The item1 and 2 are by the Audio/MIDI program like Sonar, Nuendo/Cubase or Logic right? I do not get your question that you meant how?
The item 3 is mostly mixing, you can have many choices on the SPF mixing (16/32/48/64-CH) instead of XTC! Even you can use both (combination with the VST Effects and SPF Effects processing).
In addition, you will get better quality in Realtime DSP and take advantage on your big bucks spent! It is the majority of DSP-on- card benefits!
I would not say it is easy in the mixdown world, but quality indeed! Is that what you want to hear? How you do that in mind, BTW?
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LHong on 2005-08-06 20:21 ]</font>
XTC Error Solved!!!
Hi LHorn,
You said:
"You simply do not need Nuendo within the SFP mode!"
But you're saying now that I need it for the first two items on my list.
When I say to "Automate a mix" I mean live volume, panning, EQ, FX and FX Send automation.
I'm well aware of the vast improvement in sound and efficiency that can be achieved by the use of the Creamware cards. The mixers are far better at summing than either Cubase or Nuendo, for a start. Some of the FX are magic, and the synths are great. BUT! You simply cannot volume/pan automate in front of the SFP environment. You cannot set up a compressor to work at a certain level, then actively change the input volume with automation. It defeats the purpose of inserting the compressor in the first place. So I have two options. Either I use XTC mode which is the whole reason I outlayed so much money in the first place, OR, everything must be done within the SFP environment. Editing, Automation and MIDI. Everything! If you can tell me how this is done then I'll gladly do it. If not then I rest my case.
Cheers,
AudioDan
You said:
"You simply do not need Nuendo within the SFP mode!"
But you're saying now that I need it for the first two items on my list.
When I say to "Automate a mix" I mean live volume, panning, EQ, FX and FX Send automation.
I'm well aware of the vast improvement in sound and efficiency that can be achieved by the use of the Creamware cards. The mixers are far better at summing than either Cubase or Nuendo, for a start. Some of the FX are magic, and the synths are great. BUT! You simply cannot volume/pan automate in front of the SFP environment. You cannot set up a compressor to work at a certain level, then actively change the input volume with automation. It defeats the purpose of inserting the compressor in the first place. So I have two options. Either I use XTC mode which is the whole reason I outlayed so much money in the first place, OR, everything must be done within the SFP environment. Editing, Automation and MIDI. Everything! If you can tell me how this is done then I'll gladly do it. If not then I rest my case.
Cheers,
AudioDan
you can assign controller #'s to the scope mixers for automation, but it'd be easier to do the automation in the nuendo mixer(volume and mutes for sure, auxs too can have their own asio channel and feed the scope mixer). too bad about the external gear thing, like i said, you can have a real studio or.... if you are comfortable with hardware, your problems will disappear. the problem is certainly one of attitude......it may not work exactly how you want, but it'll definitely benefit you(imho).
You wrote:
>>>When I say to "Automate a mix" I mean live volume, panning, EQ, FX and FX Send automation.<<<
Yes you can do that, by apply the MIDI CC Events for Each channels like Volume, Panning and Effect sends and Returns from and to the mixers.
No problems! I assumed that you knew this? It is different but doable.
I do not have much time to expplain in detail, it can be done several ways. Perhaps you can read the User manual or may be someone here can tell you more about it.
Hope this helps,
LongStudio
>>>When I say to "Automate a mix" I mean live volume, panning, EQ, FX and FX Send automation.<<<
Yes you can do that, by apply the MIDI CC Events for Each channels like Volume, Panning and Effect sends and Returns from and to the mixers.
No problems! I assumed that you knew this? It is different but doable.
I do not have much time to expplain in detail, it can be done several ways. Perhaps you can read the User manual or may be someone here can tell you more about it.
Hope this helps,
LongStudio
You guys funny !!
Good one, Nuendo replaced by SFP....
Incredible.
Lhong and Gary I reckon you don't use Nuendo and have no clues about what you're talking about !!
Let me see how you insert a video track in Sfp, and how do you automate (no Lhong you have not answered the question yet..) ? Where do you edit your midi tracks ? Where is the score editor ? Let's talk about control surface now... How well is the Mackie implemented (and I want the Mackie screen to be updated....)...
Got the point ?
This forum is so much into "we against the the world" that it's becoming funny !
Go ahead now and flame me telling me I don't understand the Power of sfp, I'm no believer and other evangelism blah blah... I've read hundreds of past posts from some of the frequent posters here... The same kind of close mindness seems to have gone for a very long time it seems.
By the time you guys congratulate yourself on the power of sfp, lots of power users go away because of the inability to operate this platform INSIDE their software host, some of the best developpers abandon the ship, CW doesn't do much for the platform, but hey, all is well...
Haha.
SCOPE + UAD-1 + Powercore + Nuendo... is a very good combo. They are ALL good.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bifop on 2005-08-05 00:12 ]</font>
Good one, Nuendo replaced by SFP....
Incredible.
Lhong and Gary I reckon you don't use Nuendo and have no clues about what you're talking about !!
Let me see how you insert a video track in Sfp, and how do you automate (no Lhong you have not answered the question yet..) ? Where do you edit your midi tracks ? Where is the score editor ? Let's talk about control surface now... How well is the Mackie implemented (and I want the Mackie screen to be updated....)...
Got the point ?
This forum is so much into "we against the the world" that it's becoming funny !
Go ahead now and flame me telling me I don't understand the Power of sfp, I'm no believer and other evangelism blah blah... I've read hundreds of past posts from some of the frequent posters here... The same kind of close mindness seems to have gone for a very long time it seems.
By the time you guys congratulate yourself on the power of sfp, lots of power users go away because of the inability to operate this platform INSIDE their software host, some of the best developpers abandon the ship, CW doesn't do much for the platform, but hey, all is well...
Haha.
SCOPE + UAD-1 + Powercore + Nuendo... is a very good combo. They are ALL good.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bifop on 2005-08-05 00:12 ]</font>
i don't hate nuendo, nor do i suggest you don't use it.
i agree with everything you said especially the end(all that stuff is good to use. i think that maybe you misunderstood Lhong(maybe not..), i don't think he meant don't use nuendo, just don't mix there. there's no reason not to use vsts. there's also no reason to do your track summing in nuendo, especially when scope sums better. good outboard is a wonderful thing. the only reason not to use it in mixdown is that it's terribly expensive, especially when scope makes connections easy. the uad and scope cards definitely help there.
the scope card is worth using for it's many strengths is all i said(even if it alters one's work flow a bit, it IS that useful). this is my OPINION. why does everything have to be in the asio host? it's really not that much easier than scope mode and there are more musical possibilities that are worth taking advantage of(in scope mode). many people spend good money on summing devices both analog and digital. this is done externally and always sounds better than the sequencer alone, scope helps there. there are NO vst synths that sound as good as the external ones for many good reasons, scope helps there. external effects are almost always superior than vsts and scope helps there too, both in routing and the fact that external effects(and synths and digital mixers) run on dsps...
i'm only expressing my opinion that the card is worth using for more than ins and outs alone for which it's called expensive, but i'll even take issue with the idea that it's expensive. a digi02 rack is, what, 10 in and 8 out and costs like, $1500. you can get two behringer ada8000s and a scope project card for under $1300 and get 16 in and 16 out AND 16 mic pres! so, the sampler, synths, mixers, modular synth and effects can be thought of as free throw-ins.
imho, there are CERTAINLY improvements that can be made, but this thing is a bargain and a good attitude will allow it to do lots of nice things for you.
for those who don't know, imho = in my humble opinion......
i agree with everything you said especially the end(all that stuff is good to use. i think that maybe you misunderstood Lhong(maybe not..), i don't think he meant don't use nuendo, just don't mix there. there's no reason not to use vsts. there's also no reason to do your track summing in nuendo, especially when scope sums better. good outboard is a wonderful thing. the only reason not to use it in mixdown is that it's terribly expensive, especially when scope makes connections easy. the uad and scope cards definitely help there.
the scope card is worth using for it's many strengths is all i said(even if it alters one's work flow a bit, it IS that useful). this is my OPINION. why does everything have to be in the asio host? it's really not that much easier than scope mode and there are more musical possibilities that are worth taking advantage of(in scope mode). many people spend good money on summing devices both analog and digital. this is done externally and always sounds better than the sequencer alone, scope helps there. there are NO vst synths that sound as good as the external ones for many good reasons, scope helps there. external effects are almost always superior than vsts and scope helps there too, both in routing and the fact that external effects(and synths and digital mixers) run on dsps...
i'm only expressing my opinion that the card is worth using for more than ins and outs alone for which it's called expensive, but i'll even take issue with the idea that it's expensive. a digi02 rack is, what, 10 in and 8 out and costs like, $1500. you can get two behringer ada8000s and a scope project card for under $1300 and get 16 in and 16 out AND 16 mic pres! so, the sampler, synths, mixers, modular synth and effects can be thought of as free throw-ins.
imho, there are CERTAINLY improvements that can be made, but this thing is a bargain and a good attitude will allow it to do lots of nice things for you.
for those who don't know, imho = in my humble opinion......
I agree that what Gary said!
in addition,
Please read it carefully!
The SFP mode is meant not XTC mode?
Let me ask you a question, in any words, what did I say that you do not need Audio/MIDI Sequencer program nor VST?
You must have a good Audio/MIDI Sequencer program of course, in order to do the Scores but not everything necessarily! You still can use the automation or surface control by the sequencer if you want to, that what you have the MIDI I/O ports for!
In case you are interested (to have your own) the automation on the mixing or surface control interface (Mackie for example) can be done as follows:
1> Where: additional MIDI tracks in the sequencer.
2> HOW: Record the movements of MIDI controller Events such as faders, etc. Then MIDI events data playback will control the SPF Mixer or even External Digital Mixer.
Again, It is different but doable! Just take advantage of the flexibilities.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LHong on 2005-08-05 04:02 ]</font>
in addition,
Please read it carefully!
The SFP mode is meant not XTC mode?
Let me ask you a question, in any words, what did I say that you do not need Audio/MIDI Sequencer program nor VST?
You must have a good Audio/MIDI Sequencer program of course, in order to do the Scores but not everything necessarily! You still can use the automation or surface control by the sequencer if you want to, that what you have the MIDI I/O ports for!
In case you are interested (to have your own) the automation on the mixing or surface control interface (Mackie for example) can be done as follows:
1> Where: additional MIDI tracks in the sequencer.
2> HOW: Record the movements of MIDI controller Events such as faders, etc. Then MIDI events data playback will control the SPF Mixer or even External Digital Mixer.
Again, It is different but doable! Just take advantage of the flexibilities.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LHong on 2005-08-05 04:02 ]</font>
Greetings Bifop (my kindred spirit),
I was wondering if someone would jump in and say all the things I was thinking....so thankyou.
The thing is guys, I've been using Creamware cards confidently for about two and a half years, I've thought very long and hard about my setup and how they fit in, and for XTC mode is perfect for me. I do admit that I didn't do my homework when buying my computer. Perhaps I should have checked with Creamware before I bought a dual processor system.
My setup needs no more flexibility than what Cubase/Nuendo offer me. I don't need so much flexibility I can make feedback loops. I need a good quick work flow where editing is a breeze, where MIDI record/playback/editing is available, where I can run a video window (as Bifop mentioned), where - while I am always conscious of it - I don't have to think too hard about my routing nor spend too much time on it, and most importantly where I can volume/pan/insert/send/instrument/mute automate IN REAL TIME!!!!!!! That means to be able to play it back and have it actually do something! Not just the ability to be able to (after days of work) painstakingly assign control functions to each parameter in the STM4896 and to every effect I use. I've been there and done that, and it did not help me one tiny little bit....just took a lot of time.
Garyb...you're damn well spot on that external FX are almost always better than VST's and that the Creamware FX help there. That's exactly why I wanted to be able to use them in XTC mode. It's not the way VST FX in Nuendo are applied that makes them sub-standard, it's the FX themselves. They're CRAP! There's not very much that's included in either Cubase or Nuendo that I would consider a professional effect. But! I love Vinco, I like PsyQ, I love Transient Designer and Optimaster is 'da bomb' when used correctly. All I want is to be able to use those instead of the cruddy FX in Nuendo. I would also like to be able to use the Creamware mixers for summing. Even the ability to include a mixer in the XTCProject.pro and then record back in though the Merge module....I don't know....something. The summing thing is not a big deal if I could just use the FX the way I want.
I'll be very clear though. If you insert a compressor into an audio signal, you set that compressor based on the input level of that signal. You cannot then volume automate the level of the audio signal in front of the compressor. LHorn suggested that I use Nuendo for the volume/pan/mute automation. This negates the possibility of using compressors (Vinco and Transient Designer!!!) in SFP. Compression is one of the main reasons I spent the extra money on a 15DSP booster and if I use SFP compression is one of the main things I can't use. I even tried setting up the I/O's through an ASIO64 module and using the "External FX" routing in Nuendo but it takes ten times longer to insert and use the plugins, not to mention the massive increase in CPU load.
Now, the digi002 Rack can actually take 18 ins and outs (simultaneously if my memory serves) and in Australia costs just over $2000. But! It comes with a bit of software that will do everything I've mentioned as my criteria, it's FX are fine and it's summing sounds much better than Nuendo - desregarding the fact that it's one of the most clumsy, poorly arranged, uglyiest bits of software out there, and MIDI function all round is abismal. In Australia, a LunaII and and A16 Ultra costs $2900. Comes with a software platform that is amazingly flexible, but cannot record/play back/automate either Midi or audio. Oh, and don't forget....no Mic Preamps.
Closer to what I want....a Motu 828MkII - 18 ins and 22 outs - awesome ASIO drivers - two descent mic pre's - ADAT sync - great AD/DA conversion - a stand-alone mixer - would cost me $1495 in Australia. Half the price of the Creamware system with more functionality in its actual I/O capability. On the Mac platform it also comes with a bit of software that covers a lot of the criteria I mentioned.
My point? Creamware IS expensive I/O. So there has to be another reason to buy it. DSP FX...but if the FX don't work in one of the TWO WAYS THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO!!! and the other way lacks the actual functions that most engineers need to take a session from start to finish....what's the point? That's more than a 50% failure. The money spent on that amazing flexibilty that lacks the infrastructure to be put to good use, could be put towards the hardware that Garyb mentioned that does indeed sound far better.
So....it's onwards and upwards to the UAD-1 and perhaps a Powercore FW and yes that will be used in Nuendo 'cause it's a bloody good platform. The only thing that saves the Creamware cards in my system from being expensive I/O is their summing power and mastering FX. Nothing more.
Cheers,
AudioDan
I was wondering if someone would jump in and say all the things I was thinking....so thankyou.
The thing is guys, I've been using Creamware cards confidently for about two and a half years, I've thought very long and hard about my setup and how they fit in, and for XTC mode is perfect for me. I do admit that I didn't do my homework when buying my computer. Perhaps I should have checked with Creamware before I bought a dual processor system.
My setup needs no more flexibility than what Cubase/Nuendo offer me. I don't need so much flexibility I can make feedback loops. I need a good quick work flow where editing is a breeze, where MIDI record/playback/editing is available, where I can run a video window (as Bifop mentioned), where - while I am always conscious of it - I don't have to think too hard about my routing nor spend too much time on it, and most importantly where I can volume/pan/insert/send/instrument/mute automate IN REAL TIME!!!!!!! That means to be able to play it back and have it actually do something! Not just the ability to be able to (after days of work) painstakingly assign control functions to each parameter in the STM4896 and to every effect I use. I've been there and done that, and it did not help me one tiny little bit....just took a lot of time.
Garyb...you're damn well spot on that external FX are almost always better than VST's and that the Creamware FX help there. That's exactly why I wanted to be able to use them in XTC mode. It's not the way VST FX in Nuendo are applied that makes them sub-standard, it's the FX themselves. They're CRAP! There's not very much that's included in either Cubase or Nuendo that I would consider a professional effect. But! I love Vinco, I like PsyQ, I love Transient Designer and Optimaster is 'da bomb' when used correctly. All I want is to be able to use those instead of the cruddy FX in Nuendo. I would also like to be able to use the Creamware mixers for summing. Even the ability to include a mixer in the XTCProject.pro and then record back in though the Merge module....I don't know....something. The summing thing is not a big deal if I could just use the FX the way I want.
I'll be very clear though. If you insert a compressor into an audio signal, you set that compressor based on the input level of that signal. You cannot then volume automate the level of the audio signal in front of the compressor. LHorn suggested that I use Nuendo for the volume/pan/mute automation. This negates the possibility of using compressors (Vinco and Transient Designer!!!) in SFP. Compression is one of the main reasons I spent the extra money on a 15DSP booster and if I use SFP compression is one of the main things I can't use. I even tried setting up the I/O's through an ASIO64 module and using the "External FX" routing in Nuendo but it takes ten times longer to insert and use the plugins, not to mention the massive increase in CPU load.
Now, the digi002 Rack can actually take 18 ins and outs (simultaneously if my memory serves) and in Australia costs just over $2000. But! It comes with a bit of software that will do everything I've mentioned as my criteria, it's FX are fine and it's summing sounds much better than Nuendo - desregarding the fact that it's one of the most clumsy, poorly arranged, uglyiest bits of software out there, and MIDI function all round is abismal. In Australia, a LunaII and and A16 Ultra costs $2900. Comes with a software platform that is amazingly flexible, but cannot record/play back/automate either Midi or audio. Oh, and don't forget....no Mic Preamps.
Closer to what I want....a Motu 828MkII - 18 ins and 22 outs - awesome ASIO drivers - two descent mic pre's - ADAT sync - great AD/DA conversion - a stand-alone mixer - would cost me $1495 in Australia. Half the price of the Creamware system with more functionality in its actual I/O capability. On the Mac platform it also comes with a bit of software that covers a lot of the criteria I mentioned.
My point? Creamware IS expensive I/O. So there has to be another reason to buy it. DSP FX...but if the FX don't work in one of the TWO WAYS THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO!!! and the other way lacks the actual functions that most engineers need to take a session from start to finish....what's the point? That's more than a 50% failure. The money spent on that amazing flexibilty that lacks the infrastructure to be put to good use, could be put towards the hardware that Garyb mentioned that does indeed sound far better.
So....it's onwards and upwards to the UAD-1 and perhaps a Powercore FW and yes that will be used in Nuendo 'cause it's a bloody good platform. The only thing that saves the Creamware cards in my system from being expensive I/O is their summing power and mastering FX. Nothing more.
Cheers,
AudioDan
Lhong, to quote you "You simply do not need Nuendo within the SFP mode!". Did I misunderstood the sentence ?
Greetings Audiodan !
Well, you too took the words out of my mouth ! Your explanation of the shortcomings you encounter using either mode (Xtc vs Sfp)are the exact griefs I have toward this system as it is now...
Yeah Nuendo 3 rocks (and they are adding external vsti's with full midi/audio latency compensation in the forthcoming 3.1 version) but yes, the eq and most of the included FXes are a joke. That's why most of the serious users go for third party plugs and/or the Dsp FXes (UAD-1, Powercore & Scope).
As far as I'm concerned, it's the synths that got me hooked to the Scope platform... They're fabulous. So are most of the effects you mentioned. Even the modulation fx are far above Nuendo/Cubase's included ones.
But I too can't change my workflow to the extend Gary described. Recently, I've done three projects totally in Sfp (I mean not in Xtc), based on Gary's recommendation, but that's too much hassle for me. I'm a happy camper with the way things are in Nuendo. Sometimes I work in 3/4 tunes at a time (to keep the inspiration fresh) and the swapping beetween projects is far too messy using two side platforms... Number of asio channel has changed (because I did not included enough in the default project) and the I/O in Nuendo has to be refreshed..etc..
Now for summing, I'm really interested in running some stems to the STM 4896..
I really think the ideal solution that would make everybody happy and probably gain Creamware LOTS of new customers would be a hybrid mode SFP + XTC. Emu did it with it's 500 buck 1820M solution (I have one), why wouldn't the pioneer be able to do it as well ? Around me, at least 3 Scope cards would be instantly sold if that was to happen.
Imagine running Nuendo with Creamware plugs used side by side with UAD-1 and Poco but the front mixer and the summing would happen in SFP... And yes, I accept the fact that only the front end would be 0 latency.
By the way Dan, I see you're from Australia, it's funny since I first heard and seen the Pulsar in Brisbane (Midilink was the shop I reckon) around 1997/98. I lived in Down Under for a couple of years. I loved it so much !
Greetings from France.
Greetings Audiodan !
Well, you too took the words out of my mouth ! Your explanation of the shortcomings you encounter using either mode (Xtc vs Sfp)are the exact griefs I have toward this system as it is now...
Yeah Nuendo 3 rocks (and they are adding external vsti's with full midi/audio latency compensation in the forthcoming 3.1 version) but yes, the eq and most of the included FXes are a joke. That's why most of the serious users go for third party plugs and/or the Dsp FXes (UAD-1, Powercore & Scope).
As far as I'm concerned, it's the synths that got me hooked to the Scope platform... They're fabulous. So are most of the effects you mentioned. Even the modulation fx are far above Nuendo/Cubase's included ones.
But I too can't change my workflow to the extend Gary described. Recently, I've done three projects totally in Sfp (I mean not in Xtc), based on Gary's recommendation, but that's too much hassle for me. I'm a happy camper with the way things are in Nuendo. Sometimes I work in 3/4 tunes at a time (to keep the inspiration fresh) and the swapping beetween projects is far too messy using two side platforms... Number of asio channel has changed (because I did not included enough in the default project) and the I/O in Nuendo has to be refreshed..etc..
Now for summing, I'm really interested in running some stems to the STM 4896..
I really think the ideal solution that would make everybody happy and probably gain Creamware LOTS of new customers would be a hybrid mode SFP + XTC. Emu did it with it's 500 buck 1820M solution (I have one), why wouldn't the pioneer be able to do it as well ? Around me, at least 3 Scope cards would be instantly sold if that was to happen.
Imagine running Nuendo with Creamware plugs used side by side with UAD-1 and Poco but the front mixer and the summing would happen in SFP... And yes, I accept the fact that only the front end would be 0 latency.
By the way Dan, I see you're from Australia, it's funny since I first heard and seen the Pulsar in Brisbane (Midilink was the shop I reckon) around 1997/98. I lived in Down Under for a couple of years. I loved it so much !
Greetings from France.
let's be real.
#1
cwa cards ARE external effects! that's why they use dsps!
#2
the digi002 rack is 8in and 8 out and has 4 mic pres. http://www.digidesign.com/products/digi002rack/ if you think protoools le is a great sequencer, then....fine.
i understand why you want integration and i'm not arguing with that. i'm just saying that it's not as big a problem as you make it out to be...or, if it is, get something else because it is what it is. the thing is, you'll be throwing away the best BANG FOR YOUR BUCK solution. or if you keep it, you'll find ways to use it. the external effect plugin in cubase/nuendo is EASY! again, this is only my opinion, as it is my opinion that CONSUMERS are spoiled these days....
also, xtc mode works fine here without any of the funny tweeks that seem to be popular, but then my machines(and i've built MANY), ALWAYS work the first time and every time after.....
p.s. the gentleman who was trying to help(in spite of his english ), is named LHong....
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2005-08-05 13:29 ]</font>
#1
cwa cards ARE external effects! that's why they use dsps!
#2
the digi002 rack is 8in and 8 out and has 4 mic pres. http://www.digidesign.com/products/digi002rack/ if you think protoools le is a great sequencer, then....fine.
i understand why you want integration and i'm not arguing with that. i'm just saying that it's not as big a problem as you make it out to be...or, if it is, get something else because it is what it is. the thing is, you'll be throwing away the best BANG FOR YOUR BUCK solution. or if you keep it, you'll find ways to use it. the external effect plugin in cubase/nuendo is EASY! again, this is only my opinion, as it is my opinion that CONSUMERS are spoiled these days....
also, xtc mode works fine here without any of the funny tweeks that seem to be popular, but then my machines(and i've built MANY), ALWAYS work the first time and every time after.....
p.s. the gentleman who was trying to help(in spite of his english
), is named LHong....<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2005-08-05 13:29 ]</font>
-
Guest
Applogies about the misspelling of your name LHong...no offense intended.
Garyb,
Have you tried XTC mode with a 15 DSP booster on a dual processor PC? The problem I listed earlier on in this post was confirmed by Creamware. It's nothing to do tweaking or which one of us is better at building computers. XTC mode is simply not designed to run on a dual processor PC. Creamware stated that they do not recommend any dual processor PC with their products, but only after I had the Australian distributor of Creamware approach them as I could not get the support I needed from Creamware in the past. As is, SFP works fine on my computer, but SFP is not how I want to use my cards. XTC mode IS however and I'm not asking for any more function to be added, I just want it to work they way it was designed, regardless of what the computer specs are.
As I said I will be keeping my Creamware cards, for I/O, but I will disappointed with them from now on, that they don't work the way they are supposed to and Creamware is unwilling to do anything about it. Personally I don't think this is an issue of whether consumers are spoiled or not. This is simply an issue of whether or not a product works, and you will find if you look through the forum that I'm not the only one who has had this issue, but I AM the only one who has figured out what the problem is and shared it with everyone.
It's all very well to say that I should be using SFP as the mixer, but you guys still haven't addressed the problem of compression and various other FX that I mentioned earlier. I'm being very specific about why it is I can't do what you're saying, but you guys don't seem willing to give me a straight answer.
I'm not trying to be rude guys. As I say I'm always open to suggestion, but thus far I've seen nothing to convince me that the way you guys are telling me I should be using my system will even work properly. You have to understand that while I totally respect Creamware synths and the flexibility of the SFP environment, I have little or no use for those aspects of the system. I record and mix music....other peoples' mainly and the things I need I've already detailed. I think we're all coming from different approaches because we have different needs and I don't think this debate is ever really going to be solved. As it stands, I know how I want to use my setup. There is no question of that. If you guys can tell me a way I can use SFP in a way that I can achieve what I could have with XTC, while still maintaining the speed and eas of use then I'll gladly do it. I'd love to be able to use all the Creamware FX I've bought as easily as applying a VST effect! Really! But I just can't see it happening with SFP mode. Prove me wrong....
Cheers,
AudioDan
ps. antar - I was actually talking Australian dollars....things are much more expensive here and not because of tax or exchange rates.
p.p.s Garyb, don't forget about the ADAT and S/PDIF I/O on 002. I'm pretty sure that you can use them all simultaneously.
And as I said, I hate Protools. Any version. It's an aweful program. But the point it that it does everything I listed...
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-06 01:14 ]</font>
Garyb,
Have you tried XTC mode with a 15 DSP booster on a dual processor PC? The problem I listed earlier on in this post was confirmed by Creamware. It's nothing to do tweaking or which one of us is better at building computers. XTC mode is simply not designed to run on a dual processor PC. Creamware stated that they do not recommend any dual processor PC with their products, but only after I had the Australian distributor of Creamware approach them as I could not get the support I needed from Creamware in the past. As is, SFP works fine on my computer, but SFP is not how I want to use my cards. XTC mode IS however and I'm not asking for any more function to be added, I just want it to work they way it was designed, regardless of what the computer specs are.
As I said I will be keeping my Creamware cards, for I/O, but I will disappointed with them from now on, that they don't work the way they are supposed to and Creamware is unwilling to do anything about it. Personally I don't think this is an issue of whether consumers are spoiled or not. This is simply an issue of whether or not a product works, and you will find if you look through the forum that I'm not the only one who has had this issue, but I AM the only one who has figured out what the problem is and shared it with everyone.
It's all very well to say that I should be using SFP as the mixer, but you guys still haven't addressed the problem of compression and various other FX that I mentioned earlier. I'm being very specific about why it is I can't do what you're saying, but you guys don't seem willing to give me a straight answer.
I'm not trying to be rude guys. As I say I'm always open to suggestion, but thus far I've seen nothing to convince me that the way you guys are telling me I should be using my system will even work properly. You have to understand that while I totally respect Creamware synths and the flexibility of the SFP environment, I have little or no use for those aspects of the system. I record and mix music....other peoples' mainly and the things I need I've already detailed. I think we're all coming from different approaches because we have different needs and I don't think this debate is ever really going to be solved. As it stands, I know how I want to use my setup. There is no question of that. If you guys can tell me a way I can use SFP in a way that I can achieve what I could have with XTC, while still maintaining the speed and eas of use then I'll gladly do it. I'd love to be able to use all the Creamware FX I've bought as easily as applying a VST effect! Really! But I just can't see it happening with SFP mode. Prove me wrong....
Cheers,
AudioDan
ps. antar - I was actually talking Australian dollars....things are much more expensive here and not because of tax or exchange rates.
p.p.s Garyb, don't forget about the ADAT and S/PDIF I/O on 002. I'm pretty sure that you can use them all simultaneously.
And as I said, I hate Protools. Any version. It's an aweful program. But the point it that it does everything I listed...
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-06 01:14 ]</font>
again, i do understand your disappointment. and no, i don't have any great ideas. the last dual i used was a dual p3 1ghz and it worked fine. it was a 6 chip card however, and your problems are with the big card. as i said, i don't think that the external effects plugin is a big deal to use and you can certainly route in and out of nuendo and automate almost eveything in nuendo, no big deal. you will have to decide that that is ok to be happy though, and i understand if you don't want to do that.
the other choice is to make a single processor machine. the cards you use are as expensive as a computer and it makes sense to put them in an environment that they like to take advatage of their unique possibilities. a single processor motherboard would solve a lot of problems, but use what you like.
AGAIN, the digi002 example was used to show that the cwa card is not even that expensive, relatively as an i/o card, in that it's very competitively priced compared to the digi. the digi only gives 8i/o with 4 mic pres for the same money as a scope project and 2 behringer ada8000s(16i/o with 16 mic pres) and the scope card w/ the ada8000s blows the digi away in sound quality. the rest of the card's features are a bonus. the scope card does MORE than the digi for the same money just looking at i/o. if you use the adat connectors you will need to spend more money to get the same # of i/o and pres.
i realize that i'm not saying anything that you want to hear, and i'm not telling you what to think. i'm just suggesting that a different way of looking at things might make you feel better. sorry i can't do better.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2005-08-06 01:56 ]</font>
the other choice is to make a single processor machine. the cards you use are as expensive as a computer and it makes sense to put them in an environment that they like to take advatage of their unique possibilities. a single processor motherboard would solve a lot of problems, but use what you like.
AGAIN, the digi002 example was used to show that the cwa card is not even that expensive, relatively as an i/o card, in that it's very competitively priced compared to the digi. the digi only gives 8i/o with 4 mic pres for the same money as a scope project and 2 behringer ada8000s(16i/o with 16 mic pres) and the scope card w/ the ada8000s blows the digi away in sound quality. the rest of the card's features are a bonus. the scope card does MORE than the digi for the same money just looking at i/o. if you use the adat connectors you will need to spend more money to get the same # of i/o and pres.
i realize that i'm not saying anything that you want to hear, and i'm not telling you what to think. i'm just suggesting that a different way of looking at things might make you feel better. sorry i can't do better.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2005-08-06 01:56 ]</font>
Hello again,
Out of interest Garyb, what brand of motherboard did you use with the dual P3? The reason I ask is that there was one common factor with everyone who has been getting the XTC error message. ASUS. Everyone on the forum who has complained of the "ScopeDiverIOctl...error code -99" has been using an ASUS brand motherboard.
I'm thinking there might be a slim possibility that although this is certainly a daul CPU problem, a different brand of board might manage the CPU's in a way that is more acceptable to XTC. For example, some quad Opteron boards essentially combines two CPU's into one. Each pair of CPU's is recognised as one CPU in windows so ultimately Cubase/Nuendo would see a dual processor system and not a quad processor. If I could get a board that could do that (use CPU's in serial instead of parallel) with my current Xeon processors, I'm sure that XTC would be happy, and I would be happier still.
I was considering trying an Intel brand board but I would kinda like to try before I buy, or for there to at least be more than a slim possibility of it working.
Any help you could give me would be great. Oh, and be careful. I'm not sure if you already own ADA8000's or if your considering them as an option. I work in a music shop where Behringer is one of the main brands sold (I'm currently trying to change that)and although I own behringer gear and I have reasonable confidence in its stability and operation for the price, I wouldn't trust the ADA8000. Certainly not in a critical situation like the input stage anyway. The ADA8000 has the real Alesis brand ADAT chipset which is obviously a good thing. Makes the ADAT functions of it very stable. However, I have seen one being used as the front and back end of the ADAT I/O on a TDM system and the output from D to A is about 2 or so dB lower than it should be, with no compensation. I also wouldn't trust that the AD or DA sound amazing either. That's why I bought the A16 Ultra. I heard it has the same AD/DA as RME. Even if it doesn't, I think it sounds damn good! Could do with some output metering, but for me it's an all-round winner - price for performance. The ADA8000 is a great unit for what you pay for it, and considering you get mic pre's as well, but I wouldn't trust it to deliver a highly professional result.
Bifop...hello again. I urge you to try using a Creamware mixer for your summing. The way I did it was to output 24 tracks from my XTC-based session via ADAT to my Fostex D2424. (A couple of the tracks in my session had to be summed into the output busses 'cause I didn't have enough tracks on the D2424 to get everything across indiviually) I did a mixdown within Nuendo of the exact same session (but summed by Nuendo) and one where I was playing back 24 tracks from my Fostex (all via ADAT of course) through the STM2448 and recorded the mix up into Nuendo to a stereo track.
Not only did the STM mix sound better, when I compared the two resultant wave forms, the difference in detail which I was hearing was very apparent visually. In this case I think it's definantly worth the extra time to switch modes and use SFP.
Cheers,
AudioDan
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-06 20:28 ]</font>
Out of interest Garyb, what brand of motherboard did you use with the dual P3? The reason I ask is that there was one common factor with everyone who has been getting the XTC error message. ASUS. Everyone on the forum who has complained of the "ScopeDiverIOctl...error code -99" has been using an ASUS brand motherboard.
I'm thinking there might be a slim possibility that although this is certainly a daul CPU problem, a different brand of board might manage the CPU's in a way that is more acceptable to XTC. For example, some quad Opteron boards essentially combines two CPU's into one. Each pair of CPU's is recognised as one CPU in windows so ultimately Cubase/Nuendo would see a dual processor system and not a quad processor. If I could get a board that could do that (use CPU's in serial instead of parallel) with my current Xeon processors, I'm sure that XTC would be happy, and I would be happier still.
I was considering trying an Intel brand board but I would kinda like to try before I buy, or for there to at least be more than a slim possibility of it working.
Any help you could give me would be great. Oh, and be careful. I'm not sure if you already own ADA8000's or if your considering them as an option. I work in a music shop where Behringer is one of the main brands sold (I'm currently trying to change that)and although I own behringer gear and I have reasonable confidence in its stability and operation for the price, I wouldn't trust the ADA8000. Certainly not in a critical situation like the input stage anyway. The ADA8000 has the real Alesis brand ADAT chipset which is obviously a good thing. Makes the ADAT functions of it very stable. However, I have seen one being used as the front and back end of the ADAT I/O on a TDM system and the output from D to A is about 2 or so dB lower than it should be, with no compensation. I also wouldn't trust that the AD or DA sound amazing either. That's why I bought the A16 Ultra. I heard it has the same AD/DA as RME. Even if it doesn't, I think it sounds damn good! Could do with some output metering, but for me it's an all-round winner - price for performance. The ADA8000 is a great unit for what you pay for it, and considering you get mic pre's as well, but I wouldn't trust it to deliver a highly professional result.
Bifop...hello again. I urge you to try using a Creamware mixer for your summing. The way I did it was to output 24 tracks from my XTC-based session via ADAT to my Fostex D2424. (A couple of the tracks in my session had to be summed into the output busses 'cause I didn't have enough tracks on the D2424 to get everything across indiviually) I did a mixdown within Nuendo of the exact same session (but summed by Nuendo) and one where I was playing back 24 tracks from my Fostex (all via ADAT of course) through the STM2448 and recorded the mix up into Nuendo to a stereo track.
Not only did the STM mix sound better, when I compared the two resultant wave forms, the difference in detail which I was hearing was very apparent visually. In this case I think it's definantly worth the extra time to switch modes and use SFP.
Cheers,
AudioDan
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-06 20:28 ]</font>
hello.
i used an asus p3cd(820 chipset, i beleive. rd ram...). i would usually highly recommend intel motherboards. in my experience they are stable and reliable. asus is usually likewise, although some of the new ones have been troublesome. the new 925 chipset asus has gotten rave reveiws with scope, but it's a single processor mobo......
yes, the ada8000 is a cheap solution. the a16 is a much better choice. it is light years ahead of digi....i was only comparing. i consider the ada8000 about equal with the digi002, reasonably good quality, but not state of the art or even high-end. the a16 is definitely high-end...
i think that once you get used to scope mode, you won't want to go back, at least for your critical mixes. as you've seen, the is a significant increase in quality using the stm2448....you can even skip the fostex and output the nuendo tracks to the stm2448 and record back to nuendo, the fostex, a dat(i use one with wordclock) or another app like wavelab or samplitude or magix audiostudio via wav drivers(i like to do my rough and quicky mixes that way). either way i'll bet that your projects really surprise your clients in how much better they sound.
i used an asus p3cd(820 chipset, i beleive. rd ram...). i would usually highly recommend intel motherboards. in my experience they are stable and reliable. asus is usually likewise, although some of the new ones have been troublesome. the new 925 chipset asus has gotten rave reveiws with scope, but it's a single processor mobo......
yes, the ada8000 is a cheap solution. the a16 is a much better choice. it is light years ahead of digi....i was only comparing. i consider the ada8000 about equal with the digi002, reasonably good quality, but not state of the art or even high-end. the a16 is definitely high-end...
i think that once you get used to scope mode, you won't want to go back, at least for your critical mixes. as you've seen, the is a significant increase in quality using the stm2448....you can even skip the fostex and output the nuendo tracks to the stm2448 and record back to nuendo, the fostex, a dat(i use one with wordclock) or another app like wavelab or samplitude or magix audiostudio via wav drivers(i like to do my rough and quicky mixes that way). either way i'll bet that your projects really surprise your clients in how much better they sound.
Hi,
I think Bifop is and XTC enthusiast like me, so this is the best way I can think of when most of the mixing has been done in an XTC project. Of course the D2424 could be replaced with another computer with multi-channel I/O.
On the SFP front, I have used it for many many hours. It's not that I don't know how to use it. I have a degree in Audio and the last four years has been spent in the studio using an SSL G+ and a Studer 2" 24 track reel-to-reel, with outboard FX and a TDM system to boot. I'm no stranger to signal-flow and routing, in fact I find it quite therapeutic. There's something very satisfying about patching a Bantom plug in and the lovely clean analog signal coming up. But it's not the way I need to work on my computer. Unfortunately there's just no way I can fit SFP in to my work flow. I'd get too caught up with routing instead of getting on with the job. I am however willing to put in the extra time at the end of the mix to go to the D2424 and back through the STM2448 to sum. That's definantly worth my time.
Thanks very much for the info on the motherboard. What I hear about ASUS motherboards (my last two MB's have been ASUS) is that they work really well when they work. I also hear what you said about Intel MB's, which is why I was thinking of trying one. I might make a new post to see if anyone has got such a system....
Thanks again for your help.
Cheers,
AudioDan
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-07 07:35 ]</font>
I think Bifop is and XTC enthusiast like me, so this is the best way I can think of when most of the mixing has been done in an XTC project. Of course the D2424 could be replaced with another computer with multi-channel I/O.
On the SFP front, I have used it for many many hours. It's not that I don't know how to use it. I have a degree in Audio and the last four years has been spent in the studio using an SSL G+ and a Studer 2" 24 track reel-to-reel, with outboard FX and a TDM system to boot. I'm no stranger to signal-flow and routing, in fact I find it quite therapeutic. There's something very satisfying about patching a Bantom plug in and the lovely clean analog signal coming up. But it's not the way I need to work on my computer. Unfortunately there's just no way I can fit SFP in to my work flow. I'd get too caught up with routing instead of getting on with the job. I am however willing to put in the extra time at the end of the mix to go to the D2424 and back through the STM2448 to sum. That's definantly worth my time.
Thanks very much for the info on the motherboard. What I hear about ASUS motherboards (my last two MB's have been ASUS) is that they work really well when they work. I also hear what you said about Intel MB's, which is why I was thinking of trying one. I might make a new post to see if anyone has got such a system....
Thanks again for your help.
Cheers,
AudioDan
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AudioDan on 2005-08-07 07:35 ]</font>
Quote:
Applogies about the misspelling of your name LHong...no offense intended.
---------------------------------------------
No problems, Dan.
Keep in mind, we're all here try to help, we make no profits on Creamware products.
Say, if the only Compression bothers you on the automation capability, then you might take a look the Third party compressor devices like The Sonic Timeworks, Celmo or DADEV Master-Compressor, whatever has MIDI-IN/OUT Controls. This will work!
It does not mean that you do not need the Vinco, PSy-Q or Optimaster, I love them all. How about make a few custom presets, which will save it along with the Scope projects. Due to most of cases, we do not want to change (parameters) on fly during the Sessions or within same songs. Perhaps, each Mixer channels is (already) built-in an inserted soft-compressor anyway.
Good luck,
LongStudio
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LHong on 2005-08-10 10:20 ]</font>
Applogies about the misspelling of your name LHong...no offense intended.
---------------------------------------------
No problems, Dan.
Keep in mind, we're all here try to help, we make no profits on Creamware products.
Say, if the only Compression bothers you on the automation capability, then you might take a look the Third party compressor devices like The Sonic Timeworks, Celmo or DADEV Master-Compressor, whatever has MIDI-IN/OUT Controls. This will work!
It does not mean that you do not need the Vinco, PSy-Q or Optimaster, I love them all. How about make a few custom presets, which will save it along with the Scope projects. Due to most of cases, we do not want to change (parameters) on fly during the Sessions or within same songs. Perhaps, each Mixer channels is (already) built-in an inserted soft-compressor anyway.
Good luck,
LongStudio
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LHong on 2005-08-10 10:20 ]</font>