Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

A place to talk about whatever Scope music/gear related stuff you want.

Moderators: valis, garyb

dawman
Posts: 14010
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dawman »

Yup.
Zebra w/ Drive on the filter so I can get Super Band Pass/RingMod/Chorus Switch sound like the CS80 had that required both hands.
Drive and a Distortion go a long way with Zebra.

I’ll share the Zebra resampled into the Akai MPC sometime.
It’s devastatingly disruptive.

User avatar
Bud Weiser
Posts: 1863
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:29 am
Location: nowhere land

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by Bud Weiser »

3harmonic wrote:
Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:57 pm
scope synths sound better than the majority of software synths.
even if it doesn't sound entirely analogue, it has a consistency and accuracy to the sound that really puts it up with other digital classics like the Ex5, Korg Z1, Nord Lead etc.
Well, sound isn´t all,- handling is very important too,- at least for me.
When I were able to use MIDI Prg.-Changes without audible artefacts, fast response and perfect MIDI CC assignment recall per preset,- SCOPE had replaced most of my hardware since years.
I´m not that nitpicking guy comparing vintage w/ actual gear.
In fact, it doesn´t interest me much because when I find the right sound in a preset list or I can program what I want from scratch and for a given tune,- that´s great.
But I wanna recall that work 100% !
I cannot blame S|C too much because their devices work best (or much better than some famous 3rd party devices) in MIDI PrgCh department,- but when it comes to MIDI CC assigment recall,- unfortunately not so much.

VST/AU works almost flawlessly when it comes the MIDI CC assignment recall,- and that´s a BIG advantage over SCOPE devices, period.
Lots of expression comes from control changes in realtime and not from raw sound,- and performing music isn´t triggering loops and slices only,- it always was playing instruments.

So, what´s working w/ workarounds in DAWs is not what´s needed for real live performance, where´s no time setting up things manually between tunes,- instead ALL has to change by a single press of a button and hopefully in less than a second.
You´d never have the time loading another project,- so it has to work which every device available for SCOPE and in the same project being loaded.
Means,- load ONE project which includes all the synths and FX devices,- and go w/ it thru the entire gig using MIDI PrgCH commands and MIDI CC assignements.
That´s why I bought XITE-1 for years ago.
It didn´t happen up to now.
Nonetheless I´m not disappointed w/ the toy because it´s a flexible piece of studio gear nonetheless.
I´d only wish it would be the perfect "almost no latency" keyboardist´s dream synth-module,- incl. FX, mixer, MIDI and ext. hardware connectivity too.
Reliable total recall included.

:)

Bud

3harmonic
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 1:07 am

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by 3harmonic »

I agree with you. I got my Xite-1 system not too long ago and have wondered why the midi assignment recall was not so reliable.
I would prefer a right click -> turn knob -> auto assignment scheme.
So you're saying the midi CC recall is inconsistent or it just doesn't work?
As for program change , I noticed that the SC stock synths can change programs pretty well, but the ZARGS and some others have obvious artifacts when changing patches. And sometimes it gets completely locked up when I change patches on a synth like the Solaris.

dawman
Posts: 14010
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dawman »

THIS

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36188



Hate to keep harping about this, but use SR PRO as a Master preset list that changes and recalls everything.
It’s a project preset list. No need for an entire new project? Good, keep the save devices and automate them like real hardware recall.

Forget about any standard methods and use this.
It’s the entire reason this incredible snapshot device was created.

SAL Prj Preset List was reborn as SR Pro for Windows 10.
100% live performers dream come true.
If Im on a stage where tenths of a second matter, imagine your relief if your home programming.


6D0B2F09-7181-49FE-B2A3-450B45684095.jpeg
6D0B2F09-7181-49FE-B2A3-450B45684095.jpeg (3.86 MiB) Viewed 366 times

SR PRO.png
SR PRO.png (1.17 MiB) Viewed 367 times

User avatar
yayajohn
Posts: 1407
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:01 pm
Location: Everywhere....Nowhere

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by yayajohn »

Very useful tool but do I understand correctly that it does not save midi CC# assignments though?

dawman
Posts: 14010
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dawman »

No need to save the SR Pro's MIDI Assignment, it is the Snapshot that saves the assignments for everything.
It has 127 assignments which are your presets in the SR Pro.
I struggled playing live but Scope and it's ability to integrate hardware, DSP and VSTi's all in one project is unique and a lifesaver,
Snapshots make it a breeze.
I even automate everything for lights, vocals, etc.
The only thing I have to do is control my manual over ride of FX using Sustain, FC7/EV5 expression pedals and a Yamaha Foot Switch for my Rotary Cabinet,
The singer only needs to step on the EV256 Vocoder or Neo Mini Vent, which I then control the pitches on my keyboard like the intro to Bruno Mars 24 Karat Magic.


7395A29C-7555-4D13-9C47-8B138175DC08.jpeg
7395A29C-7555-4D13-9C47-8B138175DC08.jpeg (6.05 MiB) Viewed 338 times

User avatar
Spindrift
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 18, 2020 1:04 am

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by Spindrift »

Got into Scope 99. At the time it was not surprising to me that DSPs could do what a CPU couldn't and that I couldn't find native plugins sounding as good.
I always thought the scope system would be something I needed until CPU's became powerful enough and DAWs could provide sufficient routing.

I never imagined that over 20 years later it would still not be matched by native. Bitwig does give me the routing options I need nowadays, so I rely less on scope for that. And there are plenty of great sounding VSTs, but for some sounds I just cannot find anything to replace scope. I'm not a big fan of fluffy descriptions of sound quality, but I would say it gives a 'density' that no VSTs provide. For hard hitting sounds that you want to dominate in the mix, scope always seems better. It really frustrates me that I cannot quantify it in any way, and even if I have some understanding of and have coded some basic DSP, I really don't know why scope would have this quality.

And it is extra puzzling that it noticeable on very basic patches. I do dance music, and typically the bass it just a single saw, filter and envs for amp and cutoff. And this is where scope really shines IMO. For other types of sounds there are many great sounding VSTs, and ones that better handle audio rate modulation, which is typically a weakness in digital and where scope is ok but not especially good by today's standards.

Is it just great algos, that they could have done native today with the CPU power available?
Is it not possible or just much harder to write as good algos for native compared to DSP?
Is it fixed point vs float?

I have no idea, however I'm really amazed that I'm not only still running scope at all, but that it is still a part of my setup I just find crucial to get the sound I want.

fidox
Posts: 707
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by fidox »

Spindrift wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 2:35 am
I do dance music, and typically the bass it just a single saw, filter and envs for amp and cutoff. And this is where scope really shines IMO.
Me too.
Most used synth for bass is Prodyssey and kick from Adern, KickMe Too.

dawman
Posts: 14010
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dawman »

Adern Flexor synth patches exemplify the unique Scope DSP Sound too.
Flexor III patches in a Scope project use a fraction of power offered.
You could have 6 x patches, each different MIDI Channels, cover a powerful set of sounds.
I’m trying to re route MIDI from going to ASIO host when these patches are being used.
A chore worthy of complete ing.

User avatar
Bud Weiser
Posts: 1863
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:29 am
Location: nowhere land

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by Bud Weiser »

dawman wrote:
Tue Sep 01, 2020 6:34 am
THIS

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36188

Hate to keep harping about this, but use SR PRO as a Master preset list that changes and recalls everything.
It’s a project preset list. No need for an entire new project? Good, keep the save devices and automate them like real hardware recall.

Forget about any standard methods and use this.
And where.- for the people who don´t have much time to experiment with or check out everything is offered as "workaround",- is a/the step-by-step advice/manual for this ?

I´m getting older and older while waiting for SCOPE 7.1 and in the hope it might improve things.
Sooner or later, I´ll be tired learning 3rd party stuff.
I want the stock stuff working as expected.
Has nothing special to do w/ S|C,- instead it´s what I want form every manufacturer,- hardware or software.
MIDI PrgCh, CC assignment and total recall is OLD hat,- nothing new or to call home about.
It would be nice seeing some bug fixes/improvements before the complete SCOPE v7.1 ... 7.5 ,- or what ever it will be called, is released.
I don´t understand why this issue cannot be fixed.
Instead, there´s wasted manpower for a "XTC" (VSTIM) application and other.
Fix MIDI recall, fix the STS samplers or discontinue and come up w/ a all new sampler device, a sample OSC for synths incl. modular and some FX improvements for 64Bit sytems,- and SCOPE works better.
I have absolutely no interest in XTC/VSTIM,- never had.
SCOPE works best as a standalone application.

People want DAW plugins ... ?
There are 10s of thousands available out there,- and I don´t think,- when "ancient" SCOPE plugins will be available in modern DAW sequencers again, will improve much.
The native VST/AU stuff moved on too !

Forget ZARG and s##t ...
The old device manufactures leaved the platform and will NEVER upgrade or improve their devices for SCOPE/XITE.
When stock S|C devices worked as expected w/ MIDI and totalö recall,- SCOPE would be an excellent sounding and working tool.
XITE in general, is a great audio/MIDI and routing interface and there are still some synths included not making serious issues.
But when it comes to respect ALL the ancient 3rd party and Creamware devices for upcoming SCOPE versons,- just only for all the users of ancient SCOPE PCI cards, I´m pessimistic.

And I say as an owner of PCI and XITE.

:)

Bud

dawman
Posts: 14010
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dawman »

Owners deserve opinions, we paid for it.
I hope too.
If you want I can assist you with SR Pro.
Once it’s set no more fussing or loading something, then loading a preset.
Really nice to have for mixing on the fly too.

Cheerz

User avatar
dante
Posts: 4373
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by dante »

I agree w/ BudLight. This basic MIDI CC Recall stuff should be fixed in Scope. If that was the only thing fixed in Scope it would still be a MAJOR release ! That more than VST or Sampler. Although Id wish for VST as well (VST Integration Mode would greatly benefit any DAW work if it was implemented to allow synth bounce in place (like native synths)), it would greatly improve my workflow. But not as much as MIDI Recall would for live and studio work w/ remote devices. I don't like 3rd party workarounds either. There's nothing simpler than something working in a base product without addons.

Cant understand why it hasn't been done, as seems to be most gain for least effort.

User avatar
Spindrift
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 18, 2020 1:04 am

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by Spindrift »

Personally I try to stay clear of MIDI and hardly use presets, so blissfully ignorant about those woes :)
MIDI is low resolution and has wonky timing on most systems, and after I started using Silent Way I hardly use any of the synths, and stick to modular with Flexor so I can CV control everything. And instead of using 127 step midi knobs for modulation I can use my Koma Commander or other CV sources from Eurorack.

Scope is really an awesome companion to an analouge modular, but it sure has it quirks in that context as well.
I don't have any high hopes for major updates for the platform, but my hope would rather be more focus on CV control. Make the pitch tracking normal so oscs can be tuned automatically in Silent Way and Bitwig and be sent pitch CV from external modules. Make existing devices controllable by CV.

Apart from the great sound, what really sets Scope apart from solutions running on the CPU like VSTs or VCV is that it is realtime DSP, so minimal latency. Sure you can run an osc in VCV through a filter in eurorack without it being an issue, but there are scenarios where a total roundtrip of more than a ms or two is bad news. In that sense scope it much more like having the actual hardware in your rack. When it comes to MIDI I can understand using scope for the great sound and flexible routing only, but VST's will always have tighter timing and better resolution modulation. But as a CV controlled modular system there is nothing really like it, and paired with a ES-3 and ES-6 interface it just the most incredible eurorack module!

fidox
Posts: 707
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by fidox »

Spindrift wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 8:21 am
Personally I try to stay clear of MIDI and hardly use presets, so blissfully ignorant about those woes :)
MIDI is low resolution and has wonky timing on most systems, and after I started using Silent Way I hardly use any of the synths, and stick to modular with Flexor so I can CV control everything. And instead of using 127 step midi knobs for modulation I can use my Koma Commander or other CV sources from Eurorack.

Scope is really an awesome companion to an analouge modular, but it sure has it quirks in that context as well.
I don't have any high hopes for major updates for the platform, but my hope would rather be more focus on CV control. Make the pitch tracking normal so oscs can be tuned automatically in Silent Way and Bitwig and be sent pitch CV from external modules. Make existing devices controllable by CV.

Apart from the great sound, what really sets Scope apart from solutions running on the CPU like VSTs or VCV is that it is realtime DSP, so minimal latency. Sure you can run an osc in VCV through a filter in eurorack without it being an issue, but there are scenarios where a total roundtrip of more than a ms or two is bad news. In that sense scope it much more like having the actual hardware in your rack. When it comes to MIDI I can understand using scope for the great sound and flexible routing only, but VST's will always have tighter timing and better resolution modulation. But as a CV controlled modular system there is nothing really like it, and paired with a ES-3 and ES-6 interface it just the most incredible eurorack module!
Thanks for your opinion.
Well, i'm not that deep into Scope platform.
I have just simple setup with Steinberg Cubase with VST's to Scope mixer and few Scope plugins, synths and effects, also running some mastering tools in Scope mixer.

User avatar
Spindrift
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 18, 2020 1:04 am

Re: Hardware synths vs Scope synths vs Software synths

Post by Spindrift »

Yes, it is still a good platform when used like that. I have been using it mostly like that for some 18 years, and really enjoyed it. And modular is not for everyone. I think I'm fairly good at staying productive, but modular is a time sink, and is just as likely to hinder productivity as enabling creativity. Of course it opens up a world of sonic possibility, but that is only needed if you feel it is to get in the flow. Just running standard S|C synths is enough to make great music for sure.

Post Reply