i can't follow you either. i give up :)

marc

I'll only reply to the part that is a legitimate point which is "If you don't like TI, don't use it."

The bugs exist regardless. I think this post by Soulidstate in another thread sums up pretty good:

“My TI2 desktop makes sudden outburst of noise, more like a hiss with noise which I can liken to a "sneeze". When this happens, all LEDs shut down momentarily and the LCD remains lit. This happens even if it's on stand alone meaning without USB connection.”

The A, B and C are rock solid. The B and C each have evolved features from previous models much like the TI does. The A, B and C don’t have TI which the most prevalent common dominator why the TI isn’t stable.

Without a clean OS “stand alone” version to compare and test, it’s difficult to “prove” my perspective unequivocally, but you cant say TI code doesn’t have some effect on the overall stability and performance either unless this can tested. ;) Besides, we already know the TI is more stable in stand alone mode than in TI mode, so it does clearly point that way if not provide some evidence.

What’s the harm in releasing an optimized Stand Alone OS version without TI to test? The worst it can do is work more effectively. Users can have more options on what OS they can go with.

Access has already done something vaguely similar in the past. You could load an OS version without the demo song giving you more patch storage.

your argument is flawed and it "proves" nothing. have a happy life.

r

I can't see why anyone needs to be hostile or dismissive of the suggestion that a standalone editor would be nice. If it's such an obvious non-starter and ridiculous idea, then why do Roland, Korg, Yamaha, Nord, and many others provide computer interfaces of this kind to their synths? All of these companies are clueless about synth interface design? hmm.

Here's the thing. If someone prefers to work in standalone mode for one reason or another -- because they want to use the analog outs, or because they are using a hardware sequencer, or because they find the latency of TI mode to be problematic when they are tracking, or whatever -- then they don't get any software editor to the machine at all while they are recording with it. In other words, there is kitchen sink USB TI mode, in which audio and MIDI and editing and everything goes through the computer, or standalone mode, in which nothing does. These are very extreme choices. To have a software librarian for organizing patches while you are recording would be really nice even for those of us working in standalone mode.

It's not the end of the world; I'm crazy about the Virus and I have used it in standalone mode from the first day and I've been very happy with it. But it irritates me a little that several of my much older synths have computer-based librarians and editors while, effectively, I don't get that functionality from the Virus because I choose to use it standalone.

-Luddy

I guess in all their fascination with USB and TI they forgot people still use MIDI in, out and thru ports.

That’s another good point. If Access ever decided to stopped supporting TI for whatever reason, or offer an alternative, they would have a stand alone OS and midi capable librarian/editor like most other hardware synths.

There are some people who don't like the Virus TI integration, so



sell it.

hahaha this forum gets better by the day!

Some of us have “sold it” and gone back to previous models or are waiting to upgrade (again) until there is clear confirmation of stability and the issues are resolved. ;)

But that’s not in the best interest of Access Music or the user community, is it? Certainly “take it or leave it” is one approach, there are other alternatives as well!

Yep, I along with most of the people I colab with have taken the "not buy one at all" approach - works for us. :)

psst: some people bought it for the sound it makes and not only so they could pretend it is a software plug-in. weird, I know.

-Luddy