Of course the first thing I do at every new update is check my pet bugs... The non-record-enabled Audio track no-midi-through bug is not fixed. I haven't tested whether this still breaks Track Automation Splitters too, but I imagine it does. Sysex fader input conversion is still broken. The visible Arrange grid is still barlines only, the finer grid available in 5.x and earlier is still missing. Ho hum. At least I can turn the "stupid snap" behaviour off. John Pitcairn

On a fine day, 02-10-2003, John Pitcairn wrote: >Of course the first thing I do at every new update is check my pet bugs... > >The non-record-enabled Audio track no-midi-through bug is not fixed. I >haven't tested whether this still breaks Track Automation Splitters >too, but I imagine it does. > >Sysex fader input conversion is still broken. > >The visible Arrange grid is still barlines only, the finer grid >available in 5.x and earlier is still missing. You forgot to check one: can you now record controllers as track automation again, or is that still broken as well? I slowly start wondering what good all those free updates are if core functionality remains broken version after version after version... -- Hendrik Jan Veenstra h @ k n o w a r e . n l Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com/

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@k...> wrote: > You forgot to check one: can you now record controllers as track > automation again, or is that still broken as well? Yup, still broken. I have a simple workaround for recording environment CC faders, track mixer "assign" knobs and external CC controls at http://www.revolver.co.nz/logic/ - midi_track_auto.lso.sit - but it's not astonishingly convenient. > I slowly start wondering what good all those free updates are if core > functionality remains broken version after version after version... I'd certainly prefer some more programming effort went into fixing bugs rather than flashy and expensive new ways to hog CPU power... John Pitcairn

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, "John Pitcairn" <johnp@r...> wrote: > I'd certainly prefer some more programming effort went into fixing > bugs rather than flashy and expensive new ways to hog CPU power... agreed, the cc bug is pretty annoying, and i'm sure verrry simple to sort. otoh, from first attempt the interminable midi hanging notes i experience with rolands xv5050, which was so bad as to make it unusable, appears (appears!) to have been fixed. a.

<quotes tidied up by admin> >> I slowly start wondering what good all those free updates are if core >> functionality remains broken version after version after version... > > I'd certainly prefer some more programming effort went into fixing > bugs rather than flashy and expensive new ways to hog CPU power... > > John Pitcairn Howdy Gang, I just loaded in 6.3.1 and for the moment the 9060 error is no more!!! I am thrilled even though I now own a new Mac G4 that will boot in OS9... Might send it back but who knows... I might need a computer to start writing my memoirs. Ha ha Leif

On 2/10/03 10:10, "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...> wrote: > I'd certainly prefer some more programming effort went into fixing > bugs rather than flashy and expensive new ways to hog CPU power... > Me too, but !! The problem is : > How much effort is to fix one bug ? 1 hour, one day, one month ....... > By fixing this bug will it break something else ? > How much will it cost to Emagic ? > How many users have run into that problem ? > Do I use my developers to fix bugs or to improve the product to sell it to > more people ! This is THE dilemma If one user reports a problem, he has 1 chance on a 100 it get fixed ! I have reports a BIG bug with my Serial /USB midi interfaces, I was told nicely to get lost, I am apparently the only user having 2 serial 8 port midi interface and an Emagic AMT8 ! SO THE SOLUTION IS AS SOON YOU RUN INTO A PROBLEM YOU SEND A MAIL TO EMAGIC SUPPORT, if everybody does this we may have answers. Otherwise there are other action we can have, at the next paying upgrade we can wait to buy it ! Emagic is making a lot of money on upgrades. We are almost 12 000 users on Logic's list, an upgrade is around 150 USD so : 12 000 x 150 USD = 1.8 Million USD !! big money ! This is the big advantage of Internet, we are a big group so we can put pressure on Emagic much more easily than before. I have put in copy the support of Emagic DE and FR ! Best regards Cyril Blanc France

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Cyril Blanc <blanc.cyril@w...> wrote: > I have reports a BIG bug with my Serial /USB midi interfaces, I was > told nicely to get lost That's most likely because your serial port interfaces are officially unsupported in OS X by Emagic or Apple... John Pitcairn

Lookout for Logic 7.0, already being previewed on the street, and I hear that are looking at fixing some of the bugs from 4.8, and they might even add a trim mode to the automation so that the trim button on the Logic Control might work!

On 3/10/03 7:17, "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...> wrote: > --- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Cyril Blanc <blanc.cyril@w...> wrote: >> I have reports a BIG bug with my Serial /USB midi interfaces, I was >> told nicely to get lost > > That's most likely because your serial port interfaces are officially > unsupported in OS X by Emagic or Apple... > This is not true anymore as Apple is providing samples of code to hel dev on this ! Best regards Cyril Blanc France If you want to be sure I read your answer leave my name in it ! Spam mails are directly going to trash

>> I have reports a BIG bug with my Serial /USB midi interfaces, I was >> told nicely to get lost > That's most likely because your serial port interfaces are officially > unsupported So lets hope they don't suddenly declare track automation splitters, sysex transformers and all the other carefully nurtured PITAs as 'unsupported'... I know that a bugfix-only release will definitely have to find other ways than over the marketing table, but really , all those bugs are getting a bit long in the tooth. Christian

> > That's most likely because your serial port interfaces are > > officially unsupported in OS X by Emagic or Apple... > This is not true anymore as Apple is providing samples of code to hel > dev on this ! My understanding from the CoreAudio list was that they cleaned up the serial midi driver code and released it to developers, but are not in fact going to be maintaining or supporting it in any official capacity. And Emagic have repeatedly stated that they do not support serial midi with Logic in OS X. It may be working, but your only source of support for serial midi problems would be the developers who are working on it, not Apple or Emagic. John Pitcairn

Am 03.10.2003 um 11:31 schrieb Cyril Blanc: > This is not true anymore as Apple is providing samples of code to hel > dev on > this ! You may be right that there is sample code, but this is not the question. On Mac OS X, all external hardware (including MIDI interfaces) can be accessed by applications only using a driver. AFAIR you have MotU serial port only interfaces. If you want to use these interfaces on Mac OS X, you need CoreMIDI drivers for them. A driver for a hardware is usually provided by the hardware's manufacturer, except it uses a protocol which is supported by the OS (like USB MIDI or USB HID). So you have to ask MotU for providing a driver, not us for providing direct MTP access. Beste Gruesse - best regards, Michael Haydn - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl.-Inform. Univ. Michael Haydn mhaydn@... SoundDiver Group Executive http://www.emagic.de/ Logic Developer (Logic Control integration) Emagic Soft- & Hardware GmbH - Germany Phone: +49 4101 495 0 Halstenbeker Weg 96, 25462 Rellingen Fax : +49 4101 495 199 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On 4/10/03 20:25, "Michael Haydn" <mhaydn@...> wrote: > > Am 03.10.2003 um 11:31 schrieb Cyril Blanc: > >> This is not true anymore as Apple is providing samples of code to help >> dev on >> this ! > > You may be right that there is sample code, but this is not the > question. Hello Michael Thanks for your mail, I think you are missing the beginning of that mail. The original affirmation was "Apple does not support serial midi " > > On Mac OS X, all external hardware (including MIDI interfaces) can be > accessed by applications only using a driver. > > AFAIR you have MotU serial port only interfaces. No I have an Opcode and a Motu serial and an Emagic AMT 8 (USB) > If you want to use > these interfaces on Mac OS X, you need CoreMIDI drivers for them. > A driver for a hardware is usually provided by the hardware's > manufacturer, except it uses a protocol which is supported by the OS > (like USB MIDI or USB HID). So you have to ask MotU for providing a > driver, not us for providing direct MTP access. > > Beste Gruesse - best regards, > Michael Haydn But we do not need that Motu write a serial driver as the serial driver wrote by Geethree is generic and it is working with almost any MTP serial interfaces ! (same for the Gport) The only problem is to be able to define a "rank" like in Logic OS 9 so the OS 9 midi configuration is not screwed up when you use Logic OS X ! IT SHOULD NOT be a hell of a job to fix this. Today I may be the only user to have this problem but when you will have big studio moving to OS X you will have plenty clients having this problem !` (I have explain and report that problem before, quickly in OS X you get USB interfaces first and serial interface after*) and I hope it get fixed before I buy my G5 because I will be in OS X only ! * I am an old Logic User so all my 16 midi devices are on 2 x 8 ports serial midi interfaces, my Logic Control and it's 4 XT are on an Emagic USB AMT 8 ! Best regards Cyril Blanc France If you want to be sure I read your answer leave my name in it ! Spam mails are directly going to trash

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Cyril Blanc <blanc.cyril@w...> wrote: > The only problem is to be able to define a "rank" like in Logic OS 9 > so the OS 9 midi configuration is not screwed up when you use Logic > OS X ! I don't use OS 9 at all anymore, but I'd like to see this improved on in OS X as well. I sometimes work with an MT4, sometimes an MT4 and MTP AV, sometimes those plus some "virtual" i/o courtesy of Midi Patchbay or MidiPipe etc, sometimes just the MTP AV, and sometimes just the virtual midi i/o. Sorting out where the damn incoming ports have moved to on the Physical Input is a pain. I've tried to build an input switching matrix, but that's annoying to maintain with virtual i/o coming and going. And for assigned output ports, Logic telling me "there is a port with the same name - 'port 1' or such - on a different midi interface, and asking me to reassign or not, is not very useful behaviour. Sure the port has the same name, but it's obviously a different interface. My synths live in a rack with the MTP AV, and are not often connected, but I still want them in my Autoload. It's more an annoyance than a convenience, being asked that every time I start Logic. A user pref to turn that off would be good. Perhaps this is Apple's problem, with individual midi i/o ports not being nameable by the user in AudioMidi Setup, though from what I've read of the CoreMidi docs it _should_ be possible to retain a unique reference to a device and port. Which then puts the problem back in Emagic's court - tie an output of the Physical Input to a _specific_ incoming device/port, and keep it that way between Logic restarts, regardless of whether the device is connected or not. A simple user preference to "lock" the current Physical Input port assignments might help. Tricky, I know. Any comments, Michael? John Pitcairn

On a fine day, 06-10-2003, John Pitcairn wrote: >Which then puts the problem back in Emagic's court - tie an output of >the Physical Input to a _specific_ incoming device/port, and keep it >that way between Logic restarts, regardless of whether the device is >connected or not. A simple user preference to "lock" the current >Physical Input port assignments might help. How about getting rid of the Physical Input object altogether, and have a _set_ of simpler input objects, as many as you need? I.e. New > Input Object creates an input object that has a SUM out and 16 individual outs (1 per midi channel). In the parameter pane you then pick the proper input device for this object. Basta, finito, easy as pie. This would work just like outputs (can) work now. In my environment I have an Instrument object for each output port of my midi interface. The 1st instrument is assigned to Port 1, the next is assigned to Port 2, etc. The "real" instrumentsd (synths & stuff) are cabled into those "port instruments" (yes, I know there's a port object as well, but that's redundant). That way if I ever decide to recable my gear or switch interfaces, or whatever, I only have to cable synth XYZ to Port-2 instead of Port-1. The environment thus nicely reflects my actual setup. Something like that for inputs would be very convenient imo. >Tricky, I know. Any comments, Michael? We're not allowed to comment on future developments, plans or intentions... -- Hendrik Jan Veenstra h @ k n o w a r e . n l Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com/

--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@k...> wrote: > How about getting rid of the Physical Input object altogether, and > have a _set_ of simpler input objects, as many as you need? I.e. > New > Input Object creates an input object that has a SUM out and 16 > individual outs (1 per midi channel). In the parameter pane you then > pick the proper input device for this object. Basta, finito, easy > as pie. Now that would be dandy. As long as they don't get reassigned when a midi interface appears or disappears... John Pitcairn

On a fine day, 06-10-2003, John Pitcairn wrote: >--- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@k...> wrote: >> How about getting rid of the Physical Input object altogether, and >> have a _set_ of simpler input objects, as many as you need? I.e. >> New > Input Object creates an input object that has a SUM out and 16 >> individual outs (1 per midi channel). In the parameter pane you then >> pick the proper input device for this object. Basta, finito, easy >> as pie. > >Now that would be dandy. As long as they don't get reassigned when a >midi interface appears or disappears... Yes, of course -- that was implied (or intended, or what I thought but didn't say, or... :). -- Hendrik Jan Veenstra h @ k n o w a r e . n l Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com/

> --- In logic-users@yahoogroups.com, Cyril Blanc <blanc.cyril@w...> wrote: >> The only problem is to be able to define a "rank" like in Logic OS 9 >> so the OS 9 midi configuration is not screwed up when you use Logic >> OS X ! On 6/10/03 13:35, "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...> wrote: > I don't use OS 9 at all anymore, but I'd like to see this improved on > in OS X as well. > I sometimes work with an MT4, sometimes an MT4 and MTP AV, sometimes > those plus some "virtual" i/o courtesy of Midi Patchbay or MidiPipe > etc, sometimes just the MTP AV, and sometimes just the virtual midi > i/o. Sorting out where the damn incoming ports have moved to on the > Physical Input is a pain. I've tried to build an input switching > matrix, but that's annoying to maintain with virtual i/o coming and going. <snip> > Which then puts the problem back in Emagic's court - tie an output of > the Physical Input to a _specific_ incoming device/port, and keep it > that way between Logic restarts, regardless of whether the device is > connected or not. A simple user preference to "lock" the current > Physical Input port assignments might help. THE solution is either to be able like in Logic OS 9 to define the "RANK" or to use the definitions in the OS X "audio midi setup" from left to right Thanks in advance. Best regards Cyril Blanc France If you want to be sure I read your answer leave my name in it ! Spam mails are directly going to trash