For Midex users

For users of legacy Steinberg hardware
User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
Posts: 2598
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by MrSoundman »

Transistor wrote:The MOTUs are class-compliant
Are you 100% sure about this? I know the ESI's are, but the MOTUs? That would mean they should work on Linux ... and MOTU's aversion to Linux is the main reason I won't buy any more of their hardware.
Windows 10 • Cubase 10.5.20 • WaveLab 10.0.40 • SpectraLayers 6.0.30 • HALion 6.4.0 • Groove Agent 5.0.20 • Midex

User avatar
Reiknir
Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:47 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Reiknir »

Transistor wrote: Providing information. If you've read through the thread you should have noticed two specific points being made: If you're on Win732, all is still ok, if you're not, you'll have to find an alternative.
That has been known for a long time, are there any other flame wars we can import from the old board
Transistor wrote:
Reiknir wrote:I especially do not understand the recommendation of MOTU as an alternative providers of MIDI interfaces, MOTU were selling Parallel and serial port interfaces for the PC as late as 2005 and they are not providing Win64 drivers for those, in fact even for XP they are only offering WDM drivers, no ASIO and they stopped developing drivers for those interfaces before they stopped selling them [snip]
Huh? The MOTUs are class-compliant, thus they do not need specific drivers. And if you do need drivers, MOTU's got them, for all the sevens, both 32 and 64-bits versions.

r,
j,
Class compliance is of little use with multiports and for low-latency usage, which was the reason for the Midex in the first place

Fine point me towards a MOTU parallel port midi interface driver newer than 2004 then

Please

Guest

Re: For Midex users

Post by Guest »

Reiknir wrote: What exactly do you guys hope to gain by posting on this subject yet once more, they stopped selling that unit 8 years ago, how many products do you have that were discontinued in 2003 or earlier that have current software support?
some of use want to talk about the subject and we all have our own point of view and mine is ,is usb obsolete? has midi been made obsolete ?...NO so if either side of the midex system has not been made obsolete id like to use what iv'e paid good money for.
im sure one day someone will make a 3rd party driver that will work on 64 bit , time will tell but until steinberg get all the issues sorted out with cubase and 64 bit then there is no point in upgrading which means our unsupported midex lives longer without having to buy another bit of motu !
motu are the only major reliable interfaces and are of quality build ,can't find any others makes willing to make 128 channels in one box and if your answer is going to be " well get 4x2 m audio " then i'll just laugh you right out town ,QUALITY and timing is whats needed with 8x8 i/o , i actually use 2 of them and can't fault anything about them so yer i think i would pay for a driver if it delivered what im getting now as it will be cheap than 2 new interfaces !
YEP I WOULD BUY A DRIVER

JOHN

User avatar
Transistor
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Transistor »

Reiknir wrote:
Transistor wrote: Providing information. If you've read through the thread you should have noticed two specific points being made: If you're on Win732, all is still ok, if you're not, you'll have to find an alternative.
That has been known for a long time, are there any other flame wars we can import from the old board
Transistor wrote:
Reiknir wrote:I especially do not understand the recommendation of MOTU as an alternative providers of MIDI interfaces, MOTU were selling Parallel and serial port interfaces for the PC as late as 2005 and they are not providing Win64 drivers for those, in fact even for XP they are only offering WDM drivers, no ASIO and they stopped developing drivers for those interfaces before they stopped selling them [snip]
Huh? The MOTUs are class-compliant, thus they do not need specific drivers. And if you do need drivers, MOTU's got them, for all the sevens, both 32 and 64-bits versions.

r,
j,
Class compliance is of little use with multiports and for low-latency usage, which was the reason for the Midex in the first place

Fine point me towards a MOTU parallel port midi interface driver newer than 2004 then

Please
My troll-detector is buzzing faintly, but I'll try one more time: you asked "why recommend a MOTU?" I gave the obvious answer: They provide 32- and 64-bit drivers. What else is there to understand?

Nuff said.

j,
i7-5820K/16384/Win10
CPro 10.5.12 / WLPro 10.0.20 / SpectralayersPro 6.0.2
Studio: RME HDSPe AES / Mytek 8x192 / Midex8 / (+ Aurora 8)
Mobile: CAI & WLElements [latest versions] / RME Babyface
Plugins. Hardware.

User avatar
Transistor
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Transistor »

MrSoundman wrote:
Transistor wrote:The MOTUs are class-compliant
Are you 100% sure about this? I know the ESI's are, but the MOTUs? That would mean they should work on Linux ... and MOTU's aversion to Linux is the main reason I won't buy any more of their hardware.
I was under the impression that the 128 was class-compliant. I may of course be mistaken. Even so, MOTU does provide current 32- and 64-bit drivers.

r,
j,
i7-5820K/16384/Win10
CPro 10.5.12 / WLPro 10.0.20 / SpectralayersPro 6.0.2
Studio: RME HDSPe AES / Mytek 8x192 / Midex8 / (+ Aurora 8)
Mobile: CAI & WLElements [latest versions] / RME Babyface
Plugins. Hardware.

Paul Woodlock
Member
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 8:22 pm

Re: For Midex users

Post by Paul Woodlock »

filterfreak wrote:
Reiknir wrote: What exactly do you guys hope to gain by posting on this subject yet once more, they stopped selling that unit 8 years ago, how many products do you have that were discontinued in 2003 or earlier that have current software support?
some of use want to talk about the subject and we all have our own point of view and mine is ,is usb obsolete? has midi been made obsolete ?...NO so if either side of the midex system has not been made obsolete id like to use what iv'e paid good money for.
im sure one day someone will make a 3rd party driver that will work on 64 bit , time will tell but until steinberg get all the issues sorted out with cubase and 64 bit then there is no point in upgrading which means our unsupported midex lives longer without having to buy another bit of motu !
motu are the only major reliable interfaces and are of quality build ,can't find any others makes willing to make 128 channels in one box and if your answer is going to be " well get 4x2 m audio " then i'll just laugh you right out town ,QUALITY and timing is whats needed with 8x8 i/o , i actually use 2 of them and can't fault anything about them so yer i think i would pay for a driver if it delivered what im getting now as it will be cheap than 2 new interfaces !
YEP I WOULD BUY A DRIVER

JOHN

I would too.

in fact as part of my small campaign in the old forums to get Steinberg to release a 64bit driver for the MIDEX-8 I said I'd willingly purchase a driver.

But really, if this unit is that old and discontinued then what is the harm in releasing the spec so that someone else can write a 64bit driver for it? It's surely got past the time period of commercial sensitivity now?
Got a Brian - Morans

"It's better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not" -- Andre Gide

User avatar
Reiknir
Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:47 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Reiknir »

Paul Woodlock wrote:
filterfreak wrote:
Reiknir wrote: But really, if this unit is that old and discontinued then what is the harm in releasing the spec so that someone else can write a 64bit driver for it? It's surely got past the time period of commercial sensitivity now?
Because the unit was not designed by Steinberg and they thus do not own the IP and cannot release it, the company that did is in the business of writing USB drivers and probably will not either, there is a small cottage industry of people that reverse engineer MIDI interfaces and releases paid updates for them, usually in the 25 euro ballpark, but the problem partly lies in the unusual method that the Steinberg and emagic MIDI interfaces took in minimising latency that would make these more time consuming to work around and they probably cannot see a business case for doing a driver

I have a mother-load of unusable MIDI interfaces here, from the Roland 401 for the Apple 2 (First MIDI interface shipped) and a Moog Song Producer for the C64 to a MOTU interface for Windows from ca 2003, all of them worthless, comes with the terretory ....

User avatar
Reiknir
Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:47 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Reiknir »

Transistor wrote:
Reiknir wrote:
Transistor wrote: j,
Class compliance is of little use with multiports and for low-latency usage, which was the reason for the Midex in the first place

Fine point me towards a MOTU parallel port midi interface driver newer than 2004 then

Please
My troll-detector is buzzing faintly, but I'll try one more time: you asked "why recommend a MOTU?" I gave the obvious answer: They provide 32- and 64-bit drivers. What else is there to understand?

Nuff said.

j,
No I really want an answer to this, I have a device from MOTU newer than the Midex and that is currently unusable due to lack of driver updates, but people are complaining about lack of updates from Steinberg on one hand and then recommending MOTU on the other while that company is doing the same is a bit odd, more than a bit odd actually.

I am not blaming MOTU for this just as I do not blame Steinberg, I bought the interfaces as working at the time and received no guarantees from either company as to the future compatibility of either product

In fact the 2 company's so far providing the best long term support for their interfaces have been Behringer that suddenly dropped a x64 USB audio class ASIO driver on us for use with 10 year old devices AND works with many non-Behringer productsas well, and Midiman/M-Audio that has x64 drivers for all of their midi interfaces from the last 12 years bar one ...... now you guys will have to admit that these are not the 2 companies that you thought of first when the terms "pro-audio" and "long term support" came to your mind ...

Too bad the likelihood of either of these companies releasing a proper Bismark size multiport MIDI interface is nil but at the least I can run a couple of Midisport 4x4's side by side and use my old Opcode interfaces as switchers/expanders for them......

User avatar
Transistor
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Transistor »

Well, your logic is flawed. You cannot from the fact that you in 2003 bought an interface based on already then obsolete technology (parallel port interfaces - hey, I still have my own for the Amiga 2000 from 1989) extrapolate the idea that the company providing you with this interface will not support current technology (USB) sometime in the future. Said fact has no connection to the imagined future situation at all. Secondly, noone is even questioning whether MOTU will provide drivers for their interfaces in five years, the question is whether they are available now. And they are. The only other companies providing Win7-64 interfaces are, as you mention, Behringer and M-Audio, companies whose products I - after personal experiences with some of their products - won't touch with the proverbial ten foot pole. Which leaves: MOTU. A company I harbor no specific feelings towards, good or bad, to me they are simply the only alternative. You may or may not agree, but each to ones own.

In addition, please note that noone is blaming Steinberg for the discontinuation of the Midex ((anymore), I guess we've all come to accept it), we're simply exploring the options.

peace,
j,
i7-5820K/16384/Win10
CPro 10.5.12 / WLPro 10.0.20 / SpectralayersPro 6.0.2
Studio: RME HDSPe AES / Mytek 8x192 / Midex8 / (+ Aurora 8)
Mobile: CAI & WLElements [latest versions] / RME Babyface
Plugins. Hardware.

User avatar
Tommy-boy
Junior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:32 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Tommy-boy »

Reiknir wrote:...My solution, I kept the XP box, removed the monitor and tunnel into it, and now use it as a slave for my W7 box, works like a charm
How are you accomplishing this? What's the workflow like? How is latency and jitter?

I'd really like to know how you're making out with this setup becasue I have an extra XP box and am considering the same thing.

User avatar
Antonio Escobar
Member
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:18 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Antonio Escobar »

Hi guys,

I'm not a programmer, but if anybody is, why not to make a loader for the old driver? This is done all time in linux: you use the old driver but it is encapsulated in a 64 driver who makes the calls.
Antonio Escobar
Site: http://www.antonioescobar.es
IMDB: http://www.antonioescobar.es/imdb

---
Nuendo 10.x / Cubase 10.x
Hackintosh i9 10 cores, 64 GB RAM
MacBook Pro 2017 16GB RAM, OS X10.13.6
RME Digiface Dante, RME HDSPe RayDAT, Steinberg UR824, Steinberg UR242, DAD AX32, 2x Behringer X32 (MADI and Dante)
Native Komplete Kontrol/Maschine, Waves, Softube, etc, etc, etc.
Dozens of analog synths and external hardware.

User avatar
Weasel
Member
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:29 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Weasel »

Paul Woodlock wrote:
But really, if this unit is that old and discontinued then what is the harm in releasing the spec so that someone else can write a 64bit driver for it? It's surely got past the time period of commercial sensitivity now?
Reiknir wrote:
…the problem partly lies in the unusual method that the Steinberg and emagic MIDI interfaces took in minimising latency that would make these more time consuming to work around and they probably cannot see a business case for doing a driver.
Paul:
What Reiknir states are real issues, specifically the business model part. Because the MIDEX driver used embedded proprietary time-stamping (LTB), updating the driver would basically require a rewrite, not some hacked loader. High quality driver development can cost upwards of $10k-$25k. Add in recoup-ability (marketing costs…typically 4:1 based on the bill of materials) and you wind up with a product would have to be sold without a true sales projection (no way to know how many people would actually buy it at this point in time) …making pricing difficult if not impossible.

Initial pricing aside, let's imagine they worked out a solution to the licensing issues, did the rewrite and offered it up nominally for $50 a pop. They'd have to sell 800 to 2000 units to simply break even. Even if they were suddenly overcome by an altruistic sense of guilt and offered it up at just the cost of the driver….they'd still have to sell 200 to 500 units to break even. I don't see the numbers working this late in the game.

I'd have to agree…too iffy a business model.
Dual 6 Core 2.66 MacPro/48GB RAM • OSX 10.14.6 • Cubase 10.5.20 • MOTU 424e/2408mk3 • 2-MOTU MIDI Express 128's

Oh.....so this is the Cornfield?....

User avatar
Tommy-boy
Junior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:32 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Tommy-boy »

I'm probably going to go with three of the Roland UM-3Gs - racked together. In a month or two, when I rebuild my computer on Win7 64 bit, this will be the way I go with midi.

I considered Motu, but I think Roland has done a much better job supporting their products over the years. Heck, I even have a UA-5 soundcard that is ancient - but they rolled out drivers for Win7 for it! Roland also has a good history with making solid midi boxes (like the UM-880 - which is hard to find at the moment).

ESI is off of the list because they are going down the class compliant route - which is a huge mistake for midi. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers.

What I'd really love to see is a midi interface device that would plug into soundcard out ports with integrated drivers that would make it sample accurate to match the audio playing in the computer. Kinda like the stuff on www.innerclocksystems.com - but as a full blown interface, not just a sync box for an external sequencer.

-Tom

P.S. - To think that I picked the Midex8 (2 of 'em actually) over a Roland UM-880 when I was selecting midi interfaces a few yrs back. Boy did I ever blow that decision.

User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
Posts: 2598
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by MrSoundman »

I agree on most of your points except:
Tommy-boy wrote:ESI is off of the list because they are going down the class compliant route - which is a huge mistake for midi. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers.
Yes, in the specific case of Windows .... but the fact that the Windows' own class-compliant drivers might not be good does not imply that making MIDI devices class-compliant per se is a bad thing, nor are class-compliant MIDI devices a "huge mistake for MIDI".

I'm sure you didn't intend to imply this, but I just wanted to clarify for anyone else reading this. For example, I've found class-compliant MIDI devices on Linux to perform very well. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers on Windows.
Windows 10 • Cubase 10.5.20 • WaveLab 10.0.40 • SpectraLayers 6.0.30 • HALion 6.4.0 • Groove Agent 5.0.20 • Midex

User avatar
Tommy-boy
Junior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:32 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Tommy-boy »

MrSoundman wrote:I agree on most of your points except:
Tommy-boy wrote:ESI is off of the list because they are going down the class compliant route - which is a huge mistake for midi. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers.
Yes, in the specific case of Windows .... but the fact that the Windows' own class-compliant drivers might not be good does not imply that making MIDI devices class-compliant per se is a bad thing, nor are class-compliant MIDI devices a "huge mistake for MIDI".

I'm sure you didn't intend to imply this, but I just wanted to clarify for anyone else reading this. For example, I've found class-compliant MIDI devices on Linux to perform very well. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers on Windows.
If class compliant drivers are working well with Linux, that's great. How many people use Linux as the environment for their DAWs? Does Steinberg make any Linux based DAWs?

-Tom

User avatar
Tommy-boy
Junior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:32 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Tommy-boy »

MrSoundman wrote:I agree on most of your points except:
Tommy-boy wrote:ESI is off of the list because they are going down the class compliant route - which is a huge mistake for midi. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers.
Yes, in the specific case of Windows .... but the fact that the Windows' own class-compliant drivers might not be good does not imply that making MIDI devices class-compliant per se is a bad thing, nor are class-compliant MIDI devices a "huge mistake for MIDI".

I'm sure you didn't intend to imply this, but I just wanted to clarify for anyone else reading this. For example, I've found class-compliant MIDI devices on Linux to perform very well. You need drivers that overcome problems with class compliant drivers on Windows.
If class compliant drivers are working well with Linux, that's great. How many people use Linux as the environment for their DAWs? Does Steinberg make any Linux based DAWs?

-Tom

User avatar
MrSoundman
Senior Member
Posts: 2598
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by MrSoundman »

Tommy-boy wrote:How many people use Linux as the environment for their DAWs?
You'd be surprised! Cubase on Windows is my main DAW, but there are many interesting MIDI applications available on Linux; I also use some ancient Atari ST MIDI software from time to time, connected to Cubase on Windows via MIDI.
Tommy-boy wrote:Does Steinberg make any Linux based DAWs?
Not yet. :P

My point of course was not an argument for or against either Linux or Windows -- I was merely pointing out that it is not a disadvantage if a USB MIDI interface is class-compliant. If you use only Windows, the poor Windows MIDI drivers may be a problem, but if you use another OS then class-compliant hardware simplifies matters.
Windows 10 • Cubase 10.5.20 • WaveLab 10.0.40 • SpectraLayers 6.0.30 • HALion 6.4.0 • Groove Agent 5.0.20 • Midex

musicsound
New Member
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:43 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by musicsound »

I am in the same situation. I really would like to move to Win7 64 bit for two reasons - more RAM and Cubase 6.
As a consequence I have to give up my Midex8 which is running well with XP since years. A nice piece of hardware with very reliable XP drivers.

Due to environmental reasons it is for me completely unaccaptable to simply throw away a good piece of hardware.
I am wondering that this argument is not considered by Steinberg. This is not responsible at all and I wish I could discuss this with their CEO !!!

However, I am now forced to look for other options (Motu ?) but for sure I will never/ever buy any other piece of hardware from Steinberg although I would have been very interested in their audio interface MR816.

deepsea59
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:57 pm
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by deepsea59 »

why not to collect money from Midex 3/8 existing users, in order to pay a reverse engineering to obtain new 64 bit drivers?

paulriley
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by paulriley »

Anyone out there migrated from XP to windows 7 32bit using laplink? and still having problems with midex 8?
Am contemplating this move as Cubase 6 not very stable for me under XP.

Guest

Re: For Midex users

Post by Guest »


User avatar
Transistor
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Transistor »

I honestly cannot believe this. On the one hand I'm delighted, that a revered piece of hardware can be used with the newer OS' - however - how come you didn't give us a headsup on this? I just sold my Midex for a pittance, due to Steinberg's very clear statement that no further updates would come. I cannot decide whether I'm royally p'ed off or just happy for those still holding on to their boxes.

r,
j,
i7-5820K/16384/Win10
CPro 10.5.12 / WLPro 10.0.20 / SpectralayersPro 6.0.2
Studio: RME HDSPe AES / Mytek 8x192 / Midex8 / (+ Aurora 8)
Mobile: CAI & WLElements [latest versions] / RME Babyface
Plugins. Hardware.

Guest

Re: For Midex users

Post by Guest »

Of course, for some customers the release of these drivers is too late but we had them and decided that they are good enough to be release to public. That was a very short term decision so we did not have that much time to prepare the release. It wasn't even an official project here at Steinberg.

Guest

Re: For Midex users

Post by Guest »

your right Transistor it was a very clear statement that there will never be a driver update ,so why not give people an insight that there might of been future development ?
i feel sorry for all those that have let the midex go but all i can say from my side for holding on in hope ,it has paid off and im over the moon ... thanks steiny you have restored my faith and i might even buy some more steinberg hardware in the future , once again much appreciated many thanks .....im in shock !


humbly
the freq

User avatar
Transistor
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: For Midex users

Post by Transistor »

EdDoll wrote:Of course, for some customers the release of these drivers is too late but we had them and decided that they are good enough to be release to public. That was a very short term decision so we did not have that much time to prepare the release. It wasn't even an official project here at Steinberg.
I hear you. And I applaud you loud and clear for doing this. I just wish it happened three weeks ago... grmble, mrmble... ;)

r,
j,
i7-5820K/16384/Win10
CPro 10.5.12 / WLPro 10.0.20 / SpectralayersPro 6.0.2
Studio: RME HDSPe AES / Mytek 8x192 / Midex8 / (+ Aurora 8)
Mobile: CAI & WLElements [latest versions] / RME Babyface
Plugins. Hardware.

Post Reply

Return to “Legacy Steinberg Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests