.
jxalex wrote:Their thoughts are entirely different from engineering or development. It is more about organizing and marketing, how to keep customers on the hook.
But isn't this necessary for a business to survive? If it's only about the design, you are competing with freeware, some of which is updated regularly by developers who actually listen to their user base. The difference is a freeware developer can fix bugs and make updates at his own discretion since no one is paying for it. In other words, the freeware developer doesn't need a gimmick. I guess there are no free DAW suites, but then the effort to develop them is astronomically larger. Since they all require massive engineering and development efforts, they can't use this aspect to market their product.

/-/-/

Ah yes, feature creep. Eventually the product must evolve to be more than whatever it fundamentally was when it was first introduced, in order for it to be worthy of purchase. So many things to consider and I agree if the changes
But what about the car repairmen who fix fault with crankshaft, but cuts ignition lines so You would return later?
Or a dentist who repairs one teeth, but just by accident makes injury to another teeth... Just in order to stay in business. Thats EXACTLY what all the software and technic companies do as they get the monopol status.
I think that its better that Steinberg together with Intel and M$ would just close the doors and go out of "business" permanently as their doing has caused again the old troubles than solutions. (Hey, MIDI timing for example which was sloppy again).
That all goes against all the principle "FIX the problem JUST ONCE".

As far as new versions breaking features that used to work that never get fixed, that's a clear sign to me to jump ship and change brands. This is a sign they are moving to different technologies for whatever reason, and you are going to experience h**l in a hand basket if you try and stay loyal to them.
They are getting even lazier. For example never making ready offline version of Help or complete documentation. Very frequent way the F1 just opens the browser AND sorry if there are only most generic questions answered.

Post Reply