Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Use this forum for general discussions and questions about Jamstix
Bagatell_
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:28 am

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Bagatell_ »

Robitaille20 wrote:but I would like to know why thy were so out of sync to begin with.
Different time signatures?
piergiorgio_c
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:43 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by piergiorgio_c »

For those having GUI problems, I solved upgrading the Nvidia CUDA driver under OSX 10.9.3.
It can be done under system preferences.[/img]
Robitaille20
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Robitaille20 »

Ok... got a little more time to mess with this issue I'm having in Pro Tools 11. I tried to see if it would do the same thing in Pro Tools 10 but it seems to not sync nearly as well (new 64 bit engine perhaps) as it does in 11, so I've just been doing it there.

Here is what I've found. If I set up Jamstix on one track and SSD 4 on another and set the routing up and hit play everything stays perfectly in sync. If I watch the time line maker in Pro Tools and the position indicator in JS everything looks perfect- i.e. when the timeline in PT hits bar 4, so does JS.

Now the weirdness. When I Record the MIDI on the SSD track things get really out of sync. By the time the timeline indicator hits bar 2 in PT, Jamstix is almost up to 3 on it's position indicator. In the most recent test I let PT record up to bar 10. By the time it got there JS was up to around bar 18 in the position indicator.

Does that make sense the way I explained it? I thought about making a video showing what I'm trying to explain and can do that later if that will help you visualize what I'm trying to explain.

I've tried messing with MIDI settings in PT and in the options in JS to no avail.

Oh yeah.. I forgot to mention that I'm running RC1 if that a difference.
Ralph @ Rayzoon
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:24 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Ralph @ Rayzoon »

Please duplicate the issue and then email me ~/Music/Jamstix3/rzdlog.txt for review plus the BPM of your song.
Ralph
Rayzoon Technologies LLC
Robitaille20
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Robitaille20 »

Check your inbox :-)
Robitaille20
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Robitaille20 »

Hey Ralph- are there any magic entries for the .INI for for use with Pro Tools for performance? I figured I would play around with 10 while I wait to hear back on the 11 sync issue I'm having, but 10 seems to stutter and not sync well. I remember you had me try some things with Logic when this happened.
Ralph @ Rayzoon
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:24 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Ralph @ Rayzoon »

I'm amazed it even works with PT10 at all since it is a 64-bit AAX plugin!
Ralph
Rayzoon Technologies LLC
Robitaille20
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Robitaille20 »

Holy crap... I didn't even think about that! Hahaha don't lose any sleep over it then! Any idea on the 11 side from the log I sent you?
Ralph @ Rayzoon
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:24 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Ralph @ Rayzoon »

Still trying to figure out your PT11 issue...
Ralph
Rayzoon Technologies LLC
Robitaille20
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

Jamstix 3.6 OSX - Final RC Available

Post by Robitaille20 »

Still trying to see if I can figure anything it with this. Do you think it could have anything to do with sample rate? I've been running at 44.1 24 bit. The weird thing is that while its recording it sounds fine, although you can see the bars in JS getting further she further ahead of Pro Tools. It's not until you play back the recorded MIDI you hear the faster version.

I tested the same thing in Logic Pro X and Studio One Pro and everything went as expected.
Post Reply