Yosemite kills my Focusrite VRM. Less than a year old. Grrrrrr.

[dmills]

Reading between the lines it looks like the VRM ran much of its DSP on the host system by using a ring 0 driver.
Something of a hack maybe, but cheaper then putting a sharc or tms320 on the board to do the work.

Now the problem with running things in kernel is that it is a place where few of the usual safe assumptions that apply to higher level parts of the system really apply. This is not a place you can write code and be ignorant of locking, interrupts, cache coherency and all the rest, it is a place where in a real sense you are doing bare metal coding.
The skills are rare and expensive, the documentation is usually inadequate or out of date and things are **VERY** subtle and quick to anger.

It is not something I would have done, but I don't play in quite so cost constrained a market as the lower end focusrite products do.

Apple have also never been good about backward compatibility which is a dual edged sword, on the one hand you get a serious hardware longevity issue on the other hand you avoid Microsofts need to support VB6 and old active X (Needed because there is plenty of old business logic written in it that is never going to be upgraded), this is an Apple issue more then it is a Focusrite one.

Regards, Dan.

[Richard Graham]

Seems to work on my Mac with Yosemite...

Great! Will it work at really low latencies (lower than the Apple Core Audio driver?)

[Richard Graham]

My sympathies to you!

I'd be lost without my VRM box.

Still thankfully, I've got a PC, and the VRM box seems to work whatever OS I upgrade to.

That's what I always say to Apple users when they ask about my PC... "It just works!"

(just kidding about the last bit).

Many a true word is spoken in jest. I swiftly discovered after moving to a MacBook from Windows, that Apple stuff "just works" until Apple changes the OS, and it "just stops working". There's no grey area. It's a lovely platform usability and stability- wise, but it's very unforgiving of older software and hardware.

[Dr Huge Longjohns]

What's the latency like on the VRM?

I only use it for comparing the mix on different 'speakers' when I'm pretty near the end of the process so latency isn't in the equation at this point. Don't use it at all while recording.

[The_BPP]

What's the latency like on the VRM?

I only use it for comparing the mix on different 'speakers' when I'm pretty near the end of the process so latency isn't in the equation at this point. Don't use it at all while recording.

I used to use it as part of the recording process, and the latency was easily small enough to trigger drums from my keyboard (without the speaker emulation switched on, of course).

[vmaxvmax]

What's the latency like on the VRM?

I only use it for comparing the mix on different 'speakers' when I'm pretty near the end of the process so latency isn't in the equation at this point. Don't use it at all while recording.

Same here. I use the suggested buffer size of 512 samples during my mixing phase when using the VRM. I don't use VFR for tracking, so no buffer/latency issues induced by the VRM at those stages.

[johnny h]

Cool edit was 69 dollars...

Not according to the SOS reviews I quoted above. Cool Edit 96 was available at two levels of registration of

Cool edit was 69 dollars...

Not according to the SOS reviews I quoted above. Cool Edit 96 was available at two levels of registration of 5 or 0 -- but that was back in 1997. If you're going to complain about a price hike after Adobe bought it in 2003, the only legitimate comparison is between CEP 2.1 and AA 1.5 -- and there was virtually no price jump between them. Your claim remains utterly bogus. The biggest price hike was under Syntrillium's ownership when they released version 2.5 or 0 -- but that was back in 1997. If you're going to complain about a price hike after Adobe bought it in 2003, the only legitimate comparison is between CEP 2.1 and AA 1.5 -- and there was virtually no price jump between them. Your claim remains utterly bogus. The biggest price hike was under Syntrillium's ownership when they released version 2.

1200 over 5 years is one hell of a price hike, from 25, 50, 69 or the 250 dollars it was in various stages of its life. Adobe may have the 'right' to charge this, but people also have a right not to bend over and accept it.

[Hugh Robjohns]

1200 over 5 years is one hell of a price hike

It is, but mostly because you're not comparing like with like, and you're making the numbers up as you go along.

Back in the real world, Syntrillium CEP2.1 cost around £250 in 2002. Adobe Audition CS6 costs £250 online right now. It seems pretty obvious to me that there has been no price leap whatsoever in over a decade, if you opt for a pay-once-and-its-yours-forever package, and have a compatible OS.

If you're whinging about the subscription pricing, that's an entirely different ball game. We've already debated the pros and cons of Adobe's single-app subscription pricing fairly extensively, and no one is arguing against the fact that it is pretty expensive -- even for people that upgrade every 18 months or so.

The annual sub price of Audition CC is less than the outright purchase of Audition CS6, but obviously you then have to trade off the subsequent years of free use (with a buy-once package) against continual updates and ongoing OS compatibility support (in the subs model). As already discussed, Adobe's current pricing means it really only works as part of a larger suite of apps, and that clearly is not appropriate for many previous customers.

Adobe have decided to move the goalposts. Former customers either move too, or aim at a different goal!

Adobe may have the 'right' to charge this, but people also have a right not to bend over and accept it.

Of course they do. Just as you have the right to sell your music at whatever price you like, and people have the right not to buy it. That's the commercial world.

I just don't get all the fuss. Adobe have changed their position in respect of Audition. Would people whinge the same way if they had killed it off completely? The bottom line is that if it no longer works for anyone, find something else. There are several alternative options, as have been pointed out. It's frustrating, and annoying, for sure, but that's life. Nothing lasts forever.

My advice has always been to never put all one's eggs in one basket, and never rely on just one software provider. I have my preferred DAW, editor and restoration tools, and work most quickly and efficiently with those, but I also routinely use alternatives to retain flexibility and develop alternative strategies.

H

[Tui]

Look at RME and Metric Halo. They support their products many years after discontinuation. RME have just released TotalMix for the Fireface 400/800, despite them being old (10 years for the 800) and replaced by newer models.

I still use my Digiface every day, which I bought nearly 14 years ago. Yosemite-compatible drivers were released a few weeks ago... That's what I call customer service.

I'm not prepared to give developers a pass when they sell products, but discontinue support after only a year or two.

[TheReson8or]

In my little world, if you can buy a product in a reputable retailer, then the product should be supported by the company that makes it. Otherwise the manufacturer should remove it from the shelves, or make it clear at point of sale that it is unlikely to be supported.These upgrades are part of our lives now, and we should not allow manufacturers to treat customers like cash cows. I believe it is still possible to buy the VRM....so support it, Focusrite!....I have heard about new cars that cannot interact with iphones running the latest IOS...it's nuts, do these companies talk?! Dave

[Hugh Robjohns]

I believe it is still possible to buy the VRM....so support it, Focusrite!....

Focusrite does support it! It's still fully supported and functional on win XP, vista, 7 and 8, as well as OSX prior to Yosemite.... And there seems to be some confusion over whether it still works on yosemite or not.

I have heard about new cars that cannot interact with iphones running the latest IOS...it's nuts, do these companies talk?! Dave

Yes, I've heard that too. Another good reason to stick with an HTC phone It's almost like Apple want to make it hard for outside companies to work in concert with their products, isn't it?

H

[ConcertinaChap]

I've used Audition 1.5, 3 and CC without any issues

Funny I don't remember that. Must have been asleep at the time ...

CC

[TheReson8or]

I believe it is still possible to buy the VRM....so support it, Focusrite!....

Focusrite does support it! It's still fully supported and functional on win XP, vista, 7 and 8, as well as OSX prior to Yosemite.... And there seems to be some confusion over whether it still works on yosemite or not.

I have heard about new cars that cannot interact with iphones running the latest IOS...it's nuts, do these companies talk?! Dave

Yes, I've heard that too. Another good reason to stick with an HTC phone It's almost like Apple want to make it hard for outside companies to work in concert with their products, isn't it?

H

I would say that they did support it, Hugh....but not now! All those OS are old iterations. They are in this game , they should keep up or do something else...and why not? Dave

[Guest]

Turbodave is right. There is an important point here which is being missed a little. Some manufacturers and developers seem to find it all to easy to drop development and support for their products at a much earlier point than their customers had anticipated. I fell foul to this with both Abbey Road plugins and Eiosis both with whom I spent hundreds of pounds buying products believing them to be high quality. Not only in the actual product itself but also in the support and updates that I expected to follow. I was appalled when I received absolutely no updates from either company and then like many was left with useless plugins as the companies stopped supporting them altogether and machines and OS's moved on. I firmly believed I was let down by both companies who sold me a product knowing that they had no intention of supporting it and me for a reasonable amount of time. I believe when you buy software or a piece of hardware that requires software that a reasonable amount of updates and importantly support comes with that purchase. If they fail to provide that development and support then the product becomes unfit for purpose and you should get your money back.

This needs to outlined in law, like many other consumer issues, and I can't believe that it isn't. Eventually after much pushing and a lot of hassle I did get my money back from Abbey Road (some respect to them, although they shouldn't have been so dodgy in the first place) but Fabrice Gabriel at Eiosis simply ignored my emails - so the hundreds of pounds I spent on his software was wasted.

It's fine to point out how we live in a world of a fast development cycle and that if our system isn't broke then don't fix it but we and developers both know how quickly OS's and even computers are updated these days. It's not a surprise that Apple or anyone else would continue to progress and change their OS. It should be part of their business model to expect such. We shouldn't be paying the price of having to freeze our systems and miss out on other updates because some developers drop support for their software prematurely.

I think we as customers need to stop excusing companies who drop development of their products too early. What a 'reasonable amount of time' is needs to be established along with what an unreasonable amount time is too. But if companies fail to fulfil their commitment for this period then like any other purchase the product should be deemed unfit for purpose and we should be able to get some or all of our money back.

Stop letting developers use the pace of technological advancement as an excuse for not supporting their customers...it's the business they are in!

[Kwackman]

If you have a system that works well with your software and hardware, why would you upgrade anything?

I know the marketing is seductive, but if your system works, why "fix it"with an OS upgrade?

[Guest]

Kwackman - some people do choose to freeze their system if it suits them and others don't. Some need to update their systems for various compatibility reasons or just want to to have the latest software running on the latest OS. My point is that when we buy software we should be able to have a reasonable expectation of how long that software will be supported and updated to run on future OS's. We should be able to make our own minds up on when and how we manage our systems in the knowledge that our plugins/software will be viable for X amount of years.

[TheReson8or]

Dare I suggest that an upgrade..which is the implicit nature of these new OS..has become a "pain in the assgrade"...that far from being for the benefit of the consumer, they have ever so subtly turned it into a money saving device and even market manipulation by Apple. The companies , therefore, that sell stuff on the back of these systems cannot/should not turn around after a year or so and shrug as if this was not forseeable....Apple and the various hardware/software companies MUST take responsibility. Apple cannot have it both ways...ie . make some stuff unuseable if you don't upgrade, and make stuff unuseable if you do. It wouldn't matter if all this stuff cost pennies, but it doesn't.
If a company like Allen and Heath are not keeping up, then the system is flawed! Dave

[Guest]

Yes agreed, your point is valid to some degree but Apple and other hardware/ OS manufacturers can't be held responsible for third party developers and their update/ support structure. Apple is known for not being very backward thinking and is renowned for not being too concerned with backwards compatibility yet still they do always support and involve older machines in their updates for a good few years. Even in the PPC to Intel move they supported their older machines for quite some time.

All third party developers now know the pace at which Apple etc move on, it's no longer unknown territory so they should be building this progression into their business models and providing customers with a reasonable amount of updates and support. Blaming the speed of technological advancement by the likes of Apple for lack of support is unacceptable. If they choose to make their software available on the Apple platform then they should be aware of what that will require from them in the future. They don't drop support in error but by choice they know the consequences it will have for their customers but they chose to do it anyway. You can, for instance, still go on to the IK Multimedia website and buy Miroslav Philharmonik at the full price. It reads Mac OS compatible but nowhere does it tell you that this software is only compatible with 32 bit systems and that it is no longer updated or supported. I own this software and have had no updates for years yet they still sell it as though it is new...they are not alone in having this attitude to customer support and we as customers continue to let it happen.

[johnny h]

Yes agreed, your point is valid to some degree but Apple and other hardware/ OS manufacturers can't be held responsible for third party developers and their update/ support structure. Apple is known for not being very backward thinking and is renowned for not being too concerned with backwards compatibility yet still they do always support and involve older machines in their updates for a good few years. Even in the PPC to Intel move they supported their older machines for quite some time.

All third party developers now know the pace at which Apple etc move on, it's no longer unknown territory so they should be building this progression into their business models and providing customers with a reasonable amount of updates and support. Blaming the speed of technological advancement by the likes of Apple for lack of support is unacceptable. If they choose to make their software available on the Apple platform then they should be aware of what that will require from them in the future. They don't drop support in error but by choice they know the consequences it will have for their customers but they chose to do it anyway. You can, for instance, still go on to the IK Multimedia website and buy Miroslav Philharmonik at the full price. It reads Mac OS compatible but nowhere does it tell you that this software is only compatible with 32 bit systems and that it is no longer updated or supported. I own this software and have had no updates for years yet they still sell it as though it is new...they are not alone in having this attitude to customer support and we as customers continue to let it happen.

That's terrible behaviour. 64 bit has been the standard for Macs and PCs for at least 5 years now, and while it took the audio world a little bit of time to catch up, 32 bit is dead or dying (definitely dead on logic x!).

I think its very disappointing Hugh is so sympathetic to the companies that are ripping us off here. I certainly will never be buying anything from Adobe, IK or Focusrite again. Focusrite do send me freebies sometimes - the guys who work in artist relations are actually really nice, but I just can't defend their quality control or support.

[Scramble]

>This needs to outlined in law

Complete waste of time. Companies will simply specify that they can't guarantee that their products will work with future OS upgrades -- which is basically what they do already.

It is, however, a pretty poor show from Focusrite, and one reason why I'd prefer to stick with RME.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I think its very disappointing Hugh is so sympathetic to the companies that are ripping us off here.

Just to be clear, I completely abhor companies that fail to maintain support for their products for a decent period after they discontinue a product -- and the VRM has not (yet) been discontinued. So I totally understand and agree that it is very disappointing that Focusrite have been caught out with the changes introduced in Yosemite as far as the VRM is concerned.

Consequently, some level of criticism is certainly warranted here and elsewhere. I hope any affected VRM owners also contact Focusrite directly to register their displeasure, rather than just whinge about it here. Companies are far more likely to react to direct customer feedback, than the opinionated forum rants from people who don't even use the product in question, but enjoy seeing their words on the screen.

Nothing is ever as black and white as some here like to think -- the world works in shades of grey -- and I think it is only fair and proper that, in the absence of an official manufacturer's response, I offer at least some balance and counterargument. Not to do so diminishes any meaningful debate, and turns it into a futile rant. In extremis, it also potentially opens up legal challenges to both SOS and the individual ranters.

The people at Focusrite are far from being idiots -- technologically, or in terms of business management -- and I'm sure they thought long and hard by before deciding to cease further development of the OSX software for the VRM.

Part of that shades-of-grey argument is the recognition that while the VRM might not be compatible with the latest Mac OS, it is still alive and kicking for mac users who are not slavishingly upgrading their OS just because it's out there, and it is still a perfectly viable product for at least four generations of Windows platforms.

It is also important to recognise that every other Focusrite product is apparently compatible with Yosemeti.

I believe it is fundamentally unfair and unintelligent to castigate in public the entire company and all its works for the unfortunate demise of one product on one specific platform.

I also think it is incumbent on the end user to critically assess whether an OS upgrade is actually a sensible thing to do. A computer is a tool to do a job: why would anyone voluntarily break a working a system... and then blame third parties for something they have done themselves? It might be an intrinsic element of the popular 'blame society', but that doesn't make it acceptable or right.

Focusrite do send me freebies sometimes - the guys who work in artist relations are actually really nice, but I just can't defend their quality control or support.

It would be nice to think you'd have the integrity to refuse any offered freebies from now on...

H

[Hugh Robjohns]

It is, however, a pretty poor show from Focusrite, and one reason why I'd prefer to stick with RME.

I didn't think RME offered anything remotely similar to the speaker/room modelling facilities of the Focusrite VRM.

They do make exceedingly good interfaces, though, ... and so does Focusrite -- and they all work with Yosemite, too.

H

[johnny h]

I think its very disappointing Hugh is so sympathetic to the companies that are ripping us off here.

Just to be clear, I completely abhor companies that fail to maintain support for their products for a decent period after they discontinue a product -- and the VRM has not (yet) been discontinued. I also totally understand and agree that it is disappointing that Focusrite have been caught out with the changes introduced in Yosemite.

Some level of criticism is certainly warranted, of course. However, things are never as black and white as some here like to think -- the world works in shades of grey -- and I think it is only fair and proper that in the absence of an official manufacturer's response I offer some balance and counterargument. Not to do so stifles a meaningful debate, and turns it into a futile rant. In extremis, it also potentially opens up legal challenges to both SOS and individual ranters.

Absolute nonsense. Either a product sold in 2013 works on a standard computer from 2014 or it doesn't. If it doesn't, and the manufacture offers neither a fix nor a refund, we have a right to complain.

The people at Focusrite are far from being idiots -- technologically or in terms of business management -- and I'm sure they thought long and hard by before deciding to cease further development of the OSX software for the VRM.

Of course they did. They thought its cheaper to get a third party to write code for them than to do it themselves and took the risk that future support would not be available, and that possibility would leave them open to criticism. They decided their reputation wasn't worth the extra expense and effort into maintaining compatibility.

So while the VRM might not be compatible with the latest Mac OS, it is still alive and kicking on several Windows platforms, and also for mac users who are not slavishingly upgrading their OS just because it's out there. It is also important to recognise that every other Focusrite product is apparently compatible with Yosemeti.

It is fundamentally unfair to castigate in public the whole company and all its works for the unfortunate demise of one product on one specific platform.

I also think it is incumbent on the end user to critically assess whether an OS upgrade is actually a sensible thing to do. A computer is a tool to do a job: why would anyone voluntarily break a working a system... and then blame third parties for something they have done themselves? It is an unpleasant but intrinsic element of the popular 'blame society'.

Very disappointing. Apple release a new operating system every year. Its not unexpected or unusual. If your programming teams can't deal with Apple's OS policy you should not be releasing products for it!

99% of well written drivers and programs work perfectly without any modification. "Hacky", depreciated or sloppy code is most likely to break. This is not about 'blaming society'. This is about blaming Focusrite for releasing a product which they were unable to support for a reasonable amount of time.

Focusrite do send me freebies sometimes - the guys who work in artist relations are actually really nice, but I just can't defend their quality control or support.

I presume you'll be refusing any offered freebies from now on then?

I don't really care if something free falls apart or stops working. I can always sell it to a PC user!

[Guest]

Again a disappointing response Hugh. The discussion has spread wider than Focusrite. Surely we are talking about fundamental consumer rights and the responsibilities of software manufacturers to provide updates and support for a reasonable amount of time after sale of that software. If they fail to do so, for whatever reason, then they are failing their customers.

Suggesting that any of us - slavishingly upgrade our OS just because it's out there - is just patronising and your comment - why would anyone voluntarily break a working a system... and then blame third parties for something they have done themselves? It is an unpleasant but intrinsic element of the popular 'blame society' - even more so!

It's our own choice as to how and when we update ( not break) our system and we do that for a number of reasons which are completely irrelevant to the issue here.. The point is that software developers know future updates will have an effect on the viability of their products, they know how quickly OS's develop and should be responsible enough to provide a reasonable amount of updates and support to provide future compatibility with future OS'. It shouldn't be a matter of opinion it should be a matter of principle.

[Hugh Robjohns]

If it doesn't, and the manufacture offers neither a fix nor a refund, we have a right to complain.

Owners have a right to complain, yes. I said exactly that, and advised they complain to the manufacturer directly. They also have reasons to warn other potential users of potential problems on forums like this. But these are very different things to indignant non-users jumping on a bandwagon and slagging off an entire company and all its products unjustly in public.

I don't really care if something free falls apart or stops working. I can always sell it to a PC user!

Astonishing!

H