#KCS2-V.3.01 (cont.)
19 messages in this thread
Well, ok – I was just going by that message you left which did leave the
impression that you felt Level II lacked in capabilities – I wasn't
following the entire stream – apologies if I misunderstood. I have played
with the MTPro demo, btw, but it failed to impress me. That may be due to
a lack of a manual, and serious demo-originated bugs(constantly locking
out). As you state – these are all opinions – I personally disagree with
the statement that '(level II's) interface is so horrible that it's not
worth the effort' – but you're entitled to your opinion.
I can't speak for the B&P team, so I can't categorically state what their
intended market is, but I can hardly believe that you can ignore the
powerful marco capabilities that can aid slightly-less-than proficient
players. In the reviews that I've read that aspect tends to be pushed as a
big selling point, and as a composer, I'm not terribly interested in a
program that can play automatic harmony and and transposition for me. I
prefer M's environment for that sort of stuff. But I'm not trying, in any
event, to infer that because you like B&P you're not a capable player –
that's silly. I'm simply pointing out that those sorts of things can be a
major reason for some people to buy it, while a person is likely not going
to spend $$$'s on Level II unless they're darn sure what they want and they
need that hands-on flexibility.
Btw – I assume that you have the latest version of Level II – do you not
find the 'intuitionized' interface any more useful? I'm still waiting on
mine…
Cheers,
J.C.
Note Off Velocity will most likely make it into version 2.0, which is
debuting in the fall with a whole new look. (More congruent with the new
Workbench 1.4 look.) I'll let you know when I can be more exact.
The day you add the DMCS converter is the day I buy your program (actually,
I might get it sooner, but if you want to make absolutely SURE I buy it,
get that feature in!)
Ray Lewis
I promise to announce the release of the DMCS converter here first! This
shouldn't stop you from getting Bars&Pipes (if you'd like) beause the DMCS
to Bars&Pipes converter while take the form of an Accessory, which can be
loaded into Bars&Pipes. Look for it to appear in MusicBox B.
Not yet, still looking, still shifting.
MC> Not yet, still looking, still shifting.
Who? You, or Heisenberg's brain? *8)
-= Vance =- Image Master
using Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster!
Melissa,
Put my vote in for allowing an upgrade path from Pro-Midi to B&P.
I've invested a lot of money and time into Pro-Midi, and would love to move
up. I can't even install Pro-Midi on my new harddrive, which pi__es me off
to no end!! Thanks for listening to us!! -Nick
For some reason, my AMAS samples (saved as IFF files) have never been able
to be loaded into SONIX or MUSIC-X. The other sounds on AMAS however
(those that came ojn the disk) all work.
HELP.
Does anyone have the same problem?
Thanks Jay
Actually… that particular theory isn't well-accepted anymore… because
it's quite clear that even Heisenberg himself was uncertain about it. :^)
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Oh well, I never bought that theory anyway. It alway struck me as
confusing technological limits with fundamental ones. But then, physics
was never my strong suit, or even a mediocre pair of jeans. :/
-Jim
But of course. METERS ????? Blimey, bugger off with that Metric Rot.
My search for T-Rex continues…….Maybe I could get a Photo of Marc
Bolan and …………..
Stone the crows! I thought everybody used the metric system. 🙂 Though I
admit the closest I get is the 2-liter Pepsi.
Speaking of 3d objects though… (we were, right?…) Have you seen the
Euclid object scanner? Apparently, it connects to a Toaster system. Lasers
and two video cameras scan the object as it rotates on a turntable. Not
cheap though… I know a guy who made 3d objects by getting plastic
models, slicing them into sections with a bandsaw, and digitizing the
cross sections. Cheaper, but more work. I don't know how well that
technique would work on an organic object. This guy did mostly machinery.
Jim, a gent on Amiga_Video says he's seen the results of the Euclid 3D
Digitizer and was unimpressed, they needed a TON of Touchup work he
claims. At $6000 or so, it's a big pill to swallow. Also I believe the max
size is relatively small like a foot by a foot and a half.
I hate the Metric System. Long Live the Crappy System we use now.
I'd go bonker's trying to relearn math.
Pete, A friend of mine contacted the company. They sent him a beta version
of the manual. It looked interesting, but as you say, expensive. By an odd
coincidence, the laser bit was one approach I considered when I first
started hacking on a homebrew scanner. I couldn't convince myself that the
thing would read complex objects correctly… even after seeing it work on
one of those Discovery Channel techie shows. I decided to go mechanical. A
real Rube Goldberg contraption. 🙂 It's still too early to know if it will
work… and I keep changing my mind on the basic design.
Some of these Gadget's use a light pen like thingy to grab points for
the outline of the object. Then there's the one for $80 or so from
the Animatrix folks, I believe the way it works is first you shoot 2
views of the Model to be digitized with a 35mm camera, devolop the
film. Then place each of the 2 pictures on a Drawing Tablet and Use
the Stylus to mark points on the outline of each of the View then the
Software interpolates the 2 sets of points into a 3D model. It may be
3 views tho.
They usually advertise in the back of AW and VTU, If I had a Drawing
Tablet handy I'd probably have gotten it by now.
I have seen some 3-d scanners that look like the traditional magnetic or
RF drawing tablets extended to 3d. There was one in a documentary on the
making of Amazing Stories. The Olmec head was digitized with one of those.
I like that idea, because you can pick exactly where the vertices are. The
laser scanner slices it up on a grid. I did see a surplus scanner & laser
from a printer for $40… might be worth a try.
My approach looks like a lathe. The object will be mounted on the
axis. Above it is a sliding platform. On that platform is a probe
that comes down to a needle resting on the object. The probe will be
encoded with something more or less like a mouse. At least that's the
theory. 🙂 I'm still considering something like a luxo lamp with
potentiometers on the joints. A new experimenter's microcontroller
board in the latest Electronics Now mag would make that easy.
Good Luck with your 3D Digitizer idea. I hope you get it to work well and
malke Millions selling them for $50 each heheheheheheh
>Have you seen the Euclid object scanner?
I didn't see it myself but the local Amiga Store bought one then promptly
returned it since it didn't work right at all. It would get the basic
shape but it added SOOOoooo much garbage it wasn't worth the trouble,
especially after paying so much money for it.
Btw, I don't think it uses any lasers.
If it's the same one I'm thinking of, I saw the manual. It's plastered all
over with Laser warnings. Thanks for the review… I'll pass it along to
the guy thinking of getting one.
Jim