Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

User profile for user: dhjdhj
dhjdhj Author
User level: Level 2
174 points

I don't care about new features --- are the old problems fixed?

Has anyone who had problems/glitches with the old version of MainStage been able to confirm that the new version does not have such problems?

Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Posted on Jul 24, 2009 9:39 PM

Reply
32 replies
User profile for user: sam squarewave
sam squarewave
User level: Level 1
49 points

Jul 24, 2009 10:35 PM in response to dhjdhj

I haven't had any problems so far. One crash while I was dragging pedals around. Besides that, it's been pretty good. It started glitching while I was changing patches with delay designer - understandable. The CPU meter started blinking red. I stopped for a while and turned DD off and it went back to normal.

I had problems using exs24 for a 'playback' device. That will no longer be a problem.

I also had problems before such as 'there is a conflict with a third party driver, please make sure they are up to date' - that hasn't happened yet either. CPU usage is lower too.
Reply
User profile for user: NMcQ
NMcQ
User level: Level 1
6 points

Jul 25, 2009 8:47 PM in response to dhjdhj

MainStage is way excellent as an app, but after much use, and watching these forums, and playing concerts and gigs with it, my honest question (not a flame, really not) compared to using high-quality pro hardware keyboard gear is this: With the many "issues" re stability and such (it's still on a computer), and the more complicated setup (laptop, audio interface, firewire cables) AND (this is the big one) considering the inevitable sound degradation problems one gets playing out (eg. loud band-mates, bad soundmen, clipping amps, room problems, loud crowd, etc. etc.) which to me reduces or even eliminates the sonic quality advantage of software instruments (or at least levels the playing field)......is MainStage worth the incremental problems and hassles? I'm asking playing pros who have used both hardware and now MainStage, as I have.

I've been a session keyboards playing in So Cal for decades and having considered the tradeoffs above (especially the "inevitable sound degradation" one) I have just gone back to my plug-and-play Motif ES and S90 ES and Nord Stage.

Just asking.

Neil
myspace.com/AlteredDominant
Reply
User profile for user: dhjdhj
dhjdhj Author
User level: Level 2
174 points

Jul 25, 2009 9:33 PM in response to NMcQ

The thing is, some of those softare plugins are just wonderful. And, in principle, the way you're supposed to be able to manage a sophisticated environment (i.e, multiple keyboards, pedals, etc) and easily do layering as well as sophisticated control, makes Main Stage extremely desirable. But I always end up being disappointed because of reliability issues and in fact I bought a Muse Research Receptor a few months ago to try and do much of what I did with MainStage.

I've ordered the upgrade and so I'm going to give it one more shot.
Reply
User profile for user: Logic Expert
Logic Expert
User level: Level 3
519 points

Jul 26, 2009 8:43 AM in response to NMcQ

Absolutely!

No hardware ever had such an easy patch management system. Creating Layers/Splits in MainStage 2 is simply a dream come true. Again, I've never seen anything in the hardware domain that compares. Lastly, if there is hardware that has some advantage over the software options, you can still use those with MainStage 2 because it now supports external MIDI and acts like a kind of flexible MIDI router/patcher.

Also, hardware is not flawless. I've had several devices fail me during performance (I think we all have). A typical basic setup with MainStage is smaller, lighter, and easier to setup and tear down. If you use a USB MIDI keyboard with built-in audio outputs, your setup is very easy.
Reply
User profile for user: dhjdhj
dhjdhj Author
User level: Level 2
174 points

Jul 26, 2009 11:17 AM in response to rc tech

I suppose --- now where did I put those 2 xserve machines + several backup machines just in case + a technician to nurse things (sigh)

Seriously though --- obviously it's working fine for some people, but as you can see by reviewing the history of this forum, a not insignificant number of users have had grief with it with a complete lack of help or insights from Apple to figure out why.
Reply
User profile for user: dhjdhj
dhjdhj Author
User level: Level 2
174 points

Jul 26, 2009 11:52 AM in response to Blueberry

"Rc tech" mentioned that Nine Inch Nails used MainStage so I searched for more info.

I quote from a Mix interview with Nine Inch Nails technician Mat Mitchell ( http://mixonline.com/onlineextras/mainstage_matmitchell/)


[Mix] "What are you running MainStage on?"
[Mitchell] "We’ve got two different systems. Trent’s system is two XServes. The reason he went with the XServes is that they’re really fast; he’s using PCI-based audio interfaces and he’s able to get latency down to 32 samples, so there’s really no delay between what’s going in and what’s coming out and that was really important for being able to pull off the vocal effects.Alessandro’s rig is a MacBook Pro running an Apogee Mobile and Rosetta 800 which sounds incredible."


I assumed from the above that someone was using MainStage with Xserve. Of course the point is, I'm not! I've got a top of the line MacBook Pro and MainStage 1 occasionally stops responding to MIDI smoothly, requiring the PANIC button to be pressed to reset. It also forgets settings from time to time (this is all documented in this discussion forum over time).
Reply
User profile for user: NMcQ
NMcQ
User level: Level 1
6 points

Jul 26, 2009 12:25 PM in response to dhjdhj

dhjdhj, your post exactly is my experience. And I too will give MS2 a good try, with the knowledge that something as new and innovative as MainStage inevitably needs a major rev or two to get it solid. When v1 came out, I was excited beyond words about not just the innovative new app but also about the portability and yes, the cool factor, then after awhile came to the conclusion that well, it is still on a computer, and there are reliability issues attendant to any computer. And also found the midi confusion abilities one poster mentioned. It's interesting that if you look at it, most (not all) of the major acts that use MainStage have a backup system ready to go with the touch of a switch in case of MainStage problems. I've heard of players routing everything through an A/B footswitch at the end of their output chain, precisely because if MainStage hiccups they can hit it to immediately engage an alternate rompler (in my case a MotifES rack) so there are no interruptions. Which brings me back to my main question: Given the inevitable sound degradation problems when playing live, which mitigates the sonic advantage of software synths, combined with all of the above.....is it worth it?

Just asking.

Neil
Reply
User profile for user: dhjdhj
dhjdhj Author
User level: Level 2
174 points

Jul 26, 2009 1:32 PM in response to NMcQ

I don't consider the reliability issues to be part of the computer itself (particularly when it's OS X or Linux) as all my OS X and Linux boxes stay up for months (actually my Linux box has been running almost 2 years 24x7) and in the case of MainStage I think all the problems are due to bugs in MainStage itself.

If the bugs are solved so that MainStage is really realiable, then yes, I think it's absolutely worth it --- apart from the obvious cost savings, the flexibility is wonderful particularly if you have multiple controllers, even if you're just using a few sounds.

As far as sound degradation is concerned, that's all the more reason to use the best possible sounds at the start of the chain. I have yet to hear anything that beats the Modartt Pianoteq (for example) and the NI B4 is a superb hammond emulator. The soft synths from companies like NI, Arturia and AAS are stunning.

I have tried the Rax from audio-engineering as an alternative and although it's inexpensive, it just doesn't have the flexibility of MainStage and unfortunately it's still using a primitive "MIDI channel oriented" approach so it's very awkward to setup complex patches.

If you're only using a single controller, then the Muse Research Receptor is an alternative way to run soft synths and it sounds extremely good too.
Reply
User profile for user: freakshow42
freakshow42
User level: Level 1
27 points

Jul 29, 2009 2:28 PM in response to NMcQ

NMcQ wrote:
MainStage is way excellent as an app, but after much use, and watching these forums, and playing concerts and gigs with it, my honest question.....is MainStage worth the incremental problems and hassles? I'm asking playing pros who have used both hardware and now MainStage, as I have.


Frankly, I think Mainstage is too complicated for live use and I can't grok the UI. It has too many features that I just don't use. (Begin shameless plug - no I will not make a habit of this) I use Jambalaya. Actually, I wrote Jambalaya because I couldn't find anything the fulfilled my "live performer mission" which I define as:

1) I want to lug just one 88 key controller - maybe two.
2) I want to play VIs, hardware synths, and use virtual guitar/bass amps since I double on all those
3) I want the UI entirely on the screen - no dialog boxes - no menus - it should be "like analog gear"
4) I want the UI mappable to MIDI controls
4) I want it to be simple and not error prone - I want to make a new song patch in 1-2 minutes tops.
5) I want it to replace my fake book - why am I carrying around a binder and a laptop?

Consider that Mainstage is a crackerjack prize. It comes in the box with logic. Its not the "real product" so I wouldn't bet my career on it.

This is my (highly biased) opinion.

< Edited by Host >
Reply

I don't care about new features --- are the old problems fixed?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.
Learn more Sign up