DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/16 01:31:56
(permalink)
The things I recorded with the FW1884 were very high quality. It sounded as good as any studio around here.. even ones that charge MUCH more money. When it works, it's a great thing. Even the small 'issues' with it on the thread don't bother me. What does bother me is that the computer has a hard time 'seeing' the thing most of the time. It's a game of restarting both the computer and 1884 until it just works or freezes up one. If Tascam would just release a driver that was more reliable, then the FW1884 is a great unit for the small studio/home studio setting. I just need at least 16 inputs so I don't have to keep on plugging and unplugging cables when i want to record drums anyway. 
|
mick@itc
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 629
- Joined: 2004/04/27 18:53:49
- Location: Australia
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/16 01:46:40
(permalink)
Hi Donald
I got the 16 by plugging in a DigiMax LT into the ADAT. No point in getting the full blown DIGIMAX as the ADAT can only take 44 or 48 as 8 inputs. IF you go to 88 or 96 then it cuts down the inputs to 4. The Digimax LT sounds pretty good actually and I'm happy with it. I squeez out the full 18 when I plug in the DBX through the SPDIF. Fairly rock solid fromt eh input perspective. Re the visibility of the FW. I went through the same torture and finally fixed it with teh FW card. There are lots of advise on threads here about it but in a nut shell if you get teh right FW card in the PC then its solid. Haven't had a visibility related problem for a while. The sequence of start-up was my clincher. With the current card and turning the FW-1884 AFTER windows has started I get a great result every time. The only crashes I am getting is when S6 imports a non S6 file (S5 or S3). Horrible things happen with envelopes and I get really poor performance. I now avoid using S6 as much as I can for existing projects. Its cool when I go from scratch. Had a terrible experience the other day with a client where he brought a Home Studio file in. S6 went crazy, crashed the machine a few times. Even crashed S5 when I started usign that in the hope of not being as embarrassed in frontof a client with the "professional" software crashing the PC.
Anyway I have sort of come to the conclusion I am going to get a FireStudio and start using that as the input, then when I can sell the FW I'll probably buy the Mackie. But then again that could change if Tascam/Cake/Frontier play nice together and give us a patch that works really well. However TASCAM have cheesed me off so many times (not just this driver issue) that I think I'm silly not to just walk away and work with someone else that have custoemr service.
Keep well
Mick
Mick from Oz. HP DV7-3008tx , Sonar 8.5 PE, Komplete 6, GPO, JABB, Ozone 4, Melodyne Studio & DNA
|
Jay Stephen
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 267
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:18:26
- Location: In Studio
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 11:02:04
(permalink)
S6 DRIVER ISSUE:
I received a written response to my June 1st letter to the CEO of Teac in Japan. The response came from Mr. Tim Crable, Director of Technical Services for Teac America. I won't take time to type the entire contents of his response, however, I thought you would appreciate the highlights:
-Tascam and their "development partners" are very busy with Vista drivers and others such as Sonar
-they are actively testing S6 and 1884 drivers in Japan and USA
-while they work with "development companies" the "brand name on the product is TASCAM" and "We (Teac) take responsibility for the funtionality and reliability or our products, no one else."
It would have been nice to see a date forecast for release however, at least I received a response and that is reason to remain hopeful.
XP SP1 Home (tweaked) P4 2.8 HT on P4C800-E 4x512 OCZ Dual Channel DDR Matrox G450 Dual 10G SCSI O/S 80G SATA Audio 500G SATA Backup M-Audio Delta 44 -WDM Pioneer A107D DVD-RW
|
ChronoT52
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 165
- Joined: 2006/09/27 18:15:59
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 12:48:44
(permalink)
Man, I got hella excited when I saw that photoshopped picture of the S6 FW1884 drivers. Shame on you for doing that. :-p
I'll be sending an email later today. I'll get right back with you all when they reply.
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 17:02:39
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Jay Stephen
-while they work with "development companies" the "brand name on the product is TASCAM" and "We (Teac) take responsibility for the funtionality and reliability or our products, no one else."
Amen! Amen! When I had problems with my Lexmark Printer's driver, Lexmark released a new driver. When my ATI video card had compatibility and performance problems, ATI released a new driver. Intel is always releasing new drivers for its wireless card in my laptop to keep up with changing wireless standards. Tascam sells the product. It is their responsibility. Since they advertise it to work with Sonar, it should do just that. Period. If Sonar changes, then they should update their drivers. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned, but it just seems like the right thing to do to support your own products... especially pricey ones like the 1884.
|
D K
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1237
- Joined: 2005/06/07 14:07:05
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 19:13:50
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Jay Stephen
S6 DRIVER ISSUE:
I received a written response to my June 1st letter to the CEO of Teac in Japan. The response came from Mr. Tim Crable, Director of Technical Services for Teac America. I won't take time to type the entire contents of his response, however, I thought you would appreciate the highlights:
-Tascam and their "development partners" are very busy with Vista drivers and others such as Sonar
-they are actively testing S6 and 1884 drivers in Japan and USA
-while they work with "development companies" the "brand name on the product is TASCAM" and "We (Teac) take responsibility for the funtionality and reliability or our products, no one else."
It would have been nice to see a date forecast for release however, at least I received a response and that is reason to remain hopeful.
I have been a negative force in this thread before - Here it goes again! 1st Jay - I commend you for your efforts - I read your letter a while back and thought it was very well written, concise and business like. I like all of you have tried to get some traction here by contacting various parties involved while trying to be professional and courteous along the way and keeping my emotions and frustration in check but....... I am sorry - unless there is something of much more substance in the reply you recieved here - This is about as condescending and arrogant a response as i could have ever imagined! Maybe I am all out of whack here but I cant beleive that you guys are not as offended as I am! 1st - He tells us that they are "very busy" with Vista - Fair enough - What does that have to do with completing the installation peice on a .dll that has already been submited - Months ago!! by their key "development partner" 2nd - He tells us they are testing the S6 drivers in Japan and the U.S. - Oh, I thought they were doing that a long time ago? - seeing as how Sonar 6 is already moving closer to S7 and I am sure Tascam is aware of Cakewalk's marketing and deployment scheme. 3rd - This really chaps my A** - he presumes to TELL US that they are solely "responsible for the functionality and reliablity of their products" - Thanks for the Newsflash!!! And here we all thought it was someone else's responsiblity (Especially since the only one who seems to be addressing the issue is someone else (Frontier)  I know we all want this hardware to work correctly but i cant beleive that i am the only one even slightly insulted or put off ny that response. Are we all just so beaten down that we will accept any communication at all from this company? Again Jay - This is not directed at you at all - I just put off by this and feel pretty strongly that this response to your letter is trite at best
www.ateliersound.com ADK Custom I7-2600 K Win 7 64bit /8 Gig Ram/WD-Seagate Drives(x3) Sonar 8.5.3 (32bit)/Sonar X3b(64bit)/Pro Tools 9 Lavry Blue/Black Lion Audio Mod Tango 24/RME Hammerfall Multiface II/UAD Duo
|
manthe
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 401
- Joined: 2005/11/20 18:24:57
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 19:43:51
(permalink)
I hear you...and I mostly agree. I think he (the poster, not the Tascam rep) included that information in the post because there are some folks here who have postulated that it is Cakewalk's responsibility, not Tascam/TEAC to fix this. I would venture a guess that the Tascam rep who replied may have been addressing that very point of contention in the posters original letter. While I'm not picking up on the condescension myself, I do see the 'pointlessness' of parts of the response. I am also extremely frustrated at how slow they are!!! ORIGINAL: D K
I have been a negative force in this thread before - Here it goes again!
1st Jay - I commend you for your efforts - I read your letter a while back and thought it was very well written, concise and business like. I like all of you have tried to get some traction here by contacting various parties involved while trying to be professional and courteous along the way and keeping my emotions and frustration in check but.......
I am sorry - unless there is something of much more substance in the reply you recieved here - This is about as condescending and arrogant a response as i could have ever imagined! Maybe I am all out of whack here but I cant beleive that you guys are not as offended as I am!
1st - He tells us that they are "very busy" with Vista - Fair enough - What does that have to do with completing the installation peice on a .dll that has already been submited - Months ago!! by their key "development partner"
2nd - He tells us they are testing the S6 drivers in Japan and the U.S. - Oh, I thought they were doing that a long time ago? - seeing as how Sonar 6 is already moving closer to S7 and I am sure Tascam is aware of Cakewalk's marketing and deployment scheme.
3rd - This really chaps my A** - he presumes to TELL US that they are solely "responsible for the functionality and reliablity of their products" - Thanks for the Newsflash!!! And here we all thought it was someone else's responsiblity (Especially since the only one who seems to be addressing the issue is someone else (Frontier)
I know we all want this hardware to work correctly but i cant beleive that i am the only one even slightly insulted or put off ny that response. Are we all just so beaten down that we will accept any communication at all from this company?
Again Jay - This is not directed at you at all - I just put off by this and feel pretty strongly that this response to your letter is trite at best
|
D K
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1237
- Joined: 2005/06/07 14:07:05
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 21:01:31
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: manthe
I hear you...and I mostly agree. I think he (the poster, not the Tascam rep) included that information in the post because there are some folks here who have postulated that it is Cakewalk's responsibility, not Tascam/TEAC to fix this. I would venture a guess that the Tascam rep who replied may have been addressing that very point of contention in the posters original letter.
While I'm not picking up on the condescension myself, I do see the 'pointlessness' of parts of the response. I am also extremely frustrated at how slow they are!!!
ORIGINAL: D K
I have been a negative force in this thread before - Here it goes again!
1st Jay - I commend you for your efforts - I read your letter a while back and thought it was very well written, concise and business like. I like all of you have tried to get some traction here by contacting various parties involved while trying to be professional and courteous along the way and keeping my emotions and frustration in check but.......
I am sorry - unless there is something of much more substance in the reply you recieved here - This is about as condescending and arrogant a response as i could have ever imagined! Maybe I am all out of whack here but I cant beleive that you guys are not as offended as I am!
1st - He tells us that they are "very busy" with Vista - Fair enough - What does that have to do with completing the installation peice on a .dll that has already been submited - Months ago!! by their key "development partner"
2nd - He tells us they are testing the S6 drivers in Japan and the U.S. - Oh, I thought they were doing that a long time ago? - seeing as how Sonar 6 is already moving closer to S7 and I am sure Tascam is aware of Cakewalk's marketing and deployment scheme.
3rd - This really chaps my A** - he presumes to TELL US that they are solely "responsible for the functionality and reliablity of their products" - Thanks for the Newsflash!!! And here we all thought it was someone else's responsiblity (Especially since the only one who seems to be addressing the issue is someone else (Frontier)
I know we all want this hardware to work correctly but i cant beleive that i am the only one even slightly insulted or put off ny that response. Are we all just so beaten down that we will accept any communication at all from this company?
Again Jay - This is not directed at you at all - I just put off by this and feel pretty strongly that this response to your letter is trite at best
I know what your saying Manthe but we have been at this for a long time now and we just keep getting the same non- commital, information starved responses from this company at every level. That's my only reason for wanting Cake to get involved - Maybe they can get something done here becuase we their customers clearly cannnot I really don't know why I keep letting this bother me this way - I knew and said this would happen a long time ago. Keep saying I have let it go - I need to let it go
www.ateliersound.com ADK Custom I7-2600 K Win 7 64bit /8 Gig Ram/WD-Seagate Drives(x3) Sonar 8.5.3 (32bit)/Sonar X3b(64bit)/Pro Tools 9 Lavry Blue/Black Lion Audio Mod Tango 24/RME Hammerfall Multiface II/UAD Duo
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 21:10:57
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: D K
... 1st - He tells us that they are "very busy" with Vista - Fair enough - What does that have to do with completing the installation peice on a .dll that has already been submited - Months ago!! by their key "development partner"
2nd - He tells us they are testing the S6 drivers in Japan and the U.S. - Oh, I thought they were doing that a long time ago? - seeing as how Sonar 6 is already moving closer to S7 and I am sure Tascam is aware of Cakewalk's marketing and deployment scheme.
3rd - This really chaps my A** - he presumes to TELL US that they are solely "responsible for the functionality and reliablity of their products" - Thanks for the Newsflash!!! And here we all thought it was someone else's responsiblity (Especially since the only one who seems to be addressing the issue is someone else (Frontier) ...
4th - Tascam continues to market the FW 1884 as Sonar compatible 5th - Tascam addresses OSX issues and apologizes, yet not a peep about Sonar issues ... grrrr F@KKER
Someone said: I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 21:14:10
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: ChronoT52
Man, I got hella excited when I saw that photoshopped picture of the S6 FW1884 drivers. Shame on you for doing that. :-p
I'll be sending an email later today. I'll get right back with you all when they reply.
axly, it was done in mspaint ;) the intention was one of sarcasm, sorry for unintentionally gettin' your hopes up :( F@KKER
post edited by F@KKER - 2007/07/17 21:20:26
Someone said: I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
|
manthe
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 401
- Joined: 2005/11/20 18:24:57
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 21:22:43
(permalink)
NEVER let it go...ALWAYS fight! I am in the midst of shopping for and committing to a PTHD setup. I have been demo'ing a TON of stuff. I'm telling you, from experience, there is NOTHING out there in the 1884's price range that even remotely comes close to this device in terms of functionality and quality. Trust me, nothing exists! The M-Audio thing is garbage compared to this! I am looking closely at a Command24. For 8k, the functionality is only marginally better in terms of control surface features. The preamps SUCK compared to the Tascam's, the drivers a way more flaky and unstable AND it is 8x more expensive!! The Mackie (which is also more expensive) has 0 I/O and absolutely no use as an analog board at all. Truthfully, the MCU is not a bad piece of gear, but I see NO reason at all to choose it over the Tascam. For less money you get all of the I/O, plus ADAT and SPDIF...not to mention, I can pack it up and use it at a live gig!!!! I think the 1884 was WAY ahead of its time...it is STILL a very contemporary piece of gear...5 YEARS AFTER ITS RELEASE! Any one here can look at my past posts and see that I am not a Tascam fanboy...no way. BUT, I want to give credit where it is due, and I love this thing enough to keep fighting for good drivers. Even if I delegate mine to 'live use only', I don't think I'll ever sell it. Hell, I've still got a US-428 in my locker. I will probably be re-deploying that for my son very soon ORIGINAL: D K
ORIGINAL: manthe
I hear you...and I mostly agree. I think he (the poster, not the Tascam rep) included that information in the post because there are some folks here who have postulated that it is Cakewalk's responsibility, not Tascam/TEAC to fix this. I would venture a guess that the Tascam rep who replied may have been addressing that very point of contention in the posters original letter.
While I'm not picking up on the condescension myself, I do see the 'pointlessness' of parts of the response. I am also extremely frustrated at how slow they are!!!
ORIGINAL: D K
I have been a negative force in this thread before - Here it goes again!
1st Jay - I commend you for your efforts - I read your letter a while back and thought it was very well written, concise and business like. I like all of you have tried to get some traction here by contacting various parties involved while trying to be professional and courteous along the way and keeping my emotions and frustration in check but.......
I am sorry - unless there is something of much more substance in the reply you recieved here - This is about as condescending and arrogant a response as i could have ever imagined! Maybe I am all out of whack here but I cant beleive that you guys are not as offended as I am!
1st - He tells us that they are "very busy" with Vista - Fair enough - What does that have to do with completing the installation peice on a .dll that has already been submited - Months ago!! by their key "development partner"
2nd - He tells us they are testing the S6 drivers in Japan and the U.S. - Oh, I thought they were doing that a long time ago? - seeing as how Sonar 6 is already moving closer to S7 and I am sure Tascam is aware of Cakewalk's marketing and deployment scheme.
3rd - This really chaps my A** - he presumes to TELL US that they are solely "responsible for the functionality and reliablity of their products" - Thanks for the Newsflash!!! And here we all thought it was someone else's responsiblity (Especially since the only one who seems to be addressing the issue is someone else (Frontier)
I know we all want this hardware to work correctly but i cant beleive that i am the only one even slightly insulted or put off ny that response. Are we all just so beaten down that we will accept any communication at all from this company?
Again Jay - This is not directed at you at all - I just put off by this and feel pretty strongly that this response to your letter is trite at best
I know what your saying Manthe but we have been at this for a long time now and we just keep getting the same non- commital, information starved responses from this company at every level.
That's my only reason for wanting Cake to get involved - Maybe they can get something done here becuase we their customers clearly cannnot
I really don't know why I keep letting this bother me this way - I knew and said this would happen a long time ago.
Keep saying I have let it go - I need to let it go
|
seclusion
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 111
- Joined: 2006/05/22 12:07:55
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/17 23:14:38
(permalink)
That was my decision in buying the 1884, everything in one box If it dies, $1000 will get me back up pretty quick
Mac Pro 2.66, 5 gigs ram, FW1884, Waves, Logic Pro 7.2.3. Thinking of running Xp Pro and Sonar but I should quit while I'm ahead and just make some tunes :)
|
riojazz
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1337
- Joined: 2004/02/26 13:23:02
- Location: Mid-Hudson Valley, NY
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/18 00:16:45
(permalink)
D K, the only thing hopeful I read in Tascam's response is that they seem to be getting defensive. While it's extremely stupid for anyone in customer support to ever do that, it's good for us! Maybe it means they have actually understood some of what they have been told in our inquiries.
And, I'm sticking with the unit. It's actually Cakewalk who is the loser here for me, since I will not upgrade from SONAR version 5.2 until this is fixed. For that reason, I am disappointed Cakewalk does not apply more pressure. At the rate we're going, I may skip version 6 entirely before this gets worked out, and Cakewalk loses the money I'm waiting to spend.
Software: Cakewalk by Bandlab; Adobe Audition; Band-in-A-Box audiophile; Izotope Ozone; Encore; Melodyne; Win 10 Pro, 64-bit. Hardware: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 2nd; Roland Integra-7; TCE Finalizer; Presonus Central Station, Behringer X-Touch. Home built i7 with 16 GB RAM, SSDs.
|
TraceyStudios
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 603
- Joined: 2005/10/13 12:40:33
- Location: Chandler, AZ
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/19 16:02:41
(permalink)
I would like to think that the folks over at Tascam and Cakewalk are really thinking about getting together to work all of these issues out. I am stuck using Sonar 5, even though I PURCHASED Sonar 6. I have a couple of choices here, 1) Purchase a new controller, not Tascam!, 2) Purchase new Software Not Cakwalk! 3) Just live with Sonar 5 and hope one day they figure it out. 4) Reallistically if I have to purchase anything new it will be a Protools rig. Their hardware will always work with their software. TASCAM and CAKEWALK!!! ARE YOU LISTENING, HOW LONG IS THIS GOING TO GO ONE BEFORE YOU LOOSE THE LOYALTY OF YOUR CUSTOMERS AND THEY START TO LOOK ELSWHERE??????
I really like Sonar with the Tascam and I have built a whole studio around it. I can't afford to buy new software or hardware because these companies can't work together!!
Just my 2 cents.
AMD FX-6100 six-core processor 3.3GHz 8 Gig RAM SONAR X3 Producer Tascam FW1884 Mackie Blackbird Presonus Digimax Avalon U5 BFD2 SL Trigger Alesis DM8 Pro drums KRK Rokit 8s KRK 10s ARC2 Folgers Dark Roast, a bit of crazy :) & lots of help from the forums! http://www.reverbnation.com/blakkmire
|
guitarmikeh
Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
- Total Posts : 942
- Joined: 2005/03/11 23:16:02
- Location: ?
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/19 20:48:29
(permalink)
not to be a D@#K to cakewalk, but...
When ACT came into the picture. this control surface inssue has come up. ACT is supposed to work with all controllers. even in P5v2.5 (with ACT) they advertise it as working with the tascam 1884, but yet it doesn't... Now I understand they they want ACT to work with as many controllers an possibe. but how does this help me, when it breaks the functionality that I use the most with the tascam.
I'm not saying I'm not purchasing from cake anymore, on the contrary I just bought rapture.. that, with all the other cake products I got. you could say I'm a pretty loyal cake customer. sonar 4 PE, sonar 5PE, sonar 6PE, project 5V2, dim pro, Pyro, and now rapture.
I'm also not demanding anything from them. ............anyway...just disappointed and. just venting I guess, because nothing will come of this....
I harbor no ill will towards any man.
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/20 00:06:57
(permalink)
Please, anybody going to summer NAMM? A print out of this thread submitted to both CW and Tascam at thier booths would be interesting to see what kind of response you would get, especially in front of prospective retailers ;)
F@KKER
Someone said: I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/20 00:56:51
(permalink)
I'll probably go next year... this year I was sick and was unable to go. But I don't think i'd be the person to talk to tascam... not about the 1884 at least. I can have temper control issues at times..   The that gives me the raw rump about it... is that the 1884 is such a nice piece of equipment! It has great componets and features... I just get irked that Tascam continues to overlook it... of course they did have the same web design for YEARS! And now that has changed... maybe they are turning over a new leaf.. turning the other cheek.. or at least trying to turn something around. I'm not sure their support will get better, but I don't think it could get any worse.
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/20 20:27:00
(permalink)
ahem, Summer NAMM...  F@KKER
Someone said: I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/22 14:36:49
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: F@KKER
ahem, Summer NAMM...
F@KKER
Ah I never go to those! I'm all about the winter ones though. hah
|
hockeyjx
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 839
- Joined: 2003/12/09 18:36:28
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/25 19:08:41
(permalink)
I sent another email to tascam today. I was bored at work and decided to hassle them!
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/25 21:17:31
(permalink)
 this for now... F@KKER /it's a cryin' shame
Someone said: I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
|
hockeyjx
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 839
- Joined: 2003/12/09 18:36:28
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/25 23:50:16
(permalink)
Well, I got a response - and well - I think I'll be testing my system this weekend!
|
D K
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1237
- Joined: 2005/06/07 14:07:05
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/25 23:59:38
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: hockeyjx
Well, I got a response - and well - I think I'll be testing my system this weekend!
Care ta Share ?
www.ateliersound.com ADK Custom I7-2600 K Win 7 64bit /8 Gig Ram/WD-Seagate Drives(x3) Sonar 8.5.3 (32bit)/Sonar X3b(64bit)/Pro Tools 9 Lavry Blue/Black Lion Audio Mod Tango 24/RME Hammerfall Multiface II/UAD Duo
|
ChronoT52
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 165
- Joined: 2006/09/27 18:15:59
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 00:40:59
(permalink)
Yeah, I emailed them last week and they haven't responsed to me. Don't be shy hockey- get all of our brittle hopes up so they can be shattered just one more time!
|
hockeyjx
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 839
- Joined: 2003/12/09 18:36:28
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 09:15:42
(permalink)
I may potentially possess the fix we've all been looking for, and must test it as such.
post edited by hockeyjx - 2007/07/26 09:16:11
|
D K
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1237
- Joined: 2005/06/07 14:07:05
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 09:32:25
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: hockeyjx
I may potentially possess the fix we've all been looking for, and must test it as such.
hockeyjx, Why so cryptic? - If you have a possible fix - let some of us help you test it Did this come from Tascam or is it your fix? Details please 
www.ateliersound.com ADK Custom I7-2600 K Win 7 64bit /8 Gig Ram/WD-Seagate Drives(x3) Sonar 8.5.3 (32bit)/Sonar X3b(64bit)/Pro Tools 9 Lavry Blue/Black Lion Audio Mod Tango 24/RME Hammerfall Multiface II/UAD Duo
|
hockeyjx
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 839
- Joined: 2003/12/09 18:36:28
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 09:44:21
(permalink)
I'm not allowed to give details yet :( Hence the cryptic language. But hopefully this issue will not be an issue for much longer.
|
ChronoT52
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 165
- Joined: 2006/09/27 18:15:59
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 10:18:05
(permalink)
I've had a secret fix that I've tested for the past 4 months and confirmed.
Maybe you all didn't know this, but if you dual boot install XP Pro 64 and revert to SONAR 5, it seems to fix all these issues. :-)
I hate to speculate on things that may never come, but I am hoping that for all this time we've waited for a simple revision of a control surface definition file, they completely redefine the functionality and make ALL the controls on the 1884 tailored specific to SONAR 6 (or at this point, if they've been working with Cakewalk, SONAR 7.) I would be pretty impressed and forgive a lot if the extra time taken was used to completely debug this thing for the current market and make it solid as a rock in intense recording sessions.
In fact, at this point, they should better give us improvements BEYOND returning us to original functionality for all the time it's taken them. That'll make me decide whether I go out never buying a Tascam product again or if I never go out buying a Tascam product again as well as make sure other people don't either.
|
riojazz
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1337
- Joined: 2004/02/26 13:23:02
- Location: Mid-Hudson Valley, NY
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 14:04:59
(permalink)
"whether I go out never buying a Tascam product again or if I never go out buying a Tascam product again as well as make sure other people don't either"
Well, there's a Hobson's choice for Tascam. But, it's the correct one. Let's hope the end of this frustration is in sight.
Cakewalk, I have money to spend on version 6! It's yours. Do you want it?
Software: Cakewalk by Bandlab; Adobe Audition; Band-in-A-Box audiophile; Izotope Ozone; Encore; Melodyne; Win 10 Pro, 64-bit. Hardware: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 2nd; Roland Integra-7; TCE Finalizer; Presonus Central Station, Behringer X-Touch. Home built i7 with 16 GB RAM, SSDs.
|
dcasey
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 141
- Joined: 2003/12/30 21:32:18
- Status: offline
RE: 6.2 Update and the FW-1884
2007/07/26 15:59:50
(permalink)
I sent yet another email to Tascam last week, fully expecting another “all parties are working on this issue†type response, but what I got instead was a copy of the long awaited plug-in. I haven’t had a chance to install and test it yet, but I thought I would let you guys know that there does indeed appear to be help on the way. I was told that I was welcome to use the plug-in with the understanding that it is still in “beta.†If you are interested in testing the plug-in, perhaps you should contact CustSer@teac.com to see if you can get a copy. It will likely be tomorrow morning before I can get it installed, but as soon as I can put it through the paces I’ll post my results. I just moved into my new studio, and I’ve yet to even fire my DAW up, so it may take me a while to get things going again. Keep the faith fellow FW-1884 users! Dan
DAW: i7920, 9GB, Win7 x64 / Presonus Firestudio Project (2), Firestudio Tube, Monitor Station, Faderport, Sceptre S8's/ Frontier Design Tranzport / M-Audio Midisport 4x4 / Roland GR-55, GI-20, VG-8 / Novation 25 SL MKII / Alesis 720 DSP / Sonar X3 PE / Vienna Ensemble Pro / Voxengo / iZotope / NI / IK / eieio VSTi Server 1: AMD FX-8350, 16GB, Win7 x64 / Komplete / Vienna Ensemble Pro VSTi Server 2: AMD A6-3670K, 16GB, Win 7 x64 / Echo Gina24 / Vienna Ensemble Pro www.soundcloud.com/dannycasey
|