Building a software editor... - Printable Version +- Conductive Labs Support Forum (https://conductivelabs.com/forum) +-- Forum: MRCC - MIDI Router Control Center (https://conductivelabs.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=13) +--- Forum: Computer MIDI Connectivity (https://conductivelabs.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=23) +--- Thread: Building a software editor... (/showthread.php?tid=2257)

Building a software editor... - mcmac72 - 02-10-2024 The other day I bought the CMC U6 Midi Pro, imagine my surprise when this $40 device came with a simple computer editor to configure the device, set and forget U6MIDI Pro https://www.cme-pro.com/u6-midi-pro-usb-midi-interface-routing-filter/ I refuse to believe the same can not be done for a device that costs over 10 X that amount. I don't really need to hear from people who are happy they don't have this option, you clearly don't use the device to it's full potential. Anyone who makes use of the 6 inputs and 12 outputs, will know the cable management alone, makes editing on that small screen insufficient... yet alone actually putting the unit in a rack. This thread is really to start a convo on how to make this a reality - whether directly or through a config file RE: Building a software editor... - House de Kris - 02-11-2024 Wow, that U6 MIDI Pro looks pretty cool for its low cost. Your refusal to believe certain capabilities are not available based on price leads me to think you believe cost closely follows function. In my experience, this is not necessarily true. I should preface this by saying I don't work for Conductive Labs. In as far back as the 80s I was saying that the two most expensive components of any project are the box it comes in and the power supply. I can't tell for sure, but the U6 looks to come in a plastic box. Conversely, the MRCC is in a rugged metal case. I don't know about today's manufacturing, but in the past every hole you put in a panel costs money, and there are a lot of holes on the MRCC front panel. Then there's the power supply. The MRCC power supply weighs a ton. It weighs so much because it must supply a lot of power, not only to the MRCC itself, but it must also fulfill the required capability of powering four USB powered devices. This implies a half amp apiece, or a total of 2A for external devices. Few devices demand that much, but it must be spec'd to pull off such a stunt. There's 10W right there that the MRCC cannot use but must be on tap. And how much power supply comes with the U6? Ah right, none at all. You must supply your own power to it. Due to the power supply and case alone, the MRCC will weigh considerably more than the U6. Shipping a heavier device costs more than shipping a lighter device. You may say you're getting free shipping, but that is only from the distribution point to you, someone (the customer) still must pay for shipping from factory to distributor. My point? Cost to the customer is influenced by a lot of factors beyond features. I acknowledge you've already stated you don't want to hear from me, but then you go on to say I clearly don't use the MRCC to its full potential. I do have all the inputs and outputs utilized, and struggle with how to deal with the limited number of inputs it has. Not only that, but this fully utilized MRCC is rack mounted and I still find it to be a far easier router to use than any of the MIDI routers I've used in the past. Creating a route on the MRCC is way simpler to implement, and the visual indication on its color screen (lacking on the U6, and a non-cheap feature) is a joy to use. There are other contributors to this forum who have two MRCCs just to satisfy their connectivity requirements. I can't tell for sure, but the U6 appears to require the computer to be on and hooked to the router in order to do anything. There are many ways of going about making music, and everyone has their preference, but I prefer to not have to use a computer in order to create music. Computers should be used for what gawd intended them for, looking at porn. I'm no computer programmer, but I'm not sure the MRCC could be controlled by an editor software like this and still be a MIDI class-compliant device. In other words, you'd probably HAVE to have the editor software installed and working in order to send MIDI data to and from the computer. As it stands right now, you just plug the MRCC into the computer and it works. But, all my comments aside, yes, I think software like this is cool and would be a plus. But it's not a deal breaker for me. So yeah, let's make this happen! RE: Building a software editor... - Raphie - 02-17-2024 Routing via the unit feels quicker for me. - Labeling is a 1 time excersize - presets are perfect for flipping configs The only thing lacking for me is renaming presets, so they make sense. A config file editor would be nice, though I don’t see myself unscrewing panels all the time to get microsd cards in and out. If an editor is important the MioXL with Auracle might be the better choice, different philosophy, but closer to what you’re asking for. RE: Building a software editor... - custa1200 - 02-17-2024 I too would find this useful. Not everybody understand complex scenarios the same way with some requiring more visual ways of understanding thing. Also Eyesight fades on people as they get older so it's often harder to read such small screens. IOt's a shame that people are being dismissive of the idea while showing no empathy for others that may use or understand things differently to them. RE: Building a software editor... - Raphie - 02-21-2024 I think it all starts with the possible - MRCC is NOT configureable via USB, a Teensy bootloader can’t cater for that. - editing the files on the MicroSD is the only option, which is cumbersome as it needs panel removal and the holder is not build for regular human interaction. So dreaming is nice but a sense of realism / achievement too.