Any news please its been far two long now ?
4 Likes
How’s the firmware coming along?
2 Likes
At this point, we are forgotten. They are too busy putting out SG fires with bad boards. Heck, my S6 arrived with a loose screw inside it 3 years ago. Really hope we get some love, I’ve been patient (with many others) and still using my machine. At this point, I may just move on from the UDO family. I love my synth, but the fact they made a new synth before making the S6 airtight, was a let down. Respectfully
4 Likes
I totally understand where you’re coming from. Hats off to the UDO team for crafting such an incredible piece of gear. When I got mine, I noticed the bank button was significantly misaligned, but I chose to look past that. The synth’s sound and design really overshadowed this flaw. Plus, I had this expectation, maybe a bit naively, that the synth would receive consistent updates and refinements, thanks to its innovative architecture. To me, clear communication about upcoming updates and sticking to a development roadmap are hallmarks of a forward-thinking company. I genuinely believe UDO embodies these qualities, and I’m holding out hope they’ll deliver on this potential.
I get that for a small synth company, there’s a necessity to keep rolling out new products to stay afloat. There are challenges and pressures that many of us probably can’t fully grasp. Happy birthday UDO and congratulations on the success this far.
1 Like
I would appreciate a bit more feedback/updates on progress. I understand and don’t really mind when things get delayed, but it’s just nicer for your customers and community to know where they’re at. So what’s going on, since beta testing was months ago, and there’s already a changelog file posted in january. Are there a few more quirks still to iron out, or are you still implementing more of the requested feautres (that would be great news) But just a little note once in a while keeping us updated about progress would be appreciated (i don’t even mind if it’s just ‘sorry whe had other issues and simply can’t find the time to dot the i’s’)
2 Likes
I have been working on super 6 this weekend and last week. I will post another release in 1-2 weeks for testing.
This fixes some of the remaining issues on 1,6 and makes some nice little performance tweaks.
It takes time as the economics of this business do not allow a “development team” that a product of a similar complexity in industrial or scientific industries for would demand.
We have to balance development, r&d, sales, support and operations and I think we do an admirable job. I would like more time to develop and release firmware of course.
I have been working today on improving the subtleties of synchronicity using external midi clock. Some improvements will be found in this area in the release.
I’ve also speeded up load, store, wave change and am tying the super 6 firmware closer to the Gemini so both can be inched forward in tandem.
Refactoring is not a “feature” people will notice but it’s an important produce as part of good development to “keep the house in order”.
Hold tight more soon!
16 Likes
cool. thanks
and to anyone who doesn’t know what code refactoring is, look it up… Before now, I didn’t know what it was and found the answer interesting!
Did you consider open-sourcing the firmware, considering you don’t have dev resources for it, maybe someone else would help? Or does it require too much esoteric hardware knowledge?
3 Likes
I feel your pain. I developed and published this https://patchhero.app and users loved it but there just wasn’t enough of them to pay for my time to continue developing the idea.
For those who don’t know refactoring is vitally important. If nothing else it makes a devloper more likely to contiue development because the environment in which they’re working feels organised and inviting.
Nice in theory but there are many barriers. There could be proprietary code that’s effectively UDO’s IP that they’d want to keep secret. There’s a difference between production code and code you’d actually want anybody to see. Tidying up takes time. It would likely require extensive documentation to make any sense at all, which might not exist. It opens up support nightmares. How should UDO respond to support requests for unofficial firmware? There could be many forks. Who maintains and documents them? What is the development environment? What physical hardware is required to run a Super 6 in development mode? You certainly wouldn’t want to upload the entire firmware every time you changed a line of code! The debugging tools could be proprietary, and expensive.
It has happened. The Akai MPC1000 dev environment got leaked leading to the infamous ‘JJ OS’. Somebody’s forked the venerable Elektron Machine Drum OS and added features. Regardless, open sourcing the firmware wouldn’t be the best way to fix bugs.
2 Likes
Hello, how are things progressing? Thanks 
1 Like
I’ve got a new version of with much improved midi sync behaviour. Those who use this feature will appreciate it I’m sure. It was a bit of a rabbit hole so I took longer than planned and had to park it for the Easter break. I will pickup again next week. Please keep in mind that when we issue the new firmware we will have to prevent downgrade. This is going to upset some people I’m sure but we have made a big changes to how the non volatile memory works that will greatly improve long term reliability and risk of damage from future updates. As a result we’re making sure things are in good shape so no one should want to downgrade firmware later.
16 Likes
Happy to hear that the midi side gets a little love in the next FW. Keep up the good work and have a wonderful Easter break
1 Like
This is so good to hear, thank you.
1 Like
Does this mean we will be able to sync LFO 1 to the beat of our other midi devices?
2 Likes
Good news; keep up the good work (also, slow and solid is preferred to rushed and buggy when it comes to these things).
4 Likes
Can we get an up to date list of the upcoming changes?
2 Likes
Hi @udo-audio that’s great to hear. But man, what if something is not working correctly and we upgrade and (especially me since I use it in a non traditional way with EWI and breath control) something doesn’t work correctly? Will we have to, like, mail it to you to downgrade the firmware again? Or will you offer a quick fix if something is not working correctly upon installation of the new firmware? I love this instrument and I rely on it to work. I also need the new features of the firmware update and therefore plan to install it, so this non-possibility of downgrading to a previous version is concerning to me. What happens if something doesn’t work correctly when we install v1.0?
Hi Matt I see your point and I have given consideration to this. We can issue the old firmware at any point by simply increasing the version number of the old version (0,53) to one newer than the given release leaving it otherwise the same. That is a fall back plan if we can’t issue fixes fast enough to keep you working. Please can I ask in your specific case what you have been running, is it one of the Betas (eg 1.4, 1.6) or is it 0,53 public?
Thank you, sir! Wonderful. Yes, I have been using one of the betas, which is actually working very well for me minus a few little bugs here and there which I’m sure you already know about (namely the pitchbend mutiplier…) I am not 100% sure, I’ll have to go back and look, but I think it was beta 1.2. This beta is the one from directly before you implemented MPE to the betas. Whichever one that was… That is what I’m using.
1 Like