Imitone -- wow! Most embarassing post I ever started

[highkoo]

So guys is midi guitar 2 viable for use with voice?

I think its the best all around solution for this kind of stuff right now.
None of em are perfect.., so ease of use counts for a lot.

The Imitone algo just seems to have a certain smoothness that is harder to dial in with the current solutions, imo. Maybe because its tweaked to work with vocals?

[Musical Gym]

MiGiC is not free. You can test the beta with the possibility of being rewarded for testing and providing feedback.

Must have over-read that section at BPB - it was late in the morning for me.
But thanks for the correction.

VST version aside: This guy raised his funds on KS two years ago and the backers still struggle with 0.8x?

Oh I wouldn't completely disregard that. I mean, look at one of the more recent prime examples where "Betas" turned out to be highly working regular full versions, and once they hit "v1" they turned commercial. In the VSTi realm that's definitely material from U-HE, and I still remember the outcry for Audjoo's HELIX (which was already great in Beta - and then suddenly people had to shell out 150USD), then the outstanding S.Kullmann SQ8L - which also was in "beta" and is fully usable to this day (though sadly, it has been discontinued).

In case of Imitone... he started with Beta 0.5.x - and it was already in a usable state (which lies in the eyes of the beholder - but if it can be shown as "running flawless" and be used at trade shows, then it is usable IMO!). Now we're currently on v0.8.2 - with two code revisions in between IIRC and the most different feedback on usability.

The dev did offer (multiple times) to refund who is unsatisfied, you guys can't treat the guy like a criminal...

We're not treating him like a "criminal" (spoken in a very blunt way). We only want to see the promises that have been made to us. The developer said right from the start "the project is done and usable, now it's only down to testing (the final 10%)". And since then, it has been code overhauls and excuses "why the development is so slow".

It's one thing if for example Slate Digital announces a plugin, and then doesn't deliver for the next two years. But at least he doesn't ask for money in advance and never delivers. In fact, I know of another company that asked for a monthly subscription fee and promised 2-5 plugins a year bar minimum - yet the company is standing still since February 2014 - and that is AXIS Plugins.


Additional to that - asking for a refund and getting it after over 2 years, while saying in the same breath "just look at the competition then", is not a great poster child for a company. At least there are no additional insults like "good riddance" or something (I've been there).

Dev is also providing updates with noticeable improvements every 3 months or so. The detection became noticeably better and he also added new functions since I bought it.

That seems like a steady pace of development for me.

A steady pace of development, until sh*t really hits the fan (I'm currently in such a beta myself) would be if the goal is to deliver within 3 months to 6 months, maybe 1 year max (as this was initially planned!). Especially if the plugin has already been in a "usable state" - as mentioned over and over.

Yes, "life" can always fork you over - apologies can be accepted. But what drives me up the walls is that the developer admits that he messed up, apologized more than once, he even asked for feedback on how to improve things, he wants to(!) improve things. Yet he then completely ignores what was said again and goes back to his old habits/planned course.

No matter if I'm a backer, a bystander or a current user - this gives me all the wrong signs!

The 0.7 versions were quite fiddly, a VST then would not have satisfied many people (IMO). In fact the last version (0.8.2) is the one that felt really usable for me (since I can't actually sing for sh**, just hum some simple stuff).

Even though the current version is already usable, right now I would rather have a 0.8.3 standalone with even better detection, than a VST version of 0.8.2.

I mean, I do want a VST, but now I kinda get why he said he was still too unsatisfied with the basic usability earlier.

Well, this is an Apples and Oranges situation. Like mentioned over and over at this point, the tool was usable right from the start. "How usable" lies within the eyes of the beholder (as you just confirmed, and kind of put as defense for the developer).

But it is a difference between a working concept shown on videos and at trade shows, and then delaying it for over 2 years with the most various reasons there are - like it happened in this case. Or... (to give another example from the gaming realm, which Balster should be more than aware of) having a pre-rendered FMV sequence of a game/tool, no demo at all, a huge hype and the end product is a piece of crap. Looking at the gaming industry in most recent years: Aliens Colonial Marines or EVOLVE. Or why do you think that "not actual ingame engine", "prerendered video" or "product in beta state, can change until final release" is not MANDATORY for such presentations)?

We have to put this into perspective!


Again, you could have delivered what you've promised. Like: VST version, apps for portable devices. Yet still clearly tag them as "Beta" or "Early Access". This sh*t is happening daily in the gaming industry. This type of stuff is happening daily in the audio industry (plugins, instruments, hosts!). People are then aware of that up front (they know the risks - and in some cases, it's a sorry excuse for money grabs - looking at the bigger gaming companies!), yet can still use the tools and hope that the developer updates it every 2-4 weeks. Not every 3 months, and after over 2 years it's a completely different product as initially advertised (been there as well!). This way, after 60-75 days - you could still say "works for me, I'll keep it and wait for the final version" or "sorry - developer messed up, I want my money back". Doing that after 2 years still... shows me that something is terribly wrong.


Why is it so difficult for Evan Balster to realize that?
Why is a 2 week port the anchor point for "not doing it", and continue to say "the R&D needs to be be better, the code optimized, it's made for 'beginners', not (semi) professionals (even though I showed it at at the North American Music and Merchant trade show - or NAMM in short)"? (in fact, the "research" part has been done up until the Kickstarter project in 2014 - else this thing wouldn't exist in the first place!)
Why is an initially working tool not "good enough" for that task?

To me as outside person that did not back this project, it's even more incomprehensible.


It is not about "getting more income" - it is about fulfilling your promise, doing right by your backers and show the interested parties "hey - I am the developer, it's a close-to-heart project, I care! You're welcome! This will be a great product!". Something I was actually looking forward to! Instead he's indirectly flipping us the bird and pushing us away on purpose. Even says "writing on a professional board was a mistake" - but in the end, this tool is for the audio creating people! From beginners to professionals. And he cut off his biggest market (the semi-pro's and pro's), because he thinks "it is not for you" - but the absolute beginners usually know jack about both hosts, routing and tools. So it's not really made for them either!


I'm not raising pressure on this dev - I'm just stating my thoughts. And to me, as somebody that's been in this industry for over 20 years (so I've seen/experienced things), this isn't logical!

In the interests of accuracy Evan Balster started three kickstarter projects that didn't finish

We have to be a bit more detailed than that.

By Kickstarter standards, all of these projects were fully funded, even exceeded their pledge goals. So considering that only, the campaigns were a success. What happened after that, lies on a whole different ballpark.


Infinite Blank initially asked for 1000USD, it gathered 2379USD (sans 15% fees, so 2022,15USD). It was planned for a server and further "drive for development". As I take it, the project didn't even kick off further than the funding and people couldn't play like advertised. It was planned to be a quick cash in for Balster (he even stated "he's broke") - and IMO the absolute wrong move in times of "app games" and "free to play, but unlock more goodies with payments". I think this is the biggest problem with single developers - they can't handle everything and miss the forest for the trees.

To add further insult, Balster wrote as final posts for the backers to "get access to the beta of Imitone", to make up for the not delivered game. If the 106 backers for this game are completely different backers than 106 people out of the 2433 backers for Imitone... then he has about 100 extra testers. And if only 20% of all of them give feedback... that is over 480 testers, way more than any audio company with a set beta team of 10-30 people could ever wish for. Yet the project isn't finished yet, it's still being recoded and changed (something which shouldn't happen, if you write "it's done" at the beginning of the campaign).

So why is this wasted in time, potential and patience of the backers?!



SoundSelf has been out since March 2013, and it asked for roughly 29k USD to cover all expenses. They made 36766USD from which 35% goes away for rewards and fees (sometimes even double the fees - as mentioned in their charts). So from 36766 USD, they kept 23897,90USD - about 5,8k USD more than their initial fees for the development (18k USD), which was then probably split into 3 (so 8k USD each). However, they at least delivered both the prototype and "betas" (on request). Else the writing of the text with the 90% development, 10% testing is exactly the same.



And imitone... well, I can only repeat myself. Campaign was more than a success (>3,5x the amount asked for!), module was usable right off the bat, developer insisted "only testing is needed at this point". You can't just write "it's done at this point" and then deliver a half-arsed tool, or say "it's not for professionals", if those were probably the most backers and high-rollers! In fact, the minimum "backing slot" was 20USD - and not 1USD or 5USD like so many other Kickstarter Projects. I mean, did the 8 backers for the SoundSelf Charm (250USD) even get their price yet?!

Anyway - this would be the same as saying "yo, our strategy game is finished" but in the end you only have 2 units and 10 minutes of gameplay - then your PC crashes like nobody's business and formats your OS drive. "but hey, thanks for your 200USD donation, you'll be mentioned in the credits, in font size 6!". This is not how you do an early access of a 90% finished program IMO.

Its great to have avant garde, bold innovators.
Evenly, its most valuable to have analytical, critical voices such as Compyfox and omac.
One can just wish that there is enough transparency and open dialogue for getting best results.

At this point, both backers and interested parties gave a lot of "food for thought" so to speak to Evan Balster. He picked up on it, only to dismiss it again.

Open dialogue good and fine, but at this stage it feels like that the developer just doesn't care anymore. He rather lives on the success of his campaigns and then says "sorry - can't deliver - moving on - it's my pet peeve, I'll finish eventually, just stay tuned - and if it takes too long, look somewhere else".


Now imagine one of the small independent developers here on KVR and GS saying the same thing, promise the blue from the sky, live off of the free marketing (word of mouth, anticipation by users, etc), then taking the money and run. What backlash would that be? Oh wait, we had that several times, didn't we? Most notably TeamDNR and their Workbench thing.




I stated my points - I asked a question to the developer (see my last post). It's now in the hands of Evan Balster.

But I have a feeling, that looking at alternatives is not too wayward after all. Pity, I really wanted to support this tool...

Please don't use my nick to attribute comments I didn't make. I commented on MiGiC. Please clean up your reply and attribute appropriate comments to the respective posters.
I don't appreciate having comments I didn't make attributed to me.

[omac]

@Compyfox - I think you misunderstood. I'm not arguing with you. I was clarifying what I was referring to. I don't disagree at all with what you wrote; however, my interest in this is whether or not individuals who gave funds were given what was promised in the fund-raisers. I see it as a complete package with certain results being promised in exchange for funds. While by kickstarter definition that isn't correct, I wouldn't be surprised to find that in the not so distant future, fund-raising of this type wouldn't be considered a binding contract where you are legally required to show true intent to provide the promised goods even if they aren't delivered. I will personally continue to refer to kickstarter and the delivery of products as a complete package since I don't see any difference between it and venture capitalist financing. Venture capitalist financing is a contractual obligation with identified goals and specific payment schedules. The entrepreneur is still financially liable for a specified amount in the event of the enterprise not being successfully started. The only exception to that I know of is if the entrepreneur is signing over a significant percentage of ownership.

I have an interest in this product but didn't get in on the kickstarter because I didn't see much difference in it and other audio to midi products. I've owned a couple before, Akoff and AmazingMIDI (which is now freeware) and wanted to wait until there was a vst version. I have been keeping an eye on it, but now understand that there will be no vst version and am taking it off my list. Having reached that decision I'm exiting from this discussion unless the developer changes his mind regarding a vst version and has a short timeline for distributing it.

[No_Use]

I have been keeping an eye on it, but now understand that there will be no vst version and am taking it off my list.

Evan doesn't say there will be no VST version (iiuc):

Now I do realize the standalone routing is a huge pain (or even a show-stopper) when it comes to a studio setup, and I'm not going to wait until the end of the beta to do the portwork---that would be an awful mistake. But I have my priorities, and I'm sticking to them: Get the technology to a point where I feel like I'd use it for serious composition. 0.8.2 gets surprisingly close to that, and the new tech I'm planning promises to be a much bigger improvement.

edit:
That means he'll start on the plugin port before Imitone reaches 1.0 or do I totally misunderstand this ?

[musikmachine]

So guys is midi guitar 2 viable for use with voice?

I think its the best all around solution for this kind of stuff right now.
None of em are perfect.., so ease of use counts for a lot.

The Imitone algo just seems to have a certain smoothness that is harder to dial in with the current solutions, imo. Maybe because its tweaked to work with vocals?

Thanks, yeah it looks it but with it being aimed at guitar i'm wondering how well it tracks the voice, especially via the iphones mic.

I've got a mic i could use with imitone but i'm unclear on how the setup works if imitone uses the driver for your interface and you need to use the mic input in your host.

Btw i'm not expecting perfect tracking but what is the transient detection like with MTG?

[Compyfox]

Please don't use my nick to attribute comments I didn't make. I commented on MiGiC. Please clean up your reply and attribute appropriate comments to the respective posters.
I don't appreciate having comments I didn't make attributed to me.

There was no need for a massive quote pyramid, but it should be fixed now. Answering multiple people in one post can be a bit bothersome and chaotic.

I see it as a complete package with certain results being promised in exchange for funds. While by kickstarter definition that isn't correct, I wouldn't be surprised to find that in the not so distant future, fund-raising of this type wouldn't be considered a binding contract where you are legally required to show true intent to provide the promised goods even if they aren't delivered.

Not only is this a valid argument, but also a well adjusted concern.

Having reached that decision I'm exiting from this discussion unless the developer changes his mind regarding a vst version and has a short timeline for distributing it.

I'm quite positive that the next thing that happens, is another apology, then a promise "it will happen", and 3 months later we're back to the same debate.

Which is a shame.

Evan doesn't say there will be no VST version (iiuc):

Now I do realize the standalone routing is a huge pain (or even a show-stopper) when it comes to a studio setup, and I'm not going to wait until the end of the beta to do the portwork---that would be an awful mistake. But I have my priorities, and I'm sticking to them: Get the technology to a point where I feel like I'd use it for serious composition. 0.8.2 gets surprisingly close to that, and the new tech I'm planning promises to be a much bigger improvement.

edit:
That means he'll start on the plugin port before Imitone reaches 1.0 or do I totally misunderstand this ?

The thing is, that he sets priorities. And his priority is to "finish the R&D first, then go from there", while ignoring what he has presented/announced/promised since March 2014. And that is happening for several months at this point. He even mentioned in his last two posts that he actually created a VST plugin version, yet dropped further development of them again (to my understanding!)

At this stage, we have two problems:
a) we don't even know when the next update will hit, and what version it will be
b) due to the fact that we don't know this, and v1 can be as far away as another 2 years (if we only get .8.x updates and .9.x ones), and if the focus remains on "fixing what already works", we'll never see a VST version

We need to take that into consideration.



In the end - it's your decision (you, the interested party or backer) what route you will go. But there are a lot of huge red warning flags standing in the room now that can't be ignored.

[No_Use]

In the end - it's your decision (you, the interested party or backer) what route you will go. But there are a lot of huge red warning flags standing in the room now that can't be ignored.

Well, I'm a backer and wouldn't have backed it if there wasn't a VST version announced.
So while I'm admittedly a bit disappointed that the VST version takes so long I can totally understand that he first wants to get the 'backbone' / core technology right before doing the portwork. Seems to make sense to me.

So as long as I see constant progress (even if slow) still fine with me.

[No_Use]

doublepost, sorry

[Shabdahbriah]

In the end - it's your decision (you, the interested party or backer) what route you will go. But there are a lot of huge red warning flags standing in the room now that can't be ignored.

Well, I'm a backer and wouldn't have backed it if there wasn't a VST version announced.
So while I'm admittedly a bit disappointed that the VST version takes so long I can totally understand that he first wants to get the 'backbone' / core technology right before doing the portwork. Seems to make sense to me.

So as long as I see constant progress (even if slow) still fine with me.

That's where I am as well. I backed it, and demo'd an early release, and though the "special" midi driver/router thingy had some conflicts with some things (I don't recall what, but it was a quick fix later, after uninstalling the "special" thingy), it actually worked fairly well, when using my voice to trigger a synth. More practice on my part to get down the specific 'tonal/plosive' idiosyncrasies needed, and it improved.

I would like to see the 'real-time' Vst version, without the need of the "special" midi thing, and routing hassle. In the interim I still use Melodyne to translate my voice to midi, which is what I bought 'it' for, years and years ago.

[musikmachine]

In the end - it's your decision (you, the interested party or backer) what route you will go. But there are a lot of huge red warning flags standing in the room now that can't be ignored.

Well, I'm a backer and wouldn't have backed it if there wasn't a VST version announced.
So while I'm admittedly a bit disappointed that the VST version takes so long I can totally understand that he first wants to get the 'backbone' / core technology right before doing the portwork. Seems to make sense to me.

So as long as I see constant progress (even if slow) still fine with me.

Are you happy with the way it works now; does it deliver on the results it promises in terms of pitch to midi? I've got this idea to use it with things like brass instruments, trumpets etc and use it separately to music production so realtime perofrmance/use wouldn't be critical.

I also wanna use it with standalone Reaktor instruments and record to audio so in that case the standalone would be what i needed anyway...

[No_Use]

In the end - it's your decision (you, the interested party or backer) what route you will go. But there are a lot of huge red warning flags standing in the room now that can't be ignored.

Well, I'm a backer and wouldn't have backed it if there wasn't a VST version announced.
So while I'm admittedly a bit disappointed that the VST version takes so long I can totally understand that he first wants to get the 'backbone' / core technology right before doing the portwork. Seems to make sense to me.

So as long as I see constant progress (even if slow) still fine with me.

Are you happy with the way it works now; does it deliver on the results it promises in terms of pitch to midi? I've got this idea to use it with things like brass instruments, trumpets etc and use it separately to music production so realtime perofrmance/use wouldn't be critical.

I also wanna use it with standalone Reaktor instruments and record to audio so in that case the standalone would be what i needed anyway...

I'm waiting for the VST version, haven't used the standalone extensively and the new update not at all yet, so can't give any meaningful feedback currently, sorry.

[musikmachine]

Thanks. Is that cause of the setting up involved?

[No_Use]

Thanks. Is that cause of the setting up involved?

Partly yes, because I'm lazy.
As mentioned here couple of times, it's just more convenient imo using it as plugin within a DAW than the standalone version.

Though last time I used the standalone version it worked ok for me also, it's actually not THAT much hassle to set it up imo. I used WASAPI drivers, and latency was quite ok.

And partly because I don't have any musical projects currently where I could use it.

[musikmachine]

Ah ok. So with wasapi you can share the audio between apps like a multiclient interface? Never used it. I know with Asio i'd have issues.

@the dev, all you need to do is post a clear and concise set up video on your website on how to set up a vst plugin, i've been at this a while and i'm picking up new stuff all the time that often requires a set up guide which most devs if not all devs provide.

Once i've got it that's it, happy days!

[No_Use]

Yes, WASAPI is Windows' native low latency audio driver (since Vista).
There's WASAPI shared mode which can be used with differents apps simultaniously (as a multiclient driver I mean, not inter-routing audio like e.g. with JACK), and WASAPI exclusive mode which takes exclusive control over the audio device like ASIO.