Xite or UAD - seeking advice

[ed snig]

Hi Xite owners in the forum.
I ran into Xite reading gearslutz.
The info given over there is interestng but very insular.
A friend who owns a pulsar 2 PCI card pointed me to planet z and told me I can find seasoned advice here.
Thats why I am here. i seek your advice and experience with Xte.

Would you help me to sort some questions ?

a) Is XITE more powerful than the similar priced UAD 2 Quad ?
b) Are there comparable stock plugins like on UAD ?
c) There are many 3rd party developers who left Xite for UAD. Why is this ?
d) When was the last update of the Xite SW from Sonic Core ? What were the new features ?
e) What´s next on Xite ? Any hints what future will bring ? When is next release ?
f) Is Sonic Core at Musikmesse so that I can compare them with UAD ?
g) How does Xite integrate with Live and other native DAWs ? I read something like ASIO, but what does that mean, Audio channels only ?
h) Is Xite ready for Mac ? What are the system requirements ?

I know that are lots of questions. Please bear with me.

yours truly Ed

[hubird]

No OSX support.
Xite is a compleet virtual studio with several kind of audio and Midi hardware in- and outs.
And top synthesisers.
The platform as such is in slow motion mode, but an update is announced for years as 'soon'.

[Mr Arkadin]

Maybe start with the last question first, because if you're Mac-only then sadly the current answer is no, the current Scope software is not OS X compatible. The other questions are only worth answering if you're happy to run a PC or Mac booted in Windows (assuming the Mac has the required connections).

[garyb]

yes, the others are correct, however....

a) yep. it also does more kinds of things.
b) sure. the UAD has some great stuff, but so does Scope. the XITE has things that the UAD doesn't.
c) not entirely true, but when that has happened, it has more to do with a bigger client base and more advertising money than the system itself.
d) how is this relevant? the XITE works, even with windows 10, which isn't released yet. it does stuff that no other system will do. it has it's faults, but it's still one of the best buys in the audio world. the system hasn't been updated in quite some time, however. there is an update in process, but it's stalled at the moment.
e) there isn't a lot planned for the future, since it's already a unique product. the UAD is not really in the same class as the XITE. they can do many of the same things, but the XITE is much more than the UAD. the XITE allows the mix of in the box and out of the box in real time. the UAD is really strictly a mix-down tool. there is a MADI i/o planned for the future to replace the Z-Link i/o and a smaller card is also planned. v6 software is planned to be open-sourced. there is always work on new devices(plugins). there have been about 10 new devices in the last year or so by 3rd party developers(mainly dNa).
f) yes, most likely.
g) nope. the XITE requires a PC with a PCIe 1X slot and Windows XP, Vista, Win7, or Win8. it can run on a Mac running Windows. it will work with the most humble system, or the most powerful system.

[dante]

a) XITE-1 is more powerful than a UAD Quad. Its more comparable to Octo. UAD Octo runs at a higher clock rate, but XITE has more DSP chips.
The XITE-1D (which I have) is more like the Quad in terms of DSP count.
b) XITE has more plugins than UAD in base package and a full suite (including synths) will cost less overall.
c) Money.
d) Last update was 5.1 a few years ago and mainly for compatibility with latest Windows OS and 64 bit. I'm running XITE and PCI cards on Windows 8 - 64 bit.
e) Next release will be Scope 6 - a more open version of Scope. http://www.hitfoundry.com/issue_14/mes_mast.htm
f) Do not know if SC will be at next Musikmesse. Possibly not until Scope 6 is ready. Scope 6 is still being worked on as I heard from Holger last month.
g) XITE integrates with other daws via ASIO and MIDI inside the box, and analog / spdif / ADAT externally.
h) XITE will run on Mac using bootcamp only. http://www.hitfoundry.com/issue_12/mus_mast.htm There will be a further Scoperise article on how to do this next month.

For more info check the XITE-1 tab here http://www.hitfoundry.com/scope/

[Sounddesigner]

Stock plugins? One of UAD's biggest weakness is that they don't give you much for stock plugins. In recent years they've been trying to improve the UAD stock by adding the older outdated 1176, LA2A, etc but the newer more desired versions of those plugins are commercial add-ons, and UA only added the old once the new was released. The old dated versions aren't desireable imo and they are not any reason one would buy into that platform I assure you, atleast not usually IMV. The other old stock plugins are from the uad-1 days and you'll find better freeware in Native world. There is only 2 plugins in the UAD-2 stock collection that are possibly desired by me and that is the new RAW distortion and 610-B pre-amp, both of those are new releases. Stock plugins have always been a obvious weakness for UAD so I'm VERY surprised you would even mention this as if it were a strength of theirs, it's definitely not. UA are a stingy company you'll never get too much from them far as bang-for-buck goes outside of illusion of bargains.

SCOPE's stock plugins alone ARE worth buying the platform for. SCOPE's stock such as Minimax, Vectron, Interpole filter, Profit 5 Synth, Vocodizer, Modular 3, B2003 Organ, Chorus-Delay, etc are not just the best stock plugins out here that I've seen but are amongs the best when compared to the best commercial plugins IMV. THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN UAD STOCK AND SCOPE STOCK. Most of SCOPE stock are old as well but there is a key difference. SCOPE's synths are hardware quality and were designed to be hardware quality from the start. They were built to compete in the hardware world. They actually are hardware and was sold individually as actual hardware units (ASB's, Klangbox's, Noah, etc). UAD's old plugin WERE NOT HARDWARE QUALITY FROM THE START THUS SUFFERED THE SAME DEPRECIATION OVER-TIME AS MOST OTHER PLUGINS OUT HERE. Uad's stock and add-ons was not truly built as hardware to compete in hardware world. There is no comparison since SCOPE is by FAR better stock plugins-wise and there is no comparison with regards to stock functionality also - SCOPE has more functionality when looking at routing, multi-client-drivers, hardware I/O's, MIDI, Modular environment (variety of interchangeable Mixers, etc), Modular 3 to build your own stuff, Remote control via MIDI over Mixers and effects, etc.

SCOPE has far more dsp power when it comes to XITE-1 compared to Appollo. Several Apollos can be combined but you'll need to combine 3 Apollo Quads to match or slightly beat the power and I/O's of 1 XITE-1 wich is not that elegant nor practical of a solution when looking at portability.

UAD has faster software releases but they are only playing catch-up to SCOPE as a platform. For about a decade UAD had a fixed extremely small DAW-based-VST platform that never grew, they only released more plugins every round and never added Core-Platform-Functionality (Routing, Side-Chaining, Mixers, Zero-Latency processing, etc), only about 3 years ago they released Apollo wich expanded their platform and added their own independent dsp-enviroment for Tracking and Mixing, etc. SCOPE has had its own dsp-Environment for almost 2 decades and for almost 2 decades SCOPE has had a lot of Core-Platform-Functionality that UAD is only now SLOWLY getting. While SCOPE Platform releases are slower now uad are still FAR behind when looking at Core-Platform-Functionality. As far as plugins there has been many plugins released for SCOPE these last few years most by dNa far as commercial goes and GOST, but plenty of Quality SDK-User releases from Peter, Sharc, etc so there's no starving for plugins here. Plus there are many older 3rd party SCOPE developers who's plugins are still amongs the best out here that have countless offerings for SCOPE. SCOPE has more plugins than any other dsp platform and many are of excellent quality thus there is no need for more just want. UAD does not have a complete collection (no synths, no samplers, they don't cover as many effects categories, no meters, etc) so there may be more of a need for 'more' with uad. Plus more is needed for uad to counter plugin depreciation wich hits them far harder than SCOPE.

If you need fast developing and endless new plugins then SCOPE is not for you. SCOPE is a finished product apart from a few bugfixes, THERE IS NO NEED FOR MORE. SCOPE can take you out of the endless hunt for more/latest-and-greatest because SCOPE is a genuine, complete and high-quality tool that stands-the-test-of-time as-is.



The only huge intrinsic-value advantage uad has is Mac support. The other smaller advantages uad has are Unison mic pre technology and fast releases of platform software (wich are only catch-up releases anyways). Uad has the advantage of combining several Apollo units but it also has a greater need for that than XITE-1 since Apollo has far less dsp power and I/o's. As far as everything else goes that I can think of that's of any significance SCOPE has the advantage, so much so that there really isn't even a comparison cause Apollo is too much in its infancy stage compared to the more mature SCOPE wich is by far superior on many fronts, IMV.

EDITED

PS. After re-reading it seems Garyb and others already said most of what I wrote. Did'nt mean to add redundancy.

[tlaskows]

Scope is definitely more complete and powerful. I don't have Xite though, just 3 PCI cards. I love the synths, the effects are ok. I think UAD effects are better in a way, but they're very expensive. But then, I don't really use the effects from Scope. I have Scope, UAD-2 Duo, and Powercore Express... They all serve different purposes.

-Tom

[tlaskows]

BTW,

Scope 3rd party plugins are top quality. I have most of the Zarg synths. Haven't bought any fx yet...

-Tom

[siriusbliss]

a) Is XITE more powerful than the similar priced UAD 2 Quad ?
b) Are there comparable stock plugins like on UAD ?
c) There are many 3rd party developers who left Xite for UAD. Why is this ?
d) When was the last update of the Xite SW from Sonic Core ? What were the new features ?
e) What´s next on Xite ? Any hints what future will bring ? When is next release ?
f) Is Sonic Core at Musikmesse so that I can compare them with UAD ?
g) How does Xite integrate with Live and other native DAWs ? I read something like ASIO, but what does that mean, Audio channels only ?
h) Is Xite ready for Mac ? What are the system requirements ?

a) Xite is more powerful, and it's MUCH more than just a bunch of plugins
b) yes. Scope plugins are high-quality, with the exception that they don't have the GUI that looks like the original hardware (which works great for UAD marketing)
c) money
d) years ago.
e) Scope 5.1 is very good, stable, reliable, and Scope 6 will be bringing new GUI whizbangery, more open-platform approach, - and most-likely many devs will be coming back
f) Probably not
g) DAW's can run INSIDE or OUTSIDE Scope environment. Plugins (and even some synths) can be setup as 'hardware inserts', or DAWs can be used as recording platforms inside Scope. You can route out-and-back, mixdown THROUGH Scope and back into DAW, do simultaneous parallel tracking and live-performance setups, etc.
h) no OSX yet.

It's a normal thing to try to compare UAD and Scope due to use of DSP's and the classic plugin paradigms, but that's where it ends.
Scope/Xite is WAY ahead, and has been for going on 20 years now.

My signature has my Xite setup running on Win7 on a 6-year old laptop. This may be replaced with a MacBook Pro running Bootcamp, but my main DAW (Samplitude) never made it to OSX either.
(It also runs just fine on a newer Win 8.1 system).

G

[Mr Arkadin]

Scope is definitely more complete and powerful. I don't have Xite though, just 3 PCI cards. I love the synths, the effects are ok. I think UAD effects are better in a way, but they're very expensive. But then, I don't really use the effects from Scope. I have Scope, UAD-2 Duo, and Powercore Express... They all serve different purposes.

-Tom

I think you need to check out dNa plug-ins before saying the effects are just ok. There are a lot of pretty good stock effects (better than UAD stock effects? I don't know), but some of the third party stuff is great (including the free ones).

[tlaskows]

If we're talking stock, Scope is definitely better equipped. The UAD stock effects are not that impressive. I will check out the dNa stuff when I have some coin. Are there demos?

-Tom

[garyb]

the basic plugins in Scope were the stock plugins in the $250,000 Fairlight Constellation. they're more than solid.

[tlaskows]

Yep.

I just got back into Scope. Sold my card around 10 years ago. I think I need to explore a little bit more.

I see that Scope comes with RMX16 emulation. I could A/B the plugins vs. UAD. I think I have the demo for that.



-Tom

[dawman]

If you are in the Midwest and want to hear a powerful PA System with Scope XITE-1 doing the FX and Synths drop me a pm.
All the chit chat in the world cannot replace actually seeing one used in the real world.

I had the first one made and it will be 6 years old in May.
I don't need an update, but would be interested to see what they could possibly do to make it better.
Maybe add an AES50 protocol card.

Other than that when this one dies, I will buy another. Even used as I know that nobody runs theirs for 60+ hours a week for years, so even a used one would be like brand new compared to my beaten, stained crusty ass XITE-1.

IMG_0572.JPG (209.21 KiB) Viewed 8501 times

IMG_0571.JPG (65.41 KiB) Viewed 8501 times

[dawman]

FWIW here's a post I made 9 years ago.
Just having fun with those ancient Cards, long before the XITE-1, but even then the talk about Scope being dead, and M Audio cards were just as good for less, etc.

I was wrong. My apologies........
__________________________________________________________________
The Demise Of SFP In The Year 2015,

After slaughtering VSTi's 4 years, and crushing Pro Tools synth designs, which would never then be released, The Creamwarians found themselves surrounded by hordes of Intel Quad Cores and Mac's with Quad Core AMD CPU's, and Microsoft VSTi's. Bill Gates had a messenger tell the Creamwarians to give up the body of Ralf, and he would let the SFP warriors live on in slavery of the MS VST's, Ali then said, " We Stay With Our King." The Messenger then said, "Our arrows will block out the sun." Ali said," Then We Shall Fight In The Shade." Gates then had them all destroyed by a hail of overbloated codes in 50,000,000,000,000 attacks on the server. There is a monument to honor their lives at the observatory in Germany that goes like this,..............................
" Go Stranger, And Tell The Flexorians, We Lay Here Obedient To Their Laws."
_________________________________________________________________

[ronnie]

Yea they thrash among the natives. Superfluous GUI veneers spreading their obese coded butts across all manner of hyper-threads and over-clocks, only to bleed them dry like the proverbial vampire as fast as they can spawn. Behold they become thin and scrawny and too light of weight, their brows hot to the touch. Expelled secretions mixed with sweat adheres and obscures their vision through broken windows. Lo, they shall never triumph over the immortal creamware phoenix always true to the almighty sonic core. Forevermore.

[hubird]

ed snig isn't interested at all it seems...

[ronnie]

ed snig isn't interested at all it seems...

Sure, he sees we're all insane fanatics. Prolly doesn't fit in. Let it be.

[hubird]

well, one wouldn't expect much downtalk, asking here.
But inside user information

[siriusbliss]

I love living amongst all you yahoos in Scopeland

G