View other reviews for this product:
Nico53
Published on 08/04/06 at 17:34
Why this choice?
Need a USB MIDI interface: why not with 2 out?
WinXP and Mac OSX compatibility (hopefully the older drivers on OS ...)
Usage: Virtual Instruments (Reason) MAC OSX 10.3
UTILIZATION
No driver, too bad. However, it is not uncommon for some parsons use MIDI with a lot of "hard.". remember that the concept of virtual instrument usable with almost no latency is a relatively new concept. Previous applications could completely turn with ordis modest, as they only served as sequencers.
With this interface, exit windows 95,98,2000, NT, ETC ... we pass under XP without problems on Mac OSX as well, but forget if you want to try with "an old computer."
Interface firmly oriented virtual instruments.
Under Reason, no problem: this is indeed the plug & play. No crash.
For me, the two outputs are not used. I prefer to limit myself to leave my 16 MIDI channel to manage with Mergers and Thrubox in my config.
I have just be one of the first version - I do not know - but the cables are much thinner on my interface on the picture above ... too fragile to me. I've changed a DIN and shortened the cable from the MIDI input given the fact that it is molded plugs.
LEDs indicative of the data flow in and out are really practical.
OVERALL OPINION
I use it for over a year and a half.
I'm moderately satisfied. I think she does not fit my needs. I would have preferred a simple interface 1 IN / 1 OUT and robust with the DIN socket to prevent hacks and addressed head on cable lengths that are also just too fragile.
The plug and play aspect very interesting but not be Extremely annoying for users of older machines (personal, next to my Mac I have an old 233 MHz running under Win98SE that I dedicated to MIDI hack the hard ... not possible.)
Value for money: Okay. I do not think I would do this choice. Small stuff a little expensive.
For the same price I could have an M-Audio, metal housing, one IN and one OUT. more than enough for me.
Need a USB MIDI interface: why not with 2 out?
WinXP and Mac OSX compatibility (hopefully the older drivers on OS ...)
Usage: Virtual Instruments (Reason) MAC OSX 10.3
UTILIZATION
No driver, too bad. However, it is not uncommon for some parsons use MIDI with a lot of "hard.". remember that the concept of virtual instrument usable with almost no latency is a relatively new concept. Previous applications could completely turn with ordis modest, as they only served as sequencers.
With this interface, exit windows 95,98,2000, NT, ETC ... we pass under XP without problems on Mac OSX as well, but forget if you want to try with "an old computer."
Interface firmly oriented virtual instruments.
Under Reason, no problem: this is indeed the plug & play. No crash.
For me, the two outputs are not used. I prefer to limit myself to leave my 16 MIDI channel to manage with Mergers and Thrubox in my config.
I have just be one of the first version - I do not know - but the cables are much thinner on my interface on the picture above ... too fragile to me. I've changed a DIN and shortened the cable from the MIDI input given the fact that it is molded plugs.
LEDs indicative of the data flow in and out are really practical.
OVERALL OPINION
I use it for over a year and a half.
I'm moderately satisfied. I think she does not fit my needs. I would have preferred a simple interface 1 IN / 1 OUT and robust with the DIN socket to prevent hacks and addressed head on cable lengths that are also just too fragile.
The plug and play aspect very interesting but not be Extremely annoying for users of older machines (personal, next to my Mac I have an old 233 MHz running under Win98SE that I dedicated to MIDI hack the hard ... not possible.)
Value for money: Okay. I do not think I would do this choice. Small stuff a little expensive.
For the same price I could have an M-Audio, metal housing, one IN and one OUT. more than enough for me.