From: zdenek@ksr.com (Zdenek Radouch)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: MIDI & Windows
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:55:12 EST
Organization: Kendall Square Research Corp.


Yes, I am still looking for a sequencer that would satisfy my needs.
When I saw a front page article on Windows sequencers in EM, I decided
to at least read it. Half way through the article it was pretty clear to me
that Miller is just another one of those Windows weenies, but I was
convinced to try (I also spent an hour in Sam Ash's computer showroom 
playing with the new Cubase and I liked it).

Well, I got Windows and installed them with no more trouble than I expect
from Microsoft products - there's no way to specify the drive to the install
procedure and it insists on using C: so I had to run the installation by hand
and hit <CR> two hundred times to get all defaults after specifying D: drive.
Once installed, everything looked OK so I decided to install my sequencer demos.

I got Cakewalk Pro Win off ftp.cica.indiana.edu and Cadenza off
wuarchive.wustl.edu. Cakewalk installed with no problems Cadenza had a problem
with one of the files being mysteriously expanded into the source disk instead
of the target where I was installing so I had to copy it by hand.

Installing the Windows driver turned out to be the biggest problem and I
actually haven't solved it. Windows come with an 'Roland MPU401' driver
and Cakewalk includes a couple drivers, too. There is no documentation
on this so I had to guess, but I concluded that I could use any one to
drive my MQ PC MIDI card. Well, I tried them all and they all
complained (or it might be the driver installer under Windows) that some
'Hardware Conflict' had occurred during the installation and referred me
to 'options' in the driver window. Of course, there's no such option, but
then a dialog window popped and I was able to specify the io address and
interrupt for the MIDI card. I should add that since I've been using
this card for a few years with different sequencers under DOS, I KNOW that
there's no hardware conflict of any kind!

To make the long story short, I never found out why the Windows are
complaining. There's clearly a problem - I never got Cakewalk to record
any data from MIDI (it could play back OK) and in order to use Cadenza
I had to reload the MIDI driver every time I started the Windows.
Also, after exiting, Windows would leave the machine in such state, that
the diagnostic software provided by Music Quest would either refuse to
run (claiming the MIDI card didn't respond) or would hang. I spent many
hours trying to figure out what was going on, but all I can guess is that
Windows disable the MIDI card interrupt somewhere and the MQ software
is not enabling it for whatever reason. Of course, rebooting fixes all.

I am not going to delve into the details on the two applications; many
of these issues are religious and a matter of personal preference.
I liked Cadenza much better than Cakewalk and this had nothing to do
with the fact that I couldn't get Cakewalk to record. I had issues
and problems with both. Additionally, Cadenza was dropping notes when
I was recording real time (actually, I didn't bother to check whether
the notes got recorded, they definitely didn't get passed to MIDI out).
The standard notation sucks in both applications, you can see that it's
an add-on that needs a lot of work.

I spent about 20 hours with these two applications and here my summary:

Windows suck; it's a disk and CPU hog and I would only run it because
the applications require it.
As Miller's article suggested, Windows run much faster in 'normal' mode,
switching to the 'enhanced' (386) mode is a waste. He also mentioned 
system crashes and I have to confirm; I crashed twice while running
Cadenza (these crashes fry the machine and you have to reboot).
I understand now that the demand for all those 100MHz '486 computers
is not just a 'gear lust' but often a necessity. My 20 MHz '386 with
4Mb of memory just won't do. I would also have to replace my SVGA
controller with an accelerated version for Windows.
The software (both system and applications) needs a lot of work and
I have my doubts whether anyone will make these things work before they're
obsoleted by a new version of something (NT?).

This was the first time I couldn't get commercial applications run on
my computer and it made me question whether I should look into a different
platform. Unfortunately, I use the computer to do real work as well so
I'd have to add a new toy to my collection rather than replacing an existing
toy with a new one.

I'd welcome any comments from people successfully running a high end
sequencer on an IBM machine. I'd be also interested in how much would
one have to spend to get a working high end sequencer on a different
platform. I am interested in sequencers with standard notation and
preferably real time editing.

Thanks,
-Z