EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 50, Issue 05 This issue's topics: Powerbook update .... Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? (8 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 13:45:25 -0500 From: Brian Adamson Subject: Powerbook update .... A Postscript to my last posting (sorry for the bandwidth) The DOCK portion of the duo dock just arrived and it has 2 serial ports (printer & modem) instead of the single port on the duo alone. Brian A. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 09:06:52 -0500 From: Brian Adamson Subject: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? Hi guys, I'm getting my hands on a Powerbook 170 for a while ... and am wondering what the latest news is on the infamous Powerbook/ MIDI problem. My current understanding (via Nov. 92 EM) is that Opcode's OMS has a fix which prevents losing MIDI data (input to the Powerbook) but that timing (because of the periodic, unstoppable screen control check) may be a little glitchy ... So has anyone experienced this glitchiness? Or has there been a work around this problem, too? Specifically, I plan to run Opcode's Vision sequencer ... and I'd like to run something like a Studio 3 interface... there was some mention of problem with receiving MIDI time code on the printer port... the Opcode fix in Nov. appeared to be for the modem port only... I'm not completely clear how the Studio 3 works with a Mac but I will need to sync the Powerbook to SMPTE on tape. Any comments? Thanks, Brian Adamson PS: It's probably a good time for an update to people's experience's with the Powerbook anyway ... may make a good FAQ. Or is it one already? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 07:17:24 PST From: metlay Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? >Hi guys, > > I'm getting my hands on a Powerbook 170 for a while ... and am wondering >what the latest news is on the infamous Powerbook/ MIDI problem. We haven't updated our FAQ file on this subject (appeneded below) in several months, and our experiences with OMS have been on a one-by-one basis. My PB100 has worked flawlessly (with one exception that's a bizarre enough one to warrant its own letter, q.v.), and Nick's PB140 (actually a PB170 with LED dsiplay, it's a long story) now does very well with the new OMS. > My current understanding (via Nov. 92 EM) is that Opcode's OMS has a fix >which prevents losing MIDI data (input to the Powerbook) but that timing >(because of the periodic, unstoppable screen control check) may be a >little glitchy ... Nick can give you more details on this. He hasn't mentioned any glaringly obvious problems in this regard to me.... > Specifically, I plan to run Opcode's Vision Good man! Enjoy; despite comments from various folx about Performer being "better" (I say again, "define 'better'"), I have grown to like Vision an awful lot, and have not yet had occasion to miss any features that Performer might have that Vision doesn't. Reclocking is WAY cool; it saved me and my partner a lot of headaches in our last session. And its mesh with OMS is seamless and very elegant. I could use a first-generation DX7, f*cked MIDI interface and all, to run my whole rig, and never notice the difference. >there was some mention of problem with receiving MIDI time code on the >printer port... the Opcode fix in Nov. appeared to be for the modem port >only... I'm not completely clear how the Studio 3 works with a Mac but I >will need to sync the Powerbook to SMPTE on tape. Any comments? Can't help you here. Dual-port operation isn't supported properly in the PB140 and PB170, and if the Studio 3 requires two active ports to synch to SMPTE, you may be in trouble. Ed Fleschute doesn't own a PB, but he has used the Studio 3 extensively... perhaps he could answer some questions? >PS: It's probably a good time for an update to people's experience's with the > Powerbook anyway ... may make a good FAQ. Or is it one already? See below....we're always looking for substantive updates to this file. -- mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Car's gone. I traded it for a mountain bike. (m. bergen) This letter contains the sum of Atomic City's current knowledge of MIDI with respect to the Apple Powerbook computers, containing the findings of recent tests of the 100, 140, and 170, combined with late-breaking new results. We hope you find it useful. A. THE POWERBOOK 100 The 100 works fine if you keep in mind that it's only a 16MHz 68000; Finale can make it choke. Old versions of Alchemy won't boot, but that's not a PB problem. The "big name" software we were able to try (Performer, Vision, Cubase, UpBeat, Galaxy, and MAX) runs fine. It's a good idea to disable Appletalk, and have software up and running under MIDI Manager. (Actually, on the 100, you MUST disable AppleTalk, as it will grab and munge the only available port for MIDI, the printer port.) If you use Opcode stuff, OMS goes a long way toward deglitching your work. We weren't able to test everything in the universe (the test occurred as part of a recording session, not as an end in itself, but that fact got trimmed from the article in EM), but here are some highlights.... 1. The older version of the MTP desk accessory won't run, but the MTPII utility, which runs under MIDI Manager, should be fine. In Nick's words: "The MTP-II DA will run with MIDI Manager, so using that (via OMS for example) should be OK (and this is the main reason that I'm considering buying an MTP-II). I don't know if the MTP-II DA runs on a PB100 using its own drivers. Oh, unless I'm mistaken, the MTP-II software is a proper application rather than a DA; but I could be wrong." The PB100 can run reliably at MIDI speeds - just. Any faster communication speed (such as MTP's fast handshake) will not work reliably. To be honest, I've never (in two years of MTP use) notice any improvement in using fast handshake.If that limitation is understood and nothing faster than ordinary 1MHz mode is attempted, the PB100 printer port can handle the MTP, MTPII, and any Opcode interface up to but possibly not including the Studio 5. 2. MAX handled a patcher designed on the IIci, one that was designed to kill portables (and really hung up an Outbound 2030 badly), on the PB100 without breaking a sweat. Nick points out that MAX performance can be sluggish on the PB100 with really big patchers, but that's true of any Mac-- you just have to determine the limits of "really big" by trial and error with your particular platform. I should point out that Nick uses MAX as a controller-data remapper for live performance with CASSIEL, and places tremendous burdens both upon the code and the computer running it. 3. UpBeat ran like a dream. 4. The worst timelag we got with Performer pumping eight MIDI streams of arpeggios through the MTP from another Mac into the PB was about 2 milliseconds. Not a major issue. 5. Galaxy handled input and output of bundle data from the worst synths in our rig, the Roland D-70 and Korg Wavestation EX, without a hiccup. Repeated attempts could NOT produce a failure with ANY synth SysEx dump. We tested Oberheim, Sequential, Korg and Roland gear without a hitch. 6. Vision and Cubase were not tested as extensively as Performer, but they run, do not lose input data, and no noticeable timing glitches were found, although the torture tests weren't as heavy-duty as the one for Performer. I am currently using Vision on my PB100 with an Opcode MIDI Translator interface, and it works like a charm. B. THE POWERBOOK 140, 145, AND 170 Nick Rothwell owns a PB140, which he only considered reliable for output (it lost a LOT of data on input, not just long sysex dumps. Apple was wrong on that point, as on many other points) until a recent Tech Note suggestion by Apple was augmented and implemented by Opcode in a new version of OMS, 1.2beta. Under 1.2b, the input problem is solved, but incoming data loses its timestamping. We're still testing just how bad a problem these 6 msec hiccups can be. NOTE that this fix only works for interfaces attached to the Modem port! The printer port is and always will be unreliable, apparently, for input. In his own words, Nick says: "I haven't hammered my machine heavily yet (and won't be doing until the next live project I have to prepare, in which case I'll be using both PowerBooks), but the tests I did (including SMPTE lockup) suggested the PB140 is OK. 6msec isn't too bad, but you can hear/feel that length of time." The 170 should have no differences in performance than the 140 or 145. C. FUTURE DESIGNS According to the latest technical data, the 160 and 180 will suffer from the same problems as the 140, 145, and 170. There is not enough data available to render a judgement on the Duos. We are not authorized beta testers of these machines, and cannot promise any early results at this time. If we do learn something of use, we will see to it that the Editor of EM, who has been very kind and helpful in his efforts to relay our findings to a larger audience, will hear of it and pass it along. We hope this helps possible Powerbook buyers with any decision they make. Our findings neither carry nor imply any guarantees from ourselves or any of the manufacturers involved (especially Apple!). We would, in closing, like to compliment Opcode on the excellent reliability of OMS on the Powerbooks, and to thank Doug Wyatt for the 1.2beta patch that renders the costlier Powerbooks at least partially reliable.( We would also LIKE to express our opinion of Apple's handling of the whole MIDI question, Powerbook and MIDI Manager support included, but we'll refrain for legal reasons.) Please feel free to write or email me with any comments; we do not plan any addenda to this study at this time, but circumstances may change. Dr. Michael Metlay Atomic City Productions P.O. Box 81175 Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 metlay@netcom.com Many thanks to Dr. Nick Rothwell of CASSIEL for his technical expertise, and to Mr. Eirikur Hallgrimsson of DEC for his input and encouragement. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:34:41 -0500 From: "Joseph D. McMahon" Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? This latest version of the PB FAQ will be stored on castrovalva later today. I am about to get an upgrade to a Mac II; I will continue to run FTP over AppleTalk until my new Ethernet card gets wired up and we have reassigned castrovalva to the new address. --- Joe M. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 07:46:18 +0000 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? >My >PB100 has worked flawlessly (with one exception that's a bizarre enough >one to warrant its own letter, q.v.), What exception is this? I've found that my PB100 is fine at MIDI speeds, but fails at higher speeds, and also seems to fail at high speed with the traffic coming into it at standard speed. But setting up this slower back speed with an MTP is actually rather tricky, since you're talking to it at high speed to start with, and that's unreliable. See? >and Nick's PB140 (actually a PB170 >with LED dsiplay, it's a long story) now does very well with the new OMS. LED display? Now, that would be worth seeing. Just a backlit LCD, alas. I've used the PowerBook 140^H^H^H170 onstage a few times, running MAX via a high-speed link to an MTP-II, and it's fine. No problems. I haven't come across any timing problems, and on the occasion when I was using SMPTE it seemed fine also. >From the fact file: >If that limitation is >understood and nothing faster than ordinary 1MHz mode is attempted, >the PB100 printer port can handle the MTP, MTPII, and any Opcode >interface up to but possibly not including the Studio 5. Erm, according to both Doug Wyatt (Opcode) and folks at MOTU, the PowerBook printer port won't drive an MTP-II properly. Hardware incompatibilities. This is only important on the PowerBook 100 since the printer ports on other PB's are buggered anyway. Certainly, OMS on a PB100 won't recognise an MTP-II, but maybe porting a config. file will fool it. I haven't tried this yet. The fix is two 20K resistors installed into the MTP-II. I have the details but haven't done the fix yet: I plug my PB100 into the MTP-I and the PB170 into the MTP-II. >Under 1.2b, the input problem is >solved, but incoming data loses its timestamping. We're still testing >just how bad a problem these 6 msec hiccups can be. I don't think it's a problem. If I ever do any really sense rhythmic stuff in MAX it might start being noticed; but hell, machines like the Roland D-70 will have been spaced out totally long before we get there. MIDI beat clock out of a PB170 looks a little dicky on the MTP LED's, but I was generating it from a MAX iterator, so it's not surprising. I'll have to try it with Performer. >Duos. We are not authorized >beta testers of these machines, and cannot promise any early results >at this time. Word on the street is that they're fine. Nick Rothwell | cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance | cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 09:34:08 PST From: metlay Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? Many moons ago, I made scrit on rock sheet with flint: >>My >>PB100 has worked flawlessly (with one exception that's a bizarre enough >>one to warrant its own letter, q.v.), and Nick made return-scratchy on wall of cave: >What exception is this? I've found that my PB100 is fine at MIDI speeds[...] I bang my head against floor in shame for not remembering to post promised q.v., and quickly sharpen flints to repair oversight. The problem is fascinating, as it is sometimes but not always repeatable and appears to depend on a particular set of gear wired to the PB. I haven't yet found time to hassle Opcode about it, primarily because I am loath to call Support before I eliminate cockpit error. Ahem... I am working with a PB100 running Opcode's Vision and Galaxy under OMS 1.1.3 (I have 1.2 but have not yet bothered upgrading, the fixes therein having nada to do with the PB100). The machine is only running 16 MIDI channels right now, and is interfaced to the outside world via a simple 1in/1out interface (Opcode MIDI translator) and a KMX 15x16 MIDI switcher. Aside from my small rig, the computer must also communicate with my songwriting partner's setup: a Roland JX8P and U220 as sound modules, and a Kawai Q-80 and Roland R-5 for sequencing (he does drum programming on the R-5 and dumps the notes to a sequencer when he's done, usually). The dumping of rhythm tracks to the PB seems to be the source of the problem. When the PB is told to record a drum track and synched to the MIDI clocks coming out of the R-5, the process appears at first glance to go okay. But upon examination of the resulting recorded data, several things are noticeable at once: 1. The tempo track from the R-5 clocks is very uneven, jittering around between two or maybe three values that are slightly off from the tempo set on the drum box (if you set 95 bpm, the tempo track will read 95.04, 95.04, 95.35, 95.04, 95.04, 95.35, etc.). By comparison, tempo tracks from the Q-80 when recorded in this fashion are rock-steady at the indicated tempo. 2. If one looks at the event list of the resulting tracks, there will be garbled and mistimed events mixed in with the drum notes. Clicking on any of these events or attempting to display them graphically will instantly bomb Vision and usually crash the Mac. Playing the track back will do the same thing. There are a few interesting things about this: the problem does not SEEM to be an inherent weakness of the PB in handling dense input while synched to the outside world, because if the track is recorded first into the Q-80 and then from the Q-80 into the Mac, it records perfectly every time. Another thing worth noting is that this problem *may* have "developed" over time; early recordings WERE done successfully from the R-5, and only began to fail later. I believe that we were able to successfully sync to the Q-80 even after this problem occurred, but we haven't tried lately-- as time goes on, my partner relies more and more on the Mac, and the Q-80 stays at home most of the time. For those who are curious, I get around the problem as follows: I external sync the Mac to the R-5 and record about sixteen bars of data. I do NOT attempt to do anything with this data, as it is corrupt; I delete it immediately. But I then open the Tempo window and read the timestamps, and calculate the average BPM of the R-5 to within 0.01 bpm or so, erase the Tempo track, and type in the "correct" tempo by hand. I then "flywheel" the drum track into place with no sync; both machines are stable enough so that even a five-minute song can be snapped into line with a quantization level of a 32nd-note or less. This is the sort of fix that gives Nick a rash, but it works and I don't argue with what works in this case. On the one hand, this is a very curious problem that I would really like to nail down and understand, then fix. On the other hand, my partner frankly doesn't give a damn about it, and merely demands that we work around the problem on a case by case basis rather than attempt to repair it, as the time limit for our project is too short and our available work time is too restricted for us to take out a whole day or more to chase the problem down. He is very good at ignoring my pleas to stop work long enough to fix the problem, but always finds time to complain about the workarounds and how he risks having all the nuance programmed out of his drum tracks by the final quantization process (hasn't happened yet; he doesn't go to a very fine granularity in his tracks). His latest bit of mental torture is to mutter about how he KNEW I should have bought Performer instead of Vision; amusing, because he's never SEEN a copy of Performer, and knows nothing about it except that it's the only sequencer that costs more than Vision. |-P Any ideas or suggestions? PS: >>and Nick's PB140 (actually a PB170 >>with LED dsiplay, it's a long story) now does very well with the new OMS. > >LED display? Now, that would be worth seeing. Just a backlit LCD, alas. You stop making fun of my typos and I'll stop making fun of yours. Like: >I don't think it's a problem. If I ever do any really sense rhythmic stuff None of your rhythmic stuff ever makes sense, d00d. And as for the Duos: >Word on the street is that they're fine. I'd like to hear a corroboration of this; isn't there SOMEONE out there on this List who's tried it? And how portable is a Duo for MIDI, really? Don't you need a dock of some sort to even hook up to a MIDI interface? I'm curious, as someday I may want to upgrade (the PB100 is a tad slow for nonMIDI uses) and I'd like a machine that will handle MIDI okay. And ALL of the nonDuo PBs are hosed.... -- mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- She showed paintings in the bar where she sang. Yow, thought I. Multimedia! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 13:42:27 -0500 From: Brian Adamson Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? > >I'd like to hear a corroboration of this; isn't there SOMEONE out >there on this List who's tried it? And how portable is a Duo for >MIDI, really? Don't you need a dock of some sort to even hook up >to a MIDI interface? I'm curious, as someday I may want to upgrade >(the PB100 is a tad slow for nonMIDI uses) and I'd like a machine >that will handle MIDI okay. And ALL of the nonDuo PBs are hosed.... > I've got a Duo 230 here to play with, too... It has one serial port which serves as either the printer port or modem port.. In Mac lingo, the port is graphically labeled [Printer Port Icon]/[Modem Port Icon]. So you can probably hook a MIDI interface to it without the dock. I haven't yet determined exactly what this means ...but plan to shortly ...the Duo 230 first has to go back and get the built-in modem installed that we paid for and the reseller forgot to install. >-- >mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >She showed paintings in the bar where she sang. Yow, thought I. Multimedia! - Brian Adamson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 10:49:52 PST From: metlay Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? > I've got a Duo 230 here to play with, too... It has one serial port >which serves as either the printer port or modem port.. In Mac lingo, >the port is graphically labeled [Printer Port Icon]/[Modem Port Icon]. >So you can probably hook a MIDI interface to it without the dock. Really? I only got a brief look at a Duo in a store this winter, and didn't see the serial port on it, only the multipin docking port. That explains a lot! (Suppose I should start reading MacUser again, sigh) >I haven't yet determined exactly what this means ...but plan to shortly ...the >Duo 230 first has to go back and get the built-in modem installed that >we paid for and the reseller forgot to install. I'd be very interested in any results you turn up, Brian. Nick and I would like to keep our PB/MIDI FAQ as up-to-date as possible, but we don't have the time and resources to chase down every new Mac (the initial test situation was a fluke). -- mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- She showed paintings in the bar where she sang. Yow, thought I. Multimedia! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1993 18:22:11 +0000 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Update on Powerbooks & MIDI? >1. The tempo track from the R-5 clocks is very uneven, jittering >around between two or maybe three values that are slightly off >from the tempo set on the drum box (if you set 95 bpm, the tempo >track will read 95.04, 95.04, 95.35, 95.04, 95.04, 95.35, etc.). >By comparison, tempo tracks from the Q-80 when recorded in this >fashion are rock-steady at the indicated tempo. I'm rather lost already. If the R-5 is transmitting MIDI Beat Clock and Vision is slaved to this, then I don't see where Vision's tempo information is coming from. When locking Performer to tape and/or sync, the tempo control is disabled. Or, are you trying to get Vision to calculate tempo while it's also synced to MIDI Beat and recording notes? I don't see the point in this... And if you don't need to do it, you could always try running the R-5 at half-speed. Hmm, if the R-5 sends SPP messages every few bars, that might explain it; it's losing clocks. To be honest, though, it sounds like an arithmetic rounding error. >2. If one looks at the event list of the resulting tracks, there >will be garbled and mistimed events mixed in with the drum notes. >Clicking on any of these events or attempting to display them >graphically will instantly bomb Vision and usually crash the Mac. >Playing the track back will do the same thing. That's interesting because the information has come through OMS, which would (I would have thought) be doing the MIDI packet parsing and rejecting the crap. >There are a few interesting things about this: the problem does >not SEEM to be an inherent weakness of the PB in handling dense >input while synched to the outside world, because if the track >is recorded first into the Q-80 and then from the Q-80 into the >Mac, it records perfectly every time. Hmm, I think you're confusing "dense" with "dense" (as do Apple in that famed technical note). What's probably important is the length of contiguous, full-bandwidth byte sequences, not the average traffic volume. The Q-80 might sufficiently decouple the RT timing bytes from the note messages that the problem does not arise. (Debugging a MIDI rig from a distance of 3000+ miles is not easy.) >He is >very good at ignoring my pleas to stop work long enough to fix >the problem, Hmm, reminds me of Team Metlay... :-) >His latest >bit of mental torture is to mutter about how he KNEW I should have >bought Performer instead of Vision; amusing, because he's never >SEEN a copy of Performer, and knows nothing about it except that >it's the only sequencer that costs more than Vision. |-P Hmph. I've hardly ever used Vision. Performer has pretty good sync and timecode facilities, but Vision's might be just as good. >None of your rhythmic stuff ever makes sense, d00d. No, I mean "sense rhythmic" rather than "nonsense rhythmic", dewed. The big trend in '93 will be sense rhythm. Trust me. >She showed paintings in the bar where she sang. Yow, thought I. Multimedia! Absolutely. I have a great respect for a lady who drives around in a long wheelbase Land Rover and who can jabberwock in Spanish. (Where's my DAT...?) Nick Rothwell | cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance | cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************