User 905133

This thread is over 2 years old. JMO: Asking about creating an INS file in 2022 deserves a new topic.

This reply was written several hours ago, but not posted because to me it seemed to be quite off topic from the original thread by bringing up issues related to hardware that were far removed from what I thought the original thread was about. However, I think (not 100% sure) that the meat and potatoes of the 2022 discussion is indeed related to issues raised in the unposted draft. For that reason, I resurrected the post. This sounds a little like what I faced in the MIDI Dark Ages (before I got a parallel port MIDI interface/router) trying to daisy chain a keyboard synth [controller+synth] --> a drum machine --> a software sequencer --> the same MIDI gear at the beginning of the chain. I call that a recipe for MIDI disaster. That's why MIDI routers were created!!! But I think I get what you were originally trying to say. Fortunately for me, the hardware sequencer/sound module combo I used during the last decade [Proteus 2500] had a really nice flexible architecture which had an option to merge incoming MIDI data with the outgoing sequencer data out of Port A, Port B, or Both) among other features. Very handy. For example, Using Port B [output] MIDI clock and up to 16 tracks could be sent out to some gear that used the clock [B is for Beatz], while up to 16 other tracks that didn't need the MIDI clock could be sent to sound modules via Port A [A is for "All Else]. For real-time performances, with the hardware sequencer's "in-the-box" MIDI settings I didn't need a computer, a DAW, and an 8 x 8 interface/router.

Did I say that? I will have to see if that's another typo. 😞 SHEESH!!!!!!!!!! That is what I ask if you were trying to say nine hours ago when I couldn't made sense of your headache producing comment. When you wrote "Your recent take," it sounded to me like you were claiming I said that more recently than the last round of comments. Are you now agreeing that my guess from nine hours ago was correct (but from a strictly hardware/connector point of view)? In short, is your point that once there is a single 5-pin DIN MIDI cable sending MIDI data from the output of a PC's MIDI interface, another 5-pin DIN MIDI cable cannot be physically connected from a thru port on the PC's MIDI interface because the sound module only has one MIDI input? I guess maybe that's what you meant 17 hours ago: To be clear, muting some previously recorded MIDI tracks going to sound modules while recording new MIDI tracks going those sound modules might not be your personal workflow, but some people might use it.

Sorry. I had a headache from trying to sort out what bvideo was trying to say and I typed "input" instead of "thru." I am surprised that no one picked up that it was a typo. The context of the post and the following sentence ("Have MIDI sound modules changed so users can send MIDI data into hardware by using the thru port?") should have tipped people off. In any case, I corrected the typo: SHEESH!!!!! 😜

My bad. My head was spinning so much from trying to parse this: I mistakenly wrote "input" instead of through. I spent so much time trying to sort that out that I neglected to proofread the comment that inspired the headache. It should have been: I think the second sentence should have tipped readers off that "input" was a typo. But I will correct that now. Thanks for calling this to my attention. BTW, coffee has helped to clear up the headache. 😉

JMO: (1) It would be a waste of toner/ink and (2) it would be very expensive. Also, (3) to get an image of the entire project on a single sheet of paper might make it too small to read, depending on how many tracks you have, how wide the tracks are, and how long the tracks are.

Your post is confusing. For example, are you saying: I think my headache is from trying to understand why anyone would ever think of sending the MIDI data from a sequencer (hardware or software) into the midi input thru of a sound module. Have MIDI sound modules changed so users can send MIDI data into hardware by using the thru port? Oh. Are you saying:

I am confused by the recent revival of this old thread. What is new from what was originally discussed in 2019? Did the way Cakewalk uses MIDI data change? Is there something that was posted previously wrong? Did anyone ever follow up on these suggestions?

As noted in another thread I stumbled onto the grunged tapes when looking to see if I had updated a few other products which some Cakewalk Forum members were kind enough to mention receiving e-mails about. I indeed used the Product Manager and it worked for me. Its always nice when things work! 🙂 I just checked the User Area and the ones listed under Windows are now the zip versions. Not sure if that varies from user to user, but it was good to see that it works. When we consider how long a couple of malformed SYN2 files were still being erroneously installed by the Product Manager (after it was first reported and users were being told it was fixed), I think it is important for users to be well-versed in multiple methods of installing sound content. In any case, its nice to see User Area downloads working properly. @Peter - IK Multimedia If you had a role in helping other IK departments to realize the need to fix the downloads, thanks!!

I remember a discussion probably a couple of months ago, where @Bristol_Jonesey and @David Baay pointed out the very important point that even if >>we<< aren't using Screensets (such as when we exclude them from the Control Bar and Workspaces), Cakewalk still uses Screensets.

This is a known problem. Don't bother reporting it to IK Multimedia.

Having played around with the Meldway Piano a bit yesterday and today (and to a lesser extent Dream Machines) I have moved the purchase of a larger SSD up on my list of priorities to be able to use them. (Until then, I might offload a bunch of GBs from another company's sample playing synth to my external HDD.) BTW, on my PC MSF works well within Tone2's nanohost.

Personally, I would prefer to see (1) per button enable/disable switches and more importantly (2) the ability to store and restore those preferences with Workspaces. I can see some personal workflows where I would like some buttons animated and would like to have different Workspaces for the different workflows. Having to switch animations (all or some) on and off by navigating the Preference settings (including switching between theme variations with different animations enabled/disabled) would be more intrusive than just switching Workspaces.

Not everyone who creates their own custom themes (or who uses custom themes) would want animated buttons.

Thanks for letting those of us who don't get the e-mails know. BTW, I checked, and there was an update for SampleTron 2. Oh, I also checked my profile and deleted my home address in case that's why they haven't been sending me e-mails. BTW: On my computer I am still finding the correlation is off between A/B/C UI switching and MIDI switching. (The switching of the virtual selector knob (A/B/C) and the virtual tapes themselves do not happen for me at the same time.)

Call in the man with the expert ear:

I always thought that was because 960 was a multiple of 96 ppq (a standard) where as 120 wasn't.

(1) Its a matter of individual taste and sonic goals. Personally, I like filter sweeps, including resonance sweeps (including a range from subtle to wild) and sometimes static resonance settings. (2) I just did a very simple test and found that Yes, the resonance knob had an effect on various filter modes in Syntronik (pre-2) with the 6dB filter. Simple Test: Open Syntronik > Minimod > A Deep Sweeper. Select M-Type Filter and 6 dB Slope. Try different Modes. WARNINGS: Do not do this with headphones on. When testing, start with the volume low.. Trigger some notes and play with Resonance and Cutoff. ============== Just my opinion: I applaud oqpoil's dedication to uncovering quirks and sharing his results with the community here. I appreciate Peter's efforts to inform users of information he has, even when he is just passing on information others have given him. I think the factory presets are well designed to ignore the quirks and to showcase a wide range of presets. I think the quirks can be used extremely creatively. Pun ("extremely") definitely intended. Despite all the quirks, $49 is a very nice price for the functional equivalent of Syntronik 2 MAX.

Better late than never, like some of us consumers.

Is your objection that they are text-based with sub-menus that open up instead icon-based?

[withdrawn]

I keep forgetting--"Just post the video and don 't worry that people might not get the association." 😜

Connection: "Hey, Murray, is it true . . . ?"

Now I am wondering where my first MIDI interface is. It was a Sequential (for the Commodore 64). That led me into dabbling with assembly language programming with MIDI on the C-64. The interface "manual" (more of a guide/booklet) had all I needed to understand how to access and send MIDI data using the chips. Not 100% sure, but I seem to recall it also had asm code segments (setting the chips, reading the registers, etc.). Thank you, Dave Smith!

Re: GUI Unfortunately, the fonts (and images, too) used in Syntronik 2 are still way smaller than Syntronik. Wish they had font/image scaling. Nice to see some of the filter and other parameter issues fixed.