Bring Back Simult!! vote!!

not missing the point, it's simply that i've talked to jj about this and know what the situation is. i've already detailed it fully on the forum and had hoped to not have to do the whole thing again, but here is the short of it:

OLD SIMULT behavior is excellent.
unfortunately, OLD SIMULT behavior causes bugs in many areas of the OS.
it caused these bugs in OS1, OS2, and OS2xl. users had to chase these down time and time again.

because of OLD SIMULT, changing one small thing in one area of the OS could cause problems in a number of many other parts of the OS.
this requires a LOT of continuous testing and a lot of bug-resurgence at every change.

as it was, OLD SIMULT was a shaky foundation that needed constant ramification.
if we could achieve the same behavior in some other way, this would be ideal. however, a return to the same programming used to implement OLD SIMULT would cause a LOT of problems. jj needs another way to skin this cat.

SIMULT PAD.
In voice ON/OFF processing, an exception records Master PAD.
The software with an exception tends to generate a bug.
DRUM/INST/CHORD/ARPEGITER/SIMULT PAD/SIMUTE SEQ./ Other .. You have to test these [every time].
When adding a new function, you have to check that this always operates normally.
It is difficult to build without this also generating a bug.
Much time is spent on this.

this entire poll is misleadingly worded and needs to have the entire premise edited. it shouldn't be "wat should we give in return for old simult LOL" it should be "who wants old simult type behavior back?"

in meantimes, it would be both confusing and ineffective to send this as it currently stands without some introduction like "forgive them, they know not what they ask for."

The poll should say "Is it very important that simult should work in the same way in JJOS2XL as it did in JJOS2?"
I believe the poll results would stay the same.

"...an exception records Master PAD."

What does this mean?

Hmmmmmmm...... cant he just us the ability to Q-link several pads together? Wouldn't this be a work around simult?

@ Jimmie - Exactly!!!!! +1

Nym wrote:not missing the point, it's simply that i've talked to jj about this and know what the situation is. i've already detailed it fully on the forum and had hoped to not have to do the whole thing again, but here is the short of it:

OLD SIMULT behavior is excellent.
unfortunately, OLD SIMULT behavior causes bugs in many areas of the OS.
it caused these bugs in OS1, OS2, and OS2xl. users had to chase these down time and time again.

because of OLD SIMULT, changing one small thing in one area of the OS could cause problems in a number of many other parts of the OS.
this requires a LOT of continuous testing and a lot of bug-resurgence at every change.

as it was, OLD SIMULT was a shaky foundation that needed constant ramification.
if we could achieve the same behavior in some other way, this would be ideal. however, a return to the same programming used to implement OLD SIMULT would cause a LOT of problems. jj needs another way to skin this cat.

SIMULT PAD.
In voice ON/OFF processing, an exception records Master PAD.
The software with an exception tends to generate a bug.
DRUM/INST/CHORD/ARPEGITER/SIMULT PAD/SIMUTE SEQ./ Other .. You have to test these [every time].
When adding a new function, you have to check that this always operates normally.
It is difficult to build without this also generating a bug.
Much time is spent on this.

this entire poll is misleadingly worded and needs to have the entire premise edited. it shouldn't be "wat should we give in return for old simult LOL" it should be "who wants old simult type behavior back?"

in meantimes, it would be both confusing and ineffective to send this as it currently stands without some introduction like "forgive them, they know not what they ask for."

Ok, well next time you speak to him let him know to bring back simult, please!!! Again this isn't some expendable feature, like pong or even chord. Its kind of a legacy with the mpc seeing as how its been included since damn near the mpc's inception. No shots though... Myself and others would really like to see it come back

Nym wrote:not missing the point, it's simply that i've talked to jj about this and know what the situation is. i've already detailed it fully on the forum and had hoped to not have to do the whole thing again, but here is the short of it:

OLD SIMULT behavior is excellent.
unfortunately, OLD SIMULT behavior causes bugs in many areas of the OS.
it caused these bugs in OS1, OS2, and OS2xl. users had to chase these down time and time again.

because of OLD SIMULT, changing one small thing in one area of the OS could cause problems in a number of many other parts of the OS.
this requires a LOT of continuous testing and a lot of bug-resurgence at every change.

as it was, OLD SIMULT was a shaky foundation that needed constant ramification.
if we could achieve the same behavior in some other way, this would be ideal. however, a return to the same programming used to implement OLD SIMULT would cause a LOT of problems. jj needs another way to skin this cat.

SIMULT PAD.
In voice ON/OFF processing, an exception records Master PAD.
The software with an exception tends to generate a bug.
DRUM/INST/CHORD/ARPEGITER/SIMULT PAD/SIMUTE SEQ./ Other .. You have to test these [every time].
When adding a new function, you have to check that this always operates normally.
It is difficult to build without this also generating a bug.
Much time is spent on this.

this entire poll is misleadingly worded and needs to have the entire premise edited. it shouldn't be "wat should we give in return for old simult LOL" it should be "who wants old simult type behavior back?"

in meantimes, it would be both confusing and ineffective to send this as it currently stands without some introduction like "forgive them, they know not what they ask for."

thats all very well and good, but to play devils advocate here (since i don't use simult much) - this suggests that the software hasn't been written very well from the start, if all these bugs will potentially be generated, and that what is ultimately causing them should be addressed. we now have a tail wagging the dog situation, the results of which (according to this poll) aren't wanted

well, it looks like everybody likes the old simult. everybody here usin these jjos's paid those guys for it. as barack would say: he's gotta just step up to the plate and get down to business. that business would be to stop bitchin about the bugs and fix it. if it could work in the mpc60,mpc2000,mpc2000xl,mpc3000, etc ad nauseum, then it can work in the 1000.

maybe holmes should try finishin somethin before movin on . just a suggestion. he got my money already, why not just complete the job, with no more excuses, excuses, excuses? i'm not naive , and don't expect him to step up to the plate because it sounds like it actually would take some TIME to do it correctly, and it's Sooooo much easier to drop it for something new and like this dubious looking pc-only software sequencer...

whatever , i use os2xl every day now.....i love it despite what i and many percieve as funny business practices of jj...

i just use more fingers at once and skip simult altogether now..

wow thats a big number I didn't even see this post ..... this is whats up ...a response is defiantly needed from jj

nym, savilion, and everyone else here looking to bring back the old simult...

let me know if this is the correct topic that needs to be stickied and i'll take care of it.

have a good weekend!

jj's been made aware of this thread. however - another thread would be better seeing as how this is an inaccurate poll that doesn't reflect well on the forum's general understanding of how things work. maybe a new thread "email simult wishes to jj" would be best as everything else contains a lot of either unrelated talk or "catching up"