The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum

SEQUENTIAL/DSI => Tempest => Topic started by: Arrobb on February 02, 2017, 12:16:02 PM

Title: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Arrobb on February 02, 2017, 12:16:02 PM
Hello guys,
I've waited 10 months after the petition has been put on line.
Now, I understand you are a "small" company, I understand there is some problems that never will be solved,
I understand the difficulties about the programming of that machine, I understand that every year DSI works on different and new instruments, but 10 months are not a couple of week.
The tempest has a cost not for everyone, and personally I was forced to renounce to holidays and other crap for that.
Now I don't want a perfect drum machine, and if you've solved the majority of problems that the petition asks, it's enough.
Please, not another beta release, I'm asking for an official and stable release of  the Tempest as soon as possible. Thank you.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Stoss on February 02, 2017, 08:32:11 PM
Carson... a plan and a timetable would be nice. Honestly... none of us wants to start another petition.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Morgenspaziergang on February 03, 2017, 06:47:28 AM
Good post.

Im still on the pre-beta shipped OS. Been watching on the sidelines of the progress which has been great, but will wait for the stable version.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: BTS.WRKNG on February 03, 2017, 06:51:14 AM
I've been wondering about this, too, whether I missed some announcement about Roger Linn throwing in the towel on this effort or what happened...? I know that he was putting in lots of his personal time and that he also has a company to run but in my semi-frequent visits it seems like things went from 'active!' to just 'stalled out' somehow.

So it seems that I didn't miss anything — or that these others posting above me did, as well — and while I've been using Tempest on the latest beta I, too, am wondering whether there's a plan and/or timeline for addressing remaining bugs and turning this into a final, stable official release. Any info appreciated!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 03, 2017, 03:11:10 PM
I've been wondering about this, too, whether I missed some announcement about Roger Linn throwing in the towel on this effort or what happened...? I know that he was putting in lots of his personal time and that he also has a company to run but in my semi-frequent visits it seems like things went from 'active!' to just 'stalled out' somehow.

So it seems that I didn't miss anything — or that these others posting above me did, as well — and while I've been using Tempest on the latest beta I, too, am wondering whether there's a plan and/or timeline for addressing remaining bugs and turning this into a final, stable official release. Any info appreciated!

Hey folks,

I wish I could say something to lift your spirits, but really I'm just as frustrated as the rest of you.  If it's any consolation, I still touch base with Roger Linn every couple weeks, and do my best to keep the Tempest's OS in the foreground; but the truth is that DSI has once again shifted resources (and by resources I mean their one and only programmer) to other products.  As I'm sure you're all aware, they just announced two new synths at NAMM, never mind that some of their other, equally complex, operating systems have also been somewhat neglected over the years... Ahem!

Anyway, I've sent an email to Roger Linn with a link to this thread, and asked if he could at least comment on the Tempest's status.  I can tell you that LinnStrument keeps the man busy, and that he is as much at the mercy of Dave Smith's priorities as the rest of us.

My best advice to y'all is to keep kicking and screaming (as diplomatically as possible of course).  I have kept the bug-list concise and up-to-date in the beta thread, and every bug on it has been tested and confirmed by myself, Roger Linn, and the DSI team; so I invite you to run with it: re-post it, make some noise, update the petition... Whatever it takes!

In the meantime, try not to despair.  We are setting a new precedent here after all, or attempting to anyway, for consumer rights in an era of being at the mercy of half-baked products and the software that runs them, which we cannot fix ourselves.  Not gonna come easy it seems... No surprise there I suppose.  Wish I had more pull, and some better news for you.  Keep fighting the good fight...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: onesnzeros on February 03, 2017, 11:20:35 PM
Is there any chance the OS could ever be released as open source?
The community here is awesome, I'm sure there's a few people out there who'd be happy to help!
I think a move like this would really do wonders for everyone involved.

I could be wrong, but I'm sensing that Dave is maybe not the easiest guy to convince?

There really are a few things about the Tempest that i just can't believe haven't been included.
man, i love the synth, and this forum, but damn. $2999 (AU). One would assume a certain level of support?
or should the 'boutique' tag come with inverted expectations?
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: muleskinner on February 04, 2017, 04:25:37 AM
Predictably it's all gone quiet since Roger's been too busy with the LinnStrument to keep stirring things up.

DSI on their own, sadly, are useless and I'm still in the 'never buy another product from them' camp despite loving most things about the Tempest. Dave Smith just doesn't seem to 'get' the importance of continuing firmware development.

Still - at least we're in a better state than we were. An awful lot of progress has been made thanks to John, Roger and others.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: bozo on February 04, 2017, 06:16:26 AM
Predictably it's all gone quiet since Roger's been too busy with the LinnStrument to keep stirring things up.

DSI on their own, sadly, are useless and I'm still in the 'never buy another product from them' camp despite loving most things about the Tempest. Dave Smith just doesn't seem to 'get' the importance of continuing firmware development.

Still - at least we're in a better state than we were. An awful lot of progress has been made thanks to John, Roger and others.
+1 on every point
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: idm on February 04, 2017, 09:09:08 AM
Not finishing this beta would be the ultimate finger to the community of people who have put in the time to test and report. Let's hope they are not letting this slip...

Having said that, the current beta seems stable, works great, and no major workflow killing bugs.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Stoss on February 05, 2017, 09:14:46 PM
Maybe Pioneer needs to step up to the plate and put some programming muscle behind all of the unfinished DSI operating systems. I mean... they've gone and put Dave Smith's name on some of their gear now. To a not so small few, that is just more products that cannot be recommended without a serious warning about lack of development follow through.

I'm interested in hearing from Roger Linn, because he's awesome and has always had great things to say in regards to this ongoing saga... but... we need to hear from DSI. We need to know the plan.

Thanks in advance for keeping your commitments to your paid-in-full clients.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: tigerstylin on February 06, 2017, 01:20:44 PM
I have had several friends over the last year or so ask me about DSI synthesizers.  I am glad to say, that based on this unbelievably poor experience with the Tempest alone, I have been able to redirect them elsewhere.  Simply showing them the petition was enough to scare most of them away.

The fact that Roger Linn and John the Savage have had to step up to do customer service and support for Dave Smith Instruments, and we've never heard a word out of Dave Smith, is disgusting on a level I could not effectively capture in a single forum post.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: dslsynth on February 06, 2017, 01:52:14 PM
As someone who have been following DSI for years now I can say that the delicate topic of software updates have been a theme for a very long time and usually so for good reason. The best thing one could wish for is DSI maintaining their existing products more and better than they currently do.

However, the way they run their software department currently is that they either develop new products or maintain existing products. With NAMM recently done they are most likely still working on the finishing polish on their newly announced products and have quite likely been working on them for months. That is the main reason for temporary stalled Tempest OS maintenance.

Also, this is not the first year where frustrated Tempest users have been voicing their impatience with current efforts right around/after NAMM: "All these new products and why nothing for us!?".

I have no intent of defending DSI as they better stand up for their own decisions. However the very least I can do as a long time community member with a moderator role as well is to try and explain how thing currently work. Me not impressed. But this is how that machinery behaves.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: matteoviti on February 14, 2017, 03:54:08 PM
....and the conclusion is that we have to remain with this os?No more releases?

It's sad to see new products on the way and no support for the old ones.I own a tempest and a Pro 2 and i use them a lot and i would like to see improvements on those machines instead many new products. >:(
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: natrixgli on February 14, 2017, 04:58:49 PM
....and the conclusion is that we have to remain with this os?No more releases?

I could see how one would infer that from a forum post with no official statement for a whole week.  ::)

(especially from a company that has staunchly maintained for years that they do things based on their own internal schedule regardless of how much people post on forums. Or sign petitions.)
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 14, 2017, 09:53:33 PM
....and the conclusion is that we have to remain with this os?No more releases?

I could see how one would infer that from a forum post with no official statement for a whole week.  ::)

(especially from a company that has staunchly maintained for years that they do things based on their own internal schedule regardless of how much people post on forums. Or sign petitions.)

And yet the fact remains that signing the petition, spreading the word online, and contacting Roger Linn had a direct and positive influence on Tempest development.  You of all people should be thankful for our efforts, natrixgli, considering that you were literally the first person to download the new beta when it dropped.  But hey, thanks for the reality check, man.  I mean, it's a wonder we've made it this far, what with the odds we're facing...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: timbo74 on February 15, 2017, 05:45:13 AM
....and the conclusion is that we have to remain with this os?No more releases?

I could see how one would infer that from a forum post with no official statement for a whole week.  ::)

(especially from a company that has staunchly maintained for years that they do things based on their own internal schedule regardless of how much people post on forums. Or sign petitions.)

And yet the fact remains that signing the petition, spreading the word online, and contacting Roger Linn had a direct and positive influence on Tempest development.  You of all people should be thankful for our efforts, natrixgli, considering that you were literally the first person to download the new beta when it dropped.  But hey, thanks for the reality check, man.  I mean, it's a wonder we've made it this far, what with the odds we're facing...

Cheers!



I am sure Roger said on this forum before departing temporarily/possibly longer to promote Linnstrument that...

1) He wanted to fix some remaining issues that were still pending with Tempest! (Given the go ahead from DSI!)
2) How long is a piece of string with what we all may want Tempest to possibly be or to have the facilty to do! (ie: 8 track external sequencer ect !)

So in a nutshell, I can appreciate that it's very difficult to appease everyone but as one early adopting Tempest owner I still would hope that the major issues that are still able to be feasibly fixed on Tempest be done so before the sun sets into the horizon of this current and future classic!!

Thanks!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: idm on February 15, 2017, 09:23:24 AM
....and the conclusion is that we have to remain with this os?No more releases?

I could see how one would infer that from a forum post with no official statement for a whole week.  ::)

(especially from a company that has staunchly maintained for years that they do things based on their own internal schedule regardless of how much people post on forums. Or sign petitions.)

And yet the fact remains that signing the petition, spreading the word online, and contacting Roger Linn had a direct and positive influence on Tempest development.  You of all people should be thankful for our efforts, natrixgli, considering that you were literally the first person to download the new beta when it dropped.  But hey, thanks for the reality check, man.  I mean, it's a wonder we've made it this far, what with the odds we're facing...

Cheers!



I am sure Roger said on this forum before departing temporarily/possibly longer to promote Linnstrument that...

1) He wanted to fix some remaining issues that were still pending with Tempest! (Given the go ahead from DSI!)
2) How long is a piece of string with what we all may want Tempest to possibly be or to have the facilty to do! (ie: 8 track external sequencer ect !)

So in a nutshell, I can appreciate that it's very difficult to appease everyone but as one early adopting Tempest owner I still would hope that the major issues that are still able to be feasibly fixed on Tempest be done so before the sun sets into the horizon of this current and future classic!!

Thanks!

We probably have to wait a little until the NAMM madness has toned down a little.

May I ask though what these remaining major issues are? Haven't been able to find one so far. Only minor issues (which are still issues, but no deal breakers).
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: tigerstylin on February 15, 2017, 12:29:37 PM


We probably have to wait a little until the NAMM madness has toned down a little.

May I ask though what these remaining major issues are? Haven't been able to find one so far. Only minor issues (which are still issues, but no deal breakers).
[/quote]

We have already waited for the NAMM madness to tone down a little.... in 2016... and in 2015 before that....

I'll be completely honest and say that I do not currently experience any major issues with my own workflow on the Tempest. However, that was not the case before Roger Linn and John the Savage had dedicated a pretty significant amount of time to push to have stuff fixed that had been sitting on a community bug list for well over a year.

If there was some kind of arrangement for these two wonderful gentlemen to be financially compensated for their time, then I would be perfectly willing to revise this statement and my take on the situation, however, from where I am sitting, Dave Smith Instruments is run by someone who is completely comfortable with allowing other people to do their work for them.

People had to waste time testing and documenting bugs.
People had to waste time requesting updates, over, and over, and over.
People had to waste time starting a petition.
People had to waste time signing a petition.
Specific people (Roger and John) had to waste time convincing DSI to do something.
People had to waste more time testing, and documenting more bugs.
I still waste time checking this forum for a final update that may never come.

Dave Smith has never taken the time to respond in even a single forum post (unless I missed this somewhere).

No transparency.  No accountability.  No more of my money on DSI products.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: idm on February 15, 2017, 04:07:19 PM
So, in short, there's no major flaws in the current beta that you know of. I understand the frustration from the last couple of years but this current beta works pretty well and the reason I finally bought a Tempest was because of this beta. It would be nice if it got to an official release  and I cannot say I disagree with your statements, but enjoy the Tempest for what it is now, finally. It's awesome.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: matteoviti on February 15, 2017, 04:30:10 PM
I will surely buy something else from DSI because i think they make super sounding stuff.
At the same time i would like to have an official release of my Tempest ,not because i've paid it many euros, but because there's the chance to make it.
At this point the chance to release a newer OS is covered by the release of new products, so taking in consideration i have another piece of DSI gear what i have to expect?I have to make a petition once again?I have to send many mails to DSI support?I have to write here many words regarding DSI products?Maybe....

But i have ,like everyone of you, an own life made of other things and i would like to see a company do its things properly.

Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: timbo74 on February 15, 2017, 04:38:12 PM
So, in short, there's no major flaws in the current beta that you know of. I understand the frustration from the last couple of years but this current beta works pretty well and the reason I finally bought a Tempest was because of this beta. It would be nice if it got to an official release  and I cannot say I disagree with your statements, but enjoy the Tempest for what it is now, finally. It's awesome.



I was probably overzealous to say "Major bugs" and agree that most of the remaining issues are mostly workflow related.
Reading Rogers last posts gives us an idea of what is remaining to be fixed.
All the work put in by all involved (petition/beta testing/feedback ect) is appreciated to get Tempest to this point.
Cheers.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 15, 2017, 06:30:55 PM
If there was some kind of arrangement for these two wonderful gentlemen to be financially compensated for their time, then I would be perfectly willing to revise this statement and my take on the situation, however, from where I am sitting, Dave Smith Instruments is run by someone who is completely comfortable with allowing other people to do their work for them.

People had to waste time testing and documenting bugs.
People had to waste time requesting updates, over, and over, and over.
People had to waste time starting a petition.
People had to waste time signing a petition.
Specific people (Roger and John) had to waste time convincing DSI to do something.
People had to waste more time testing, and documenting more bugs.
I still waste time checking this forum for a final update that may never come.

Dave Smith has never taken the time to respond in even a single forum post (unless I missed this somewhere).

No transparency.  No accountability.  No more of my money on DSI products.

Ya, Dave, where’s my gratuity?  A man cannot live on integrity alone (smirk).

At any rate, you’re entirely right, tigerstylin.  This whole agonizing process has been an unfortunate waste of our time, and we have every right to be pissed about it.  We live in an era where companies don’t care and regularly mistreat us.  That notwithstanding, the fact is that if someone takes your money, they are obliged to stand by their promises, stated or implied.  The burden of Tempest development and maintenance should never have fallen on the community.  As customers, we should never have had to do DSI’s legwork for them: having to prove to them repeatedly that bugs exist, having to keep track of every word and every detail in order to hold them accountable.  There’s no other way to see it than they created our frustration.  People only get angry and raise their voices when they are misled or otherwise not listened to.  The obvious solution to angry customers is to simply listen, closely and accurately, then take action.

A great and principled man once said those exact words to me, but he will remain nameless (wink).



May I ask though what these remaining major issues are? Haven't been able to find one so far. Only minor issues (which are still issues, but no deal breakers).

Well, what constitutes a “major issue” is certainly subjective; however, this is as good a time as any, I suppose, to re-post an updated version of the bug-list for y’all...



Bugs remaining as of Feb. 15, 2017:

·       If you accidentally hit the 16 Beats or 16 Mutes button first, when trying to enter 16 tunings or 16 Levels mode, the Roll function automatically disengages – mode changes should happen upon the button’s release in order to prevent this.

·       In 16 Tunings mode, when the sequencer is stopped, both adding and releasing notes interrupts the Arp causing it to reset and fall out of sync.

·       In 16 Levels mode, when the sequencer is stopped, the Arp allows notes to be triggered outside of the selected quantize value, which creates undesirable flams when trying to depress multiple notes at once, or when adding new notes to the arpeggio.  Also, both adding and releasing notes interrupts the Arp causing it to reset and fall out of sync.

·       When recording with the Arp in 16 Levels mode, the held pads blink in succession with each note trigger as expected; but after the first pass of the sequence is recorded, only pad 16 blinks.  *In all other Arp modes, the pads continue to blink in the order they were depressed/recorded as expected.

·      When switching beats on-the-fly, the first step of the sequencer-out is consistently late; so if you're triggering a sample loop on the one, every time you switch beats on the Tempest, it will be out of sync for the first pass.  *This is an invasive fix.

·      Tempest starts one midi clock late or early depending on various conditions of the sync source or Tempest modes.  *This is an invasive fix.

·      If you hold 'Shift' and turn the Compressor knob to get into the compressor menu, you can no longer get back to the Mixer screen.

·      Compressor Envelope 'Amount' only goes from -64 to +127 instead of -/+127.

·      Regardless of what value is set and saved, every time the Tempest is power cycled the Compressor Envelope 'Peak Hold' parameter changes to match the value of the 'Amount' parameter.

·      After a power cycle, all the Compressor Envelope parameters display at the correct value as saved (*with the exception of 'Peak Hold' – see above); however, in actuality they are zeroed, and will otherwise remain that way until each parameter is revisited and its value is moved by at least one increment.

·      When Slider Mode is set to 'Real-time', only FX1 Slider is affected. FX2/3/4 sliders are always 'Step' regardless of this parameter setting.

·      Using Mod Paths for external MIDI sound control results in intermittent affect on the sound.  *Causes are unclear, but the bug occurs more frequently on playback of a Beat with many sounds.

·      When playing a Beat containing held notes of an ADSR sound, if you turn on Bank B while 1) a note is playing and 2) a different sound is selected, the playing note's pad sticks on.

·      LFO sync drifts when set to either 'Beat' or 'Play', and dotted eighths remains missing from the sync options.

·      The sequencer-out still doesn't trigger notes in real-time: i.e. it only sends trigger information after the sequence is recorded, which essentially means that you're recording deaf.

·      Beat roll still doesn't swing.

·      A sound folder is still need to correspond with the pad name "Synth".

·      When adding or copying steps via the Events Screen, the Pad lights do not correlate correctly in 16 Time Steps mode.

·      In 16 Mutes mode, on the Pads screen, although you are still able to select a sound (holding shift and hitting a pad) it is not reflected graphically on the display.  This could be fixed if the display matched the style of the Mixer screen.

·       The Mute/Solo/Delay buttons should perform their functions in both the 16 Mutes/Pads and 16 Mutes/Mixer screens.

·      Mutes “All On” should be available on the mixer screen in both 16 Mutes and 16 Sounds Mode.

·      In the System Menu > MIDI Remote Pad Play > when 'Pad To Note Mode' is set to 'Mutes', if a note number is received that is one of the 'Bank B' assignments on that page, it is treated as the 'Bank A' assignment of the same number.  For example, if Pad B1 is assigned to note# 80, and Pad A1 is assigned to note# 69, sending Tempest note# 80 will toggle the mute of pad A1.

·      The “Undo All Sounds” functionality needs to be better implemented or otherwise removed.  It is currently awkward, buggy, and a liability on account of the fact that it uses the 'Undo Rec' as a 'SHIFT' function.

·      When you set System > UI Preferences > Solo/Mute behavior to 'Seq only', if you mute a pad that contains a sequence and then attempt to play that same sound live in 16 Tunings mode, turning the Mixer Level knob causes the sound to cut-out.

·      If you edit a project and then attempt to do a RAM dump via the 'Save/Load' screen: 7. Export Project over MIDI, the Tempest freezes.

·      In '16 Beats' mode, when trying to copy/paste beats by holding the 'copy' button, nothing happens if you attempt to 'paste' into the beat that is currently selected; whereas pasting into an unselected beat works as expected.

·      If you toggle the 'Reverse' button on and play a beat, it plays correctly in reverse. However, if you then select a different Beat, the newly-selected beat does not play in reverse even though the 'Reverse' light is on.

·      While a sequence is playing, in '16 Time Steps' mode, on the 'Events' screen, disengaging the "Loop Screen" function causes the tempest flip-out for a second: i.e. all the pads light-up in rapid succession and the beat stutters.  Sync, however, is maintained.



Okay, the above list should accurately represent the Tempest’s status as of Beta OS 1.4.4bb.  I’ve removed any bugs that have recently been noted in the change-log as “fixed”, and have added any bugs that have been reported and confirmed since the last time I updated the list.  If I’ve missed anything, or if I’ve removed anything that has in fact not been fixed, please let me know.

Keep making noise, y’all.  We’re almost there.  And by “almost there”, of course, I mean hopefully we'll see these remaining bugs fixed within, say, a couple years or so, given the precedent that DSI has set… Ahem!

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: natrixgli on February 16, 2017, 04:57:01 AM
Fighting with DSI about Tempest development has been futile since about 2012. After four years of this you really gotta either love it or leave it. It's not worth the stress.

I'm not suggesting feature requests / bug reports are a waste of time, I'm just suggesting getting all upset when the company doesn't respond to forum posts is a waste of energy because it's pretty par for the course, and entirely expected based on several years of the same experience over and over.

DSI believes the Tempest is feature complete. They have not abandoned development, but plan to work on it at their own pace when they feel like it or have time or whatever.

I respect and appreciate the effort that John the Savage and Roger Linn put into trying to get development going again, though I can't say honestly that it's directly affected my enjoyment of the Tempest. Personally I liked it better before the most recent Beta OS versions. (The arp swing is great, but not worth the annoying alphabetical patch sorting and slow/glitchy screen refresh)

If owners should realize ONE thing about the Tempest, or DSI for that matter: Don't expect anything more than what's in the box when you buy it.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 16, 2017, 03:43:28 PM
Fighting with DSI about Tempest development has been futile since about 2012. After four years of this you really gotta either love it or leave it. It's not worth the stress.

I'm not suggesting feature requests / bug reports are a waste of time, I'm just suggesting getting all upset when the company doesn't respond to forum posts is a waste of energy because it's pretty par for the course, and entirely expected based on several years of the same experience over and over.

DSI believes the Tempest is feature complete. They have not abandoned development, but plan to work on it at their own pace when they feel like it or have time or whatever.

I respect and appreciate the effort that John the Savage and Roger Linn put into trying to get development going again, though I can't say honestly that it's directly affected my enjoyment of the Tempest. Personally I liked it better before the most recent Beta OS versions. (The arp swing is great, but not worth the annoying alphabetical patch sorting and slow/glitchy screen refresh)

If owners should realize ONE thing about the Tempest, or DSI for that matter: Don't expect anything more than what's in the box when you buy it.

If it seems "futile" to you, natrixgli, that's fair - hey, we're all entitled to our opinions - but to say that you preferred the Tempest before some 40 odd critical bugs were fixed, just because you'd sooner not have your files alphabetized, seems a little shortsighted if not discourteous.  It also betrays your casual use of it, because several of the bugs that we fixed were, without question, a hindrance to workflow, sound design, and live performance.  And that's before you consider that those broken and missing features represented a failing of the manufacturer to deliver, in a timely fashion, what their customers had paid for.  I dare say that the Tempest feels stable for the first time in years because of these improvements, and now we're pushing to get the loose ends tied up.  Why?  Because that's why you buy hardware.  Indeed a purpose-built interface and stable functionality are the only reasons to choose hardware over software.

Besides which, it's my time wasted (if that's the way you want to see it), not yours.  And whether you're willing to admit it or not, your Tempest is the better for it.  You can believe that DSI would have stepped-up eventually, without intervention, if you want to; but I'm telling you that you're wrong.  The activism and integrity of this community, myself, and Roger Linn have had a profound affect on Tempest development, and may even be setting a new precedent for the consumer.

And, no, I don't have to "either love it or leave it".  In fact, from where I'm standing, that kind of apathy and cynical outlook are exactly the problem.  Keep on fighting the good fight, folks...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Yorgos Arabatzis on February 16, 2017, 04:33:14 PM
We're with you all the way John ;)
"We gotta fight for our right to party" as the great Beastie Boys said!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: bozo on February 17, 2017, 02:38:52 AM
Fighting with DSI about Tempest development has been futile since about 2012.
How in the world are the recent developments futile?
Thats just goofy talk, and quite frankly disrespectful to John, Rodger and any of the now faceless DSi coders.
I wish something similar had happen over at Elekton with the Octatrack as E spent 2 years all on overbridge and said "No software update for you, NEXT."

If wasnt for the interface and underlying software, I would have sold my T by now, for me I've got much better sequencers and better sound generators.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: soidthezoid on February 17, 2017, 03:40:45 AM
Fighting with DSI about Tempest development has been futile since about 2012.
How in the world are the recent developments futile?
Thats just goofy talk, and quite frankly disrespectful to John, Rodger and any of the now faceless DSi coders.
I wish something similar had happen over at Elekton with the Octatrack as E spent 2 years all on overbridge and said "No software update for you, NEXT."

If wasnt for the interface and underlying software, I would have sold my T by now, for me I've got much better sequencers and better sound generators.

Hi Bozo,

I'm in the market for some good sequencers.  Which ones do you recommend?  I'd prefer a software plugin solution but would consider hardware too.  Also the sound generators you mention, what do you recommend?

Cheers, J :)
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on February 17, 2017, 09:52:11 AM
I agree and thank The Savage for his uncanny persistence. I can only hope that a final release will complete all bugs and that no new ones will be introduced. This partnership between companies was awesome but am afraid that the track record for this particular product will prevent future collaborations. I read from Pym a long while back that the code for the machine is extremly inflexible which made it difficult as hell to modify and or squeeze new features. I dont believe they realized this when planning the development of the Tempest.

Savage is bang on about corp product developement vs consumer expectations AND the reason why we buy hardware vs software. The prime reason why I sprung for the Tempest was the reputation of Roger Linn/DSI. I could have bought the Roland Aria series but am acutely familiar with Roland's set and forget corporate attitude. Besides, the feature differences of the TR-8 and the T! To me it was well worth it but the petition and the corp response to fixing the Tempest over all these years cemented by decision to buy it last year.

I am very happy with the purchase and mostly dont notice the bugs as a major flaw. I admit I use the machine for hobbying than professional use and so appreciate the dedication of this forum to hold DSI accountable. I wish that kicking and screaming wasn't needed to get their attention. Anyway, this whole topic can raise the ethical obligations of corporate financially driven needs vs the pursuit of perfection. It is a losing argument since companies compete to reduce costs and must also live on hairline proffit margins. I suggest the following: Can you honestly hold yourself accountable to the same expectation of standards that you hold others?

Consider that JR Tolken wrote a masterpiece over 20 years and 50 years later there are still errors in the print which are taken up by his son and few others 50 years later. I admire that dedication to the craft but know deeply about myself that any music I write doesn't carry the same intensity as Mr Tolken's drive to perfection. So, can we really beleive that DSI will continue to adress bugs over the next 50 years? Obviously no. It is admirable that they have gone so far as they did and trust that a final release will be worked on.

If you are still not impressed then sell or dont buy. However, Elektron stopped dev on the OT; Access comes close to continued dev due to new products but has stopped since the release of the TI2; A&H promised future upgrades on the DB4 and they shut down the forums due to community complaints about various bugs and requests; Pioneer charges a ridiculous amount for their CDJ's and only improve on new products not feature set of exisiting products; need I go on? These are products which I own but the list can surely cover at least 75% of the other companies out there. As the popularity of music production increases quality will undoubtably decrease to satisfy demand and new tech.

Just my two cents...
Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: idm on February 17, 2017, 11:35:14 AM
Completely agree. Can't thank John enough for his immense persistence and Roger for doing what is needed. I would've never bought a T if it weren't for the state the current beta is in.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Stoss on February 17, 2017, 03:22:37 PM
Hey LucidSFX.

I think it's important to remember that there is a difference between expecting a product to do what it is supposed to do and behave the way one would expect vs. thinking you are owed years worth of additional new features.

When I first bought the Tempest, a number of key features were not working correctly. I emailed customer support and let them know that I thought I had a broken unit. I was directed to the forum to download the latest beta which would supposedly fix all of my troubles. I had no interest in being on a forum. I just wanted the fix to my machine I had just paid a lot of cash for. What happened after that was a continued attempt to "get it right". It has not ended.

If you're relatively new to the Tempest, it's easy to see how you may think that this thing is fine... in fact I enjoy mine with no major complaints (except swing on beat roll). If you've been here a while, there is this disbelief that they can't just finish the thing.

I seriously just want the final fix to everything so I can stop coming to this forum looking for an update, or feeling like if I don't check in, DSI will just let it fade out of sight.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on February 17, 2017, 03:51:35 PM
@Stoss I agree with you considering that the product should not have been released as it was. I would even build into the R & D cycle a 2 year beta test group of a select group chosen from their dedicated fan base. The chosen get to buy at a heavily reduced price to accommodate the testing.  Come the release date it would be far cheaper to keep dev tem on new products than revisiting old ones.Aside from the fact that there are a couple of must fix issues most of this dialogue in my opinion falls under the category of philosophy *grin*. For example the push to sequence multiple hardware or the ability to make a cup of coffee. I actually don't mean to make light of the new feature request but come on people:) Workflow bugs need to be fixed. DSI should prioritize this as a final push to release the final public release and let the development die into Public Domain as open source. Considering how difficult it was to program the machine I would think that DSI will never opt for this coding again...let the public do so at their own risk.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Stoss on February 17, 2017, 07:10:34 PM
Yup. Early release of a product to try to sneak onto the market and get your dollars before you commit them to something else has become a real epedemic, which I think may be fading. The Tempest is a good example of the trouble it can get you into... writing a manual based on what you hope it will do rather than what it actually does. Then you've got the embarrassingly long teasers and half finished product demos... MatrixBrute (which is actually looking like quite the instrument). Anyway... Things are moving at quite a fast pace... something that doesn't seem to pair well with thorough vetting of equipment before release.

PS... just noticed the scotch in your equipment line up. Well done. 😉
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on February 17, 2017, 09:19:36 PM
Now if I can only figure a way to sidechain my scotch...
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 18, 2017, 12:32:55 AM
[...] Aside from the fact that there are a couple of must fix issues most of this dialogue in my opinion falls under the category of philosophy. For example the push to sequence multiple hardware or the ability to make a cup of coffee...

I'm getting tired of people associating "feature requests" with the bug-list, and otherwise skewing the conversation in the wrong direction.  There is no more room for conjecture here.  There are exactly 28 bugs on the list, which have been tested, confirmed, and carefully documented; and every last one of them represents a malfunction of the existing feature-set and functionality.  They are all "must fix issues" as far as I'm concerned.  A great deal of objectivity has gone into the compiling of that list, the petition behind it, and every one of the now hundreds of emails and phone calls that myself and Roger Linn have exchanged.

Our efforts to get the Tempest fixed have had nothing to do with the subjectivity and daydreaming found in the feature request thread; nor have we pandered, in any way, to the wild speculation of those coming late to the party.  If you want to make a point, I implore you to stick with the facts, and try to refrain from using dramatic examples that don't actually apply to the objective at hand.

And yes, admittedly, I'm in a testy mood.  But seriously, folks... I need you to focus (wink).

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on February 18, 2017, 05:02:09 PM
Hey John, I feel you man but am not sure if you understood what I wrote in that quote.

Just hope you quoted me correctly understanding that I absolutely do not want my Tempest to make a pot of coffee. *grin* when it is far more reasonable to expect a healthy glass of scotch.

Cheers!



Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Shanesplanet on February 18, 2017, 09:36:57 PM
I don't know either company or their philo's enough to sling mud. I will say that I sold my fist tempest because of 'deal breaker' issue that i noticed once i began really trying to utilize what i wanted it to do. A few months later I realized that the Tempest has a lot of flaws, but nothing was really filling the niche' it had. Since then, I have updated it a few times, and each time was a VAST improvement. This last Beta release is also an improvement.

I think my WANTS are a bit lofty. I am in an era that is blurring the lines between hardware and analog and un-realistic expectations. Yes, I am a little peeved that there were functions omitted after put in print, but I am seeing this as a trend, so I cant be so pissed at the dsi squad, unless i want to hate on ALL the current product manufacturers.

Long story short.. I don't know who or what is helping update the Tempest OS, but i thank them a LOT! I am sure at one point, I will be entirely content with what the T can and can't do. For now tho, we seem to hope for more. Im diggin it either way.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 19, 2017, 03:18:56 AM
Hey John, I feel you man but am not sure if you understood what I wrote in that quote.

Just hope you quoted me correctly understanding that I absolutely do not want my Tempest to make a pot of coffee. *grin* when it is far more reasonable to expect a healthy glass of scotch.

Cheers!

My apologies, Lucid, I should not have singled you out.  I just spend too much time reading, trying to keep up with a conversation that is convoluted at best and spread throughout dozens of threads on two separate forums - testing bugs, and going back and forth with Roger Linn over every detail - all in an effort to maintain an informed and objective perspective on the task at hand.  It takes hours to cross reference every bug report with the change-log, determine which bugs are real and which ones are just user error, and update the bug-list to accurately reflect the state of the Tempest with every new beta release.  I do this only to keep the community in the loop and focused on our mutual objective of getting the Tempest fixed; while Roger Linn and I have our own, much more in depth, conversation going behind the scenes (most of which I'm not at liberty to discuss in public, and for good reason).

I'm not complaining.  Hell, I'm doing this of my own volition.  I do, however, get frustrated from time to time when people interject with their subjective opinions or otherwise reference the absurd requests of others.  I'm not saying you did that necessarily, I'm just saying.  I mistook your comment about the conversation being mostly philosophical, as yet another cynic offering an unsolicited "reality check" about how we're never going to see the Tempest do this or that.  To which indignity, I thought you were using 'multi-channel external sequencing' as an example, when that's not even on the list that I so carefully compiled.  Please understand that many uninformed opinions going flying around here all the time, and that's why my tired self overreacted to you at 4a.m., even though I realize now that your comments were well-intentioned.  No hard feelings.

I'm sipping on a fine and very mature single malt as I type this, in hopes of making amends (wink).

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: rottis on February 19, 2017, 03:20:54 AM
DSI releasing the firmware source code would be the proper thing to do at this point.

- DSI could put the project to rest and stop dedicating any further resources.
- DSI would sell more units, since the product has new potential.
- Community would fix remaining bugs.
- Community would implement wanted features.
- All parties would be happy.

I can't see any downsides for this kind of arrangement. Only blocker I can think of, is that there are some licensing issues related to the source code. Perhaps some proprietary algorithms (swing?). But nothing that couldn't be solved by using a proper distribution license, like GNU GPLv3.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on February 19, 2017, 05:50:28 AM
Thanks Savage;) Scotch always lends to quality perspective *grin*
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: mano1 on February 19, 2017, 11:20:12 AM
>>> DSI releasing the firmware source code would be the proper thing to do at this point.

YES I was thinking about this the other day. I work with a lot of super talented engineers, including embedded code folks, and this isn't a crazy idea really...

I'm a long time AKAI MPC and Roger Linn fan, and have thought for years that AKAI should open source old OS code from discontinued / not supported products. Roger Linn himself released MPC 60 MkII OS update(s) years after it was discontinued. Not sure this was official stuff... Just saying.

I heard that "JJ" the Japanese guy behind the JJ OS for MPC 1000 and 2500 actually *took the source code with him* when he left AKAI, and built mad features on top. This was quite amazing for the community. Imagine if it wasn't just 1 person having free-for-all access...

Anyway --- again this is not too crazy a proposal / idea for Dave Smith to consider, again, for products DSI does not support any more.

mano

PS: how about an in-between idea? ... If no official engineer time is available, DSI reaching out to a few key people who may be happy to offer some of their time to fix things? Not DSI employees, engineers in the community
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Stoss on February 19, 2017, 12:22:25 PM
The release of the firmware from DSI is a topic that was covered at length on the old forum. It's a complicated matter. Please read up on what has been written to properly understand what the situation is.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Yorgos Arabatzis on February 19, 2017, 01:30:51 PM
This was the answer from Chris on the old forum:

Quote from: Pym
If someone invested in the tools to do the programming and was able to reverse engineer it enough to start coding, I'd certainly help them with some of the more difficult parts of the code process. I just don't have the time to manage an open source project, nor do we want to post the full code base at this point in time. Open sourcing things would not be less work for me, it'd end up being a lot more
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: idm on February 19, 2017, 01:39:12 PM
Which makes total sense. Open sourcing something after the fact is a lot harder than coding from the beginning with open sourcing in mind. There's so much that has to be explained, and the coding is probably not very intuitive for someone who  hasn't been through the process from the beginning.

Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 19, 2017, 03:23:28 PM
DSI releasing the firmware source code would be the proper thing to do at this point.

Hey, I'm the first to encourage the rebel mind and the independence of cottage industry; but seriously, "the proper thing to do at this point" is for Dave Smith to simply allocate the time and resources needed to fix the remaining bugs in the firmware and be done with it.  That much is perfectly doable with a little time and focus.  We've proven that already.

Again I say, can we not just focus on making the machine, as it was designed, work as intended and be happy with that?

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: dsetto on February 19, 2017, 10:44:14 PM
John the Savage, I appreciate what you're doing to address the Tempest. I'm patiently looking forward to the resolution of the issues that you, RLD, & DSI feel are significant.

Thank you.

dsetto.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 20, 2017, 02:28:58 AM
John the Savage, I appreciate what you're doing to address the Tempest. I'm patiently looking forward to the resolution of the issues that you, RLD, & DSI feel are significant.

Thank you.

dsetto.

Thank you, dsetto, I appreciate the kind words and the vote of confidence.

I promise y'all that the conversation between all camps is still moving in a positive direction.  I'm still hopeful that we will see more bugs addressed in the firmware before its final release.  And I encourage everyone to stay engaged.  Your voices are making a difference, at least as far as bug-fixes are concerned.  So if we can manage to keep focused on that objective, and ease up on the feature requests and demands for the code to be made public, we might just get the real issues fixed.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: muleskinner on February 21, 2017, 12:39:10 AM
Hi John - I don't see anything on that list about the bug that stopped the Tempest from playing two sounds at once (via the pads). Was this addressed do you know? I can't see it on the changelogs and still run into it sometimes (though I am not on the absolute latest beta)...

cheers
 
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 21, 2017, 01:36:19 AM
Hi John - I don't see anything on that list about the bug that stopped the Tempest from playing two sounds at once (via the pads). Was this addressed do you know? I can't see it on the changelogs and still run into it sometimes (though I am not on the absolute latest beta)...

cheers

Hi muleskinner,

Yes, that bug was actually a malfunction of the arpeggiator, and it has been address in the latest beta.  See #2. below...

Main OS 1.4.4bb:


Of course, if you do endeavor to update to the latest beta and happen to run into it again, please let me know.  To the best of my knowledge, however, it has been fixed.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Yorgos Arabatzis on February 21, 2017, 04:26:02 AM
Yep has been addressed on the latest beta..Make sure you reset system parameters though
Hi John - I don't see anything on that list about the bug that stopped the Tempest from playing two sounds at once (via the pads). Was this addressed do you know? I can't see it on the changelogs and still run into it sometimes (though I am not on the absolute latest beta)...

cheers
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: muleskinner on February 21, 2017, 05:09:04 AM
OK great - thanks. Looks like I need to update again!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: BTS.WRKNG on February 21, 2017, 06:20:19 AM
Make sure you reset system parameters though

Sorry if I've missed previous discussion of this and not to derail the thread, but could someone please briefly explain why this is important? I've kept up with some/most of the betas but don't think I've ever reset system parameters...
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: Yorgos Arabatzis on February 21, 2017, 07:05:46 AM
Ooops my mistake no need to reset parameters that was for previous beta...Here's my conversation with Carson:

Yep for me the 2nd was the lucky one..Didn't encounter it again..If i'll update to a newer beta and still persist then it must be somewhere hidden and comes out with every update..Just a guess..
The issue with two sounds not being able to be triggered at the same time seems to be resolved by resetting the Tempest's system parameters.  Would users whom are encountering this issue please reset the system preferences and check whether the issue is still present?

I already spoke to Roger Linn directly about this; but just so everyone knows, I was able to get the Tempest back into this state, despite having reset the system parameters.  So the reset does work to solve the problem temporarily, but it seems this bug runs deeper and remains cause unknown...

Cheers!

This was the bug:

Main OS 1.4.4bb:

Fixed Bug: When roll mode is set to anything other than retrig, only a single sound may be played at one time.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: guy smiley on February 21, 2017, 11:16:13 AM
John,
Until reading this thread I hadn't realised how much of the recent improvements to the Tempest were in no small part due to your concerted efforts. Like many more, I expect I am part of a silent majority who benefit from this, but don't participate.
Just to say thank you very much indeed. It's obviously a mammoth task, and the lack of active participants is not an accurate measure of the number of beneficiaries.

It would seem to me that a final 'push' from DSI to release a single stable version (even one with 'known bugs') HAS to be the only way to move forward. There are far too many people who would never run a Beta version of (any) software. DSI seem to think that having the only truly functional operating system for their brand defining product residing on a forum post somewhere is acceptable. It clearly is not.

DSI. get it together. Seems to me that the current Beta is such an improvement on the existing 'official' OS that it should be released properly and 'known bugs' published. Then work on releasing betas to squash those bugs.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: John the Savage on February 21, 2017, 05:01:01 PM
John,
Until reading this thread I hadn't realised how much of the recent improvements to the Tempest were in no small part due to your concerted efforts. Like many more, I expect I am part of a silent majority who benefit from this, but don't participate.
Just to say thank you very much indeed. It's obviously a mammoth task, and the lack of active participants is not an accurate measure of the number of beneficiaries.

Well, I've been acting primarily as an intermediary, beta tester, and clerk.  And yes, it has proven to be a lot of work, and certainly has demanded my undivided attention at times; but it's Roger Linn that you have to thank more than anyone.  He's the guy with the influence.  Indeed he is the only person with the means to negotiate directly with Dave Smith to get these bugs fixed.

It has been an honor and pleasure working closely with Roger: isolating issues as they arise, prioritizing fixes, testing each new incarnation of the firmware before it is posted here; and discussing, not just the Tempest, but music tech in general.  And as I've said before, I did assume this role of my own volition, and I'm flattered to have ended up representing the community in the process.  So thank you.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: MisterHemi on February 22, 2017, 03:59:07 PM
John,
Until reading this thread I hadn't realised how much of the recent improvements to the Tempest were in no small part due to your concerted efforts. Like many more, I expect I am part of a silent majority who benefit from this, but don't participate.
Just to say thank you very much indeed. It's obviously a mammoth task, and the lack of active participants is not an accurate measure of the number of beneficiaries.

Well, I've been acting primarily as an intermediary, beta tester, and clerk.  And yes, it has proven to be a lot of work, and certainly has demanded my undivided attention at times; but it's Roger Linn that you have to thank more than anyone.  He's the guy with the influence.  Indeed he is the only person with the means to negotiate directly with Dave Smith to get these bugs fixed.

It has been an honor and pleasure working closely with Roger: isolating issues as they arise, prioritizing fixes, testing each new incarnation of the firmware before it is posted here; and discussing, not just the Tempest, but music tech in general.  And as I've said before, I did assume this role of my own volition, and I'm flattered to have ended up representing the community in the process.  So thank you.

Cheers!

No, thank you and of course Roger Linn.

I know Roger is busy and hopefully he'll be back soon. That "push" is what seems to be needed to get things going again.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: bozo on February 24, 2017, 10:01:35 AM
It has been an honor and pleasure working closely with Roger:
Other than our gratitude I guess thats your "paycheck" for the massive effort you've put in, and a "sizable one" imo. :)

As an aside, our band bought Linn 2 to replace our 808, and when I left the band a year or so later I bought a Drumtraks
Linn vs Smith = Solid Tempest OS? ;D
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on March 06, 2017, 06:19:37 PM
I can't believe we have been slammed with a final beta OS. That sucks. In my opinion, out of all the issues the LFO sync drift is brutal and should have been included in the final release.

Dave mentioned that he was happy with the creative ways to use the Tempest...etc...the LFO sync drift for play or beat is used specifically for sound design not only unplanned creative usage. Seriously, this just can't be left as is...

We should have a poll for which bug from the list above should be considered as the most important fix and try to get at least one more done. I only care about the LFO's...the foundation for any synth...
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: tigerstylin on March 07, 2017, 07:30:11 AM
Dave Smith is disgusting.  A one post F-U to us in a locked thread.  Cowards hide.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: dslsynth on March 07, 2017, 03:16:34 PM
I have personally been looking at Tempest maintenance as an exam for DSI on how they handle their long term product maintenance. And well, the exam is in writing so it will be a while before the marks are in. But I think quite a few of us have a clear feeling of the direction its heading.

Tempest is of cause a little special because it was a project that was honestly at the edge of what they had resources to make. That is probably the reason why they decided to stop now: lack of resources. But no matter what it can easily develop into a PR disaster for DSI as people knowing of this will think: "Can we trust that our software quality problems with our instruments will actually be fixed!?"

Looking forward there are a number of lessons to be learned. First of all for DSI to make machines they are sure they can make and maintain well. Secondly instead of DSI making a new drum machine it would be much smarter to make a multi-timbral module that can be sequenced from either a DAW or a hardware sequencer. Thirdly DSI customers can benefit from testing their use cases for their synthesizers before buying them.

Going back to the initial BoomChik/LinnDrumII design concepts there were voice architecture ideas on the board that could very well be worth exploring in a new product. Think dual use drum synthesis and polyphonic duties. Features like very fast envelope times and AD modes would be great to have. Tetra style poly and voice-per-channel multi modes would be perfect to see in a new product.

Anyway, its time for popcorn! . o O ( :-X )
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: LucidSFX on March 07, 2017, 03:28:30 PM
Think you'd mind posting your paper? I remember when software came out for audio...programs were buggy as hell. Hardware was the way to go but they were much simpler then. However, the concepts of build, sell, then fix is all too common place in this market. If this machine was $300 then ok but it isn't.
Title: Re: Official Release OS Date
Post by: muleskinner on March 08, 2017, 05:34:35 AM
However, the concepts of build, sell, then fix is all too common place in this market.

Or even worse - build, sell, then don't fix!