Beta's are great but.....

I really applaud Access for the fantastic dedication and ongoing support for the Virus support. The fact that Access constantly update the TI with brilliant new features cannot be denied. However, part of me wishes we could have a definitive version that is ROCK solid, instead of what seems to be a constant stream of Beta releases. I realise that the TI is in a constant state of evolution, and therefore relates to what seems to be a permanent Beta state for the TI, but I would rather forgo some new features and have a really solid and reliable synthesizer instead.

There are problems that I and other users have experienced with the TI that have been ongoing for some time, regarding especially issues to do with sync, latency and the arpeggiator,. To my mind at least, these haven't been fixed satisfactorily. What is the point in having an arpeggiator if it will not sync properly? What is the point in having direct integration with DAW and sequencers if the latency is a real problem and the sync constantly misbehaves?

I don't want to have a downer on Access because I love my TI, but I feel we need a definitive version that works across the board. When it boils down to it, I want to use my TI, but I hesitate these days, because I know that it won't be straight forward, and I know it will throw up issues. Last night while working on a track I needed an arp patch, and I gave up on it in the end because of the sync problems and turned to a different plugin. This is a shame. I want to be able to turn to my TI for most of my synth needs, but at the moment it is just too unreliable and buggy, and it's been like that for quite some time, over a number of releases.

I understand your position, Miffy, and I share some of that feeling. There seems to be an inevitable trade-off between 'being rock solid' and enjoying the flexibility of a continuous improvement policy based on high customer involvement. There are visible patterns of problems/issues in broad areas such as 'sync' (especially arp sync) that Access can clearly recognise, investigate as far as feasible, and presumably address as best they can.

I don't believe it is only 'going that little bit further' to document an issue in maximum detail, although many experienced and knowledgeable users do, and some problems clearly get solved that way.

For one thing, the number of variables in any individual user's system that would need to be documented is probably so great that any user's system is practically unique and in many cases simply not replicable (and therefore not diagnosable) by another party: what else is hanging off USB ports, what build of DAW, what type of cables, what apps the computer is running, what ambient temperature, ....

And for another thing: many of us are not expert enough in the systems to document the problem in the necessary terms anyhow. All we know is that we want to use our instruments to make music, and we just wish the instrument were somewhat more stable and predictable. It's no good beating us up, as some may do, by saying that we should get to know our systems in great technical detail otherwise we shouldn't be involved with them. That's absurd and unfair. I bought my TI because I thought it sounded great when I auditioned it vs a handful of other synths, because I found out that it was well and actively supported with manufacturer updates and upgrades, and because I saw how it could integrate with my DAW to make things easier, more fun, and more productive. But I also use the synth live as a straight analog-output instrument, and I too am somewhat disappointed to discover that certain patches can glitsch and cease out of the blue, mid-phrase, that an arpeggiator can wander off time - in other words, that the synth feels like an instrument I can't totally rely on and have to get adept at re-setting (even if it's only up and back down a program to get the patch back).

I could begin to document these glitsches, but I would probably never finish documenting them to a point that is useful to anyone, and I would rather just switch patches and try something else that achieves a musical objective, than spend an hour or so figuring out how to describe the problem for someone else to observe remotely and even attempt to replicate. Excuse my impatience and intransigence, please!

So I think it's fair enough, while paying tribute to Access at the outset, Miffy, as you do, to express a further bit of user feedback in albeit vaguely-defined terms. I too would gladly forego a further phase of OS development for an OS that renders my TI a couple of degrees more trustworthy especially in live situations

To suzzymackenzie.....

WOW i could have not said it better my self, probly one of the best post i have seen from a access user..

Spot on!!!!!

The original post is right on the spot. I want to print it and frame it above my buggy TI2! Maybe you should post it on a public forum so other people who are about to shell US$4K can make some savings. No wonder this forum is locked in from non Access owners.

Prior buying a TI2, I did some googling to find out where my money was going. I read multiple bad reviews at musicianfriends about the VI bugs and Access inexistent customer support and because I am an idiot, I still bought that instrument. Today I've got the Ferrari of the synths sitting in my home and can't even commit to bring it on stage because the bugger is constantly misbehaving. I updated, downgraded, keep going back to the forums for help. At the end of the day, give me a Honda Civic to drive and I'll be happier than that luxury vehicle who needs road assistance every 10 miles.

At this point, I am really debating about selling that lemon on eBay and getting something like Clavia because I know they won't crash on me as they never did for 15 years. If anyone is interested to get it, drop me a line.

Interesting, I agree in some respects but one thing to take into consideration in defense of Access is that the Virus TI IS the one and only most powerful platform of its kind in the industry. I truly have thought about how to replace it during a few tense moments fighting with VC and not one synth gets even close to the amount of processes that are going on simultaneously and how deep it gets, so in that respect I have to give it to them, as diagnosing and fixing problems within this software has got to be an incredibly daunting process, and plenty of issues will arise just addressing problems do to its complex nature. In hindsight I don't regret going thru the drama with it because ultimately it changed the way I use it and discovered a wonderful way to have it integrated but still stable like standalone.

I have made it crash in standalone but as the previous poster stated, why harp on a problematic patch and loose momentum, just create another one until more revisions are done. The board works just fine 95% of the time. Thats good enough for me.

Zitat von Marc

i've just used the TI for two days on winter music conference, running an arrangement with multiple arps and about 8 tracks in parallel. i was constantly changing things to demo various aspects of the virus. everything was in sync, nothing was crashing or odd. so i do not share you experience. all i can offer is to help people out having problems and i will continue to do so.

marc

That's just it. Ninety-five percent of the time, there may be no problem. With 95% of units and 95% of users, there may be no problem. The result is not that all users are only 5% worried, but that a few users are so worried or vexed that they pass some catastrophic threshold such as: wanting to exchange their unit; feeling unable to trust the unit for the next crucial performance.

My last two standalone excursions (band rehearsals) with the TI have been fine. But only because I dispensed with a particular multi patch that previously interfered with rehearsal, the TI falling clickety silent in mid-phrase while the band played on. At the back of my mind is: what if take a patch on a gig that has behaved well in rehearsal, but chooses a gig to reveal its fatal flaw?

Marc, from what I have seen your approach to helping out individuals with problems has been fantastic. But what's going on here (if anything!) just may be something that goes beyond the individual and instead forms a blob of 'reputation' that Access would want to ponder at a more strategic level. Or not, as the business sees fit. Companies and products do acquire reputations, sometimes deserved, sometimes not. Sometimes exaggerated. But what would a company do if it detected that its reputation contained - alongside a big blob labelled 'most powerful synth in the market' - a smaller but wobbly blob labelled 'not totally reliable'?

In the meantime, I now find that my multi-store function is no longer storing edited patches, only the original patch. <sigh>

Zitat von SpencerSteel

Crickey - this is the next thread I've read since the first two I read (see my introduction for what I'm talking about)

Hostile forum and hostile towards Access too ....

What have I bought into?

S.S. - a new guy.

Alles anzeigen

Hi SS. I think it's a misinterpretation to simplify to 'hostility' what we have here. What we love about Access is the high degree of interactivity and responsiveness they provide - not least in the guise of Marc - which means that customers feel enfranchised to be honest and robust, and it's usually in the name of product/service improvement which is in everyone's interest. Outright abuse is, frankly, rare. We do play relatively nicely, we speak in balanced terms, we don't use too many bad words, and we don't get too personal. Welcome to the club

You took the words right out of my mouth lol

Nice one suzzymackenzie

Zitat von Marc

let me add two things to this discussion. everybody can read this forum, not only registered virus users.
secondly, and i've just used the TI for two days on winter music conference, running an arrangement with multiple arps and about 8 tracks in parallel. i was constantly changing things to demo various aspects of the virus. everything was in sync, nothing was crashing or odd. so i do not share you experience. all i can offer is to help people out having problems and i will continue to do so.

marc

Thank you for your offer of help on the matters raised in this post. I really feel that people have very different experiences with their Viruses, and this is part of the problem. Some of the issues are anomalies and are not 'across the board'. I'm glad that Marc has had a problem free experience with his Virus - I just wish I could say the same thing (as do others). I crave for a definitive release, and I hope one arrives soon.

On a final note on the posting by Spencer Street: Crickey - this is the next thread I've read since the first two I read (see my introduction for what I'm talking about)

Hostile forum and hostile towards Access too ....

What have I bought into?

S.S. - a new guy.

I can't see anybody being hostile to Access in this post, just truthful. As I originally stated, I love my Access Virus TI very much - it is the Dog's B******s. However, the whole point of a forum is to raise issues and debate. Being thin-skinned doesn't help the discussion process.