Hi Diki.
When people use hardware, James, they tend to bring hardware paradigms to the table. So much is made of how good the MS is, but whenever anything is wrong, suddenly it's the software...
If you have been following the threads in the Lionstracs section of the forums you would see that when there is a problem the responsibility to fix this is directed that the right people.
Lionstracs responsibility is to provide the platform and deliver the seamless integration through their custom software. That is the full scope of what Liosntracs are expected to provide and if that is compromised in anyway, then those issues need to be dealt with by Lionstracs directly.
This is exactly what is been happening and we have all been talking very openly over in the Lionstracs section of the forum. Domenico has been great in responding.
So I'm sorry but I don't see things taking place like you see them. Things have been extremely productive actually and the Mediastation is just a hair away from being every single thing ever promised.
Yu can't have it both ways. Either the MS is a dumb bit of kit that does NOTHING at all, and everything is down to the software (in which case, it becomes a question of whether the hardware is cost effective and needed at all, when MUCH cheaper computers can run the same software), or the OS and associated software IS something to do with the overall instrument, in which case criticizing it for failures past and present is legitimate.
That's not how it works at all. Try to think of a Lionstracs keyboard in terms of modules you can link together. Lionstracs provide the platform for these modules to sit on, and the means for them to communicate with each other. They also built a few of these modules themselves that offer functionality to the keyboard but that's the scope of Lionstracs responsibility. You then have all these other third party modules like Linux Sampler, Wine, VSTHOST, Live styler and any VSTi you install which can do all manner of other functions but being third party modules, they have nothing to do with lionstracs and so if you have a problem with them, then no point blaming Liosnracs for other peoples work.
So Linux is the OS and the foundation, Lionstracs custom OS runs on top of Linux in order to provide the platform and some of Lionstracs own modules. Finally you have the third part modules that make up the rest.
See ?..... You can't just point the finger Liosntracs for all responsibility.
As has been pointed out, do you REALLY think that Dom couldn't have programmed full ON Bass capability into it during the four or five YEARS it was supposed to be an arranger (running on HIS software)? And if not, WHY didn't he do it? It is when ESSENTIAL details get missed so blatantly, like this, that you wonder about whether some of the other things that plague the MS will ever get fixed also, or only those that Dom thinks are important?
Haven't got a clue to be honest. Is it even important any more ? It's all past history and things have moved on quite a tremendous amount overall.
It is SO nice and convenient to simply toss off anything he doesn't FEEL like fixing himself on the shoulders of it being someone else's software, but this is the Achilles Heel of the entire 'open' arranger concept. When the entire thing working properly doesn't rest in the hands of ONE team, but in the myriad teams of a myriad of different software entities, often with little regard for how other parts of this mess of worms wants to use THEIR software they designed for THEM... or what schedule they feel like fixing broken parts of the OS (especially when few of them even design with Linux in mind) as things get updated and changed.
Well he can only fix what's under his control. This is the nature of an open system and the entire point of the concept. It's simply logic.
Arranger by committee... and none of the committee is talking to anybody else in it
Silly. How many programs have you installed on your PC ? Do the developers of all those different programs communicate with each other >
Exactly... no they don't.
Integration is the mantra of the arranger. WS's can get away with being far more piecemeal than an arranger. But for an arranger to work, it has to ALL work. Smoothly, easily, integratedly. I'm still not seeing that. You have issues with this, issues with that, issues with something else. But you can't go to ONE place and ask for it all to be fixed. Which you CAN with a closed arranger.
Be specific. What are you referring to ?
I'm not aware of any issue in the arranger software that needs to be fixed.
At the moment, live use of VSTi's, especially in an arranger, everything ready to go at the drop of a hat paradigm, is still pretty low on most VSTi designers' list of priorities. There's a lot to be said FOR open keyboards. But I still feel that the open 'arranger' needs a LOT more advancement by softwrae designers at ALL ends of the spectrum. From OS design (Dom and Linux/Wine's dept.), to VSTi design, to style playing design.
Well just look at how far things have come since this time last year. Right now there is nothing in the world stopping you from going gigging with the keyboard as an open arranger.
Progress is made by positivity and constructive efforts.
Bottom line is, someone calls up and says they need a four hour all arranger (no SMF's) gig from you tomorrow. Do you grab the MS, or do you grab the PA2X?
Honestly, I have grown to be so comfortable with the Mediastation that if I had a 4 hour program of all arranger playing, I would use the Medaistation just to have the mega sound of Giga files with me. There's a level of pleasure that's impossible to describe when your preforming with massive and super realistic sounds like that.
Regards
James
Previous Topic
Index
