MPC-Tutor wrote:Does anyone have any experience beta testing for audio production companies, hardware or software? Are they relying on volunteer beta testers, or do most hire dedicated in-house testers?
Monotremata wrote:Done it for a couple companies in the past and recently the 'public beta' for SoundToys. In all these cases, there is an internal team that handles the majority of the work and the 'public' testers get to play with it and just make sure nothing is broken. Never seen a script or anything to run against like I have doing this kinda stuff 'in house' at work. Most of it was ages ago, and I got the plugins I tested for free out of it. SoundToys was just a fun one since it was the whole VST3 update and its not like anything new was coming out from them.
MPC-Tutor wrote:Ultimately I'm wondering if these companies normally have an extensive alpha team consisting of actual full time paid staff, 9-5 testing the stuff before handing over to volunteer public beta testing, or do they just rely on volunteers throughout the entire chain, even on the internal team.
Bodyguard wrote:For the more juicy stuff: I have it on good authority via a few direct sources that they are NOT doing well behind the scenes. You know how a few users have said the people programming the MPC don't use the MPC? Believe that. Also believe the stories of hired guns fixing the code of previous employees. INMUSIC is NOT interested in implementing things that aren't already available in their previous software from ten+ years ago, because that would require knowing what to do, and why do that when you can copy/paste your way though this lifecycle?
Bodyguard wrote:Thought I'd register on the forum after reading a few posts in this thread. Here's my experience.
tl;dr - RUN. RUN AWAY AND DON'T LOOK BACK.
So I was "beta testing" the MPC Live for Akai for several years on their super secret beta testing forum, and during this time, I submitted close to 67 bug reports, 83 UI/workflow suggestions, and countless other ideas to make the MPC a better machine to use. I have experience beta testing in other fields, and I'm intrinsically familiar with both the vintage/modern MPC workflows. Everything was thoroughly documented, and submitted in a way that should have made sense to even the most basic user. From where I stand, there are smart ways to bridge the gap between workflows and have it make sense, but when I tell you Akai has been a dumpster fire for literal YEARS, please, believe me. Or don't, I guess. I know some of the users are bizarre Akai apologists, so if you are one of them, you do you and miss me with that.
For the petty stuff: want to take a wild guess as to how many of my suggested bugs were hammered out (as far as I was informed)? Zero. How about the workflow suggestions they claim to care so much about. Zero. Akai offered zero feedback on what was accepted, what was being working on, when a new beta could be expected, or hell, ANY information. It got to the point where a few of us thought maybe everyone at Akai lost their login info. There were periods of months were there was zero word about anything. To add insult to injury, there was another Akai ALPHA group running in parallel, and the only way any of us knew was because Akai reps would cross lines, confuse the two, and leak their own information. It's a ****.
For the more juicy stuff: I have it on good authority via a few direct sources that they are NOT doing well behind the scenes. You know how a few users have said the people programming the MPC don't use the MPC? Believe that. Also believe the stories of hired guns fixing the code of previous employees. INMUSIC is NOT interested in implementing things that aren't already available in their previous software from ten+ years ago, because that would require knowing what to do, and why do that when you can copy/paste your way though this lifecycle?
Basically, save your time and energy. Don't sign up for beta. It's both free marketing and free QC for them, which wouldn't be such a bad thing if they knew what they were doing with it.
jabberwalky wrote:Curious what device you moved on to because of all this? I can see myself sticking around with the MPC for a while, but my optimism has been worn away in a matter of 2 years. The potential is great, but the people running the show are not.
Bodyguard wrote:...Akai offered zero feedback on what was accepted, what was being working on, when a new beta could be expected, or hell, ANY information. It got to the point where a few of us thought maybe everyone at Akai lost their login info. There were periods of months were there was zero word about anything. To add insult to injury, there was another Akai ALPHA group running in parallel, and the only way any of us knew was because Akai reps would cross lines, confuse the two, and leak their own information. It's a ****.
Bodyguard wrote:Basically, save your time and energy. Don't sign up for beta. It's both free marketing and free QC for them, which wouldn't be such a bad thing if they knew what they were doing with it.
jamos wrote:Bodyguard, thank you for your Frank assessment. I was considering applying for the beta program, I'm a former software engineer at Emu and have been around the business a bit even though it has been a few decades. I thought perhaps my skills could help, but if they're that disheveled, I don't think I want to get involved.
jamos wrote:Bodyguard, thank you for your Frank assessment. I was considering applying for the beta program, I'm a former software engineer at Emu and have been around the business a bit even though it has been a few decades. I thought perhaps my skills could help, but if they're that disheveled, I don't think I want to get involved.
Bodyguard wrote:Thought I'd register on the forum after reading a few posts in this thread. Here's my experience.
tl;dr - RUN. RUN AWAY AND DON'T LOOK BACK.
So I was "beta testing" the MPC Live for Akai for several years on their super secret beta testing forum, and during this time, I submitted close to 67 bug reports, 83 UI/workflow suggestions, and countless other ideas to make the MPC a better machine to use. I have experience beta testing in other fields, and I'm intrinsically familiar with both the vintage/modern MPC workflows. Everything was thoroughly documented, and submitted in a way that should have made sense to even the most basic user. From where I stand, there are smart ways to bridge the gap between workflows and have it make sense, but when I tell you Akai has been a dumpster fire for literal YEARS, please, believe me. Or don't, I guess. I know some of the users are bizarre Akai apologists, so if you are one of them, you do you and miss me with that.
For the more juicy stuff: I have it on good authority via a few direct sources that they are NOT doing well behind the scenes. You know how a few users have said the people programming the MPC don't use the MPC? Believe that. Also believe the stories of hired guns fixing the code of previous employees. INMUSIC is NOT interested in implementing things that aren't already available in their previous software from ten+ years ago, because that would require knowing what to do, and why do that when you can copy/paste your way though this lifecycle?
