Bug in parameter value range with VALUE knob

[Razmo]

Try this... wiggle the FINE TUNE knob to max for one of the oscillators.... it will max out at +50... now try to turn the VALUE encoder to the right... notice that this allow you to set a value of 51... this must surely be a bug?

[skrohmer]

Sometimes the FINE TUNE knob lets me set -49 to +51 and snaps in the middle at +1, most of the time its range is -50 to +50 with middle pos = 0. The VALUE knob always provides me the range -50 to +51. Should not be the most serious bug though... 

[The Man Machine]

Try this... wiggle the FINE TUNE knob to max for one of the oscillators.... it will max out at +50... now try to turn the VALUE encoder to the right... notice that this allow you to set a value of 51... this must surely be a bug?

It probably works as a tachometer, it counts pulses that result in a read out.

In your case there is probably an off set.

[Razmo]

No... the range I get is from -50 to +50 with the Fine Tune knob... with the Value Knob it is -50 to +51 ... which is really quite odd because it should not exceed +50...

Besides, this thing seems to be riddled with bugs

[Robot Heart]

Please inform our dedicated technical support channel of any potential bugs directly rather than starting multiple bug threads. Perhaps stick to a single thread to keep things tidy.

This synth is not "riddled with bugs", for the most part the OS is extremely solid and as you can see some of it is user error. Even if this is a bug, it's a very small one that does not affect operation and it's low visibility. If we confirm it for you through our support channel we'll add it to the bug list.
Thanks!

[The Man Machine]

Besides, this thing seems to be riddled with bugs

That is a bold statement, can you back it up?

[Razmo]

Besides, this thing seems to be riddled with bugs

That is a bold statement, can you back it up?

Partly I'd say... I made some mistakes that was because of me, and not bugs like I thought... but I still feel there are quite a few of them... The LFO's don't work as they should, The value range I mentioned in this thread and the weird behavior with the Layer A/B initialization when switching programs... that is three bugs, in addition to other reports that I've read about FX etc... besides, to me even ONE known bug is one too many, that's just how it is... riddled or not .. .my definition of "riddled" probably have a very low treshold... I just like stuff that work.

Another thing I do not know if I'd call a bug is the way the REV2 behaves when hooked up with a DAW that echo back to the REV2 (Local off set to "off")... when I turn the Program encoder fast, the behavior is erratic... if I give the encoder a fast turn, the programs seem to keep changing up to half a second after... I'm not sure why that is, but it seems like the echo'ed program changes get delayed or something.

Then there is all of the typos in the MIDI section in the manual that bear very clear signs that it was not proof read very well before launch, having old values from earlier manuals for other machines... I've been partially "fixed" with this as I've been given a new NRPN list from support, and even if this is not a bug, it's still very confusing..

Then there is the SysEx bug... it may be "impossible" to fix it as DSI says, but that any program dumped ends up with the four last bytes not in the dump, damaging the velocity track 6 of the Poly sequencer, is in my eyes, a bug.

Things add up, and that is why I say it's "riddled with bugs"... it's MY opinion, anyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

[The Man Machine]

Besides, this thing seems to be riddled with bugs

That is a bold statement, can you back it up?

Partly I'd say... I made some mistakes that was because of me, and not bugs like I thought... but I still feel there are quite a few of them... The LFO's don't work as they should, The value range I mentioned in this thread and the weird behavior with the Layer A/B initialization when switching programs... that is three bugs, in addition to other reports that I've read about FX etc... besides, to me even ONE known bug is one too many, that's just how it is... riddled or not .. .my definition of "riddled" probably have a very low treshold... I just like stuff that work.

Another thing I do not know if I'd call a bug is the way the REV2 behaves when hooked up with a DAW that echo back to the REV2 (Local off set to "off")... when I turn the Program encoder fast, the behavior is erratic... if I give the encoder a fast turn, the programs seem to keep changing up to half a second after... I'm not sure why that is, but it seems like the echo'ed program changes get delayed or something.

Then there is all of the typos in the MIDI section in the manual that bear very clear signs that it was not proof read very well before launch, having old values from earlier manuals for other machines... I've been partially "fixed" with this as I've been given a new NRPN list from support, and even if this is not a bug, it's still very confusing..

Then there is the SysEx bug... it may be "impossible" to fix it as DSI says, but that any program dumped ends up with the four last bytes not in the dump, damaging the velocity track 6 of the Poly sequencer, is in my eyes, a bug.

Things add up, and that is why I say it's "riddled with bugs"... it's MY opinion, anyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I have communicated with DSI about a silly thing on their website (not gear related) and had an almost instant reply.

I did the same with Moog (this time gear related, filter pot on Sub37) and they replied within hours.

Just love to see that these brands take their customers seriously.

Imho it is great that these brands are around these days and mind a REV2 is a lot of synth for the money!

Support them and help them make better synths 

No, DSI is not paying me to say this 

[Razmo]

Besides, this thing seems to be riddled with bugs

That is a bold statement, can you back it up?

Partly I'd say... I made some mistakes that was because of me, and not bugs like I thought... but I still feel there are quite a few of them... The LFO's don't work as they should, The value range I mentioned in this thread and the weird behavior with the Layer A/B initialization when switching programs... that is three bugs, in addition to other reports that I've read about FX etc... besides, to me even ONE known bug is one too many, that's just how it is... riddled or not .. .my definition of "riddled" probably have a very low treshold... I just like stuff that work.

Another thing I do not know if I'd call a bug is the way the REV2 behaves when hooked up with a DAW that echo back to the REV2 (Local off set to "off")... when I turn the Program encoder fast, the behavior is erratic... if I give the encoder a fast turn, the programs seem to keep changing up to half a second after... I'm not sure why that is, but it seems like the echo'ed program changes get delayed or something.

Then there is all of the typos in the MIDI section in the manual that bear very clear signs that it was not proof read very well before launch, having old values from earlier manuals for other machines... I've been partially "fixed" with this as I've been given a new NRPN list from support, and even if this is not a bug, it's still very confusing..

Then there is the SysEx bug... it may be "impossible" to fix it as DSI says, but that any program dumped ends up with the four last bytes not in the dump, damaging the velocity track 6 of the Poly sequencer, is in my eyes, a bug.

Things add up, and that is why I say it's "riddled with bugs"... it's MY opinion, anyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I have communicated with DSI about a silly thing on their website (not gear related) and had an almost instant reply.

I did the same with Moog (this time gear related, filter pot on Sub37) and they replied within hours.

Just love to see that these brands take their customers seriously.

Imho it is great that these brands are around these days and mind a REV2 is a lot of synth for the money!

Support them and help them make better synths 

No, DSI is not paying me to say this 

I have not complained about DSI's support ... they are quick to answer, yes...

Yes... MOOG support is very good, Amos fixes ALL bugs I report without any talk about "visibility etc."

Agree... but sometimes I do not think DSI take all bugs seriously, and I have all the reasons in the world to think so.

Yes I'm very happy with these brands (Waldorf, Moog, DSI, Novation etc.), and yes, REV2 is darn cool... even better when bugs have been eliminated. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against DSI at all, I just try to encourage them to fix all the bugs they know about, and make the REV2 perfect! (it's like with parants you know... they may get angry at their kids, but does so out of love )

I AM supporting them... I've bought in the past: Mopho, Tetra, Mono Evolver Keyboard, Desktop Evolver, Poly Evolver Rack, Prophet 08, Prophet 12, Tempest and now REV2 ... and I have tried supporting them with bug reports since the beginning, either thru forums or via support.

No... DSI gear is usually pretty stable, but almost all of their products have known bugs that was never fixed, either because the gear is now too old, or because they obviously prioritize their bug fixing... some things are simply not fixed, and what might seem like nothing to some people, may be a nightmare to others... it's a completely personal thing depending on how you use your gear... I've always been extremely MIDI dependent, mostly because I use editors, and remote control DSI gear... DSI gear have the best MIDI control... when it works that is...

But I know that this is their company philosophy, no matter how much I disagree with their bug-fixing policies, so I'll just learn to live with it... DSI is still great gear, and my plan is to actually have just three pieces of DSI gear in the end when my studio is finished...

[vinnyburns1@mac.com]

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I would rather you carried on relaying things you find as you find them. I really wanted this synth from when it was first announced but am sticking with my mk1 until everything is ironed out. Think it's a bit naughty for anyone from DSI to pressure people to keep anything they find wrong with the REV2 secret from the forum. :-(

[DavidDever]

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I would rather you carried on relaying things you find as you find them. I really wanted this synth from when it was first announced but am sticking with my mk1 until everything is ironed out. Think it's a bit naughty for anyone from DSI to pressure people to keep anything they find wrong with the REV2 secret from the forum. :-(

I disagree - there's a lot of noise in this subforum in particular, much of which turns out to be user unfamiliarity (first synthesizer, USB MIDI issues, DAW interaction, etc.). If the issues are relayed through support, they can be tracked internally at DSI, replicated in-house and then enumerated here, rather than anecdotally on the user forum (with no way to formally track their resolution for developer purposes).

I'd rather see something along the lines of the Tempest unresolved issues thread, e.g., "POST ISSUES here".

The sysex bug, on the other hand, could easily foul up a third-party editor, so it's probably appropriate to raise that as its own quasi-operational issue.

[Razmo]

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I would rather you carried on relaying things you find as you find them. I really wanted this synth from when it was first announced but am sticking with my mk1 until everything is ironed out. Think it's a bit naughty for anyone from DSI to pressure people to keep anything they find wrong with the REV2 secret from the forum. :-(

I'll write about it in here if I find anything... but I'll have the bugs confirmed by DSI first via support, before I write about them... that is sort of the "middle way" of doing it...

[Razmo]

But don't worry... I've promised to just send bug reports directly to support in the future, which I intend on doing ... I won't post them in here anymore... I should have known from past experiences that I should not do that.

I would rather you carried on relaying things you find as you find them. I really wanted this synth from when it was first announced but am sticking with my mk1 until everything is ironed out. Think it's a bit naughty for anyone from DSI to pressure people to keep anything they find wrong with the REV2 secret from the forum. :-(

I disagree - there's a lot of noise in this subforum in particular, much of which turns out to be user unfamiliarity (first synthesizer, USB MIDI issues, DAW interaction, etc.). If the issues are relayed through support, they can be tracked internally at DSI, replicated and identified here, rather than anecdotally on the user forum with no way to formally track them for developer purposes.

I'd rather see something along the lines of the Tempest unresolved issues thread, e.g., "POST ISSUES here".

The sysex bug, on the other hand, could easily foul up a third-party editor, so it's probably appropriate to raise that as its own quasi-operational issue.

I find that trying to hide bugs from the users is a problem really... but I can also see, that errors in posted bug reports like I've been doing a few times is capable of hurting sales, so I'm perfectly aware why DSI want us to go directly for support with bug reports...

But hiding known bugs I find bad... REALLY BAD! ... especially if DSI has no intention of fixing them, like I feel has been the case with the missing data at the end of the REV2 SysEx string... that's not fair in my opinion.

But I've decided to go directly to support and get the bugs I find confirmed before I'll write about them in the future... that way I'm not going to be blamed for posting about bugs that are not bugs anyway...

Besides I only find it fair, that potential buyers know about existing bugs... especially those they have no intention of fixing ... a bug may be nearly invissible to some users, while it will ruin a lot for others, depending on how they use their gear...

[dslsynth]

The sysex bug, on the other hand, could easily foul up a third-party editor, so it's probably appropriate to raise that as its own quasi-operational issue.

Both yes and no. It depends on how important the last few steps of layer B chord sequence six is to the user.

As one of those affected by the Evolver sysex bug where several central voice parameters are not transferred from a received edit buffer dump to the Evolver's current sound I can tell you that it could be a lot worse than it is on Rev2.

[Razmo]

I just guess we have to face that even though DSI does A LOT to make really comprehensive MIDI specs (which of course also leads to greater chances for bugs in it), then this area is the one that is most often neglected, simply because most people do not use it or even encounter the problems... especially if they do not use editors... the devices was made for live tweaking with huge editing interfaces, so I guess they simply downvalue the MIDI spec bugs if other things are more pressing... This is something people should simply take into account when they buy their devices... unfortunately it's really hard to know if nobody writes about these bugs, and DSI don't make a list of current bugs for people to read before purchase.

I myself have no excuse... I've witnessed these neglected bugs on both Evolvers and Tempest the hard way...

[Robot Heart]

For the record, we *never* try to hide bugs from the public eye. Our request was simply what Razmo proposed to do, which is verify bugs before posting. There's nothing wrong with trying to get consensus with other users regarding synth behavior, but as DavidDever points out there is a lot of chatter in this forum and it can be difficult to distinguish between something that is user error and a bonafide issue with the synth. We're all for documenting actual bugs. We'd just like to keep the forum full of informed information and less misinformation whenever possible.

We'll make a dedicated bug thread where bugs can be collected in one place.
Thanks!

[Razmo]

For the record, we *never* try to hide bugs from the public eye. Our request was simply what Razmo proposed to do, which is verify bugs before posting. There's nothing wrong with trying to get consensus with other users regarding synth behavior, but as DavidDever points out there is a lot of chatter in this forum and it can be difficult to distinguish between something that is user error and a bonafide issue with the synth. We're all for documenting actual bugs. We'd just like to keep the forum full of informed information and less misinformation whenever possible.

We'll make a dedicated bug thread where bugs can be collected in one place.
Thanks!

Cool! I'll look forward to that thread then... Maybe it would be smart to make such a thread in every device section... just a thought...

[dslsynth]

For the record, we *never* try to hide bugs from the public eye.

Have to agree very much with the stated bug report policy.

But strictly speaking, wasn't there some rumors of users knowing about the Rev2 sysex bug being asked not to talk about it?

. o O ( ... )

[Robot Heart]

Not to my knowledge, that doesn't sound like a policy we have on bug reports, but also I can't read every single user post on the forum 100% of the time, so I can't speak to what a user may have said publicly.

I assure you, we do not try to hide the knowledge of bugs from the public. We just want to make sure what's being touted as a bug is actually a bug, and not a feature request or user error.

[Razmo]

Not to my knowledge, that doesn't sound like a policy we have on bug reports, but also I can't read every single user post on the forum 100% of the time, so I can't speak to what a user may have said publicly.

I assure you, we do not try to hide the knowledge of bugs from the public. We just want to make sure what's being touted as a bug is actually a bug, and not a feature request or user error.

Then maybe you could elaborate a bit on why this bug is not fixable, which is what I got the impression that it's not? ... I really do not understand why, as this is a software bug... after having analyzed the SysEx structure, there seems to be many unused bytes left, so why not move the polyseq data a few bytes back so that everything is included? ... is it because older bank dumps will then be obsolete? ... is it really so cumbersome a task that you would rather have a slightly crippled poly sequencer?

I mean... you don't have to answer me if you don't want to... but I really are wondering why this is not considered a serious bug to be honest....