01-15-2022, 04:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2022, 04:27 AM by oldgearguy.)
Apologies for the slightly long post. My family says I can't ever give a simple yes or no answer...
I keep coming back to the post and pinging you guys because I haven't heard an answer one way or the other.
Here's the fundamental issue - if only ports 1-6 support system exclusive in and out, then that means a lot of gear that I need sysex support for can only live on ports 1-6. Not 7-12 (for outputs) nor USB.
Normally, any gear that uses In and Out (whether it's audio or MIDI) gets connected to the same I and O channel number. Yes, in theory you could connect the In to one number and the Out to some different numbered point in the patchbay, but every audio patchbay from the beginning of time has the Ins and Outs in the same place, typically outputs above the same inputs.
So, sequencers, synths with on-board arpeggiators, and remote control surfaces (like the Electra One and others) need to at a minimum receive clocking and most likely CC messages and system exclusive for OS updates, patch dumps, etc. These are natural candidates for ports 1-6.
In parallel, there's effects units and rack synths that **mostly** receive MIDI (for notes, clocking, sending new patches via sysex, CC control over parameters). These could live on ports 7-12 but then you'd need some external merge box to handle the cases when those units send MIDI back and you'd need an available input for that merged data.
The MRCC is designed to be a hardware MIDI solution. It is expected to be connected to lots of hardware. There shouldn't be any difference *for the data* whether it's coming in via DIN, computer, or USB and whether it's going out USB, PC, DIN 1-6 or DIN 7-12. A patchbay lets you patch and route data from anywhere to anywhere.
It was already a slight concern that there was an uneven number of Ins and Outs, so I have two MRCCs to help with that. I do use a computer connected to the two MRCCs so that I can move data (notes being generated, clocking, sysex data, etc) to and from all the devices connected to the MRCCs and to route between the MRCCs if necessary. I plan on using the External connections for Remote 7 boxes and hopefully eventually plug in a 4 In expansion to the USBs if necessary.
However, if the majority of the MRCC connections do not support sysex, that leaves me in a bind. I bought into the MRCC concept because of the modern conveniences and the number of problems it solved for my setup. The sysex issue now causes me to periodically unplug and re-cable devices just to do basic things, which is exactly the thing you try to avoid when buying a patchbay.
So, it would be great to get a real status and approximate timeline on this issue. If it's being fixed, great; an estimated release date would be a huge help. If it's something that can't be fixed (for whatever reason), I'd like to know now so I can work on designing and implementing an alternate solution (FWIW, I don't think a third MRCC is the answer, but it might end up being the most cost effective one. I just haven't given it much thought yet).
I keep coming back to the post and pinging you guys because I haven't heard an answer one way or the other.
Here's the fundamental issue - if only ports 1-6 support system exclusive in and out, then that means a lot of gear that I need sysex support for can only live on ports 1-6. Not 7-12 (for outputs) nor USB.
Normally, any gear that uses In and Out (whether it's audio or MIDI) gets connected to the same I and O channel number. Yes, in theory you could connect the In to one number and the Out to some different numbered point in the patchbay, but every audio patchbay from the beginning of time has the Ins and Outs in the same place, typically outputs above the same inputs.
So, sequencers, synths with on-board arpeggiators, and remote control surfaces (like the Electra One and others) need to at a minimum receive clocking and most likely CC messages and system exclusive for OS updates, patch dumps, etc. These are natural candidates for ports 1-6.
In parallel, there's effects units and rack synths that **mostly** receive MIDI (for notes, clocking, sending new patches via sysex, CC control over parameters). These could live on ports 7-12 but then you'd need some external merge box to handle the cases when those units send MIDI back and you'd need an available input for that merged data.
The MRCC is designed to be a hardware MIDI solution. It is expected to be connected to lots of hardware. There shouldn't be any difference *for the data* whether it's coming in via DIN, computer, or USB and whether it's going out USB, PC, DIN 1-6 or DIN 7-12. A patchbay lets you patch and route data from anywhere to anywhere.
It was already a slight concern that there was an uneven number of Ins and Outs, so I have two MRCCs to help with that. I do use a computer connected to the two MRCCs so that I can move data (notes being generated, clocking, sysex data, etc) to and from all the devices connected to the MRCCs and to route between the MRCCs if necessary. I plan on using the External connections for Remote 7 boxes and hopefully eventually plug in a 4 In expansion to the USBs if necessary.
However, if the majority of the MRCC connections do not support sysex, that leaves me in a bind. I bought into the MRCC concept because of the modern conveniences and the number of problems it solved for my setup. The sysex issue now causes me to periodically unplug and re-cable devices just to do basic things, which is exactly the thing you try to avoid when buying a patchbay.
So, it would be great to get a real status and approximate timeline on this issue. If it's being fixed, great; an estimated release date would be a huge help. If it's something that can't be fixed (for whatever reason), I'd like to know now so I can work on designing and implementing an alternate solution (FWIW, I don't think a third MRCC is the answer, but it might end up being the most cost effective one. I just haven't given it much thought yet).