Pro remote accessibility
Hello all, Has anyone ever tried to use the pro remote app with ProTools? Is it accessible with voiceover on the iPhone? Thanks, Brian Sent from my iPhone
Re: ivory grand piano question
Brian: I've not been able to get Ivory working on the mac with anything. Cheers. - Original Message - From: "Brian Howerton" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 4:41 PM Subject: ivory grand piano question Hello folks, I have this piano library and I absolutely love it! Before I go through the trouble of installing it on the mac, however, I wanted to know if anyone has had any success using it with pt and vo. Thanks, Brian __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7102 (20120501) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7102 (20120501) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
I also would be interested in the logic accessibility list info - T.O.M On May 1, 2012, at 4:24 PM, "Brian Casey" wrote: > Keith, > > You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks for > the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. > > Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember someone > posting about it a year or so ago on this list. > > Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? > > Brian. > > -- > From: "Keith Reedy" > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM > To: > Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > >> Brian and all, >> >> I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had >> to use to get GarageBand up to speed. >> >> To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. >> accessibil...@apple.com >> Keith Reedy >> Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from >> Bibles For The Blind. >> >> http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml >> >> God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. >> >> >> >> >> On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: >> >>> Good info T.O.M and Scot. >>> >>> I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting >>> ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still >>> might be a good way to look at things. >>> >>> Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for >>> their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O >>> S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an >>> easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, >>> passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for >>> a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and >>> helpful for blind musicians. >>> >>> Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of >>> apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least >>> at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your >>> not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so >>> putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the >>> message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't >>> find it to big a deal. >>> >>> Brian. >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Scott Chesworth" >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools >>> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: > I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will > Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as > needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything > about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to > make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to > where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects > are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil > of > secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with > apple > that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does > employ > some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of > the > company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added > to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite > usuable > over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future accessability > of > apple's products on our own as a community again. > - T.O.M > > On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Scott Chesworth > wrote: > >> Just a short reply to chime in with a "here here" across the board
Re: Logic list,,,
Here it is,,, >> If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: >> * Group name: Logic Accessibility >> * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility >> * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com > Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 4:36 PM, Brian Howerton wrote: >>> For those of you who are using Logic or interested in discussing its >>> current state of accessibility, I started a Google Group to explore these >>> areas. >>> If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: >>> * Group name: Logic Accessibility >>> * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility >>> * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com >
Re: Logic list,,,
For Brian H, here's the Logic Accessibility group homepage again: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility Or, unless Google have changed things lately, a blank email sent to logic-accessibility+subscr...@googlegroups.com should get you hooked up. Hth Scott On 5/1/12, Brian Howerton wrote: > I missed the list subscription URL. Could you send it again please? > Brian > On May 1, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > >> >> Thanks a million for this! >> >> Might see you over there soon! >> >> Brian. >> -- >> From: "Keith Reedy" >> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:27 PM >> To: >> Subject: Logic list,,, >> >>> Hi Brian, >>> >>> I sure am on the list and I sure am interested in Logic and working >>> toward that fine day when Logic is accessible. >>> >>> Here is the list info, >>> SNIP >>> Hi folks, >>> For those of you who are using Logic or interested in discussing its >>> current state of accessibility, I started a Google Group to explore these >>> areas. >>> If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: >>> * Group name: Logic Accessibility >>> * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility >>> * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com >>> Hope to see you on the list, >>> Vinny >>> >>> Keith Reedy >>> Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift >>> from Bibles For The Blind. >>> >>> http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml >>> >>> God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson >>> Taylor. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On May 1, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Brian Casey wrote: >>> Keith, You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks for the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember someone posting about it a year or so ago on this list. Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? Brian. -- From: "Keith Reedy" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > Brian and all, > > I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we > had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. > > To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. > accessibil...@apple.com > Keith Reedy > Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift > from Bibles For The Blind. > > http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml > > God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson > Taylor. > > > > > On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > >> Good info T.O.M and Scot. >> >> I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better >> hunting ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, >> and that still might be a good way to look at things. >> >> Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though >> for their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built >> into the O S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the >> developer in an easier position to latch on accessibility, or from >> another point of view, passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple >> don't do this themselves for a product like logic. I guess garrage >> band is more imediately useful and helpful for blind musicians. >> >> Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes >> of apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, >> at least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in >> Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the >> programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services >> at Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a >> new set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. >> >> Brian. >> >> -- >> From: "Scott Chesworth" >> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM >> To: >> Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools >> >>> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of >>> years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re >>> Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight >>> behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least >>> nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility >>> work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent >>> when >>> my report was submitted. The only differen
Re: Logic list,,,
I missed the list subscription URL. Could you send it again please? Brian On May 1, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > > Thanks a million for this! > > Might see you over there soon! > > Brian. > -- > From: "Keith Reedy" > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:27 PM > To: > Subject: Logic list,,, > >> Hi Brian, >> >> I sure am on the list and I sure am interested in Logic and working toward >> that fine day when Logic is accessible. >> >> Here is the list info, >> SNIP >> Hi folks, >> For those of you who are using Logic or interested in discussing its current >> state of accessibility, I started a Google Group to explore these areas. >> If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: >> * Group name: Logic Accessibility >> * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility >> * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com >> Hope to see you on the list, >> Vinny >> >> Keith Reedy >> Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from >> Bibles For The Blind. >> >> http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml >> >> God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. >> >> >> >> >> On May 1, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Brian Casey wrote: >> >>> Keith, >>> >>> You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks >>> for the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. >>> >>> Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember >>> someone posting about it a year or so ago on this list. >>> >>> Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? >>> >>> Brian. >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Keith Reedy" >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools >>> Brian and all, I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. accessibil...@apple.com Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > Good info T.O.M and Scot. > > I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting > ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that > still might be a good way to look at things. > > Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for > their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O > S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an > easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, > passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves > for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful > and helpful for blind musicians. > > Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of > apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at > least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in > Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the > programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at > Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a new > set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. > > Brian. > > -- > From: "Scott Chesworth" > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM > To: > Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > >> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of >> years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re >> Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight >> behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least >> nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility >> work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when >> my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that >> Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility >> solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added >> quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the >> world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the >> time to do much other than expound it. >> >> Scott
Re: Logic list,,,
Thanks a million for this! Might see you over there soon! Brian. -- From: "Keith Reedy" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:27 PM To: Subject: Logic list,,, Hi Brian, I sure am on the list and I sure am interested in Logic and working toward that fine day when Logic is accessible. Here is the list info, SNIP Hi folks, For those of you who are using Logic or interested in discussing its current state of accessibility, I started a Google Group to explore these areas. If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: * Group name: Logic Accessibility * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com Hope to see you on the list, Vinny Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Brian Casey wrote: Keith, You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks for the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember someone posting about it a year or so ago on this list. Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? Brian. -- From: "Keith Reedy" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Brian and all, I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. accessibil...@apple.com Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: Good info T.O.M and Scot. I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still might be a good way to look at things. Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and helpful for blind musicians. Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. Brian. -- From: "Scott Chesworth" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple that is working with pro tools. I
Logic list,,,
Hi Brian, I sure am on the list and I sure am interested in Logic and working toward that fine day when Logic is accessible. Here is the list info, SNIP Hi folks, For those of you who are using Logic or interested in discussing its current state of accessibility, I started a Google Group to explore these areas. If you are interested in joining the information is as follows: * Group name: Logic Accessibility * Group home page: http://groups.google.com/group/logic-accessibility * Group email address logic-accessibil...@googlegroups.com Hope to see you on the list, Vinny Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > Keith, > > You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks for > the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. > > Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember someone > posting about it a year or so ago on this list. > > Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? > > Brian. > > -- > From: "Keith Reedy" > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM > To: > Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > >> Brian and all, >> >> I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had >> to use to get GarageBand up to speed. >> >> To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. >> accessibil...@apple.com >> Keith Reedy >> Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from >> Bibles For The Blind. >> >> http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml >> >> God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. >> >> >> >> >> On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: >> >>> Good info T.O.M and Scot. >>> >>> I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting >>> ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still >>> might be a good way to look at things. >>> >>> Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for >>> their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O >>> S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an >>> easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, >>> passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for >>> a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and >>> helpful for blind musicians. >>> >>> Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of >>> apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least >>> at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your >>> not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so >>> putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the >>> message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't >>> find it to big a deal. >>> >>> Brian. >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Scott Chesworth" >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools >>> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: > I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will > Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as > needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything > about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to > make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to > where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects > are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil > of >
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Keith, You might see my message to Scott I just sent on this subject, but thanks for the info, and good to know you're invested in the logic cause. Do you frequent a logic accessibility type list, I'm sure I remember someone posting about it a year or so ago on this list. Perhaps you could pass on the subscribe address to me if you wouldn't mind? Brian. -- From: "Keith Reedy" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:12 PM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Brian and all, I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. accessibil...@apple.com Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: Good info T.O.M and Scot. I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still might be a good way to look at things. Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and helpful for blind musicians. Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. Brian. -- From: "Scott Chesworth" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does employ some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of the company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite usuable over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future accessability of apple's products on our own as a community again. - T.O.M On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: Just a short reply to chime in with a "here here" across the board to everything that's been said so far. Having dealt with a company acquired by Avid recently, I wouldn't change a thing about Slau's intended approach. And, aside from struggling to think of anybody else equally qualified for the job, I'm 110% sure that changing our poster boy would be massively detremental. Apple, IMHO, is a different kettle of fish, given that their DAW and accessibility solution are both coded in-house (all be it a big house), and also given their own approach of touting an integrated environment. ON that front, the lines of comm
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Hi Scott, Thanks a million for that info, it helps to have it out there. We'll finish up with this as its gone fairly OT in a way, but I might look into approaching the Logic development team from another angle, as I live in Cork Ireland, which is the head of European opporations for Apple. I know a few people working high up in the European operation, and I might see who they might be able to put me in contact with...but this is a very long shot, but rather than working from the bottom up, things are often done much faster when you make contacts from top down, or at least horizontally! Again, I'm not certain if I'm the best person to be speaking about these things at all, as the only apple product I own at present is an iPhone, and my interest in logic becoming accessible is very much centered around the idea of having options. I'm actually fairly happy with sonar and ProTools is next on my radar. Then again, if logic opened up tomorrow then I'd probably buy a mac in the next year and put PT on the long finger. Who knows. Thanks again, Brian. -- From: "Scott Chesworth" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 7:07 PM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Yep, we seem to be basically of one mind Brian. Personally, other than bouncing a quick mail off of accessibil...@apple.com whenever a new version of Logic is out to remind them, I've taken a backstep for my own sanity's sake. Unfortunately, we don't all have the patience of Slau. The thing that infuriated me the most about Apple was that, in every response, they kept refering to accessibility as an upcoming feature, and we all know how Apple runs a tight ship on that front. Taking the tact that being able to use core established features with their own accessibility solution was quite different got me nowhere, no matter how chummily I wrote it. A couple years ago though I managed to scrounge email addresses and move up the chain a bit, eventually reaching the product manager (at the time) for logic by phone. Again, nada, nothing, zip. I guess I'm just sharing the tail to make sure that anyone who might tread a similar path knows what to expect. Hopefully, someone will have more luck than me. Scott On 5/1/12, Keith Reedy wrote: Brian and all, I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. accessibil...@apple.com Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: Good info T.O.M and Scot. I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still might be a good way to look at things. Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and helpful for blind musicians. Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. Brian. -- From: "Scott Chesworth" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Sco
ivory grand piano question
Hello folks, I have this piano library and I absolutely love it! Before I go through the trouble of installing it on the mac, however, I wanted to know if anyone has had any success using it with pt and vo. Thanks, Brian
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Not sure and it doesn't make any sense. Except that once I turned it off I no longer got that message. Even stranger, I didn't have that problem in Snow Leppard just in Lion. HF On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: > ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? > On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > >> Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is >> what cured it for me. >> >> HF >> >> On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >>> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and >>> I'm >>> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >>> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up >>> properly >>> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get >>> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up >>> in >>> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >>> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and >>> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every >>> few >>> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really >>> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >>> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >>> greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Kevin > >
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Awesome. I knew those sweetwater guys could get it working for you. Sorry you and I couldn't do anything in that regard today. AMS is not accessible, so I wouldn't have been able to help with that. Kevin On May 1, 2012, at 2:31 PM, Brian Howerton wrote: > Hey folks, > Everything is working great now. I called sweet water and got on remotely > and got it working. Basically one of the things he did was went in to midi > studio and created a new device and called it my motif ES8 and he basically > drew a picture with the errors there of it being connected to the pro24. He > then went in to periferials dialog and got rid of the m-audio keyboard that I > had selected because he says that that is basically just for controllers or > control surfaces which I knew that already, and he did one more thing but I > can't remember. Anyway, it's all working now :). Thanks everyone for your > help! You guys rock! > Brian > On May 1, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > >> Yep Brian, Airport is Apple speak for Wifi. Hit CTRL+F8 as you were, >> arrow right to Airport, arrow down to open that menu, then choose >> "turn Airport off" or something to that effect. >> >> No idea if it'll solve it, but hth a bit >> >> Scott >> >> On 5/1/12, Brian Howerton wrote: >>> Kevin, >>> Does this refer to the wifi when I go in and hit control+F8, I see the >>> wireless internet but I'm not sure if that's what he is referring to as >>> wifi. >>> Brian >>> On May 1, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Kevin Reeves wrote: >>> ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is > what cured it for me. > > HF > > On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and >> I'm >> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up >> properly >> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't >> get >> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up >> in >> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input >> and >> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every >> few >> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm >> really >> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >> greatly appreciated. >> >> Kevin >>> >>> >
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Hi Brian, Let apple know about that "AMs" Audio midi set up, not being accessible! I started through my apple care letting them know that was broke about 2.5 years ago! They said they could do it but no go so far. BTW THIMC I KNOW THERE are SOME WORK AROUNDS for the AMS! !!!Keep up the good work! :) CHUCK REICHEL 954-742-0019 www.SoundPictureRecording.com In GOD I Trust On May 1, 2012, at 2:31 PM, Brian Howerton wrote: > Hey folks, > Everything is working great now. I called sweet water and got on remotely > and got it working. Basically one of the things he did was went in to midi > studio and created a new device and called it my motif ES8 and he basically > drew a picture with the errors there of it being connected to the pro24. He > then went in to periferials dialog and got rid of the m-audio keyboard that I > had selected because he says that that is basically just for controllers or > control surfaces which I knew that already, and he did one more thing but I > can't remember. Anyway, it's all working now :). Thanks everyone for your > help! You guys rock! > Brian > On May 1, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > >> Yep Brian, Airport is Apple speak for Wifi. Hit CTRL+F8 as you were, >> arrow right to Airport, arrow down to open that menu, then choose >> "turn Airport off" or something to that effect. >> >> No idea if it'll solve it, but hth a bit >> >> Scott >> >> On 5/1/12, Brian Howerton wrote: >>> Kevin, >>> Does this refer to the wifi when I go in and hit control+F8, I see the >>> wireless internet but I'm not sure if that's what he is referring to as >>> wifi. >>> Brian >>> On May 1, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Kevin Reeves wrote: >>> ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is > what cured it for me. > > HF > > On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and >> I'm >> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up >> properly >> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't >> get >> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up >> in >> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input >> and >> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every >> few >> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm >> really >> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >> greatly appreciated. >> >> Kevin >>> >>> >
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Hey folks, Everything is working great now. I called sweet water and got on remotely and got it working. Basically one of the things he did was went in to midi studio and created a new device and called it my motif ES8 and he basically drew a picture with the errors there of it being connected to the pro24. He then went in to periferials dialog and got rid of the m-audio keyboard that I had selected because he says that that is basically just for controllers or control surfaces which I knew that already, and he did one more thing but I can't remember. Anyway, it's all working now :). Thanks everyone for your help! You guys rock! Brian On May 1, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > Yep Brian, Airport is Apple speak for Wifi. Hit CTRL+F8 as you were, > arrow right to Airport, arrow down to open that menu, then choose > "turn Airport off" or something to that effect. > > No idea if it'll solve it, but hth a bit > > Scott > > On 5/1/12, Brian Howerton wrote: >> Kevin, >> Does this refer to the wifi when I go in and hit control+F8, I see the >> wireless internet but I'm not sure if that's what he is referring to as >> wifi. >> Brian >> On May 1, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Kevin Reeves wrote: >> >>> ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? >>> On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: >>> Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is what cured it for me. HF On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: > Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and > I'm > having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi > ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up > properly > because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't > get > Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up > in > the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since > it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input > and > output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every > few > minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm > really > confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is > definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be > greatly appreciated. > > Kevin >>> >> >>
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Yep Brian, Airport is Apple speak for Wifi. Hit CTRL+F8 as you were, arrow right to Airport, arrow down to open that menu, then choose "turn Airport off" or something to that effect. No idea if it'll solve it, but hth a bit Scott On 5/1/12, Brian Howerton wrote: > Kevin, > Does this refer to the wifi when I go in and hit control+F8, I see the > wireless internet but I'm not sure if that's what he is referring to as > wifi. > Brian > On May 1, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Kevin Reeves wrote: > >> ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? >> On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: >> >>> Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is >>> what cured it for me. >>> >>> HF >>> >>> On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Kevin >> > >
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Yep, we seem to be basically of one mind Brian. Personally, other than bouncing a quick mail off of accessibil...@apple.com whenever a new version of Logic is out to remind them, I've taken a backstep for my own sanity's sake. Unfortunately, we don't all have the patience of Slau. The thing that infuriated me the most about Apple was that, in every response, they kept refering to accessibility as an upcoming feature, and we all know how Apple runs a tight ship on that front. Taking the tact that being able to use core established features with their own accessibility solution was quite different got me nowhere, no matter how chummily I wrote it. A couple years ago though I managed to scrounge email addresses and move up the chain a bit, eventually reaching the product manager (at the time) for logic by phone. Again, nada, nothing, zip. I guess I'm just sharing the tail to make sure that anyone who might tread a similar path knows what to expect. Hopefully, someone will have more luck than me. Scott On 5/1/12, Keith Reedy wrote: > Brian and all, > > I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had > to use to get GarageBand up to speed. > > To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. > accessibil...@apple.com > Keith Reedy > Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from > Bibles For The Blind. > > http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml > > God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. > > > > > On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > >> Good info T.O.M and Scot. >> >> I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting >> ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still >> might be a good way to look at things. >> >> Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for >> their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O >> S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an >> easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, >> passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves >> for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful >> and helpful for blind musicians. >> >> Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of >> apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at >> least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, >> your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate >> you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end >> up in the message being passed on that something to a new set of people >> who mightn't find it to big a deal. >> >> Brian. >> >> -- >> From: "Scott Chesworth" >> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM >> To: >> Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools >> >>> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of >>> years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re >>> Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight >>> behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least >>> nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility >>> work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when >>> my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that >>> Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility >>> solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added >>> quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the >>> world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the >>> time to do much other than expound it. >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does employ some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of the company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite usuable over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future access
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Kevin, Does this refer to the wifi when I go in and hit control+F8, I see the wireless internet but I'm not sure if that's what he is referring to as wifi. Brian On May 1, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Kevin Reeves wrote: > ?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? > On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > >> Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is >> what cured it for me. >> >> HF >> >> On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >>> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm >>> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >>> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly >>> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get >>> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in >>> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >>> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and >>> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few >>> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really >>> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >>> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >>> greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Kevin >
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
?Strange. What is airport doing to the Midi Interface? On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is > what cured it for me. > > HF > > On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm >> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly >> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get >> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in >> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and >> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few >> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really >> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >> greatly appreciated. >> >> Kevin
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Herman, This is the wyfy right? If that is right, I just tried making sure my wifi was off and it made no difference. Just wanted to make sure that's what you meant by the airport being off. Thanks, Brian On May 1, 2012, at 1:23 PM, Herman Fermin wrote: > Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is > what cured it for me. > > HF > > On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: >> Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm >> having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi >> ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly >> because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get >> Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in >> the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since >> it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and >> output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few >> minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really >> confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is >> definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be >> greatly appreciated. >> >> Kevin
Re: Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Make sure his airport is turned off. I had this happen and this is what cured it for me. HF On 5/1/12, Kevin Reeves wrote: > Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm > having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi > ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly > because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get > Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in > the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since > it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and > output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few > minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really > confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is > definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be > greatly appreciated. > > Kevin
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Brian and all, I am still pestering Apple about Logic. It is the same process that we had to use to get GarageBand up to speed. To those who are interested you can and I hope you do write. accessibil...@apple.com Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Brian Casey wrote: > Good info T.O.M and Scot. > > I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting > ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still > might be a good way to look at things. > > Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for > their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O S, > or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an easier > position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, passes the > buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for a product > like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and helpful for > blind musicians. > > Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of > apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least > at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your not > necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so > putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the > message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't > find it to big a deal. > > Brian. > > -- > From: "Scott Chesworth" > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM > To: > Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > >> Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of >> years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re >> Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight >> behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least >> nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility >> work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when >> my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that >> Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility >> solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added >> quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the >> world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the >> time to do much other than expound it. >> >> Scott >> >> On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: >>> I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will >>> Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as >>> needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything >>> about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to >>> make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to >>> where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects >>> are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of >>> secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple >>> that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does employ >>> some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of the >>> company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added >>> to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite usuable >>> over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future accessability of >>> apple's products on our own as a community again. >>> - T.O.M >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Scott Chesworth >>> wrote: >>> Just a short reply to chime in with a "here here" across the board to everything that's been said so far. Having dealt with a company acquired by Avid recently, I wouldn't change a thing about Slau's intended approach. And, aside from struggling to think of anybody else equally qualified for the job, I'm 110% sure that changing our poster boy would be massively detremental. Apple, IMHO, is a different kettle of fish, given that their DAW and accessibility solution are both coded in-house (all be it a big house), and also given their own approach of touting an integrated environment. ON that front, the lines of communication are more open, VO compatibility is a feature that could and should be publicised and is long overdew. If anybody wants a campaign trail to blaze, that's the one! Thanks for all the effort that's gone in so far Slau, I hope there's plenty more where it came from. Scott O
Midi working in GB, but not in PT.
Hey Folks. I'm working with Brian Howerton on configuring his setup, and I'm having a huge problem. He's got a Sapphire Pro 24, and is using the Midi ports with his Motif ES. We've definitely got everything hooked up properly because I'm definitely getting midi into Garageband. However, I can't get Pro TOols to accept any midi data. Firstly, we've got everything set up in the Peripherals dialogue. We've selected M Audio keyboard as type, since it's the only setting that makes sense at this point, we've set input and output to Pro 24 midi and click OK. Pro TOols gives us that error every few minutes that it can't communicate with the Pro Midi 24 device. I'm really confused, as this has worked for me in the past, and the sapphire is definitely receiving midi because GB works no problem. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Kevin
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Good info T.O.M and Scot. I didn't really know for sure but thought apple might be a better hunting ground, in terms of not alienating the developers at least, and that still might be a good way to look at things. Its unfortunate that Apple are so unresponsive in that respect though for their own aps. I mean the whole idea of Voice Over being built into the O S, or one of its great advantages is that it puts the developer in an easier position to latch on accessibility, or from another point of view, passes the buck to the ap developer, yet Apple don't do this themselves for a product like logic. I guess garrage band is more imediately useful and helpful for blind musicians. Anyway, the point is, maybe a more aggressive approach with the likes of apple would be much less damaging than a similar course with avid, at least at the moment. If you annoy the customer service peope etc in Apple, your not necessarily making the guys coding/marketing the programme hate you, so putting prolonged pressure on customer services at Apple may end up in the message being passed on that something to a new set of people who mightn't find it to big a deal. Brian. -- From: "Scott Chesworth" Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 10:47 AM To: Subject: Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does employ some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of the company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite usuable over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future accessability of apple's products on our own as a community again. - T.O.M On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: Just a short reply to chime in with a "here here" across the board to everything that's been said so far. Having dealt with a company acquired by Avid recently, I wouldn't change a thing about Slau's intended approach. And, aside from struggling to think of anybody else equally qualified for the job, I'm 110% sure that changing our poster boy would be massively detremental. Apple, IMHO, is a different kettle of fish, given that their DAW and accessibility solution are both coded in-house (all be it a big house), and also given their own approach of touting an integrated environment. ON that front, the lines of communication are more open, VO compatibility is a feature that could and should be publicised and is long overdew. If anybody wants a campaign trail to blaze, that's the one! Thanks for all the effort that's gone in so far Slau, I hope there's plenty more where it came from. Scott On 4/30/12, David Eagle wrote: A brilliantly worded Email Slau. Thanks for all you have done. Agree with Brian's point about Logic. I would hope that steps are already being made to make Logic accessible. I would be happy to buy both ProTools and Logic just out of support. On 30/04/2012, Jim Noseworthy wrote: Hey Slau: You're a class act. Thanks for all your work and effort. - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:25 AM Subject: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Let me say that, in a way, I dread even addressing this subject because, frankly, I'm certain that this will be a long thread filled with everybody's two cents. While that's entirely reasonable and to be expected, it often devolve
Re: pt-access.com
Kevin, My hat is off to you my friend. This may be the most important contribution to those who are blind learning PT to date. I will be watching this site with great interest. Keith Reedy Click the link below to download MP3's of Keith Reedy's music as a gift from Bibles For The Blind. http://biblesfortheblind.org/download_music.shtml God gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him. J Hudson Taylor. On May 1, 2012, at 6:37 AM, Kevin Reeves wrote: > Ok folks. I have purchased the domain pt-access.com and have placed a blank > wordpress install there. My vision for this site is to be the end all be all > for blind Pro Tools users. It will contain links to important resources such > as shortcut key charts, manuals, etc, downloadable content such as plugin > Presets, special templates, and such, and a tutorials section. I plan to do > little 5 minute tutorials instead of large hour long ones. This will allow me > to get more content out in less time. > > Here's what I'm looking for. > I need a few folks willing to co-manage the site with me. Wordpress knowledge > is a plus, but not required. HTML knowledge would be helpful, but again not > required. I want this to be an awesome site, but I can't do it alone. I want > to have a solid team of folks that this community can submit stuff to who > will be able to edit and post it. > What I would love from the rest of the community is content. If you've > created a helpful template, have a collection of plugin presets, want to make > a tutorial, write an article, etc, I and my soon to be assembled web team > will want to hear from you. > If you want to be a part of the web team, please write me off list with a > description of what you can bring to the table. > > Thanks so much, and I look forward to getting some content on the site. > > Kevin
Re: pt-access.com
Kevin this sounds great. As a new PT user who also has a professional studio, this would be a real tru blue resource for me. If I think of a way I can help I will let you know. Again, thanks for the effort you want to put into this. - Original Message - From: "Kevin Reeves" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 2:37 AM Subject: pt-access.com Ok folks. I have purchased the domain pt-access.com and have placed a blank wordpress install there. My vision for this site is to be the end all be all for blind Pro Tools users. It will contain links to important resources such as shortcut key charts, manuals, etc, downloadable content such as plugin Presets, special templates, and such, and a tutorials section. I plan to do little 5 minute tutorials instead of large hour long ones. This will allow me to get more content out in less time. Here's what I'm looking for. I need a few folks willing to co-manage the site with me. Wordpress knowledge is a plus, but not required. HTML knowledge would be helpful, but again not required. I want this to be an awesome site, but I can't do it alone. I want to have a solid team of folks that this community can submit stuff to who will be able to edit and post it. What I would love from the rest of the community is content. If you've created a helpful template, have a collection of plugin presets, want to make a tutorial, write an article, etc, I and my soon to be assembled web team will want to hear from you. If you want to be a part of the web team, please write me off list with a description of what you can bring to the table. Thanks so much, and I look forward to getting some content on the site. Kevin=
Re: Just My take
Hi Deavid, Naturally, those emails and conversations of thanks did take place and will continue in the future. Hopefully, we'll have more for which to be thankful in the future :) Best, Slau On May 1, 2012, at 5:08 AM, David Eagle wrote: > Not sure whether this would be wroth it but Slau could always send a > message to Avid which contained short messages of thanks for the > current accessibility of ProTools. I have to use it as part of my > work, doing feelance production work for radio. and so if the company > can see how many people have bought it based on their accessibility > and the fact that it means we are able to make a living, or get an > education or persue a hobby because of it, then perhaps this will help > them realise how important this is to us. > > I may be in the near future doing some stuff with the BBC. ProTools > accessibility will mean that I can do this work fine, but if > accessibility is pulled or does not continue as things get updated, > then this could severely impair my career. > > Anyway, I am happy to take the lead from you slau, but rest assured > that if the time came I would happily make my voice heard and do what > I can to do represent accessibility in ProTools. > > There are so many amazing things happening in terms of accessibility; > things can't start taking a dive again. I hope that in the future, it > will be an embarrisment for companies not to have a strong > accessibility policy and it will just become the norm. > > On 30/04/2012, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: >> Slao, why would you think it would blow up in a flame. We all trust you and >> have very high respect for you and all you do. You have done so much to >> help all of us. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. You keep doing what >> you're doing, as words can't begin to express how greatful at least I am to >> you for what you have done and still plan to do. >> >> Without you, I may not have this mac, interface, and copy of ProTools >> sitting right here in my studio just begging again to be used. >> >> Chris. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Slau Halatyn" >> To: >> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:10 PM >> Subject: Re: Just My take >> >> >> It's lunchtime and, having checked the list, I'm almost surprised this >> didn't blow up into a major thread. I take that as a good sign for now. I >> know that every individual on the list has an interest if not investment in >> Pro Tools and its accessibility. We all want the same thing, more or less. >> Previous models for accessibility through scripts have been successful in >> ways and unsuccessful in other ways. That model included not only third >> party screen reader developers but developers of music-specific scripts. >> We've seen the strengths and weaknesses of that model. This is different and >> definitely has its advantages and disadvantages. >> >> I hope we can avoid taking aggressive steps, per se. I think that's rarely a >> good idea but I recognize that at some point it actually might be. Let's see >> what unfolds in the near future. I will share any significant news as it >> develops. >> >> Best, >> >> Slau >> >> > > > -- > http://www.davideagle.co.uk
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Hey Gord, Yep, the whole Sibelius area is another one worth addressing at some point. It's an aspect that really dried up on the Windows side. I'm hopeful that at least something can be done. Best, Slau On Apr 30, 2012, at 3:01 PM, Gordon Kent wrote: > Hello Slau: > I went through a very similar experience when establishing a releationship > with cakewalk back in the day. There were basically three of us who had > started forging our own path so to speak to make it practical to use cw on > Windows, starting back in widnwos 3.1. I felt at the time as you do that it > was important to have a few of us serve as representatives. We were able to > do quite well for a long time. Now the direction that cw is taking iws more > slanted toward loop-based urban production techniques with a lot of video in > the gui. I am able to get around in Sonar x1 but that is mainooy because > I've been using it for a long time and can work around some of the pitfalls. > I would not recommend it for a new user. But mainly I would say that we will > go a lot further with avid if we let a few of you who have been dealing with > them on a regular basis continue to work on our behalf. Actually we would > probably have a greater chance of success with sibelius because of the > obvious education market and wider user base. > Gord > > -Original Message- From: Slau Halatyn > Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 11:25 PM > To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com > Subject: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools > > Let me say that, in a way, I dread even addressing this subject because, > frankly, I'm certain that this will be a long thread filled with everybody's > two cents. While that's entirely reasonable and to be expected, it often > devolves into opinions that are wholly unreasonable and suggested approaches > that are downright ridiculous. That said, I will explain the lay of the land > as I currently see it and will set out my intentions. Let me also point out > that, while I've been the de facto person responsible for liaising with > Digidesign/Avid, I never asked to be that person. I believe I happen to > currently be the most qualified person to perform that role and I'd be happy > to continue fulfilling that position but I won't engage in battles when it > comes to approach because I'm frankly uninterested in spending time rallying > the troops and talking sense into irrationally motivated armchair > spokespersons. Now, allow me to put into perspective what has occurred over > the last two years: > > When I initially flew out to San francisco to meet with folks at Digidesign, > there was no telling how this was going to turn out. I think, most of all, > they were impressed with how a blind person could access Pro Tools in general > under OS 9 with outSPOKEN, of course. It was no accident that I requested > this scenario specifically. It was stunning how inaccessible Pro Tools 7 was > in comparison with voiceOver under OS X. I think this made an important > impression on the folks at Digidesign. Further, the face-to-face interaction > was critical. In a way, I became the poster child for the accessibility of > Pro Tools. That was truly a good thing because it made the situation real and > tangible. > > It took a long time for something to finally happen regarding access to Pro > Tools. All the while, I maintained contact with Digidesign. Specifically, the > person who took interest in the issue was David Gibbons, vice-president of > marketing for digidesign. David knew that this was important and assured me > that they would look into what needed to be done to make Pro Tools > accessible. As time went on, there were rumbles of dissatisfaction within > some of the blind community with the lack of progress. There were those who > insisted there should be a class action lawsuit. How I wish that happened, if > only to prove how truly ineffectual that would have been. Anyway… > > before I go on, let me back up a bit and point out that there was a long > period of time leading up to the initial meeting with david where nothing was > happening. We weren't even getting much response from anyone at Digidesign. > Rick Boggs finally sent me a draft for a petition that we ultimately put > online and harvested signatures. By this point, Digidesign became aware and > actually contacted us about meeting. Now, I must say that, throughout all of > this, everything continued to be very friendly and non-confrontational. OK, > back to the point where I left off… > > Nearly 3 years after my first trip to Daly City, I got word that there was a > good chance that there would be some progress toward the accessibility of Pro > Tools. To me and to many others, having patience in the process and the > concept of corporate timeframe paid off. Imagine how helpful a nice lawsuit > would've been in the meantime, not to mention the utter improbability of > pulling off such a f
Re: setting input and output
ok finally had a chance to try this on my iMac. It worked fine, so not sure where the issue is. Try creating a new project from scratch. - T.O.M On Apr 29, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Courtney Curran wrote: > Hi, > Yes, it said that it was an option, but when I select it and record enable > the track it says I don't have both my input and output selected. > Thanks, > Courtney > On Apr 29, 2012, at 2:01 PM, The Oreo Monster wrote: > >> on the track its saying that the internal mic isn't an option? >> On the input pop up menu on the track you should be able to choose >> interface>built in mic or something similiar to that >> - T.O.M >> >> On Apr 29, 2012, at 1:54 PM, Courtney Curran wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I got my output set to the headphones okay, but it still says I don't have >>> an input set up, I'm trying to make the input my internal mic. >>> Thanks, >>> Courtney >>> On Apr 29, 2012, at 1:30 PM, The Oreo Monster wrote: >>> IF you don't have any other hardware audio interfaced connected then it should be that way by default. However its in playback engine under the setup menu. There you can select which soundcard you want ProTools to use. - T.O.M On Apr 29, 2012, at 1:19 PM, Courtney Curran wrote: > Hi, > I have an iMac with protools on it. How can I make my input for protools > be the internal mic, and the output be the the speakers/headphones. > Courtney >>> >> >
pt-access.com
Ok folks. I have purchased the domain pt-access.com and have placed a blank wordpress install there. My vision for this site is to be the end all be all for blind Pro Tools users. It will contain links to important resources such as shortcut key charts, manuals, etc, downloadable content such as plugin Presets, special templates, and such, and a tutorials section. I plan to do little 5 minute tutorials instead of large hour long ones. This will allow me to get more content out in less time. Here's what I'm looking for. I need a few folks willing to co-manage the site with me. Wordpress knowledge is a plus, but not required. HTML knowledge would be helpful, but again not required. I want this to be an awesome site, but I can't do it alone. I want to have a solid team of folks that this community can submit stuff to who will be able to edit and post it. What I would love from the rest of the community is content. If you've created a helpful template, have a collection of plugin presets, want to make a tutorial, write an article, etc, I and my soon to be assembled web team will want to hear from you. If you want to be a part of the web team, please write me off list with a description of what you can bring to the table. Thanks so much, and I look forward to getting some content on the site. Kevin
Re: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools
Yep, I've experienced everything T.O.M wrote about below a couple of years back on two separate approaches to Apple, the first being re Logic, the second being re GarageBand with a bit of extra weight behind me from my employer at the time. Both times, nada, at least nothing up front, even though the timings suggest that accessibility work on GB would likely have already been underway to some extent when my report was submitted. The only difference I can see here, is that Apple are responsible for the product itself and the accessibility solution, so it's a faeture that wouldn't necessarily have to be added quietly. I think that's a big difference, but that's only a "how the world ought to work" opinion from one chap who really doesn't have the time to do much other than expound it. Scott On 4/30/12, The Oreo Monster wrote: > I am not sure bombarding apple is the way to go either, or that it will > Yield any results. Apple is notorious for shifting resources around as > needed, and are also notorious for not responding to or saying anything > about future products untill the features are done and they are ready to > make announcement. While the company may have grown alot over the years to > where they may not have to shift resources around based on which projects > are the main objective at the moment as much as they once did, the veil of > secrecy hasn't lifted any. I think a similiar approach will work with apple > that is working with pro tools. I say this because I know apple does employ > some blind people, and that's the a pproach those with in the ranks of the > company have been successful with, in terms of getting accessibility added > to things. Also cosidering that garage band has quietly become quite usuable > over the years i think we'll be left to discover any future accessability of > apple's products on our own as a community again. > - T.O.M > > On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Scott Chesworth > wrote: > >> Just a short reply to chime in with a "here here" across the board to >> everything that's been said so far. Having dealt with a company >> acquired by Avid recently, I wouldn't change a thing about Slau's >> intended approach. And, aside from struggling to think of anybody else >> equally qualified for the job, I'm 110% sure that changing our poster >> boy would be massively detremental. >> >> Apple, IMHO, is a different kettle of fish, given that their DAW and >> accessibility solution are both coded in-house (all be it a big >> house), and also given their own approach of touting an integrated >> environment. ON that front, the lines of communication are more open, >> VO compatibility is a feature that could and should be publicised and >> is long overdew. If anybody wants a campaign trail to blaze, that's >> the one! >> >> Thanks for all the effort that's gone in so far Slau, I hope there's >> plenty more where it came from. >> >> Scott >> >> On 4/30/12, David Eagle wrote: >>> A brilliantly worded Email Slau. Thanks for all you have done. >>> >>> Agree with Brian's point about Logic. I would hope that steps are >>> already being made to make Logic accessible. I would be happy to buy >>> both ProTools and Logic just out of support. >>> >>> On 30/04/2012, Jim Noseworthy wrote: Hey Slau: You're a class act. Thanks for all your work and effort. - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:25 AM Subject: issues concerning the future accessibility of Pro Tools Let me say that, in a way, I dread even addressing this subject because, frankly, I'm certain that this will be a long thread filled with everybody's two cents. While that's entirely reasonable and to be expected, it often devolves into opinions that are wholly unreasonable and suggested approaches that are downright ridiculous. That said, I will explain the lay of the land as I currently see it and will set out my intentions. Let me also point out that, while I've been the de facto person responsible for liaising with Digidesign/Avid, I never asked to be that person. I believe I happen to currently be the most qualified person to perform that role and I'd be happy to continue fulfilling that position but I won't engage in battles when it comes to approach because I'm frankly uninterested in spending time rallying the troops and talking sense into irrationally motivated armchair spokespersons. Now, allow me to put into perspective what has occurred over the last two years: When I initially flew out to San francisco to meet with folks at Digidesign, there was no telling how this was going to turn out. I think, most of all, they were impressed with how a blind person could access Pro Tools in general under OS 9 with outSPOKEN, of course. It was no accident that I requested this s
Re: Just My take
Not sure whether this would be wroth it but Slau could always send a message to Avid which contained short messages of thanks for the current accessibility of ProTools. I have to use it as part of my work, doing feelance production work for radio. and so if the company can see how many people have bought it based on their accessibility and the fact that it means we are able to make a living, or get an education or persue a hobby because of it, then perhaps this will help them realise how important this is to us. I may be in the near future doing some stuff with the BBC. ProTools accessibility will mean that I can do this work fine, but if accessibility is pulled or does not continue as things get updated, then this could severely impair my career. Anyway, I am happy to take the lead from you slau, but rest assured that if the time came I would happily make my voice heard and do what I can to do represent accessibility in ProTools. There are so many amazing things happening in terms of accessibility; things can't start taking a dive again. I hope that in the future, it will be an embarrisment for companies not to have a strong accessibility policy and it will just become the norm. On 30/04/2012, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > Slao, why would you think it would blow up in a flame. We all trust you and > have very high respect for you and all you do. You have done so much to > help all of us. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. You keep doing what > you're doing, as words can't begin to express how greatful at least I am to > you for what you have done and still plan to do. > > Without you, I may not have this mac, interface, and copy of ProTools > sitting right here in my studio just begging again to be used. > > Chris. > > - Original Message - > From: "Slau Halatyn" > To: > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:10 PM > Subject: Re: Just My take > > > It's lunchtime and, having checked the list, I'm almost surprised this > didn't blow up into a major thread. I take that as a good sign for now. I > know that every individual on the list has an interest if not investment in > Pro Tools and its accessibility. We all want the same thing, more or less. > Previous models for accessibility through scripts have been successful in > ways and unsuccessful in other ways. That model included not only third > party screen reader developers but developers of music-specific scripts. > We've seen the strengths and weaknesses of that model. This is different and > definitely has its advantages and disadvantages. > > I hope we can avoid taking aggressive steps, per se. I think that's rarely a > good idea but I recognize that at some point it actually might be. Let's see > what unfolds in the near future. I will share any significant news as it > develops. > > Best, > > Slau > > -- http://www.davideagle.co.uk
