Huge adc bug!??

[masterplan]

Damn, why didn´t we think of that!!!
29.000 views and 54 pages and we never thought of that!
Just turn the ADC off.
Thanks buddy!
My life just got so much easier.

[muhis1]

Oh thank God!! Finally a solution!!!
Thank you so much!!

Originally Posted by midnightrambler

Can't you just turn ADC off when you're tracking? I mean, I know it's not ideal, and I'm not excusing AVID for a second, but compared to the mixing board catching fire, the tape machine spinning wildly without stopping, the air con breaking down, etc etc (all of which have happened to me) it's not that bad, is it? This bug hasn't stopped me making records, that's all I'm saying. Unlike the other examples.

[studiojimi]

Originally Posted by muhis1

Oh thank God!! Finally a solution!!!
Thank you so much!!

well we HAVE been praying for enlightenment LOL

[midnightrambler]

Alternatively, you could all go back your bedrooms, get under the bedclothes, and have a good sob.

With thanks to Larry David.

[masterplan]

Now thats the spirit!
Lol!

[muhis1]

Lol

[masterplan]

So....
According to DTS this is being worked on.
But won't be fixed until the next major update.
And that is, in their own words, not a "dot" update.
But rather PT 9.
A bit scary since we are now at 8.1....
So DTS, I hope you are bitching on development on our behalf.
Can we just confirm that Avid is aware that there are 2 semi separate issues we are talking about.
1. If you record Midi in a session with any kind of latency in it, and of course have ADC turned on, the midi notes will end up wrong timingwise.

2. That we need to separate the ADC between Midi record and playback.
So that even if you have a miditrack record armed, it should play back the recorded notes WITH ADC.
If it doesn't, it becomes impossible to do any kind of midi overdubs or punch-ins when what you already recorded plays back out of time.

Would be good to get it confirmed that Avid is aware, and working on these very important tasks.

Thanks!

Peer

[muhis1]

Bump!

Originally Posted by masterplan

so....
According to dts this is being worked on.
But won't be fixed until the next major update.
And that is, in their own words, not a "dot" update.
But rather pt 9.
A bit scary since we are now at 8.1....
So dts, i hope you are bitching on development on our behalf.
Can we just confirm that avid is aware that there are 2 semi separate issues we are talking about.
1. If you record midi in a session with any kind of latency in it, and of course have adc turned on, the midi notes will end up wrong timingwise.

2. That we need to separate the adc between midi record and playback.
So that even if you have a miditrack record armed, it should play back the recorded notes with adc.
If it doesn't, it becomes impossible to do any kind of midi overdubs or punch-ins when what you already recorded plays back out of time.

Would be good to get it confirmed that avid is aware, and working on these very important tasks.

Thanks!

Peer

[relaxo]

Originally Posted by masterplan

So....
According to DTS this is being worked on.
But won't be fixed until the next major update.
And that is, in their own words, not a "dot" update.
But rather PT 9.

Hopefully DTS means PT 9, but Avid doesn't guarantee a PT9 fix from how I read his words:

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

this is going to require a huge 'under the hood' change that affects a lot of code and will take awhile. You won't see this in anything less than a 'major' update.

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

Yes, major would mean a full version number like 9.0.

To me that says, AT LEAST PT 9, but it doesn't guarantee the fix showing up in PT 9.

[WernerF]

With all of the advances that are happening every day in technology I find it hard to believe that this is taking this long to fix. After all, the guys who are supposedly working so feverishly on this don't have to totally re-invent the wheel. They're the ones who wrote the original code in the first place and then went and broke it. There's gotta be a whole lotta clues lying around that shop, wherever it is these days. Why the h__ does it have to be part of a full version number? That implies that this version, 8, is fundamentally flawed and if it is, they know what's flawed about it. Correct me if I'm wrong.