Midiclock sync drift IS a bug. My prophet 12 does not drift even 1 sample on the same midiclock feed (which is being sent via USAMO sample accurate midi)
- when you sync the delays to tempo, check out the selectable delay times. Pretty f"$#ed up.
Play with the synth yourself appesino, if you dont find some major bugs with the firmware your either a fanboy/girl shill or lack the ability to know the difference. If I spent $2000.00 less, I'd be fine with the synth as it is, but this is a $3k synth, it needs to f$%$ing work.

I'm putting pressure on a company that sold me an incomplete product so that they will complete the product. The synth cost as much as my car; I want it to work properly.
If that makes me a "dick" pass me a condom and I'll call it a hat.

If anyone is interested in the known issues with Matrixbrute firmware have a look at the arturia forums. If anyone is curious as to why I would be so vocal, check out Arturia's last flagship the Origin or any of their other hardware: firmware updates are lacking.

One bug I find unnecessary is the way the upper part affect the triggering of legato portamento on the lower part in Duo Split. And that the keyboard doesn’t transmit on different midi channels in said mode according to Control Center settings.

That's right, there's no complete list anywhere public. You'll have to trawl the Arturia forum to find them all, and some may not be mentioned there.

I've submitted 20 bugs (that's real bugs, some minor, some major), and 17 feature suggestions (annoyance-fixes and actual features). I've only submitted bugs that I've tested and verified. There are more, and I hope everybody are submitting them as they're found.

The state of the firmware isn't too bad IMO, as in no real show stoppers AFAIC. I suppose most users don't hit most of the bugs most of the time, as always. But what's there must be fixed, of course.

Whilst I understand that the repetition might be annoying, I think Standingwave is being a hero of sorts standing up for all the users - not only for himself.

Arturia do have a highly criticised history, and I for one promised to never ever buy anything Arturia because of that, until I got weak and ordered the MatrixBrute anyway due to its promise.

Not having delved into the machine yet, I can't contribute with any bug reports, but DrJustice is doing another hero's work in this regard.
I point you to his posts if you think Standingwave is too annoying.

Looking forward to the half-promised update, and, based on all the reports both in this thread and on the Arturia forum, I think it really ought to come.
IMHO of course.

@ Dr. justice
As a Brute owner myself, I appreciate the efforts you have given to help the synth become one of the greats!

I love this instrument and it is worth fighting to make sure Arturia live up to their responsibility of finishing the development.

Cheers!

I would love to have as many users as possible happy about the matrixbrute. But I think we might be able to make it more easy for Arturia to focus and prioritize their work with a precise list of confirmed bugs and annoyances.

Just claiming that it has tons of bugs and is totally unfinished doesn’t help. That’s just letting out steam (which can be needed and is fair enough).

Basically: Make it as easy as possible for Arturia to improve the matrixbrute

I doubt knowledge organisation is the issue, its resource allocation and company priorities.

@ Ninecows
We are doing what Arturia have requested: opening support tickets and reporting on their forum.
As steveelbows said; Arturia have spent their resources on developing other products. Unless we kick up a bit of a public fuss, I dont think they would even bother IMO.

I'm sorry to those that find my repetition to be annoying. I just want to ensure that the real truth of where this synth is is heard by prospective buyers so that they know the full story. Arturia have spent oodles on marketing, all we have are these forums. All I can do is try and keep the issue on the latest page so that it is seen by all and not buried.

I think there's a psychology here as well in that, when one spends this kind of money on a product they may be less likely to criticize said product. One may feel to criticize such an item that they spent their money on may be a critic of themselves to a degree. So there's this ouroboros of misinformation surrounding some products in the marketplace.

Just my $.02

I asked this previously but will ask again: does anyone know if the phase-lock issue (or whatever you want to call it) on Osc 1/2 has been fixed in more recent versions?

Keeping the heat on is entirely legit @ standingwave . As I´ve written elsewhere, Arturia gets no more money from me until they make good. But in fairness the full story is that even with the unaddessed bugs its a killer synth.

Mine has it...not sure how to determine when it was built but it was bought new 10 months ago. Im guessing no as theyve said nothing after the discussion above. Workaround as im sure you know is to use osc3 for close detunes, or an external sound source. Its a drag...no firmware fix for this. But for me, its not much of an inconvenience. The hold key problem, now thats an inconvenience .

I remember the question, but don't remember hearing any audio examples of this phenomenon from the MB.

Or maybe i remember now.

Thanks for confirming. I assume it’s just not going to get fixed. I guess I’m one of those in the small minority who cares about this, but it is frustrating because I otherwise thought the MB was a fantastic synth and would love to revisit, even in light of the other bugs that have since come up.

I'm hoping Arturia releases a new firmware and an editor/librarian soon.

Can anyone from Arturia comment on this? I'm sure they keep tabs on this thread, at least I assume so.

+1 for updated firmware; as a MatrixBrute owner, it pains me not to be able to use the machine to its full potential due to Arturia slacking. All the bugs mentioned above are neither trivial nor impossible to fix - let's try our best to make it happen!

On one of my last support tickets I asked about a firmware release and was told to expect one this upcoming spring.
+1 on a editor/plugin. I haven't heard anything from Arturia regarding that, but it would indeed be sweet.

Arturia have a great opportunity here to release a 'MatrixBrute V' that is at once polyphonic VST extension, VST control panel, and patch librarian and one-up the omnisphere folks. But will they!?

Thanks, appreciated.

I've (relatively) plunged the depths of the instrument, so I'll contribute to the present discussion:

RE the subject of bugs etc - so far I have identified 53 bugs, and three (quite major) faults.

I haven't sent tickets through to Arturia, nor do I have any intention of doing so.


When Bruno/Ben etc turn up to the Arturia offices in the morning, they are paid for the work they do.

If Arturia (any synth company, for that matter) want a detailed and comprehensive report of bugs/faults etc - and if this information is sought externally - they should be employing a consultant to create such a report.

Expecting the general public - public who have paid good money for their product - to do this for free is an insult. It is also corner-cutting, and shows lack of the implementation of compliance protocols at the management level.

The process is very simple i.e 'feature x performs function x. Test function x to check the function is successful'.

Any company failing to do this is a failure at the company level.


It is in the interest of synth companies to create the sense of 'community' with their products. The cynic could see 'community' as a way of having work done for free (i.e members of the public submitting tickets etc.).

Arturia should have someone in situ to test for faults/bugs. Problems should never reach the general public, but being realistic, bugs etc do occasionally creep through. However, it is not the responsibility of the purchaser to report these bugs.

My reply to Arturia - to any synth company - is 'invest in your products or pay someone to conduct a comprehensive analysis'.


I've had around 12 private messages from people who have watched my MB videos and went on to purchase the MB as a product of said videos. This equates to almost $20k made for Arturia.

I'm a musician - my focus is music (not reviews etc). I mention this as:

It would be very easy to create a '50 things wrong with the Matrixbrute' video - which I won't do, as I simply make music (which can speak for itself - or not).

I mention the above in relation to appalling marketing campaigns by synth companies. These consist of either defrosting 'celebrity player x' for a quick session, or, in Arturia's case, employing an external marketing company who tick all the boxes RE video production,yet completely fail to understand their target market, with the result being a very tacky product.

Both are an insult to the synth community.


Given company promotional material is, in general, a failure, relying on this to sell instruments is a terribly risky strategy for a company.

If I created the aforementioned '50 things wrong' video, Arturia's sales would likely plummet. But if Arturia already had a strong body of work of their own to demonstrate their products, the rough would be taken with the smooth, and potential purchasers could make a balanced judgement based on both user and company videos.


I won't produce a '50 things wrong' video as I'm not a review channel, neither would I hold a company to ransom. But they do have a responsibility to provide a good product - and to follow through with compliance etc.


In defense of Arturia: they have no obligation to reply to every email sent to them each time an issue arises. They have promised an update - lets see what they deliver - and lets hope they have tested the product thoroughly from their end, rather than relying on user input.


It is up to Arturia to uphold their reputation. As is the case with any synth company.

Relying on the public (directly or otherwise) to sell products is madness; creating highly critical videos illustrating flaws/bugs etc isn't difficult.


I'll submit tickets etc when Arturia's staff work for free.



Best
Kris

Sorry, I might be a bit ignorant here, but why would you need an editor for a one-knob-per-function synth? To type in exact values for e.g. LFO speed?

Library yes.

Edit: I actually bought this synth to avoid the whole computer/menu diving thing... :-)

I cannot speak for the OP, but I would like an editor to make automation in the DAW easier, and to be able to save patches with my DAW project and not have to manually re-set the synth when I load a project (when writing, I like to put things on the shelf and come back to them later). Automation is certainly doable with the CCs, but it would be easier with an editor.

Don’t forget the MILLION things RIGHT with the MatrixBrute!

I’m of the mind that team Arturia will circle back and wow us with a grand MxB firmware UPGRADE. I do hope so. It needs it. I can’t wait for freedom from the computer and all the rest (like more presets and a multi-page matrix!). It really deserves the royal treatment from Arturia.

But, hey, I turn it on and it’s always something special. A true innovative mono flagship.

First off, welcome to GS!

There are some very nice vids on your channel

It would be helpful if you did so though. If not, posting a report on the Arturia forum would also be helpful, so that others can verify the issues and submit tickets.

In an ideal world, all software would be bug free from the get-go. However, in the real world, that's a rare occurrence for software of some complexity. Relying on user feedback to catch the last bugs, in addition to internal testing, is how it's done in reality. I.e. it becomes a community effort, and particularly in small businesses like the synth industry.

Yes, fast and convenient updates done by the users have made a culture of "patching later", but that's everywhere in all businesses, all synth makers do it.

Right, that is your prerogative, but it's not helping anybody.

I'd say it doesn't help/isn't helpful, as doing so continues the culture of complacency whereby synth companies can rely on users to tell them what improvements could/should be made, rather than the companies doing the right thing by maintaining standards/stringent protocols.

See below:



Submitting suggestions RE desired updates is great, and I applaud companies for listening to their clients.

But this should not be confused with bug fixing/identification - which is company responsibility - and is their duty to the end-user/purchaser.


I also don't buy into the concept of 'sympathy for the small company'. Take, for example, Vermona. Small company - yes. I'll talk about their '14, since I've posted videos of it:

Vermona's '14 has a run of 222 instruments, at a cost of £2k+ per instrument. Top-end, this project will generate c.£500,000 for Vermona.

That is more than enough to invest in the creation of promotional material/compliance checking RE bugs etc. Failing to do so is, at best, naive.



Arturia are a far bigger company - there is no excuse. Scale up the sales/profit of the Matrixbrute and we are talking millions. When a project will generate millions for a company yet the product has many bugs, there is a fault at management level, in terms of quality assurance.

Also RE promotional material. Blowing a marketing budget on a video to impress really doesn't cut it.

If Arturia had sent myself/someone who does something similar a selection of their synths, I'd happily create many, many pieces of music showing what their products are capable of/give their synths a musical context. This would be a fair trade I'd be happy with.

But providing a bug list for no other reason than to end up with the instrument that should have existed in the first place is not a fair trade - this is working for a company for free.




As above. It is helping Arturia by holding them responsible for the product they choose to release on the market. Arturia's product is Arturia's responsibility.

If the Matrixbrute fails, it is in no way the fault of any user failing to feed back info RE bugs - it is Arturia's fault for failing to identify/deal with said bugs.


Best
Kris

We're a community here, we help each other, and we even help manufacturers when needed so that they can help us by maintaining their products. That's how it usually works in the synth world these days, especially w.r.t. manufacturers that do interact with the community (i.e. not so much Yamaha, Roland and the like).

OK, so you refuse to disclose anything without getting paid and/or to punish Arturia, and that's your right. I'd still ask you on the behalf of the community to share your findings. Since you mention a tally of exactly 53 bugs, I suppose you have a list detailing those. Why not send that list to Arturia, or posting it here or on the Arturia forums, helping all MxB owners including yourself?

Don't send the list to that evil Arturia !
But please copy/paste it here for us who are considering buying the synth.

Thanks Kris---Im very interested to hear what you like about the MB warts and all?
Its pretty much a given that the MB is the best and most complex mass produced synth since the Andromeda A6
So why has sales not gone through the roof and used MBs are hard to sell? (Just like what happened to Andromeda A6 during its production lifecycle)

I have this thought the more purchasers of the MB the better support we will get from Auturia and it will be a current model for a long time to come. As it stands today the risk is Auturia will discontinue after sales decline to certain level and parts may be an issue in the future (Just like what happened to Andromeda A6)

So just like the Andromeda A6 none of the lessons have been learned and history repeats?

Yes. Please do so.

It’s pretty simple actually. Arturia for some reason wants to limit the resources spent on firmware updates. So we can either help them by providing a detailed bug list with as much information as possible or we can sit here and complain. I think we stand a better chance with the former.

Second (and this is a wild, crazy shot): Do we have some geeks in this forum that can extract the firmware? Possibly reverse engineer it and customize/modify it? I mean: the hardware is pretty amazing so it holds a lot of possibilities with a different firmware :-)

This is a perplexing standpoint. I understand and agree with the core of what you're saying--companies, not users, SHOULD be catching these things before product release--but in a market-based system, synth makers have always balanced getting a product out onto the market with the potential for undiscovered bugs. I can think of very few complex digital/analog-hybrid synths that appeared on the market and worked perfectly or did not need any fixes or updates (your Vermona example isn't really valid as it's a far simpler synth--no digital--that also builds quite heavily on a long lineage of similar simple products).

So if companies have and will continue to do this, user feedback is likely the only way to produce fixes/updates because by the time a product is actually released, the developers have probably already moved on to the next thing. You obviously have your reasons, but I'm still curious why you went to the effort of keeping track of 53 bugs if you never planned to report them.

The MatrixBrute has 4 classes of MCUs, a "main" one, a "voice" one, a "matrix" one and several for the panel boards (8 in total). It's technically possible to reverse engineer it, of course, but it's just too complex with too much software for a hobbyist project. Quite different from the synths of yore, usually with an MCU and an EPROM all out in the open and blissfully simple by comparison.

@ KL1982
This is how responsible capitalism works. I am simpatico with your stance here, and thank you for chiming in. This is a sober and logical evaluation of the situation.

A top tier product like the Matrixbrute should have a team dedicated to ironing out the bugs and furthering development after hearing feedback. The hype does not match the product, I'm sorry to say. Unless Arturia change gears and look after their baby, this will be the Fyre festival of synths.