Need Help ... Midi to USB for external midi keys and control

[GaryN]

Sorry about your screen DieHard… I make it a point to never read the news on ANY forum with coffee in hand…

I do not own a MOTU interface - never have. SO, I rely on what I read and hear.
One thing I read more than once was the for some reason, you need to have and/or run FreeMIDI to use Clockworks.
That seemed to indicate that even if you want to use ONLY OMS, you would need to "keep FreeMIDI around" just to make adjustments to your interface with Clockworks.

According to Refinery, that's NOT true. If so, and you're running ProTools, there is not one good reason to have them both.
Apparently, tunedbytad knows this as well, since he NOW mentions he "ditched Free Midii long ago and yes use PT5 w/ MTP/AV without Free Midi"

That makes his last query much simpler re: What should i use for my "PT Lite" writing rig?
Since that rig turned out to be another entire MDD, I don't have a clue what to suggest.

The real question seems to be "Can I put together a more-or-less compatible PT rig to write on that I can then transfer the files to my main rig?"
…which make it a ProTools question -  which then boils down to issues involved moving PT session from place to place.

We also clearly have VERY different ideas what constitutes a "writing rig"

Am I close? This thread has been wandering over multiple subjects, so I'm not sure myself.

[tunedbytad]

Gary,

I did settle on a midisport 2x4 for my PTlite song writing rig!!!
it is working great.

which then boils down to issues involved moving PT session from place to place.

Will be writing entirely with samplecell2 TDM & Access Virus TDM insterment /synth
bare bones system with limited TDM power and I/O
If I keep a copy of the samplecell insterment in the session folder it belongs to,
I can drag an drop a session onto a USB stick
this will be a very manageable size w/o little to no audio files

We also clearly have VERY different ideas what constitutes a "writing rig"
Am I close? This thread has been wandering over multiple subjects, so I'm not sure myself.

the point of this is to get me away from endless tangents of playing with all the studio gear
option over load / and tone exploration is a serious distraction for me.
as you can see I can barely keep this topic on the rails

[IIO]

that being said, I never had to chase down a MIDI issue in OMS for more than about 5 minutes, yet FreeMIDI was always a bitch, troubleshooting, filtering, and checking if continuous data from a sequencer was overloading it.

i find both to be completely idiosychratic nonsense systems and would have wished for a more linear setup and organisation.

it start with things like device list windows which can list no more than 6 units instead of providing a zoom bar and it doesnt end with not having a default location for "OMS setups" which easily let you change between different setups at startup of a project.

current coreaudio setup app is already quite a progress but still overcomplicated and buggy.

[GaryN]

i find both to be completely idiosychratic nonsense systems and would have wished for a more linear setup and organisation.

it start with things like device list windows which can list no more than 6 units instead of providing a zoom bar and it doesnt end with not having a default location for "OMS setups" which easily let you change between different setups at startup of a project.

As is so often the case, what you're saying makes no sense to me……at all.

My OMS setup window does everything I need it to do -
1) no "list limits" (I don't even know what that could be)
2) WTF is a "zoom bar" and how late are they open
3) OMS Setups DO indeed have a default location - in the OMS Folder (duh…) in System Extensions and they are easily accessed from the menu

I also don't know what you think "OMS setups" are supposed to be but everybody else sees them as Opcode intended: A layout and routing diagram of your studio and the MIDI devices in it - NOT something that needs to be accessed and changed often UNLESS you've decided to use the Setup window in some other way than it was intended to be used, in which case you're complaining Opcode didn't magically look into the future and foresee you doing so.

 "i find both to be completely idiosychratic nonsense systems and would have wished for a more linear setup and organisation."

If you're going to complain about what you perceive as "idiosyncrasies" in something, you should at least spell it properly.

[IIO]

As is so often the case, what you're saying makes no sense to me……at all.

yes of course. that happens because you think that everyone must have the same perception or opinion as you and otherwise he is "wrong".

but this doesnt work with opinions.

[/quote]My OMS setup window does everything I need it to do[/quote]

exactly.

[GaryN]

…and as also so often happens, you make statements and declarations ("i find both to be completely idiosychratic nonsense systems")

and when challenged to please explain / confirm / justify / elaborate upon what the Hell that means. you bail out.

I don't believe "everyone must have the same perception as me" - I asked you to explain specific things about your "opinion" where you named things ("list limits", "zoom bar" etc.) that I have never seen or heard of in OS9 Opcode software. (That's what people DO in order to communicate)
But when you either can't or won't and instead just throw shade at everything, you sadly become a waste of time for everybody.