Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Other Products > MIDI

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-22-2002, 09:02 PM
srik srik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 40
Default The Midi implementation Story.

Hi all,
The moral of my story The midi implementation of Pro tools LE simply "sucks". It is too weak and lame. How did I come to this conclusion? Read below.

I compose my sequences using Cakewalk. I would bet my fortune on this, cakewalk’s midi implementation is by far superior than Protools. Let us face it this is the truth.

I have a p4 1.7ghz pc that has ram to hold 10 foot ball fields.. Now, I have midi 8x8 midi interface., It works perfectly fine with cakewalk. No trouble, clear and easy sequencing.
The problem starts when ? . after composing a huge sequence with 20 layers of midi,
I wanted to record audio tracks into Protools. I want to retain cakewalk as my sequencer and sync them both using MTC. Sounds simple isn’t it? However! "Protools LE " does not start , it complains with a message saying midi ports are taken up by some other software (you guessed it - Mr.Cakewalk). No where in the world I told ProTools to use all my midi ports. Protools grabs/chews them (8x8) mercilessly without my permission. It does not care!…bottom line, If you want to me to start just shut down all other programs that are using the midi ports. I need them I use it or not I don’t care.

Not willing to give up (My investment (sometimes called as donation) is $1000 for Protools, $250 for cakewalk, $250 for midi man, $2700 for DELL and tons of sounds modules)
I tried to convert my sequence to dot mid files so that I can import into Protools...but!
No way! Protools imported it but the port numbers were changed. All the tracks contains port #1 as default, no clue why it takes #1.

Cakewalk has a superior idea of selecting the port(s) to use for sequencing. It does not occupy or go near the unselected ports. I have 8x8 ports – now you can see my night mare, entire track become messed up.

The only solution I had was I have Korg d1600, I record one by one into Korg d16 then exported them to Protools as wav files. Frankly Cake walk would do this perfectly. If not better. Why pay for a hardware which is does not work with other audio programs or atleast live along with other other programs.

I think it is high time for the code developers in Digi labs to start thinking about simple user interface. Getting a superior recording quality is appreciated however I cannot compromise my easiness to work when all other software in the world does things the better way. I agree or hear the Digi guys saying "Go buy them", my answer sure I would have, if I had known this or DIGI had documented it clearly saying warning all ports will be locked when using ProTools LE. What else we can do. I pray to god that Digi design takes care of its small time users like me. The investment is quite high for us, it needs to be justified.

Moral once again: The midi implementation of Pro tools LE simply "sucks". It is too weak and lame. As computer software architect I feel there are many ways Protools LE can be improved. Just ask the users here in the discussion board Digi will get tons of problems people face during a peak recording session. They will also give a solution.

Simply!, I would think 10 times next time when I venture into Protools world.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-02-2002, 02:56 PM
chris67 chris67 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 262
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

I completely empathise with you on this. But make no mistake it isnt just LE users that want better midi implementation.

beleive it or not, many PT users seem to be perfectly happy with PT's midi implementation and some are actually against any enhancements in case they have another screen to look at it.

Personnally I am dumbfounded by this attitude to no change. The midi in all PT versions is pathetic and amateur. I really cant see significant enhancements to PT midi for a long long time. It just isnt high on their priority list.

I was all ready to upgrade to an HD system, but am having to reconsider this. especially if there is no sign of midi enhancements.

I am actually having to seriously look at other systems. I have tried and tried to use the midi in PT but it is infuriating. beleive it or not I still use an Atari running Cubase ver2 for midi !!
__________________
contribute to the Studio Techniques forum @ www.hookrecordings.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-02-2002, 06:55 PM
srik srik is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 40
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

Or Please!
simply give us an option to enable and disable midi ports to be used by PT.
Make PT live along and share the resources with other software applications..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-03-2002, 12:00 AM
Kev Kev is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic, Aust
Posts: 873
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

Quote:
Originally posted by chris67:

....... beleive it or not, many PT users seem to be perfectly happy with PT's midi implementation and some are actually against any enhancements in case they have another screen to look at it.

.... beleive it or not I still use an Atari running Cubase ver2 for midi !!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That is not quite what we have said. Enhancement are welcome but not at tthe expense of the very basic stuff like sync between audio and midi. We just want it to work right.

The Atari is still my yard stick that I judge this stuff by. For me it was CLab and a couple of things in Clab are still not on any other sequencer.... like a midi flow indicator. Sound Diver has a midi event lister in real time but a flow and overflow indicator per midi port would be good for trouble shooting.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-16-2002, 04:08 PM
Ragsdale Ragsdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cedar Hill, TX USA
Posts: 19
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

I too am experiencing difficulty (understatement) implementing a software sequencer (Cakewalk Home Studio or Cakewalk 9.0) with the Digi001 in Windows 98se.

I prefer being able to physically see my banks and sound libraries in a drop-down menu for each midi track, and then selecting it from that menu. It's one-stop sound shopping that software sequencers have and Pro Tools does not.

My problem is in recording (or simply hearing for that matter) ANY audio in Cakewalk without reconfiguring my entire midi system's audio outputs to the Digi001. In Cakewalk's Home Studio for instance, my only input options in a Cakewalk audio track are left, right or stereo "Digidesign Channel 1-2"; and my only output option is a "Digidesign Digi 001: Channel 1-2" A through D. (Not sure where the B, C and D output channels came from...)

This means I have to manually disconnect each sound module's output from the Digi001's rear panel outputs (channels 3 thru 8), and manually re-connect them to one of the 2 front panel inputs to get any sound every time I use it. And once connected to the front panel audio inputs, I get a single repeat echo of everything I play, and I'm not even using the Digi001's midi I/O!

It appears that Digi001's audio and/or midi driver will not allow me to select any Digi001 input channel other than the front panel Channel 1 or 2 inputs in my software sequencer. So not only can I not do ANY polyphony, but I have to manually rewire the system every time I want to make an instrument change. UGH!!! [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img]

I have a full midi SYSTEM (MOTU 8x8 MTP/AV, Roland A-37 keyboard controller, E-MU Proteus 2000, DR-660 drum machine, plus room to grow) as well as a full-fledged audio recording system (with midi'd Line6 PodPro & Digitech GNX2 processor.) All of my Digi001 audio input channels are used.

Is there ANY WAY for anything other than Pro Tools to access the other Digi001 audio input channels (preferrably in software) and if so... how? Or was my $800 investment in the Digi001 (and it's appearantly wimpy drivers) as a COMPLETE(?) audio AND MIDI digital studio workstation a waste of hard-earned dollars?

HELP!!!

Rags
__________________
XPS400, WinXP Home SP2
3.2GHz Dual Core, 4G RAM
8800GTS w/dual Dell 19" Monitors
003 Rack
MOTU Midi Express 128
Roland A-37 88-key Controller
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-16-2002, 08:19 PM
mfym mfym is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 992
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

I don't have any proof other than hearsay, but I believe the midi implementation in PT and PTLE is in for a big change for the better.

The MIDI I/O from Digidesign has just been released with midi time stamping which should improve midi timing, but none of the current versions of their software support it yet. A bunch of software upgrades are expected before the end of the year, and it's my guess that since midi time stamping has to be supported (they already have the hardware), there would be other improvements to midi also. There are just too many other midi features that the competition offers that Digidesign does not for them to ignore the shortcomings anymore. Shortcomings Digidesign readily admits and has repeatedly said would be addressed.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-17-2002, 09:32 AM
Ragsdale Ragsdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cedar Hill, TX USA
Posts: 19
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

Thanks mfym,

I appreciate your feedback. It sounds like I may have 3 problems on my hands:

1- The initial release of the Midi I/O appears to be a Mac-based system. I have a Win 98SE system...

2- Assuming a Windows version is released, the audio driver probably still won't provide Windows Control Panel support and/or configuration for the Digi001's audio input channels 3-8, and

3- I recently purchased a MOTU MTP/AV. Assuming all the Digi001 performance and configuration issues are successfully resolved, I'll likely be forced to purchase Digidesign's Midi I/O system to replace it. For the musician on a budget - that stinks. Especially since I'm absolutely enamoured with my MTP/AV and it's software Console wiring capability.

I have an email into Digidesign's support center. If input channels 3-8 are not, or will not soon, be available to my Windows system, I may have to put my Digi001 on E-Bay and get a MOTU 2408mk3 digital audio workstation or its equivalent. Unfortunately, the 2408mk3 isn't compatible with ProTools LE, and I just hate to loose ProTools' intuitive audio mixing capabilities.

Rags
__________________
XPS400, WinXP Home SP2
3.2GHz Dual Core, 4G RAM
8800GTS w/dual Dell 19" Monitors
003 Rack
MOTU Midi Express 128
Roland A-37 88-key Controller
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-17-2002, 05:11 PM
mfym mfym is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 992
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

The MIDI I/O will be available for PTLE and I believe it will be available at the same time for PT and PTLE. I've already asked and received that answer. This was on the TDM MAC OS forum, but the thread is no longer available.

I, however, neglected to ask specifically if it would be available for PC PTLE at the same time. It was my impression from what I read that it would available on all platforms at the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-17-2002, 05:18 PM
Ragsdale Ragsdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cedar Hill, TX USA
Posts: 19
Default Re: The Midi implementation Story.

Issue resolved...

3rd party software sequencers require Digi001 Direct I/O hardware compatibility to access the Digi001's audio inputs 3-8. There is currently only one software sequencer for Windows (that I've found anyway) that does this - Emagic's Logic. Neither Cakewalk SONAR nor Steinberg's Cubase support it.

Problem is, Apple bought Emagic and they will offer no new Windows-based products after September 30th, 2002. Digidesign is also going to Apple big time, though they will continue(?) offering Windows-compatible products.

So if you are experiencing this problem, get a copy of Logic before they disappear altogether. Or you're left with either a minimalist Midi system, or buying a Mac.

Ciao for niao,

Rags
__________________
XPS400, WinXP Home SP2
3.2GHz Dual Core, 4G RAM
8800GTS w/dual Dell 19" Monitors
003 Rack
MOTU Midi Express 128
Roland A-37 88-key Controller
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MIDI Implementation sheet? shotgunndunn macOS 1 01-19-2012 06:08 AM
HUI midi implementation chart Hogie MIDI 3 10-03-2005 09:11 AM
Mackie HUI MIDI Specifications - Midi implementation chart yamyyy Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 2 05-31-2001 07:16 AM
midi implementation zawaz 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 3 01-03-2001 05:51 AM
MIDI Implementation bluemt Tips & Tricks 2 11-18-1999 06:45 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:19 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com