All your thoughts on new DAW technology

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:00 pm

I'll just put my thoughts forward and then I invite you all to express yours.

I am always on the look out for new technology. At the moment I totally love my PulsarII/LunaII combo and I will argue its competancies against anyone ferociously as you may have seen in this and other forums.

HOWEVER! If I was to come across some new technology that "I" felt supplied an even more powerful platform for a similar price I would not have much hesitation in switching. Not because I have any disfaction at all with Pulsar, just cos I'm a Tech-slut.

I expect that some will say that this platform is continually growing and totally competant so why change (especially if you are like myself and have setup that works with nominal issues) IE. "If it aint broke why fix it?"

I personally like wavelengths statement. "If it aint broke, fix it 'til it is" This said of course in the concept of always trying to improve. So I don't mind making major changes to my tech setup an all of the associated challenges that such an activity presents. In fact I probably enjoy the job of tackling the challenges. Nuff said.

My reason for asking this is that although I find CW's product offerings to be first rate no-one is going to suggest that their support policy leaves a bit/lot to be desired. Therefore if they were challenged with a serious contender in the marketplace, could it be that their aftersales could have a significant impact on their business?

Peace guys & Respect
ontiK.

[ This Message was edited by: ontik on 2002-02-04 22:01 ]

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Mon Feb 04, 2002 10:56 pm

Yes, maybe... We will see what goes on with the improvements and new devices to come up on the cw platform...
And if another product emerges, then I hope it will be complementary to the tools we already have...
It would be great if each company would put a brick in the building and fully cooperate to reach the most powerful and integrated system ever... Unfortunately, as long as maximum short-term profit is the main concern of businesses, then we only get the hulls of what we could really have...

We're getting closer and closer to the point where the elements on this planet who will refuse to cooperate and harmoniously create our children's children's future will be wiped out and annihilated...

That's why I love planet z! I feel this family vibe, truly cooperative and peaceful!

Thanks to all who make this happen!!!

[ This Message was edited by: eliam on 2002-02-04 22:56 ]

wayne · Post by **wayne** » Mon Feb 04, 2002 11:59 pm

Beautifully positive for someone in the music industry, Eliam. Respect.

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 3:45 am

Eliam

There may be such a thing! UAD-1 or Power plugins have an interesting product. As yet I have not found any test results using both it and CW products but the guys that make are claiming that tests are coming involving CW stuff. Although I have concerns about it stealing PCI bandwidth

Basically its more card based plug ins and multiple cards can be used as one. BUT no IO's, no mixing, its just more VST's that run like our XTC stuff. and the cost is similar to a pulsar II arrangement.

If it works WITH Pulsar I might consider.

Peace.

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 8:47 am

The only advantage would be the access to a wider variety of plug-ins? It might be interesting, especially with the faster cpu coming on... I'm not familiar with UAD products. Can you elaborate a bit on it?

Wayne, what makes you think I'm in the music "industry"?
I believe that a ruthless positivism is the only way to reach enlightenment...

samuel40 · Post by **samuel40** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 8:51 am

"I believe that a ruthless positivism is the only way to reach enlightenment..."

Great Line Eliam !!!!!

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 3:34 pm

More detail here:

http://www.uaudio.com/PPI/included.html

they list the price as US$995

Its just effects that run on a card instead of on the host CPU. Creamware does this but also does Synths, samplers, mixing and handles all your IO's as well. If someone were in there market to buy brand new at the moment Pulsar still wins by a mile in terms of functionality, expandability and comprehensiveness. But I have not heard the UAD product so I cannot speak of its quality so it would have to be absolutely outstanding to take my money. The technology being used is intelligent and the chip is next gen. But that doesn't guarentee that they've got the algorityhms right, and if they haven't , that they can't in future.

Also there appears to be no midi control either but I expect that you should be able to control it somewhat realtime via your sequencers automation but that would be mouse only.

We'll see.

[ This Message was edited by: ontik on 2002-02-05 15:38 ]

algorhythm · Post by **algorhythm** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 8:40 pm

eliam wrote:
Unfortunately, as long as maximum short-term profit is the main concern of businesses, then we only get the hulls of what we could really have...

and that is why capitalism sucks!

sorry, I just had to say it!

wayne · Post by **wayne** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 9:51 pm

I'm with you, E

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 6:29 pm

Well, if the capital and labor can harmonize with each other, then both will be winners! It's coming, my friends, it's coming! and faster than we ca imagine!

The sores of despair shall be wiped from the land
As the tide and the wind clear their way through our mind

Anyway, the point is: how close can we get to have all the tools to produce top-quality recordings? For now, I consider I have these satisfying appz on the cw platform:
-Sampler
-Mixer
-Synths
-Some effects
-Multi-track soon(vdat)!

Now what's left? Mainly an integrated midi sequencer. This would free us ( if well done) from Logic and these quite more or less good softwares...

I think that we should have access to way more plug-ins, like high quality reverbs, but this is coming too!

Once we have this, then we're almost free!!! A good mic, pre-amp and of course a studio space, a grand piano... and a symphonic orchestra... uuuh... well, let's not loose time! Anyone interested to build it?

RedSun · Post by **RedSun** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 7:25 pm

Yes! In maybe 20 years of BioTech and miniaturisation, we'll be able to fit a whole orchestra un one of those SHARC DSP, as long as they don't start to breed...

Oh! Not quite what you had in mind I guess!

RedSun .:.

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Thu Feb 07, 2002 3:11 am

Hell with it. Let 'em breed they'll be cheaper

So Eliam does it tick you off that I'm fairly well off and have capitalistic tendancies? Not that I'm trying to tick you off, its just the way I am.

Mind you I dont screw poeple I screw corporates. I hate corporates.

Peaces.

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Thu Feb 07, 2002 6:56 am

I don't maintain opinions regarding other people's thoughts and deeds, because I don't feel apt to decide if someone is doing the best thing for their own salvation...

Only, I can't help but want everybody to be happy

So if you don't mind, please be happy!!!

[ This Message was edited by: eliam on 2002-02-11 19:59 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 5:19 pm

The Pulsar/Scope system could a flexible platform for new audio algorithms. But obviously there are some tweaks in the underlying audio engine necessary which are beyond the scope of scope dev system, as all CW stuff has a certain sound. A completely new audio engine isn't that simple, to say at least, but a must for highend plugins imho. Opposed to the mips and ghz believers I still trust in quality of algorithms.

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 8:01 pm

Can you elaborate? What does that imply?

Post by **garyb** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 11:30 pm

good sound is not to be found in raw power alone.

eliam · Post by **eliam** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:03 am

Yes,I get that, but it means thas cw will decide to open their system to new algorythms if there is to be more possibilities and more third parties plug-ins?

Post by **garyb** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 10:13 am

well,maybe for SOME new functionality new algorythms may be necessary......there is still some developement to go on these current algorythms.(see the new devices in the announcement section)the cw "sound"is the result of the current code and the code must be updated to change that significantly. (or that's how i read the post)

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 10:20 am

Can you elaborate...
OK, I've no in depth information about the complete Scope developement system, so some of this may be pure fantasy:
as we all know, a device is designed by connecting predefined modules for the sound calculation by the DSPs. This results in a datastream being sent to a final audio out stage, where it is prepared for the physical DA converters.
This final stage is NOT one of the output items on the application's visual surface, it's the underlying code driving these.
Imho this piece of code is highly responsible for Pulsar's basic sound character. Pulsar doesn't sound like Nord or Virus - though much of the concepts are the same.
To come back to the original point: developers for really high end plugins have to include this final stage in their efforts, otherwise Pulsar's character will spoil their results. This doesn't mean Pulsar's bad, it's just different.
Besides from legal and patent aspects, this kind of coding needs top level engineers, familiar with low level coding technics (funny combination) - shurely not easy to find.
Maybe someone with deeper knowledge of Scope can clarify if my 2 cents have any relation to reality - otherwise sorry for messing things up