Master Fader V2.0 Wants and Speculation

[ijpengelly]

There might also be a more technical and strategic decision for going the Apple route. I'll go with strategic first, which is that music production is typically undertaken on Macs and so the association with Apple provides a more professional appearance and one that existing (Mac) users are likely to buy into. The technical angle is that the hardware platform on which iOS runs is relatively limited and well controlled, therefore, it is easier to ensure your app will work as intended for all users (or at least you can point out which devices may struggle) and will be stable. This has always been the reason that Macs have typically been considered more stable and reliable. Finally, by limiting it to the one platform (which at the time they were developing this product had the major share of the market by a country mile) it meant costs could be kept down, by not having to develop for and support multiple operating systems.

I would somewhat disagree with your (WK154) comment about isolationism resulting in the company creating something new or bespoke having to change its ways, as there are also plenty of examples where it has been the other way round and others have adopted or introduced compatibility with the bespoke (or whatever term is most appropriate) product / technology.

[Mixfix]

I think people are making more of an issue of it than it actually is, perhaps because they are overusing the dynamics or aren't setting up monitors particularly well. I've done some challenging gigs and had very few issues with feedback due to either element

A lot of the stuff this little mixer gets into involves little (if any) "sound check" and most of that is limited to basic signal and line checks so it is not always possible to set the monitors up for max GBF and the post eq aux source really limits your courage using eq as a tool for the FOH mix on any stage mics that are hot and close to a monitor that you can not even hear from wherever you might mix FOH. I personally rarely get the stones to do anything but cut eq slightly if even that and there are lots of tweaks that I would otherwise prefer to make, so the fear factor is a limitation that I do not prefer.
  I think a lot of these units have taken the place of a mix wiz or similar and even the wiz was customizable (internal jumpers) to allow the pre source to be pre eq and my Crest Xr20 I was using for the small gigs prior also had the ability so I think this is the biggest gripe I found with this DL and bottom line is that it just seems so utterly simple to have included the option and almost seems like an oversight indicative of  ignorance.

[Mixfix]

MixFix:
I am a bit surprised that it didn't seem like an obvious feature they could have easily implemented at conception with little effort and the absence of this makes me question the competence of the development team. It seems like they need some better experienced audio engineers or maybe simply actually try and test the thing in real situations where stuff like this would become obvious real fast.
My take on the design decisions made by Mackie is based on their desire to mimic the analog desks as much as possible and to keep it simple (KISS) for the intended market (just look at their adds). Since it is all just numbers after the A/D converters it's just moving arrays of numbers around to anywhere until you bring it to the outside world via the D to A's. Just look at the full cross-switch implementation of the XAP-800 (XDM I call it) and all the flexibility it has, but at the expense of complexity for the end user. It takes a bit of doing to understand all the possibilities not something that you would present to this target market. I agree that they missed some essential features in their oversimplification but they still have V1.5 to fix it otherwise the competition will do that for them for their more advanced users market. The key here is not to let the advanced features get in the way of simplicity.

Agreed 100%, the simplicity of the app is the beauty of the design and makes for a very simple analog xover and the lack of a million possible features is part of the recipe and if every single feature we request (within it's capabilities) was added it would no doubt quickly become a crowded surface with too many things for avg user to have to think about as well as potential to cause their own problems. It would also be product support request chaos, though Mackie seems to be fine just ignoring my attempts to contact them for support (several times).
 I would love to see some custom app alternatives for advanced users become available through third party app designers and I am sure many of us would be willing to pay for a premium designed app and I would even think we'd step up a bit for an app that cost a few bucks if it were not one of the $3.99 apps. I would pay $50, or more if it was built well and they offered a full featured trial for a few weeks to make sure it isn't crap, at least until enough people were using it to trust it is decent then I'd certainly shell out the dough!

[sam.spoons]

I might do likewise but if I hadn't already bought a DL even a $6.99 app would have been a serious disincentive, if they sell a $1000 device which won't work without an iPad then the app (at least, they haven't offered a bundled iPad with the DL yet) should be included in the hardware price.

This mixer is going to replace lots of lower end "pub band" mixers (many more than the unique in its class MixWiz) none of which have moveable pre eq/aux inserts so the pre eq/dynamics aux issue is only a big concern for pros stepping down and will not be a concern for the vast majority of users (of course I'd love that feature on my "pub band" desk).

I think it's fair to say that Apple are one of the most successful tech companies in the world and haven't suffered from their technical "isolationism". I'm not an Apple Fanboy (is there such as an Apple Fanpensioner?), I've been into computers and hi-tech for most of my life, I grew up before cassette recorders and cut my computing teeth on DOS. Now while I think Apples business practices are frequently abhorrent, I find myself more and more attracted to products which simply work as expected nearly all of the time. I'm sat in front of a MacBook Pro which I never turn off (OK, once every two or three weeks) but when I'm away from home it lets me get my emails and do a bit of light browsing for a whole long weekend without charging (several hours, my best PC laptop wouldn't run for even two hours without needing charging).

I totally understand why Mackie chose to go with the iPad alone.

[WK154]

ijpengelly:
I would somewhat disagree with your (WK154) comment about isolationism resulting in the company creating something new or bespoke having to change its ways, as there are also plenty of examples where it has been the other way round and others have adopted or introduced compatibility with the bespoke (or whatever term is most appropriate) product / technology.
Not without supporting open or industry standards unlike Apple that snuffs most. Apple started as an open company I know having bought and developed product since day one from them. I dealt with Jobs and when he turned paranoid with Apple III for those that go back that far I dropped Apple since I had other vendors.  Like IBM, Apple will have to come around or be shut out by the World. A company that tries to invade your privacy and control your actions will eventually get your attention it's just a matter of time. Apple is not the only one. The US gov. snooping has set off a lot of concern around the World in server location and may have a large impact on future server locations. It takes $ to make moves so nothing will happen instantly but it will happen. I believe Firefox Os will eventually have a large impact on the smartphone business so iOS and Android may not be the future for long.  We're getting to far off subject here. The MI even by Uli B's admission is insignificant in the overall scheme of things to have an impact on mainstream products. To ignore a USB audio standard is downright dumb.

[Jkowtko]

I fear the volume levels of these units are too low for a 3rd party to make any money building a DL app.  So it's really up to Mackie to put the investment into the app where they see fit.  Maybe if they had a waiting list of people who will buy when the appropriate feature set is implemented, would they implement those features in a timeline which matches the apparent user demand we are seeing on these forums.

In the future, I hope a good interoperable "sound console communication protocol" emerges that allows for healthy competitive sound console app development separate from the development of the consoles themselves ... then the consumers will really win.

[sam.spoons]

I fear the volume levels of these units are too low for a 3rd party to make any money building a DL app.  So it's really up to Mackie to put the investment into the app where they see fit.  Maybe if they had a waiting list of people who will buy when the appropriate feature set is implemented, would they implement those features in a timeline which matches the apparent user demand we are seeing on these forums.

Agreed

In the future, I hope a good interoperable "sound console communication protocol" emerges that allows for healthy competitive sound console app development separate from the development of the consoles themselves ... then the consumers will really win.

Such protocols already exist. Mackie even have one themselves in the form of HUI. For it to be useful Master Fader needs to be accessible via MIDI though.

[WK154]

I fear the volume levels of these units are too low for a 3rd party to make any money building a DL app.  So it's really up to Mackie to put the investment into the app where they see fit.  Maybe if they had a waiting list of people who will buy when the appropriate feature set is implemented, would they implement those features in a timeline which matches the apparent user demand we are seeing on these forums.

Agreed

In the future, I hope a good interoperable "sound console communication protocol" emerges that allows for healthy competitive sound console app development separate from the development of the consoles themselves ... then the consumers will really win.

Such protocols already exist. Mackie even have one themselves in the form of HUI. For it to be useful Master Fader needs to be accessible via MIDI though.

I will have to disagree with your assessment regarding 3rd party development. Having been there several times myself. Do the math it's simple. Let say that DL has sold as many as the X32 for which we have numbers of 40,000 units in less than a year (per Uli). Let's say that Mackie has shipped 50,000 units (it hasn't even been a year). This is the risk part what % of the market do you think you could sell to?  Let's use 30% since your app is much better than Mackies and is cross platform. The number $50 has been mentioned on this forum but I believe that's too high so let's use $30 (29.95).  That's a gross of $450,000.00 for one or two sharp programmers for a year. Ready to quit your day job Sam? It's all academic since Mackie wont release the communications spec for the DL. The USB v2.0 audio device spec has been out since 2006 and would be my choice.
 http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs

[sam.spoons]

Not my point actually, Mackie have HUI already, if it could talk to MF that'd be nice (I know it'll never happen). A multi platform protocol as jk suggests would have a much bigger customer base.

No disagreeing with you, mind, I know it's all pie in the sky 

$450,000 a year... where do I sign.... oh, just a minute, I can't program worth sh1t....

[Jkowtko]

The only caveat about a multi-platform multi-vendor protocol is that it won't solve all of our problems immediate, as not all features could be implemented on the client side only.   Fader linking, groups, DCAs, shorthand screens, yes -- but anything involving audio signal routing changes (e.g. aux send points) would have to be programmed on the server side as well.

I still think it's a great idea though ... the protocol could be designed to "encompass all" functionality, and recognize server restrictions and adjust the UI accordingly ... and allow our great capitalistic and competitive economy to do it's work in providing the consumer with more complete and feature-rich products across the board.

[WK154]

What Mackie hasn't figured out yet and may never is that all that secrecy is working against them. Opening up protocols which they've done in the past would only help sell more units (no ND's or royalty payments if they wake up). Hardware clones is not the issue since the competition is already out there and with more to come. With the balance of tablets going against Apple (latest figures from reputable sources places them well under 50%) there is a significant market out there that won't have to buy an iPad.

[Mikeboltz111]

1.4.3 is out. I hope 1.5 is not too far away!

[abzurd]

I dunno. The fact 1.4.3 comes out as a patch tells me not to hold my breath for 1.5 within the next 60 days.

[WK154]

I'm sticking to my October/November time table for V1.5. I'm a bit hesitant in iOS7 as a basis for the release since it upsets the GUI and Audio applecart if the new physics/3D and audio support is utilized. Probably to complex for Mackie. I hope GUI backward compatibility is there to some degree but Apple has a habit of not caring about their 3rd party developers anyway. Mackie if you have a couple of hrs. at least include Audiobus capability in your V1.5 release.   http://developer.audiob.us/doc/    . Sept. 10 is now the date for Apple iPhone announcement and will know more then.

[Mikeboltz111]

Multitrack recording would be cool.