irrelevance wrote:Big downside for me so far (if there has to be one?) is the initial set up time/calibration, + time investment to convert exsisting modular designs over to bc equivalents and I'm yet to get a truly satisfactory result, or at least anything that couldn't be achieved through quicker means in with scope and daw at this stage at least I appreciate this is probably just a case of working styles as I like to ptach small and quick patches. However the scope sync once set shows some great modular control potential.
JoPo wrote: I wish so much to control any Scope device thanks to ScopeSync that I thought that's what you were doing !
Maybe I misunderstand your request but is there a need for scope sync with regular scope devices when the internal resolution of parameters when modulated even with midi sounds smooth (interpolated?) . Sample accuracy would definitely be welcome and bi-directional OSC would be my top wish for scope.
Hi irrelevance,
Good to hear from you and thanks for your feedback. I totally agree that for simple short-term patching, the overhead of setting up parameters etc. is a bit much. Your request for bi-directional OSC is actually next on our roadmap though and if this works well it could be our route to automating more of the device setup, if modules are created (or updated) to expose their parameter definitions. We'll be keeping everyone informed on progress of that, as I'm sure lots of people will be interested.
Sample accuracy is an interesting one, as I'm only aware of Cubase offering sample accurate automation, which requires VST3. In other hosts that we've tested, the best automation frequency* is around 700Hz (or every 1.5ms). In terms of what can be achieved with the current Scope libraries, our audio-based solution is close to optimal, as the sync/async conversion inside the DSP implementation occurs at roughly 3.3kHz, so about 5 times faster than typical hosts.
For the OSC solution, we will initially be using the host-based async handling, which will give us updates roughly every 50ms (possibly affected by system load), which is 200Hz. Ideally we'd move to sync-based handling (which would then be accurate down to buffer size), but we want to make sure that the system is as stable as possible and we had difficulties getting compatibility across all Windows versions using the sync handling in the Scope libraries. I'm sure someone with a deeper understanding than me of device drivers etc. would be able to resolve it though, so we're certainly not ruling it out!
Regarding your point about smoothing, it's worth noting that there is still a resolution benefit over MIDI, as there are plenty of use cases where you need to be able to pick out a specific value, rather than the nearest of 128 steps. For example, when tuning FM operators, or for precise EQ or filter control. Ignoring automation for a second, it's important that loading up a VST preset results in the same sound as when you saved it.
Anyway, we're very open to wider debates about how we move forward with ScopeSync and what the priorities should be and hope you'll be patient with us as we continue to build on the current foundation!
Thanks,
Will
* When I say automation frequency, I mean how often the DAW processes an automation update and does something with it. To put it another way, it's the sample rate of automation curves in the DAW.