Sonoma Wire Works - Support Forums

by **Maxe** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:23 am

Hi.
There's a few minor bugs I'd like to report:

When I start a new recording the layer name isn't always straight sequential.
The other day the first recorded layer was named "take 014", and most of the time when I record the next layer in a row, it jumps one or two numbers... "take 001", "take 003", "take 005" etc. No big thing - but a bit annoying.

In the "backup" section my "Drummerheads - 4 on the floor" appears twice, and some times they don't find the assigned drummers automaticly when I open a song - especially in RiffLink sessions.

-----

I must add that I am, in general, very very happy with my setup (RW2, POD XT Live and Variax 700). I was helping a friend of mine, last night, by setting up the RiffWorks Standard (That I made him buy recently). And I must say... it was trial and error getting it to work with his M-Audio fasttrack interface. Latency beeing a huge problem, and also it only worked with the "hardware monitoring" disabled within RiffWorks. You couldn't use "arm" or "set tempo". I went home a little disillusionated... but then I fired up my own setup with RW.... and YES MAN! sweet and well functioning. Made a little song in less than 30 minutes... slept tight with a big smile on my face.... man I'd really like to be able to give him a little of that joy too. Maybe I should convince him to buy a POD XT too - no latency problems what so ever!

Regards

-=M=-

by **dave** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:49 pm

The "take ..." has to do with creating a unique name. And I believe that the "take ..." name is something we use internally in addition to the name displayed in the Riff. I know I'm not explaining it well, but it wouldn't be considered a bug in the traditional sense. We could maybe take a look at grouping recordings a little better in a newer version instead of the take ... naming.

We've had some troubles with drummer naming that should be fixed now, but it will take a while to work old names out of the system. It all started with browsers not naming things as we expected... Really annoying...

I'm sorry your friend is having troubles with the fasttrack. We've tested a lot of those devices and a lot of them are off in their reported latency numbers so we can't even adjust for it after the recording is done. There are a couple devices that we really recommend because they work well, have low latency, and report the proper latency numbers. One is obvioulsy the GuitarPort/TonePort/PodXT. The others that we like around here are the Presonus Inspire/FireBox. I personally had some problems with setup of an M-Audio firewire 410 on my machine, but once I got it setup, it sounded great and I could get very low I/O latency on a screaming fast dual core PC. If Junt didn't work for him, the input level might be set too low.

Dave

by **Maxe** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:14 am

Dave. First of all, thanks for the quick reply - you are always "there" and listening to your users. I really like that. Good support and dialog with the team behind a product is definately raising, an already, superb product to an even higer ground. I only reported these small issues to let you know about it - it shouldn't be considered a complain.
Regarding the M-Audio problems at my friends PC, I tried to to use the ASIO4ALL driver - it helped a lot. I'm sure we'll get things to work properly with a little fingering around. Again, thanks for your support.
-=M=-

by **dave** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:48 pm

Really? The M-Audio devices should have their own ASIO drivers. Did those not work for some reason? I guess I just a little surprised that ASIO4ALL would work better than a manufacturer's own drivers. Maybe I shouldn't be...

Dave

by **Maxe** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:29 pm

You know Dave, it's not my own PC but my friends. I think something was worng with the M-Audio driver he's installed. I tried to remove it and reinstall, but that didn't help. So I checked at M-Audio's support, but didn't find any updates, and I figured: If I can't fix the driver I'll just install ASIO4ALL instead. It seemed to work okay. So I kept it that way in order not to fiddle with his PC-infrastructure.

-=M=-

by **hbursk** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:42 pm

I've had problems getting m-audio interfaces to install properly. I was at the Decibel Festival in a Seattle a month or so ago, and on my trip there my bags had gotten lost. So for my presentation, (I'm the Line 6/Propellerhead Product Specialist), I borrowed an m-audio interface from the m-audio product specialist, and we had to try a couple different interfaces before I could get it to install properly. And I wasn't trying to record, I was just trying to play audio back from my computer.

Not too impressed with the m-audio stuff.

by **ShredRex** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:57 pm

I was considering getting a low end m-audio controller..........I think I may wait and see if I get the TP KB37 for Xmas. If not then I may treat myself...........

by **mickeymix** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:26 am

Thought you weren't gonna get the KB37.... you gear slut you.....Just like me too!!

by **Maxe** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:02 am

I just wrote to santa... I want a TP KB37 for Xmas too!
"There's a lot of cool sh.. I want..." -Jack Black. Teneciuos D.

Nb. santa - dont mind the solid gold harley with machine guns in the front.

-=M=-

Sonoma Wire Works - Support Forums

Minor bugs report

Who is online