(very) serious question about NI "transparency"

yes, actually, that's it, I feel like it's specific to Maschine and even more specifically to Maschine+

I was not aware of these recent Q&As but it's a good thing, indeed (it was also about Maschine?)

The other NI products all seem good and well placed on the market (and the software market is also very competitive..)

But when I read that Maschine+ is a "complete" product (as a standalone sequencer/groovebox)

no, sorry. Maschine mk3 maybe

but Maschine+, no.

as for the excuses on the difficult transition to Apple silicon, VST3 etc.

it's even worse...

I mean...NI aren't the only ones having to deal with this (it doesn't seem to bother the other companies that much)

but that said I haven't seen NI teams say that (yet..and thankfully) it’s just speculations of those trying to find reasons for this status quo (because there are indeed reasons to ask questions...)

yes, that is exactly it. I think it's not even the time for feature requests anymore...

In fact, you know them (and that for a long time now)

I haven't been a Maschine user for so long (since it's only the standalone aspect that interests me and it's precisely this new product, Maschine+ , who made me come to you, and I'm not the only one so it's also important to tell you that it brings you another clientele..)

but from what I understand there are requests (not crazy ones) that have been requested for a very long time now.

So about transparency...yeah

WHEN? :-)

I'm kidding but.. is NI even able to guarantee that this will be done one day? (on this very hardware version)

I mean, there will be an extra effort to take into account these "old" requests?

Often small ones by the way.. (but which make a huge difference in terms of workflow)

so I understand that it's less sexy for a brand since it seems there is less possibility of communicating on it

(unlike a new on-board virtual instrument for example)

but for the community of users (and on a daily basis in the use that the musician has of it)

it is essential.

(not to mention trust... I work in UX research so I know how important all of this is, and it's even what in the near future will make one brand stand out from another)

Let's start with the old ones :-)

it would already be fine

anyway they are more or less the same, I checked, and many come back again and again... but you already know that

and that's normal, because even if we all have different ways of working, there are still functions which seem common

I mentioned program change and aftertouch but there are some others like that

I give a quick example (which I have already mentioned elsewhere):

as Maschine+ couldn't allow me to do certain things, I thought of add other sequencers into my setup (or at least using the onboard sequencer in other devices)

that being said, Maschine+ still needs to be able to sync properly with the rest...

BUT we don't have a STOP button 

since the current stop button actually sends a "pause" midi message (which is a duplicate of the play/pause button btw)

nothing that can send a real "stop" message as far as I know...

And it's problematic because when you press on stop the other devices actually go into "pause" and when you restart, the whole thing is no longer synchronized obviously

see..small things... 🙂

(I'm sure it won't take long for a developer to send a stop message instead of a pause midi message...)

it would be really great, indeed.

but to make everything clear to him, it would be nice to think of a way to efficiently centralize requests

(there will be duplicates and the format of the threads is not ideal for synthesizing ideas...)

By the way, it makes me think that a year ago we also discussed with you the possibility of having new ways of exchanging and collecting these ideas.

via vote/ranking... or something like that. Where are we on this?