MIDI problem - can anyone replicate?

[falcowe]

Originally Posted by midnightrambler

Update : just had email from Avid that this is a “legit issue” and they’re working on a fix. To all the unbelievers I say : you’re forgiven.

That is good to hear!

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by midnightrambler

They should just disable the facility at higher buffers then, instead of pretending it's of any use. It's unusable.

Why? Some people would like to mix with larger buffers to get just few more plugins in there. As long as you know 256@48k is the max amount of latency you can deal with while tracking, just choose a proper buffer.

[midnightrambler]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Why? Some people would like to mix with larger buffers to get just few more plugins in there. As long as you know 256@48k is the max amount of latency you can deal with while tracking, just choose a proper buffer.

You've misunderstood me : I'm not arguing for the removal of higher buffer sizes. I use higher buffer sizes all the time when mixing. I'm saying there is no point pretending the facility to record MIDI works at higher buffer sizes - it doesn't, it places the MIDI early, so it's unusable - so they might as well have disabled the ability to record MIDI at those higher buffer sizes. This is a moot point now as they've already said it's a bona fide problem.

[Southsidemusic]

And Janne - No serious producer could use 256 Buffer size as the latency is too much even at 128. The artists we worl with would never sing or play to anything more than 64 and MAYBE 128 in EXTTREME cases so 256 is ridiculous!!