OMAC and Audiobus - what's happening?

snoopy

I have been following up with the OMAC developer (also develops MidiBridge)
asking about fast-switching from OMAC apps and Audiobus apps from Genome's
and MidiBridge's app panels and in particular switching apps via MIDI
commands which MidiBridge supports. This is from my conversation:

Quoted (with permission)

"I spoke to the Audiobus guys while they were developing it with a view
to trying to prevent the creation of two competing music app registries
for fast-switching. I offered to assist by either expanding OMAC to
accommodate Audiobus (turns out just two fields would be needed; icon and
input slot) or migrating OMAC to Audiobus, but they didn't take me up on my
offer I'm afraid. My request for access to the SDK has also gone unanswered
so from my end there is not much I can do. Maybe when the SDK is made public
I could add bridging code to the public OMAC class to support Audiobus in
terms of fast-switching via the UI or MIDI commands both currently
supported in the OMAC, but until then the two are separate although OMAC is
currently shadowing Audiobus apps (as you've noticed in MidiBridge and
Genome) which means you can switch to them via Genome/MidiBridge and
MIDI commands but not the reverse"

So, Audiobus guys, is there something that could be done to make this
happen???

Sebastian

We've had a conversation with Nic Grant who makes MIDI bridge a few weeks before Audiobus went live and Michael and me decided that app switching via MIDI commands was not an absolutely crucial feature that had to be there right when we launched Audiobus.

We still think it's a good idea to eventually provide functionality for users to do this but currently not a lot of our users are asking for it, so other things are higher up the list (like making the SDK public).

Hmtx

Sebastian, I like this idea. Please add one more user who would like app switching via MIDI commands. Just three programmable commands is all I would need:
1. cycle thru input apps
2. go to effects app
3. go to output app

Is this the idea? Or would it be more like having a midi command that sends the message to iOS for a "four finger swipe" to cycle thru all apps running on the device? or maybe all of the above?

Either way, this would be really useful.

snoopy

Thanks for the reply Sebastian,

I guess my point is that Audiobus has made a new OMAC (see BassLine for an example of an app that has both OMAC switching and Audiobus support) and it would have made sense (IMO) from the get-go to have taken OMAC and used it in Audiobus rather than re-inventing the wheel; there would be no double app lists and MIDI switching would probably already be available. I'm a software developer (not iOS but linux) and I see this happen a lot. I don't mean to have a go at you (because you've managed to create something extraordinary), it just seems like a more logical way to have progressed. Maybe you're already on this case, so please forgive me if so.

@Hmtx MidiBridge dev made a video demonstrating how this works
here.
I have played with this (you define your own cycle of apps) but only his apps implement this so far. OMAC provides a public open source class so it would be great if Audiobus and OMAC switching could work together for the benefit of iOS musicians!

I bet there are more than just two of us who would like to switch between apps using our external gear.

Sebastian

We did not reeinvent the wheel. OMAC is different from Audiobus in so many ways. Just because both have a feature in common (app switching) does not mean that Audiobus would have to integrate the OMAC list or vice versa. We've thoroughly considered it back then and decided against implementing it at that point in time.

In fact, if I remember clearly, we came to the conclusion that we could do it later on, anyway - should we find the time and should it still be the best solution. I even think this was agreed on by Nic.

jonmoore

I'm 100% behind Sebastian on this.

There's a temptation to allow 'feature creep' to influence and change the original vision for an application and this can mean the said application loses focus. This problem is only amplified when you have two developers (Sebastian & Michael) who are so responsive to their social media platforms.

MidiBridge already handles OMAC perfectly (it's an essential purchase for anybody utilising Audiobus workflows) and the important thing is that the end applications (sequencers, instruments, FX etc) play ball with the OMAC protocol not necessarily a 'pipe' application such as Audiobus.

I'm all for Audiobus being the central connector for Midi Clock but I think that's as far as it's direct midi feature set should go. And as a side note if anybody nails jitter free inter-app midi clock on the IOS platform I'll send them a case of booze! Both Windows & OS X developers have been trying to crack that particular nut on desktop systems for years and the only system that come close to being workable is Rewire (and even that induces a fair amount of latency, which needs to be compensated manually).

Back to the main point though, lets make sure we don't allow Audiobus to lose focus through so many iterative feature request enhancements that we lose sight of what made it great in the first place.

jm

http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble

uglykidmoe

wise words jon. cheers.

Will

@jon, you didn't ask but yes, you can get a witness.

jonmoore

@syrupcore

Chapalo

Agree with sebastian & jon too.

snoopy

I really did not expect this to turn into some sort of slanging match. I actually agree with the statement that Audiobus needs to focus on what is important and not get bogged down with 'feature creep'. The last thing Audiobus needs is to start becoming another MidiBridge.

My original point, which I tried to make as subtly as possible (but obviously failed) is:

The OMAC developer (which is why I quoted him) is prepared to augment OMAC/MIDIBridge with UI and MIDI switching of Audiobus apps if Audiobus will open this up to him. I'm not requesting Audiobus add this feature at all since it already exists in OMAC, just that they engage and allow it to happen.

As a bona fide paid-up user of both Audiobus and MIDIBridge, I am posting here to voice my vote (not that I have one) that I would like to see this over some of the marginally useful apps that have somehow emerged with Audiobus support.

Sebastian

Let me also add that app switching via MIDI is nice and MIDI Bridge is a useful app.
If you don't own it and do a lot with MIDI you should buy it:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/midibridge/id449160859?mt=8

jonmoore

@snoopy

I had no intention to belittle your request and I've carefully re-read what I stated and I don't believe it was derogatory in any manner. Much as you have a right to voice your opinion others have a right to respond with their viewpoint. I think in the main the Audiobus forum is populated by a very considered bunch of people, hence why I post here so much. Not everybody agree's with each others viewpoints (wouldn't that make for dull reading) but we all seem to learn new things through our interactions which has to be a good thing.

Apologies if I did cause offence but it wasn't intended.

Hmtx

alright, alright, you guys win :-) I love what Audiobus does and have to agree that this is not a crucial area to invest their time in, especially now hearing about the other MIDI options.
Thanks everyone for the info about MIDI Bridge and OMAC. I'll look into both of these.

snoopy

@jonmoore no need to apologise, and no offense taken. Just putting a stop to all the 'me too' posts. ;-)

I do tend to lower the tone as my husband often reminds me.

Back to your regular programming, sorry for the interruption.