The MASCHINE+ Feedback Thread

1356717

Comments

  • Akira-76
    Akira-76 Member Posts: 39 Helper
    edited January 2022

    I create a tread here : https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/66/maschine-will-be-great-if-feature-requests about it. But since no feedback come from NI, I just give up this tread.

    I am totally agree with Percevale here :


    A roadmap for M+ "would be an acknowledgement that the device does have issues", and big issues. As big issues, I didn't mean features to improve a finished products, but features to finish the product. 2 years now that the M+ was released, update was released to add things like KK and Jam recognition... I want to say, what's the point since basics standalone features are still missing? Well, it is good to add those functions, but since M+ is not fully "standalone", it is a wall which hide the forest.

  • TheAndroid
    TheAndroid Member Posts: 15 Member

    I find these comments about "unfinished product" quite harsh.

    The audio glitches often come from drum kits designed for the computer version - i.e. where more CPU/RAM are available. They have lots of effects, which quickly drain down M+ capabilities.

    The best thing for NI would be either to remove those kits from the platform or adapt them to the M+ specs. Furthermore, there should be limitations on the number of groups / sounds as well, like all hardware can have. You don't get infinite polyphony on a synth or a groovebox, and you deal with it. That's even sometimes part of the creativity (constraints etc).

    We'll hear a lot less complaints about technical specs.

    Furthermore, we all know people tend to complain a lot on the internet, rather than praise something. I'm not sure it's representative of the actual opinion around the M+ but I understand that might be worrying for a purchase. Many resellers do have a return policy, I think it's possible to make your own opinion ?

    Personnally, I like M+ a lot. I'm not trying to have 20 tracks at the same time, I tend to use FX aux to contain CPU usage. When I load a kit from the library, I remove the sounds I won't use, such as actual synths, chords or crazy FX. And it works. I have a few glitches sometimes, which disappear by either rebooting the M+ or twisting the Settings / Audio / knob 1. But this "slimmed down" approach, where I carefully choose my sounds / synths makes it very enjoyable overall and has (I think) benefited to my music, i.e. not piling up tons of audio everytime everywhere.

    I'm no pro musician, so I guess it's less of a big deal for me to have a few hiccups sometimes.

    But the platform is still very fun and very special in terms of what can be done and how fast it's done.

  • TheLoudest
    TheLoudest Member Posts: 110 Advisor
    edited January 2022

    Hey guys

    I haven't really had the opportunity to notice the "glitches" since I mainly use my external synths... :)

    (and that's why I would like to see more "midi" improvements, for this type of use 😉 )

    But I can understand why it's frustrating for all those who imagined having a standalone Maschine with all the "NI software ecosystem"...

    Maybe as TheAndroid suggests it would be better to keep only the instruments that the CPU can really handle..?

    or else do a real optimization of the plugins to really adapt them to the hardware specifications of Maschine+ (the specifications seem a bit light in 2022 but we must not forget that it is a dedicated system...it should not be compared to a computer)

  • Akira-76
    Akira-76 Member Posts: 39 Helper

    I am agree and disagree about what you say.

    Yes, "unfinished product" complaints are sometimes harsh, but it need context to be fully understandable. I will only speak about the M+ and not about audio gliches :

    When you can record midi automation (CC) made outside M+ but not able to edit them or have a feedback (at least of their presence) on screen. It is strange.

    When you can create macro only from Maschine Software, it is strange...

    When you can't tags presets create on M+, it is strange

    etc.

    (And it become more strange when the competition (MPC) do it, and have less specs.)

    Despite that, you have not necessary functions that was added like KK and Jam recognition. What is for a music producer (even for an amateur) more basic (evident for a midi sequencer) and usefull ? KK and Jam recognition or the ability to edit midi automation or tagging presets/audio files?

    It is an objective facts that basic/evident needs are not fullfilled on M+.

    Imho, yes NI have to recognized that some complaints are objectively right/accurate : basic/evident functions are missing. And I am sure that when those objectively right/accurate features will be added, it will have still complaints, but they will be less aggressive and "we" will have less the feeling that the M+ is not finished.

    On my side, I think that audio gliches are not a "fail" on it's own, what it is, is the enormous consumption of some "factory" presets of M+. I compare it with the new MPC line, what was added in it didn't eat too much the CPU (and you have to stack a lot of thing to heard gliches). And on my side I work mainly with HW synth, so I don't need Massive/Reaktor/etc. they are good things but yeah imho not necessary. The simple plugin imho are enough : Drumsynth, bass synth, poly synth, Sampler, and basic FX plugin. What the hell add Raum ? Is Raum necessary? I answer no.


    I find also on my side a way to overcome those missing feature (I don't speak about the audio limitation), but it need a computer are other device not cheap. And objectively some basic/evident (and certainly simple to implement) features will avoid a lot of people to use computers or to use other hardware gear to do it.

  • TheAndroid
    TheAndroid Member Posts: 15 Member

    Hi @Akira-76 , thanks for the clarification. You're right about macros, MIDI CC, tags etc. I'm adding Program Changes as well, and the fact they're always resent when a pattern restarts.

    That would certainly make the M+ more standalone and also make it the center of a hardware setup. It's limited in that regard and it should be improved. I would love that.

  • olafmol
    olafmol Member Posts: 112 Advisor
    edited January 2022


    Under "All sounds" (so not Instruments), select "Instruments", "Keys" et voila! Multisampled piano's, rhodes and other keys :)

  • TheAndroid
    TheAndroid Member Posts: 15 Member
  • ozon
    ozon Member Posts: 760 Guru

    having a dedicated program change (and bank change) section is essential for standalone use, indeed.

    We definitely need that. Personally, I vote for this to be done at the "pattern level". But I could be wrong..and maybe it would be smart to put it on another level.

    That’s a hard one. At first it seems practical to have it at the Pattern level, but the more I think about it, the more difficulties I see. Main problem is that a lot of (older) hardware requires some time to execute a program change. If program change events are sent on the first beat of every Pattern repeat, you probably will have your gear lagging periodically (on the one).

    Considering how a Maschine Project is organized in a Song/Section/Scene/Pattern hierarchy for the music composition and a Group/Sound hierarchy for the sonic elements, a Program Change should probably be part of a Sound which holds an External MIDI Instrument.

    The question is then when to fire the Program Change events. Probably when Start is hit. Which will lead to an unpredictable lag.

    editing automations... How we can deal with this in standalone otherwise?

    Just record automation over the existing one. It’s quite possible, but a bit of a PITA with a tactile learning curve if you’re used to drawing automation in a DAW.

    can someone tell me how to quantize the end of notes (events) on the grid?

    I couldn’t find a way and would love to know as well.

  • ozon
    ozon Member Posts: 760 Guru


    When you can record midi automation (CC) made outside M+ but not able to edit them or have a feedback (at least of their presence) on screen. It is strange.

    I assume you expect curves in automation lanes on a screen. That’s not available. But there is an indication for automated parameters on the automation screen and you can edit it easily. Just not in the way you expect, but suited to a performance workflow.

    When you can't tags presets create on M+, it is strange

    You are missing features that are not available on the Mk3 controller either, probably for a good reason. Imagine doing all that Sample and Preset tagging without a keyboard and mouse on those tiny screens without multi-selection capability. That would be quite the nightmare.

    Despite that, you have not necessary functions that was added like KK and Jam recognition.

    The JAM integration is fantastic and adds a whole new dimension to the M+, especially for standalone use. Again, suited to enhance the performance (or jam) workflow.

    What the hell add Raum ? Is Raum necessary? I answer no.

    It’s nice to have a great reverb in such a box. Sounds way different (some think „better“) from the Maschine native reverbs (which IMHO are underestimated) and adds an interesting creative touch. And if only one instance is used on an FX bus, the CPU load is negligible.

    And it become more strange when the competition (MPC) do it, and have less specs.

    […]

    I compare it with the new MPC line […]

    I suggest moving to an MPC One/Live/X since it seems to offer what you need and you’re not interested in any of the M+ unique features (FM8, Kontakt, Massive, Monark, Reaktor).

  • djadidai
    djadidai Member Posts: 223 Pro

    It is a standalone device. For it to be a standalone device means you can make music and play music without having to connect it to a computer and use a software. It’s not less standalone than a friggin akai. Doesn’t matter if it has a built in battery and some ***** speakers. This is a standalone device. Isn’t an electric guitar a standalone device?

  • tetsuneko
    tetsuneko Member Posts: 268 Pro
    edited January 2022

    In my opinion, the best way to resolve MIDI program change would be to add it at the sound level. Add one more page of controls to the sound output menu, where setting of a sound's MIDI device and channel now exists. Include both program change number as well as LSB/MSB bank select. The sending of program and bank change could be handled exactly like the MIDI output settings are handled, applies immediately when changed, and applies immediately upon loading the project, regardless of transport state being PLAY or STOP.

    This would take care of setting the basic patch, and further program change automation during a performance could be done exactly as it is done now (via macros). Even if one cannot set a bank change with the macros, you would have already set the appropriate bank within the sound's default MIDI settings. The only niggle in this approach would be that it would be impossible to switch program change banks during a performance, but that could be sorted by making sure that every patch you need to use in a given song is saved into the same bank.

    Lastly, Raum is indispensable for me. If you must leave something out (why though?), Phasis can go instead ;)

  • Akira-76
    Akira-76 Member Posts: 39 Helper

    I assume you expect curves in automation lanes on a screen. That’s not available. But there is an indication for automated parameters on the automation screen and you can edit it easily. Just not in the way you expect, but suited to a performance workflow.


    No, i didn't expect curve. And No, when you move a knob from a hardware synth that transmit CC and record it on M+, you get no feedback that automation is present. You get feedback only when exist a Macro on M+ and you use the knob on M+ to create automation, but in standalone you can't create Macro...


    You are missing features that are not available on the Mk3 controller either, probably for a good reason. Imagine doing all that Sample and Preset tagging without a keyboard and mouse on those tiny screens without multi-selection capability. That would be quite the nightmare.


    The purpose of the M+ is to be a standalone device... and the Mk3 a midi controller. So your hypothesis is pointless.

    Tagging can be done since : 1) you can enter characters on the M+ 2) the way to selecting tag can be use to set tag.


    The JAM integration is fantastic and adds a whole new dimension to the M+, especially for standalone use. Again, suited to enhance the performance (or jam) workflow.


    No doubt about it, but you have to buy it in extra... And autosampling for example is clearly more useful, and for more people than Jam or KK integration.


    It’s nice to have a great reverb in such a box. Sounds way different (some think „better“) from the Maschine native reverbs (which IMHO are underestimated) and adds an interesting creative touch. And if only one instance is used on an FX bus, the CPU load is negligible.


    Yes it is great, no doubt again, but before adding fanzy things, imho it is more important to implement basic features. For example, you can't rename sample you record. So, yeah, definitively "Raum" is more useful than renaming sample... since you have already 2/3 others reverb that do the job well.

    It is like you say "Cyberpunk 2077 is awsome because it have a big city you can tavel into, with a lot of people" but if you experience gliches, bugs, latencies, the experience is just awful.


    I suggest moving to an MPC One/Live/X since it seems to offer what you need and you’re not interested in any of the M+ unique features (FM8, Kontakt, Massive, Monark, Reaktor).


    I have a MPC One, so I can tell you that the new MPC line have drawbacks that the M+ didn't have. As exemple MPC didn't offer : different pattern per track, clips sections for building song. When you see the midi capacity of the old MC-80, M+ is just a joke even with FM8, Kontakt, or what else.

    And as I wrote, I would love the M+, but can't. It is not only me that say that, but a lot of known and unknown people. See youtube as example or other Forums ! I don't say that youtuber say always the truth, but objectively when you work with M+, they are right. There is no doubt since the release even after the firmware that follow the release that things are wrong.

    If you don't take into consideration youtuber that advertise the M+, quite all of them like him : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuGuQHuvQiM say to no buy it. Others just "wait" (since 2 years) before using it again, the time NI fix bugs or had basic functionality. But as you say : "yeah, all is good "Raum" is there and Jam is integrated...", Raum is just a reverb, and Jam is not a necessary device.

  • tetsuneko
    tetsuneko Member Posts: 268 Pro

    What's all this talk about two years? Maschine+ has been out for a bit over a year now..

  • Akira-76
    Akira-76 Member Posts: 39 Helper

    Yes, 1 year and 3/4 months. But whatever, it is more than 1 year, and it is already too long that a lot of people wait real improvement, or at least a clear roadmap.

    Anyway, the device (all devices) should be finished on the release and not after.

  • ozon
    ozon Member Posts: 760 Guru

    No, when you move a knob from a hardware synth that transmit CC and record it on M+, you get no feedback that automation is present.

    Ok, that is true. But again, the Mk3 has the same problem, and the solution is to use MIDI Instrument macros.

    (There is a whole universe of problems lurking in that topic, which is mostly unrelated to the M+ as such: There are way too few provided by NI, there is no User Library to collect, exchange and improve them, they’re a major PITA to create)

    To me it seems you are using the M+ in a way it wasn’t designed for and you are rejecting the proposed solution.

    The purpose of the M+ is to be a standalone device... and the Mk3 a midi controller. So your hypothesis is pointless.

    If a software ported to a different platform can grow new basic features out of thin air, then my conclusion is pointless indeed.

    Regarding standalone or not compared to the MPC: You need a computer to organize samples, create Expansions and change MIDI note maps there as well. Raises the question where to draw the line to call a device standalone.

    I have a MPC One

    Oh, then you missed three years of growing pains with the Live and X. Most of what you see there, especially regarding MIDI, was added in later releases after lots of complaints.

    Now they have a useful MIDI implementation, which is great. That wasn’t always the case.

    However, unlike M+ having lots of great syths on board, the MPC line needs to offer integration of external synths (initially, they had no synths at all).

    So, yeah, definitively "Raum" is more useful than renaming sample... since you have already 2/3 others reverb that do the job well.

    Raum is creative and not just a reverb. Try it out, you might be surprised.

    Regarding Sample renaming and renaming on general: There’s lots of room (ger. „Raum“) for improvement. The whole file management concept is questionable and in need of many changes. This was already discussed extensively in many threads on the old forum and is known to the team.


    I have the impression you are using the M+ in a way the whole Maschine concept was not designed for, and beside mentioning some already well known issues, you reject known workarounds just for the sake of complaining.

This discussion has been closed.
Back To Top