181 postsPage 7 of 10
1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Baphometrix wroteEven after the 1.15 firmware update, I'm convinced that the design of the ATOM SQ pad triggering is flawed at a fundamental level. No matter which Velocity sensitivity I choose, it's still VERY easy to get double-trigger Note On/Off events if you hit anywhere near the CENTER of any pad. This is especially easy to reproduce today with firmware 1.15 in exactly the same way as I demonstrated over and over to Presonus in the early launch days of the SQ.

Bottom line, the pads seem to send a NOTE OFF event if your finger pressure is anywhere near the CENTER of the pad and your hand movement "rocks" the top-bottom axis of the pad in any way. Why? Because there's literally a physical "pivot point" across the center of each pad, and yet the sensors for note ON/OFF signals seem to be equally sensitive around the entire area of the pad. So as you "rock" a pad across its pivot point even infinitesimally, you trigger a Note off immediately followed by another Note On.

This is especially common when you are playing held arpeggios or chordal top lines, where some fingers rest on their pads after hitting while one finger bounces around to different pads. It's also especially common on "weak" fingers such as the ring or pinky.

The easiest way to demonstrate/reproduced this design flaw is to aim for the CENTER of each pad. Which is entirely natural to me, and obviously also to the other people also griping about the double-triggering. I mean, the center of every pad is brighter in luminousity, and your brain just naturally aims for this brighter area.

But ff you instead aim for the BOTTOM EDGE or TOP EDGE of each pad, you can avoid this double-triggering behavior almost entirely. Why? Because when a finger is resting on the top/bottom EDGE, a slight "rocking" from normal hand movement doesn't seem to cross the center "pivot point" of the pad and therefore trigger a Note Off event immediately followed by another Note On from the opposite edge.

So is there a "workaround" for this design flaw? Yes. Is it a good workaround? Personally, I don't think so. It's awkward when you need to hit pads in both the top and bottom row. Invariably, trying to hit a top/bottom edge works for some fingers in one of the rows, but not for other fingers that need to hit in the other row. This is because my "aim" is better if I try for the TOP edge of pads in the top row, but instead aim for the BOTTOM edge of pads in the bottom row. But this requires a finger that needs to hit a note in the top row and then move down to the next hit in the bottom row (or vice-versa) to travel much farther than feels natural, which is slower and requires a very curved hand position with lots of finger curling and uncurling.

Just posting this because I can see evidence I'm not the only user frustrated by this design flaw. It's a shame because the overall layout and functionality and workflow of the SQ is great, but those oblong pads with their uneven triggering behavior because you wanted to keep this thing at a low price point is really really really REALLY disappointing.


That is similar to what I'm feeling as well, and I've also noticed less double triggers if I aim for the edge/corners of the pads. It's not exactly a workaround for many reasons, like you said, especially when you are not looking at the pads.

I still think this is correctable for 99.9% of use cases with a firmware update that ignores note-ons within a certain time threshold. Assuming the Atom SQ keeps a buffer of timestamped events for inputs, something like:

IF ( (previous timestamp of this note) - (current timestamp of this note) < (configurable double trigger threshold time) ) THEN (filter out current note_on event)

shadiradio.com | Studio One Pro 5, Atom SQ, Windows 10 Pro 64bit, macOS Big Sur, AMD Ryzen 7 3700x, 32 GB RAM
User avatar
by robertgray3 on Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:33 pm
shadiradio wrote
I still think this is correctable for 99.9% of use cases with a firmware update that ignores note-ons within a certain time threshold. Assuming the Atom SQ keeps a buffer of timestamped events for inputs, something like:

IF ( (previous timestamp of this note) - (current timestamp of this note) < (configurable double trigger threshold time) ) THEN (filter out current note_on event)


I completely agree. If one could setup a note filter in other software that can fix it, they likely could do that in the firmware. I set up a filter like that for a Nektar keyboard that was prone to a similar issue.

Mac OS X Catalina 10.15.7
Mac Pro (Late 2013)
3 GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5
32 GB 1066 MHz DDR3
Dual AMD FirePro D500 3072 MB
Quantum 2
User avatar
by marahbonjer on Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:26 am
Hello everyone, so i got the Atom SQ after many nice reviews. But let us see what is the reality. I still have 27 days to return this product. Help me decide if there is an alternative to this.

On the track where you're actively playing MIDI with the ATOM SQ (or ATOM), just add an Input Filter Note FX device. (Use the "Note FX" area in the track inspector to do this. It's fast and easy.) Then set the minimum velocity to 4%, and expand the keyboard range to span the entire keyboard.


I tested the Atom SQ it appears with Setup - Soft Velocity (actually any setting) it registers the lowest velocity of 3.9% so maybe that is why they said to set it at 4% the filtering, in order to remove the lowest registering ones.

Next values after 3.9% it always registers are: 4.7%, 5.5%, 6.3% and 7.1%.
So basically this controller (ATOM SQ) has some fixed values that can be registered and not anything else in-between of those.

Moreover the pads themselves are not equally easy or hard to trigger, some of them trigger more easily and others seem to be much stubborn. Can you also confirm this ?

If i do NOTE FX as described at 4% in the quote, having set Velocity to SOFT in SETUP and if i try to write a song, the harder to press pads and sometimes all of them no longer register properly the notes that would normally be triggered when the system considered registering at 3.9% !

That means i have to press even harder despite having set the SOFT Velocity setting from SETUP to even register a note.

Basically the only way to play in this case is to also set fixed velocity at 80% for example from inspector. That way at least you know that you need to press harder to pass the 4% minimum velocity set by NOTE FX and you will always register ~80% velocity (or whatever you chose) no matter what.

However the 4% minimum velocity limitation makes me miss many notes even with Soft sensitivity (it should be easier to press with soft, but with the 3.9% threshold removed the keys feel much worse !).

Lydian scale is missing from Presonus Studio One & Atom SQ, indeed.

The main knob from the right that controls the menu, touches or is rubbing something inside or the plastic when turning it around. Can anyone confirm this ?

irawasserman wrotei guess Mediocracy is ok with Presonus:

there's a real-world possibility that they should/could included a Filter (option) that blocks triggers that are:

- less than velocity of 4

- accidental 'bounces' or 'mis-triggers' that are less than 1/64 or 1/128 (time) after the previous (intended) trigger

I have found that even tapping firm in the middle of the pad can do a double trigger.

some pads seems to do this more often then others.

tapping on or near the edge of a pad seems to run a high chance of multiple triggering

but tapping in the middle firmly should not multi-trigger

i think their might be a technological limitation on how these pads (rubber) work - physics - whereby there can easily be some 'bounce' in the pads with the top of our fingers - and that the pads might indeed be super sensitive

but since Presonus has decided on zero communication with those of us who actually purchased the item ... at one time in world/society these people were called: "customers" or "paying customers" ... obviously Presonus' arrogance is going the way of NI and Steinberg -- thinking they know everything and no need to solve "little problems" -- that for us: is the ability to even use the Atom SQ.

I've tested the Atom SQ in numerous DAWs and SO5 and when there is a DAW option for a Midi Velocity Filter (as noted in this thread) to filter out MIDI velocity below 4 (out of 128) it gets rid of most of the multi-triggers.

but the fact that Presonus doesn't feel that need to address this (in the firmware or a beta firmware) so we can actually use the device as marketed -- sours me on purchasing anything else from Presonus and I have basically moved onto Bitwig (as my primary DAW) and other input devices.

Shame actually, they were so close. But obviously they don't care. The proof of that is in the lack of communication or fixes. I think there is some elitism going on there.

Sorry to have to post my honest thoughts There are companies that listen to their customers and address obvious glaring issues, and then there are companies that think they know better then the people who are actually trying to use these devices.

I see SO5.1 came out, so maybe, just maybe -- they can now find an engineer to work on a firmware fix -- but I don't have a good feeling about it. Maybe they don't see sufficient revenue on the SQ to fix it so we can rave about it vs complain about it. Crazy world how Corps think.


Removing velocity under 4% such as 3.9% (which is minimum it registers) makes you miss some of the notes as i stated.

The current velocity settings are useless for melodies because with normal playing (not to break fingers on the pads) it registers :

on HARD from 10% to 30% (so it is too low to express)
on MEDIUM from 31% to 60%
on SOFT from 61% to 95%

So the only useful is SOFT for normal playing and MEDIUM for calm passages at most.

But it would have been much better if :
HARD was 40% to 60%
MEDIUM 60% to 80%
SOFT 80% to 100%.

compared to my above perceived estimations.

To me the big bonus of Atom SQ was the fact that in such a small form factor you can play SCALE only notes from a particular Scale, thus from 32 keys you were being able to play 4.5 and up to 6 octaves, depending on what scale you chose.

Using a fixed velocity makes it lack expressiveness. The pads are too hard to press and they double trigger.

For example in order to try to avoid double trigger you need to:

- fully press and use your finger on the whole length of a pad / against the full pad just like on a piano key

- To be extremely disciplined and avoid all the rest of the keys, so to not accidentally click them.

- To not rest fingers on PADS.

- use HARD or MEDIUM with fixed velocity. These are hard to press but you know you get same velocity in the end. SOFT is much better to play with velocity expressive but it is still a little hard to press.

Baphometrix wroteEven after the 1.15 firmware update, I'm convinced that the design of the ATOM SQ pad triggering is flawed at a fundamental level. No matter which Velocity sensitivity I choose, it's still VERY easy to get double-trigger Note On/Off events if you hit anywhere near the CENTER of any pad. This is especially easy to reproduce today with firmware 1.15 in exactly the same way as I demonstrated over and over to Presonus in the early launch days of the SQ.

Bottom line, the pads seem to send a NOTE OFF event if your finger pressure is anywhere near the CENTER of the pad and your hand movement "rocks" the top-bottom axis of the pad in any way. Why? Because there's literally a physical "pivot point" across the center of each pad, and yet the sensors for note ON/OFF signals seem to be equally sensitive around the entire area of the pad. So as you "rock" a pad across its pivot point even infinitesimally, you trigger a Note off immediately followed by another Note On.

This is especially common when you are playing held arpeggios or chordal top lines, where some fingers rest on their pads after hitting while one finger bounces around to different pads. It's also especially common on "weak" fingers such as the ring or pinky.

The easiest way to demonstrate/reproduced this design flaw is to aim for the CENTER of each pad. Which is entirely natural to me, and obviously also to the other people also griping about the double-triggering. I mean, the center of every pad is brighter in luminousity, and your brain just naturally aims for this brighter area.

But ff you instead aim for the BOTTOM EDGE or TOP EDGE of each pad, you can avoid this double-triggering behavior almost entirely. Why? Because when a finger is resting on the top/bottom EDGE, a slight "rocking" from normal hand movement doesn't seem to cross the center "pivot point" of the pad and therefore trigger a Note Off event immediately followed by another Note On from the opposite edge.

So is there a "workaround" for this design flaw? Yes. Is it a good workaround? Personally, I don't think so. It's awkward when you need to hit pads in both the top and bottom row. Invariably, trying to hit a top/bottom edge works for some fingers in one of the rows, but not for other fingers that need to hit in the other row. This is because my "aim" is better if I try for the TOP edge of pads in the top row, but instead aim for the BOTTOM edge of pads in the bottom row. But this requires a finger that needs to hit a note in the top row and then move down to the next hit in the bottom row (or vice-versa) to travel much farther than feels natural, which is slower and requires a very curved hand position with lots of finger curling and uncurling.

Just posting this because I can see evidence I'm not the only user frustrated by this design flaw. It's a shame because the overall layout and functionality and workflow of the SQ is great, but those oblong pads with their uneven triggering behavior because you wanted to keep this thing at a low price point is really really really REALLY disappointing.



What do you think ? Will there be a fix hardware or software from Presonus or are they abandoning the product and ignore its problems ? And maybe Atom SQ MKII will be better ?

Will they recall the products and add more pivots to the pads ? Or is this wishful thinking ?

The rocking behavior and note registering on central pad with light touch is bad. Only playing with full finger like on piano pushing the whole pad down avoids this, but that makes playing much harder.

What alternatives are there to Atom SQ ?
I saw this https://www.embodme.com/ EREA Touch with MIDI 2.0 & MPE

phpBB [video]


On second 1:30 it seems you may be able to use it with scales and different styles. So maybe it can do what Atom SQ is doing now with scales.

What other controllers that can do this aspect do you know or are worth mentioning ?

Thank you all.
User avatar
by Baphometrix on Fri Apr 30, 2021 8:27 am
marahbonjer wrote....What do you think ? Will there be a fix hardware or software from Presonus or are they abandoning the product and ignore its problems ? And maybe Atom SQ MKII will be better ?

Will they recall the products and add more pivots to the pads ? Or is this wishful thinking ?

The rocking behavior and note registering on central pad with light touch is bad. Only playing with full finger like on piano pushing the whole pad down avoids this, but that makes playing much harder...


It's wishful thinking. As I stated above, after they've made several attempts to fix the core problem with firmware updates, it's improved slightly, but not improved nearly enough. I'm a bit restricted in how much I can say about this, but let's just say that I am VERY confident they understand what the core problem is.

At this point, IMO if they could have fixed the issue, they would have. I mean, this controller has been out for roughly 8 months now. I received mine like a few days after they came on the market, and reported this double-triggering issue immediately. And I worked extensively with several people to help them understand the issue.

So now, 8 months and several firmware releases later, I think this is as good as it gets. I think the best we can hope for is someday a better "MK II" version of the ATOM SQ might come out. One that has higher-quality design and components for the pads and sensors, and which would also therefore be more expensive.

There's a reason that a Push 2 (from Ableton), or a Maschine (from Native Instruments) have such excellent playability and responsiveness of their pad controllers. They're using different, higher-quality components that sense and react both to the downward velocity AND the upward release velocity. And their pad material is different (spongier/softer) and lays perfectly flat and doesn't rock or move around a central axis. Their pads transmit only downward and upward pressure, faithfully. But this is also why those controllers are fairly expensive.

Do I regret buying the ATOM SQ? No, not really. Its size and form-factor and overall functionality is great. Especially with Studio One. Most of the composing I use it for is simple and rudimentary. It's still too awkward of a pad layout to actually play like you'd play on a real keyboard, with chords and voice-leading and trills/flams, etc. So I just record my stuff in multiple simple passes, and edit out the occasional flubbed double-hits.

But yeah, don't expect that this controller feels or responds anything like a high-quality pad controller you might be used to. It will disappoint you in that regard.

Oh, and in 8 months and several firmware updates, they've NEVER improved the "speed" of the macro knobs, either. The knobs themselves are solid and feel great. But I never EVER actually use them to control any instrument parameters because they SUCK. You have to turn and turn and turn and turn and turn any given knob to barely move some instrument parameter. It's ridiculous. Other people have complained about this too. And still not a single hint of improvement in this regard. :thumbdown:

Studio One 5.2.x Pro (Sphere) | Bitwig 4.x | Ableton 10.x
Faderport 8 | ATOM SQ | MOTU M4 | Windows 10 | i9 9900K | 64 GB RAM | Geforce RTX 2070
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 1:33 am
I haven't checked this thread for months, but I am so happy to see people being honest and open about those of us who thought we were purchasing a playable musical instrument (midi controller) with the Atom line.

These products are unusable in my opinion. They get like 10/10 on design and logic (as a controller), but hitting the pads with any sense of nuance is absolutely atrocious. It's like asking someone to play the guitar, keyboards or drums with a hammer -- and even then: a high number of Double Triggers that completely kills any creative experience (with frustration). Yes, I have the latest firmware / drivers.

I've tried (multiple times) approaching these controllers with the assumption that they were designed to make music and be responsive to the player -- and I always wind up putting them back in the drawer. I spent all that hard earned money for nothing.

and the fact that the Product Manager(s) don't even attempt to allow us to have an experimental/optional 'filter' in the firmware so we can remove the double taps (that happens when we release our fingers from the pads), proves that PreSonus is in it for the money (primarily) and is egocentric, because they think 'doing nothing' (to address the known problem) is acceptable. (They get the same paycheck if they help us or not -- so no incentive to help us -- we are just lowly users). I'd love to hear anyone who was able to create something musical (with velocity nuance) on those things.

As far as I am concerned, the people 'responsible' for the Atom line are uncaring thieves and not part of the the world's solution of hope and betterment. My experience with these bricks is so bad: I will never purchase another PreSonus hardware product again. We've been conned by an organization that thinks "hey it looks great". My gosh, who in their right mind let these products be released without testing to see if they are playable. When I last tested Atom (16-pad) and SQ, whatever VSTI I tried (including Impact XT) -- it sounds like a 5 year old just banging (either everything is too loud, skips, or double triggers). I've tried everything (device sensitivity settings, midi velocity filter, playing with different pressure, etc).

I have an older Korg PadKontrol which sounds fine, and an Akai MPD232 which sounds fine, Even if PreSonus knew they were using low quality pad triggers, the fact that they won't even help us out with a (selectable) Double Trigger sensitivity filter (in Setup), means they have a complete disregard for real (paying) end users.

I think all of us are well meaning and gave PreSonus a fair shot to do something to help, and they just don't care. More features -- no -- how 'bout getting these things not to double trigger (with a setup mode option to ignore the finger release double taps). These pads all have some bounce -- and musician's like bounce dynamics. We are being penalized here by not having our hands / fingers magically disappear after the first push down on the pads. In the real world, it takes time for our fingers to get off the pads. The world would be a sad place musically if our fingers aren't allowed to bounce a bit. That's why these Atoms are not playable. It seems like the physics of these pads was designed by someone who never bothered to listen to the results.

One would have thought that 'musician owners' want to do good in this world. Corporate bureaucracy and incompetence seems to have won out here.

I wish there was a nicer way I could state my frustration. We tried. They didn't care.

Lastly, I doubt that I spent more than 2 hrs (in total) on my (brand new) Atom 16-Pad, and now one of the knobs doesn't work (skips and actually 'creeps' backwards (up is down and down is up) -- the opposite direction, even with latest firmware and a firmware refresh). Doesn't matter what DAW or computer I use. It's one of the knobs on the Atom 16-Pad. Broken already.

Both products are a total waste of money unless you are a hard hitter and don't mind taking time (away from music making) to edit out all the midi double trigger notes from the DAW's midi editor. The Atom devices look pretty and are excellent physical format (size) design, but these Atom devices are not for making creative music with -- you will be quickly frustrated trying to get any dynamics or nuance out of them.

It's an insulting disgrace. Pretty on the outside, terrible results if you are looking for any nuance, dynamics or sanity.
User avatar
by PreAl on Mon May 03, 2021 4:32 am
irawasserman wroteI haven't checked this thread for months, but I am so happy to see people being honest and open about those of us who thought we were purchasing a playable musical instrument (midi controller) with the Atom line.

These products are unusable in my opinion. They get like 10/10 on design and logic (as a controller), but hitting the pads with any sense of nuance is absolutely atrocious. It's like asking someone to play the guitar, keyboards or drums with a hammer -- and even then: a high number of Double Triggers that completely kills any creative experience (with frustration). Yes, I have the latest firmware / drivers.

I've tried (multiple times) approaching these controllers with the assumption that they were designed to make music and be responsive to the player -- and I always wind up putting them back in the drawer. I spent all that hard earned money for nothing.

and the fact that the Product Manager(s) don't even attempt to allow us to have an experimental/optional 'filter' in the firmware so we can remove the double taps (that happens when we release our fingers from the pads), proves that PreSonus is in it for the money (primarily) and is egocentric, because they think 'doing nothing' (to address the known problem) is acceptable. (They get the same paycheck if they help us or not -- so no incentive to help us -- we are just lowly users). I'd love to hear anyone who was able to create something musical (with velocity nuance) on those things.

As far as I am concerned, the people 'responsible' for the Atom line are uncaring thieves and not part of the the world's solution of hope and betterment. My experience with these bricks is so bad: I will never purchase another PreSonus hardware product again. We've been conned by an organization that thinks "hey it looks great". My gosh, who in their right mind let these products be released without testing to see if they are playable. When I last tested Atom (16-pad) and SQ, whatever VSTI I tried (including Impact XT) -- it sounds like a 5 year old just banging (either everything is too loud, skips, or double triggers). I've tried everything (device sensitivity settings, midi velocity filter, playing with different pressure, etc).

I have an older Korg PadKontrol which sounds fine, and an Akai MPD232 which sounds fine, Even if PreSonus knew they were using low quality pad triggers, the fact that they won't even help us out with a (selectable) Double Trigger sensitivity filter (in Setup), means they have a complete disregard for real (paying) end users.

I think all of us are well meaning and gave PreSonus a fair shot to do something to help, and they just don't care. More features -- no -- how 'bout getting these things not to double trigger (with a setup mode option to ignore the finger release double taps). These pads all have some bounce -- and musician's like bounce dynamics. We are being penalized here by not having our hands / fingers magically disappear after the first push down on the pads. In the real world, it takes time for our fingers to get off the pads. The world would be a sad place musically if our fingers aren't allowed to bounce a bit. That's why these Atoms are not playable. It seems like the physics of these pads was designed by someone who never bothered to listen to the results.

One would have thought that 'musician owners' want to do good in this world. Corporate bureaucracy and incompetence seems to have won out here.

I wish there was a nicer way I could state my frustration. We tried. They didn't care.

Lastly, I doubt that I spent more than 2 hrs (in total) on my (brand new) Atom 16-Pad, and now one of the knobs doesn't work (skips and actually 'creeps' backwards (up is down and down is up) -- the opposite direction, even with latest firmware and a firmware refresh). Doesn't matter what DAW or computer I use. It's one of the knobs on the Atom 16-Pad. Broken already.

Both products are a total waste of money unless you are a hard hitter and don't mind taking time (away from music making) to edit out all the midi double trigger notes from the DAW's midi editor. The Atom devices look pretty and are excellent physical format (size) design, but these Atom devices are not for making creative music with -- you will be quickly frustrated trying to get any dynamics or nuance out of them.

It's an insulting disgrace. Pretty on the outside, terrible results if you are looking for any nuance, dynamics or sanity.


Whilst I totally understand the frustration, I would totally disagree that Presonus aren't trying to do anything although it's been slow. There are people in Presonus who have been extremely helpful, especially the Atom people.

They only recently released a firmware update for both Atoms to try to address the issue. They've been pretty helpful with me but I agree more needs to be done, not enough dev resources on it I suspect. Also it's a known fact that all companies are in it for the money, a living needs to be made.

I assume you have been in contact with Presonus?

Studio One Pro 5, Faderport Classic (1.45), Atom Pad, Atom SQ, Presonus Studio 26c, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, Maschine Studio, Octapad SPD-30, Roland A300, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit, also running it on Mac OS Catalina via dual boot (experimental).

Intel i9 9900K, 32GB RAM,
EVGA Geforce 1070 (Nvidia drivers).
Dell Inspiron 7591 (2 in 1) 16Gb.
User avatar
by Baphometrix on Mon May 03, 2021 6:48 am
irawasserman wrote...My experience with these bricks is so bad: I will never purchase another PreSonus hardware product again...


While I certainly understand (and frankly, agree with) your frustration about the ATOM line, I'll point out that the Faderport 8 (and probably also the 16) is IMO a really solid piece of hardware and a very useful control surface.

I use my FP8 all the time to control all manner of Arranger scrolling/zooming, Section/Marker jumping, Console/Browser opening/closing, automation writing, anything to do with mixing in the Console, and it's especially great as a control surface for instrument parameters and channel insert parameters (including VST parameters). Those long faders give a great visual representation of where parameters are currently set, and you can easily grab a fader and quickly set the corresponding parameter right where you want it, or explore the full range of that parameter with one simple up/down slide of the fader.

For example, when I'm composing, I leave the FP8 in "Edit Plugins" mode. When I open ANY instrument window or VST plugin window, the faders instantly jump to their current parameter assignments that I've set up. So for example, I can load an instrument preset and start playing notes/chords with my right hand on a MIDI controller, while my left hand slides pre-assigned faders up and down for the instrument's macro knobs, modulation wheel, output gain, etc. It makes it super fast to audition presets and dial in the sound I want (if it can be done via macro knob and mod wheel alone).

Same deal for commonly-adjusted plugin parameters, like input drive into a clipper, or attack/release times on a compressor, and so on. The moment I switch over to that plugin's window, the faders swap over and are ready for me to just grab and adjust.

I guess what I'm saying is that however salty I might be about the ATOM SQ, I'm quite the opposite about the Faderport 8. I'm super happy with the FP8. Working with it is MUCH better/faster than, for example, using a Push 2 to control Ableton Live or Bitwig Studio for sound design and mixing. Push 2 is great for responsive MIDI playing/recording, but that's it. For anything else it's faster to reach for your mouse and do it directly in the DAW window. It's quite the opposite with the FP8--it can be MUCH faster/easier to do things in the FP8 instead of in Studio One's DAW window.

So don't give up on ALL Presonus hardware.

Studio One 5.2.x Pro (Sphere) | Bitwig 4.x | Ableton 10.x
Faderport 8 | ATOM SQ | MOTU M4 | Windows 10 | i9 9900K | 64 GB RAM | Geforce RTX 2070
User avatar
by Bbd on Mon May 03, 2021 7:16 am
I too understand the frustration others can feel when things are not working right.
It's another thing to bad mouth Presonus for not trying or caring. They really do try and care.
I hope support requests are created for issues to let Presonus look at the issue.
If it is design issue, they will make the devs aware and we hope for improvements.

Bbd

Please add your specs to your SIGNATURE.
Search the STUDIO ONE 5 ONLINE MANUAL. Access your MY.PRESONUS account.
OVERVIEW of how to get your issue fixed or the steps to create a SUPPORT TICKET.
Needs to include: 1) One Sentence Description 2) Expected Results 3) Actual Results 4) Steps to Reproduce.


OS: Win 10 x64 Home, Studio One Pro 5.x, Notion 6, Series III 24, Studio 192, Haswell CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.4GHz, RAM: 16GB, Faderport 8/16, Central Station +, PreSonus Sceptre S6, Eris 3.5, Temblor 10, ATOM, ATOM SQ
User avatar
by PreAl on Mon May 03, 2021 7:52 am
Bbd wroteI too understand the frustration others can feel when things are not working right.
It's another thing to bad mouth Presonus for not trying or caring. They really do try and care.
I hope support requests are created for issues to let Presonus look at the issue.
If it is design issue, they will make the devs aware and we hope for improvements.


I think it's the length of time to get fixes, and the perception there are no eyeballs on the issue. The Studio One software itself is the big exception to this, things get fixed quite quickly (mostly). This thread is 9 months old. Presonus is definitely aware.

Studio One Pro 5, Faderport Classic (1.45), Atom Pad, Atom SQ, Presonus Studio 26c, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, Maschine Studio, Octapad SPD-30, Roland A300, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit, also running it on Mac OS Catalina via dual boot (experimental).

Intel i9 9900K, 32GB RAM,
EVGA Geforce 1070 (Nvidia drivers).
Dell Inspiron 7591 (2 in 1) 16Gb.
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 11:15 am
thanks all for the replies and concern

yes, I did/do feel bad about 'bad mouthing' PreSonus and even possibly being 'banned from the forum' by making it 'personal'

but I think we all agree/see, that: 'at the end of the day', PreSonus has done very little to communicate with us on what's going on, why this happens, and why they resist putting in a SQ (alternative mode) that allows us to filter out the notes (threshold) of those 'after-touch/after-bounce' pad Double Triggers.

Oscar seems like a very caring, detailed oriented person. It's hard for me to believe that he would be the one who is not allowing a filter in the firmware to minimize Double Triggers.

SQ isn't a 99 dollar 'toy' product, is a 225USD cost product to make music with and I can't even use it for composing anything. My Atom 16-pad has one bad knob after 2 hrs of use. Someone at PreSonus needs to step up their game and be responsive if they are truly concerned about how their products are received. I know it's a challenge to get a sophisticated (mechanical / electrical) product out the door and still have room for profit. But, at a minimum, if users and testers see constant Double Triggers in midi notes, then: do something about it (don't ignore it and make believe it's not happening).

Do any of you actually use the SQ or 16-pad to make music in Studio One ??

I know SQ is cool for (non-mouse) DAW Navigation and Knobs for Parameters, but is anyone actually using the SQ pads for keyboard playing or drumming ??

I had to go back to my regular midi keyboards for a creative (non-double trigger) work experience.

Gregor and Joe (frontline communicators for PreSonus) have SQs -- but, do they actually use them (for anything beyond Navigation and Parameter Control) ??

Thanks much Baphometrix for recommending the FaderPort 8/16 and happy to hear they operate well, and are productive and reliable. If I knew that the Atom line SQ and 16-pad's were going to be a Fail for making music (because I trusted PreSonus), I could have saved the 225USD and 135USD and purchased a FP8 (600USD)

Sorry again for my 'over the top' rants, but I spent nearly 400USD (with tax and shipping) on the Atom line and at best: I got (one bank of) 8 knobs (on the SQ for Instrument and VST parameters) that work (sufficiently) for me. I'll probably warm up to the DAW Navigation also. But using the Atom line for actual (dynamic/nuanced) music (note) making -- seems to be a complete fail (and it didn't need to be that way with a little more effort on PreSonus' part, IMHO).
User avatar
by Bbd on Mon May 03, 2021 11:45 am
I bought my ATOM when it was first released and have kept up with the UC and firmware updates.
I also now have an ATOM SQ.
For me, I think it works fine. It may be the way I hit the pads so I'm not diminishing your issue.
I also own FP8, FP16, SIII mixer, and other Presonus gear which is holding up well.
I do know that the more users create support tickets, no matter how old the issue is, the better Presonus will be aware even if they don't have a fix.
Sorry for your problems. Just know that Presonus does listen and if they can fix issues, they do.

Bbd

Please add your specs to your SIGNATURE.
Search the STUDIO ONE 5 ONLINE MANUAL. Access your MY.PRESONUS account.
OVERVIEW of how to get your issue fixed or the steps to create a SUPPORT TICKET.
Needs to include: 1) One Sentence Description 2) Expected Results 3) Actual Results 4) Steps to Reproduce.


OS: Win 10 x64 Home, Studio One Pro 5.x, Notion 6, Series III 24, Studio 192, Haswell CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.4GHz, RAM: 16GB, Faderport 8/16, Central Station +, PreSonus Sceptre S6, Eris 3.5, Temblor 10, ATOM, ATOM SQ
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 11:55 am
Bbd wroteI bought my ATOM when it was first released and have kept up with the UC and firmware updates.
I also now have an ATOM SQ.
For me, I think it works fine. It may be the way I hit the pads so I'm not diminishing your issue.
I also own FP8, FP16, SIII mixer, and other Presonus gear which is holding up well.
I do know that the more users create support tickets, no matter how old the issue is, the better Presonus will be aware even if they don't have a fix.
Sorry for your problems. Just know that Presonus does listen and if they can fix issues, they do.


thanks Bbd
User avatar
by PreAl on Mon May 03, 2021 2:23 pm
I've got the SQ for workflow and step sequencer, and the standard atom pad controller for hitting, which Presonus has helped me swap out, it's better than it was before but not perfect. In terms of quality of pads though nothing beats the Maschine studio I have, but then it lacks portability. Oh and I do have an Octapad gathering dust..

Also I've got a great Mackie template for the Maschine studio that gives the SQ a run for its money when it comes to workflow. The dial works great.

I think if I just had the Presonus devices I would def be foaming in the mouth more.

Studio One Pro 5, Faderport Classic (1.45), Atom Pad, Atom SQ, Presonus Studio 26c, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, Maschine Studio, Octapad SPD-30, Roland A300, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit, also running it on Mac OS Catalina via dual boot (experimental).

Intel i9 9900K, 32GB RAM,
EVGA Geforce 1070 (Nvidia drivers).
Dell Inspiron 7591 (2 in 1) 16Gb.
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 3:39 pm
PreAl wrotethe standard atom pad controller for hitting, which Presonus has helped me swap out, it's better than it was before but not perfect


thanks PreAI

Presonus let you return the Atom Pad Controller ? and the newer one (they sent you) seemed to work a bit better ? (in terms of Pad responsiveness and more accurate recording of midi notes) ?

Ira : )
User avatar
by PreAl on Mon May 03, 2021 3:46 pm
irawasserman wrote
PreAl wrotethe standard atom pad controller for hitting, which Presonus has helped me swap out, it's better than it was before but not perfect


thanks PreAI

Presonus let you return the Atom Pad Controller ? and the newer one (they sent you) seemed to work a bit better ? (in terms of Pad responsiveness and more accurate recording of midi notes) ?

Ira : )


Def much better but not perfect.. in regards to the double triggering issue. Otherwise can't tell the difference.

Studio One Pro 5, Faderport Classic (1.45), Atom Pad, Atom SQ, Presonus Studio 26c, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, Maschine Studio, Octapad SPD-30, Roland A300, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit, also running it on Mac OS Catalina via dual boot (experimental).

Intel i9 9900K, 32GB RAM,
EVGA Geforce 1070 (Nvidia drivers).
Dell Inspiron 7591 (2 in 1) 16Gb.
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 3:51 pm
Baphometrix wroteI use my FP8 all the time to control all manner of Arranger scrolling/zooming, Section/Marker jumping, Console/Browser opening/closing


thanks for the great FP info Baphometrix

three quick questions on the FP:

- when you open the Browser from FP, can you scroll down to a desired Instrument/FX selection (or subfolder) and make a final selection from FP (I guess with the big knob for scroll and press to select ?)

- does the (fairly loud) Fader noise of the (fader adjusting) FP bother you ?

- do the transport control buttons seem solid enough ?

Sorry if I am 'hi-jacking' this thread -- to briefly discuss the FP option -- because I think some of us Atom SQ users would consider the FP at some point

Ira : )
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 3:57 pm
PreAl wroteDef much better but not perfect.. in regards to the double triggering issue. Otherwise can't tell the difference.


thanks PreAI, much appreciated !

maybe there is hope then ... if I swap my Atom 16-Pad (I think it's still under warranty) and my big beef being those extra double trigger notes.

Ira : )
User avatar
by Bbd on Mon May 03, 2021 4:14 pm
Please don’t hijack this thread!

Bbd

Please add your specs to your SIGNATURE.
Search the STUDIO ONE 5 ONLINE MANUAL. Access your MY.PRESONUS account.
OVERVIEW of how to get your issue fixed or the steps to create a SUPPORT TICKET.
Needs to include: 1) One Sentence Description 2) Expected Results 3) Actual Results 4) Steps to Reproduce.


OS: Win 10 x64 Home, Studio One Pro 5.x, Notion 6, Series III 24, Studio 192, Haswell CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.4GHz, RAM: 16GB, Faderport 8/16, Central Station +, PreSonus Sceptre S6, Eris 3.5, Temblor 10, ATOM, ATOM SQ
User avatar
by irawasserman on Mon May 03, 2021 4:55 pm
k

thanks Bbd

Ira
User avatar
by shadiradio on Tue May 04, 2021 12:15 am
I previously purchased a Native Instruments M32 because the form factor and features aligned with what I needed, but the velocity response was ridiculous and I learned from their support that it was by design. You had to hit the keys with extreme force to register max velocity, and there is no velocity curve remapping. I could not imagine anyone playing actual piano on it, and I'm pretty wary of what comes out of NI's doors in the future if they prototyped that, played it, and thought "yes this is fine." After about a year of waiting for a firmware update, I gave up and sold it at a loss even though it was basically unused.

During that time I had switched to Studio One as my DAW of choice and I love it. I picked up an Atom SQ because of its tight integration, innovative layout, and overall feature set. I still love the design of it, and if the pads functioned better, it would be such an amazing device - it is otherwise so well thought out. I really hope a firmware update can resolve some of these issues.

The irony is that a Melodics trial comes with the SQ, and I tried it just for fun - not thinking much of it - but it actually turned me on to signing up for a year of it. However as I progressed through the levels, the SQ's double triggering and sensitivity issues started preventing me from actually scoring well in the exercises. I'm hoping that I can reach out to Melodics support for a refund (or early cancellation) because the SQ is (again, ironically) not currently capable of performing the later exercises cleanly. :(

shadiradio.com | Studio One Pro 5, Atom SQ, Windows 10 Pro 64bit, macOS Big Sur, AMD Ryzen 7 3700x, 32 GB RAM

181 postsPage 7 of 10
1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests