Lexicon Alpha Driver Win 10

[DanielleOM]

I don't see a driver yet for win 10.

I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.


Danielle

[Scott Dorsey]

DanielleOM <danie...@reply.to.group.com> wrote:
>
>I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>
>I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.

Are you sure you even want to be running win 10 on an audio workstation?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[John Williamson]

On 05/09/2015 14:22, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> DanielleOM <danie...@reply.to.group.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>>
>> I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.
>
> Are you sure you even want to be running win 10 on an audio workstation?
>

Maybe it's a new computer and there's no option to upgrade to Windows 7?


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[John Williamson]

On 05/09/2015 12:46, DanielleOM wrote:
>
> I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>
> I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.
>

I have seen reports that at least some Windows 7 and 8 drivers will work
in Windows 10. I cannot verify this as I will not be letting Windows 10
near *any* machine I run until at least the Service Pack 1 is issued,
and possibly not even then, due to its "phone home" tendencies.

[Peter A. Stoll]

>
>I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>
>I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.

I think the party line is that the normal expectation is that both windows 7 and windows
8 drivers will usually work on Windows 10. Microsoft's business policy of massively
encouraging huge amounts of blind conversion by millions of user would be having a
nightmare amount of bad publicity by now were this not _usually_ true. But for
specialist hardware that motivation and evidence is very much less powerful.

In your situation I'd at minimum search for affirmations of success from other similar
users.

My personal Windows 10 conversion failure/success tale is that the laptop I chose to
convert first because I thought it had nothing "special" on had catastropfic wireless
connection problems. In searching for a newer driver for the wireless hardware on it, I
found none labelled for Windows 10, but did find one labelled for Windows 8 which
was well over a year newer than the as-delivered one on this Acer laptop. Installing
that driver completely improved the wireless behavior--not only not catastrophic, but
better than ever in the life of the unit in my home.

As to "why Windows 10?". I'd prefer to have my home fleet of four machines on a
single operating system, think Windows 10 support will go much farther into the future
than Windows 7, and think Microsoft has actually fixed some Windows 7 problems in
10. So I am inching along, one machine at a time, watching for problems and believe
that most users have found the supported reversion to work if needed.

Other than the horrible wireless problem, now fixed, my biggest Windows 10 trouble has
just been the ergonomic one of finding formerly familiar functions. That was largely
solved when I learned to try holding down the Windows logo key and hit "X". A old-
style text menu pops up with direct access to at least half a dozen useful functions I
was having trouble finding in the new layout.

[Neil]

On 9/5/2015 11:55 AM, Peter A. Stoll wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>>
>> I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.
>
> I think the party line is that the normal expectation is that both windows 7 and windows
> 8 drivers will usually work on Windows 10.
>

Not so. In fact, some Win7 drivers won't even work under Win8. Win10 has
broken some very generic drivers for video and audio on notebooks.

The most reliable answer about whether a driver will work properly under
Win10 will come from the manufacturer of the device(s) in question. If
they won't or don't confirm compatibility, it's probably best to err on
the side of caution.

--
Best regards,

Neil

[Trevor]

On 5/09/2015 11:22 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> DanielleOM <danie...@reply.to.group.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't see a driver yet for win 10.
>>
>> I wonder if there's much chance that the win 8 driver will work.
>
> Are you sure you even want to be running win 10 on an audio workstation?

What makes you think Windows 8 is any better?

Trevor.

[Bill]

In message <msfdp6$uo6$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com>
writes

I haven't tried anything on the "proper" DAWs yet - they are on XP and
Vista (!), but I have been involved with some testing on laptops.

For example, my Edirol UA-4FX wouldn't instal the Win8.1 drivers in Win
10.
On the MS Insider forum, a very helpful Japanese gentleman popped up and
suggested changes to a text file in the driver set, and it now works. I
see that Edirol says the Win 10 driver is under testing, and I suspect
the gentleman in question was the writer of the software.

The bigger question is regarding the "Windows 10 is the last Windows"
policy, which sees security updates being mixed up with undocumented OS
"improvements".
I have kept a couple of laptops on the W10 Insider program and, again
for example, the "stereo mix" feature in the Windows Recording tab seems
to have been disabled in the latest builds. It has become a situation
where no-one really can be sure if what worked today will work tomorrow.

The other Microsoft issue is the sneaky telemetry updates to Windows 7
via a bunch of KB files. One, KB2952664, seems extremely reluctant to
removal, being hidden etc.

It's a real shame. Losing trust in an OS manufacturer doesn't look good
to me.
--
Bill

[Neil]

On 9/6/2015 8:54 AM, Bill wrote:
>
> It's a real shame. Losing trust in an OS manufacturer doesn't look good
> to me.
>

Based on comments I've seen over the decades, that ship sailed when MS
discontinued DOS 6.2. 8-D

One question for folks in this ng is whether an OS in a constant state
of flux will provide sufficient reliability to run a business?
--
Best regards,

Neil

[Scott Dorsey]

Bill <Billa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>It's a real shame. Losing trust in an OS manufacturer doesn't look good
>to me.

What led you to have any trust in Microsoft in the first place?

I lost my trust in them in 1978 when I called and was told that although
they sold a port of MBASIC for the HP2100, that they knew it was broken, and
they didn't have any intention of fixing it. I was sure that with service
like that, they'd be out of business within six months.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <mshlkf$18t$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>
>One question for folks in this ng is whether an OS in a constant state
>of flux will provide sufficient reliability to run a business?

I worry that it doesn't. On the other hand, the two major alternatives are
just as bad these days. Even the linux people seem to have embraced change
for the sake of change, with dumb stuff like systemd.

I'm keeping my Ampex.

[Nil]

For one, Windows 8 doesn't update itself at any time it feels like it,
whether you want it to or not.

[Neil]

On 9/6/2015 11:38 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <mshlkf$18t$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>>
>> One question for folks in this ng is whether an OS in a constant state
>> of flux will provide sufficient reliability to run a business?
>
> I worry that it doesn't. On the other hand, the two major alternatives are
> just as bad these days. Even the linux people seem to have embraced change
> for the sake of change, with dumb stuff like systemd.
>

I worry that unless embedded OS devices become popular enough to deliver
viable feature sets user-managed systems will be a real burden. A real
circle-jerk is being introduced. Even if one was able to prevent their
OS from updating, the app developers have to keep their apps compatible
with the "current state", so drivers, programs and so forth are
reliable. Those with "unupgradable" tablets and smart phones can already
experience the consequences of this. It's preposterous to impose that on
businesses, which may be one reason the U.S. Navy is paying big money to
MS to stick with XP. Not that I'm happy about that use of my tax bucks.

--
Best regards,

Neil

[Peter Larsen]

Nor does 10, unless you get the toy version. But worse is to come, the
analphabets have won and we will see a never ending train of
dumbification and reduced access to the engine bay.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Nil]

On 06 Sep 2015, Peter Larsen <dig...@hotmail.com> wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

> Nor does 10, unless you get the toy version. But worse is to come,
> the analphabets have won and we will see a never ending train of
> dumbification and reduced access to the engine bay.

If by "toy" version, you mean the Home version, that's what 90% of
people will have. There's little in Pro that Home has that the average
user will use. The ability to delay (but not avoid) updates is a poor
excuse for being forced to spend twice as much for a new version of
Windows if you're eligible for a free or low-cost upgrade.

Home Edition is no more a "toy" than any other edition.

[Les Cargill]

Neil wrote:
> On 9/6/2015 11:38 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> In article <mshlkf$18t$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil
>> <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> One question for folks in this ng is whether an OS in a constant state
>>> of flux will provide sufficient reliability to run a business?
>>
>> I worry that it doesn't. On the other hand, the two major
>> alternatives are
>> just as bad these days. Even the linux people seem to have embraced
>> change
>> for the sake of change, with dumb stuff like systemd.
>>
> I worry that unless embedded OS devices become popular enough to deliver
> viable feature sets user-managed systems will be a real burden.

Nah.

> A real
> circle-jerk is being introduced.

It's been in play since the '80s.

> Even if one was able to prevent their
> OS from updating, the app developers have to keep their apps compatible
> with the "current state", so drivers, programs and so forth are
> reliable.

And? I still use programs from win3.11 that work fine. They run on an XP
virtual machine, but they run.

> Those with "unupgradable" tablets and smart phones can already
> experience the consequences of this.

So don't use the stuff that does not work that way.

> It's preposterous to impose that on
> businesses,

"Businesses" are the reason this is the way it is.

> which may be one reason the U.S. Navy is paying big money to
> MS to stick with XP. Not that I'm happy about that use of my tax bucks.
>

That's the least of the Navy's technology worries.

--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

Since any sane person would never run an audio workstation while
connected to the net, I don't see how it can update itself? In fact my
DAW never connects to the net, any updates are done via another computer
and USB stick. But since it doesn't connect to the net, are rarely required.

Trevor.

[Gray_Wolf]

That's what I'd do if I was doing serious music production. At the
least I'd have a dual boot machine with only the DAW and maybe a few
other apps on a second HDD and OS

[Les Cargill]

If I were billing hours, I might agree. I do both without
problems on the same box for now.

I do turn off the Ethernet port at times because some fool DPC
checker suggested it ( and I can't tell the difference ).

Nothing here updates itself.

The only infection has been that Sony rootkit from 2007 or so. That
came on a CD. And that was a different machine.

The next more paranoid approach would be a VM for all the Internet
stuff.

--
Les Cargill

[Frank Stearns]

Gray_Wolf <gray_wolf@howling_mad.org> writes:

>On Mon, 07 Sep 2015 18:39:14 +1000, Trevor <tre...@home.net> wrote:

>>On 7/09/2015 2:48 AM, Nil wrote:
>>> On 06 Sep 2015, Trevor <tre...@home.net> wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>>>> On 5/09/2015 11:22 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

snips

>>Since any sane person would never run an audio workstation while
>>connected to the net, I don't see how it can update itself? In fact my
>>DAW never connects to the net, any updates are done via another computer
>>and USB stick. But since it doesn't connect to the net, are rarely required.

>That's what I'd do if I was doing serious music production. At the
>least I'd have a dual boot machine with only the DAW and maybe a few
>other apps on a second HDD and OS

In theory and past practice, I agree. But in more recent practice, a real-time 'net
connection is vital, so much so that these days I'm leaving it always active on the
production machine.

Both of my past two large mix projects hinged on connectivity, and it'll be the same
going forward. One project involved multiple pro and musicians' home studios spread
out across the continent, with updates and add-ons coming fast and furious. (And me,
being the mix guy, was at the end of that chain. I'd often be mixing one tune while
in the background tracks for a new tune were coming in.)

Going the other direction, the ability to post proofs immediately is very good.
Then, at the end, getting a DDP player and file from the mastering facility "right
there", on my desktop, is a nice touch as well.

And all through this, being able to single click-and-drag milestone mixes out
onto an off-site backup location with no fuss/no muss was very reassuring,
particularly given the tight timetables.

For me, messing with memory sticks or other transfer methods to get to a connected
machine just doesn't cut it any more. There really isn't time and worse, the break
in workflow isn't so helpful either. Even a dual boot would be a pain, because I
couldn't continue to work on a mix while new data was loading in or proofs were
going out.

The good news is that on a modern machine, network activity no longer appears
to have even the slightest impact on the DAW (unlike the bad old days). Plus, one
can turn off many of the "garbage" services that promote "stupid use" of the
network.

If you're saying that with Win10 one doesn't have control of silly network uses
unless the "pro" version of the OS is acquired, well, then, that's the game we'll
have to play. Generally, other restrictions in "home" versions push me to the pro
version from the get-go regardless. For now, I'll run Win7 as long as possible, if
not a good ways beyond.

YMMV

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

[Nil]

On 07 Sep 2015, Trevor <tre...@home.net> wrote in rec.audio.pro:

> Since any sane person would never run an audio workstation while
> connected to the net, I don't see how it can update itself? In
> fact my DAW never connects to the net, any updates are done via
> another computer and USB stick. But since it doesn't connect to
> the net, are rarely required.

In a pro studio environment I might try to minimize a workstation's
Internet connectivity, but I would want it to be networked with the
other workstations in the studio.

There is no reason networking has to impact DAW performance. If it
does, something is wrong, and that something should be fixed.

[Scott Dorsey]

Nil <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:
>On 07 Sep 2015, Trevor <tre...@home.net> wrote in rec.audio.pro:
>
>> Since any sane person would never run an audio workstation while
>> connected to the net, I don't see how it can update itself? In
>> fact my DAW never connects to the net, any updates are done via
>> another computer and USB stick. But since it doesn't connect to
>> the net, are rarely required.
>
>In a pro studio environment I might try to minimize a workstation's
>Internet connectivity, but I would want it to be networked with the
>other workstations in the studio.

Agreed.

>There is no reason networking has to impact DAW performance. If it
>does, something is wrong, and that something should be fixed.

It's also possible, if you have a machine that is constantly trying to
phone home and being foiled by the lack of networking, that the system
performance will be reduced by not having a network since the OS will
be dealing with all these constant timeouts. That's something just as
wrong.

[Trevor]

That's all true, and a valid reason if you have those needs. I haven't
had to do real time internet collaboration, and my backups are to USB
hard drives, so for now I'm happy to not worry about internet problems
including viruses.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

Having a separate internet machine means if somebody does something
silly with that, it won't interrupt my DAW at least. But it's true there
is a loss of convenience to be paid by isolating it. Each to their own.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

On 8/09/2015 6:00 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> It's also possible, if you have a machine that is constantly trying to
> phone home and being foiled by the lack of networking, that the system
> performance will be reduced by not having a network since the OS will
> be dealing with all these constant timeouts. That's something just as
> wrong.

I only have one program that takes a while to start while it tries to
"phone home" and fails, but works fine after that. Personally I'm happy
that it can't.

Trevor.

[jmp4l...@gmail.com]

I was unable to even install Windows 10 until I uninstalled the Lexicon Alpha driver. The install failed twice with some sort of error relating to drivers. I figured the Lexicon Alpha was a likely culprit... Sure enough, that was it. Not a huge loss as it still works for system audio and I boot my system into Mac OS X for real creative work.

[robso...@gmail.com]

Got it to work on Sonar X3 using MME. Just select "USB Device." Also use the monitor knob so you don't get latency.