Access Future,hardware or software or both?

[to-pse]

Originally Posted by MBTC

I just want to see improvements around total integration, USB and DAW integration, more power/voice count, or at least a trade off in price so that there is more bang for the buck compared to soft synths.

I don't know if anyone outside Access knows the sales figures of
the various Viruses. But I would suppose that they won't sell
in the numbers that the DX7 sold in his time.

Manufacturing quality hardware in small batches cannot really be done
for cheap. And development of hardware, software and support needs
to be payed for (not to forget marketing

I really think that Access should move to a hybrid approach in the
future. The support & development of the total integration is more
hassle than could be worth if they did this:

a.) port their DSP-routines to x86 (I would suppose that somewhere in
their labs they have done so already).

b.) Release a VSTi/AU version of this for integration into hosts.

c.) Have an external Virus "D" without the "TI" part but complete
processing power necessary for live (which is probably much less
than whats used in the production environment)

d.) Use the external Virus "D" as a "dongle" & controller for the virtual
instrument running on Mac & PC

It is much easier to maintain a virtual software instrument than to
maintain their total integration over the years (see my other post).

Tobias

[feedingear]

Originally Posted by MBTC

But, the positive things I say never get noticed.. lol. I am just going to try to force myself to back off for a bit, because my membership on these forums is for a reason (I hope to own the next-gen Virus). Lately I'm getting accused of being a troll and I never wanted to come here to make enemies or piss folks off.

You are welcome and entitled to your opinion. I just think that with less then a months experience on the virus before you returned it (for your reasons youve stated), there are a few areas you post about (sound quality as in relation to VSTS etc) that its hard to give you credibility for, particularly without getting to hear your own music/production output as a way for others to judge your level of expertise. My 2c.

[MBTC]

Originally Posted by feedingear

You are welcome and entitled to your opinion. I just think that with less then a months experience on the virus before you returned it (for your reasons youve stated), there are a few areas you post about (sound quality as in relation to VSTS etc) that its hard to give you credibility for, particularly without getting to hear your own music/production output as a way for others to judge your level of expertise. My 2c.

That's largely because between my job, dating & social life, and the rest of life's time-sinks, I have not had the time to complete a fully produced track I'm proud of in a very long time, so posting a full musical track is not necessarily indicative of my expertise, it would only be a demonstration of my emphasis on melodies and prove that I still have a long way to go before I am good at mixing. And since I've never aspired to be a professional musician or DJ I am not motivated to spend a lot of time on the art of mixing when I just enjoy creating melodic trance as a sort of therapeutical exercise.

When it comes to sound design, it is easier to post small snippets of examples, to illustrate a point. And I did that as recently as a couple of weeks ago.

[to-pse]

Originally Posted by Berni

2. The whole VC fiasco proves that they are'nt that good at creating solid, reliable software.

Well - as the whole Virus is primarily software I would dispute this claim.

But there is a big difference between writing embedded code for a specific
hardware (which one has total control over) and writing low & high-level
software for two totally distinct OS-architectures (Win & OS X) which
is meant to run on all kinds of different OS-versions, architectures (32 &
64 bit), with all kinds of different USB-hardware as basis for realtime
low-latency communication and a truck-load of different hosts which
need to interoperate with the higher-layer.

I don't know how many people are working for Access or how much of
their development for the total Integration was outsourced.

But this whole thing is a giant task - and unfortunately one that constantly
needs to be refinded due to OS-Updates, hardware-updates, host-updates
etc.

And it seems to be one task that IMHO no other hardware-synth manu-
facturer has burdened themselves with...

Best regards,
Tobias

[Berni]

Originally Posted by to-pse

Well - as the whole Virus is primarily software I would dispute this claim.

But there is a big difference between writing embedded code for a specific
hardware (which one has total control over) and writing low & high-level
software for two totally distinct OS-architectures (Win & OS X) which
is meant to run on all kinds of different OS-versions, architectures (32 &
64 bit), with all kinds of different USB-hardware as basis for realtime
low-latency communication and a truck-load of different hosts which
need to interoperate with the higher-layer.

I don't know how many people are working for Access or how much of
their development for the total Integration was outsourced.

But this whole thing is a giant task - and unfortunately one that constantly
needs to be refinded due to OS-Updates, hardware-updates, host-updates
etc.

And it seems to be one task that IMHO no other hardware-synth manu-
facturer has burdened themselves with...

Best regards,
Tobias

So what are you disputing? VC is a great piece of software?

[to-pse]

Originally Posted by Berni

So what are you disputing? VC is a great piece of software?

Like I wrote in my reponse I dispute that Access is not able to write
solid, reliable software - as obviously the Virus itself (since the A
version in the 90s) is primarily software.

I could repeat my whole post again, but the essence is that there
are various kinds of software:

a.) embedded software (stuff in the virus)
b.) system-level software (USB-drivers for TI-integration)
c.) user-space software (VSTi plugin)

And at least in the part a.) they know how to deliver!

But especially the b.) part is tricky to get right (again like I wrote
in my last post).

Look how many companies still struggle to provide high-performance,
reliable drivers even after years in the business.

It might be that Access overstrained themselves in this task, but it
seems that the quality of the integration has improved over time.

Tobias

[Roby31]

No in fact it was an ironic comment (with the ) I don't think you missed the point in presenting other kind of "instruments"; more like you went to a parallel road than the other user that said that people use the Virus to play music instead of producing music (and people that do both) because it's still meant to be a performer's instrument designed to be a musical instrument rather than a series of glasses filled with different amounts of water

[thomas]

Nicely said

[cl516]

I'm curious about the same thing, specifically when a new version might be released, because I'm thinking about buying a Polar.

2005 = TI1, 2008 = Snow, March 2009 = TI2. OS4.5 coming up...

I think Musikmesse is early April. As long as a new one doesn't come out then, I wouldn't mind buying now...

Originally Posted by oblivion

What is the future for Access?

I think they should go software but with a hardware controller as dongle.

What do you think?

Is Summer Namm when Access release something new? I think it is time for Access to come up with a Virus TI3.

What is their next move?

[Roby31]

Hay guize listn 2 dis tuun i made wid mazzive!11