I have a Scope pro...
Could someone tell me which is the best way to use this card...XTC mode? or other...
I have found the problem with the Card and the Cubase 4.1...I have now rolled back to V4.02 and things seem to be working again (I hope this issue gets sorted, or are Steinberg dropping support for Creamware stuff).
Anyway....If someone could tell me the best way to use the Scope pro inc advantage & disadvantages etc....I have used it in XTC mode but not really in the other (does this have a name).
TIA
Andy.
XTC mode or other please help
-
hubird
Why don't you just try working in SFP for a while?
You just have to setup the Midi and ASIO connection with Cubase and there you go.
You win a lot, and at least you can make up your mind what's best the method for you to work with.
edit: your poll isn't rightly setup, and now that I'm telling you it's to late to change it
You just have to setup the Midi and ASIO connection with Cubase and there you go.
You win a lot, and at least you can make up your mind what's best the method for you to work with.
edit: your poll isn't rightly setup, and now that I'm telling you it's to late to change it
-
the19thbear
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
latency in your host program ( cubase etc) should be the same.. no matter if you use xtc of normal scope mode..
of course, if you use sfp mode ( normal scope mode), then the internal latency, in the scope program is next to nothing! which is brilliant!!!
and if you use xtc mode, the vst instruments and effects and the xtc instruments and effects have latency. But you can monitor in xtc mode without latency, and apply fx on the monitored track with no latency.. and you can monitor the output from a xtc synth and play it without latency.
Sounds confusing?? well... try it out as other people said. Find out what you like!
I personally use XTC mode. The workflow is faster for me. I spend more time making music, than routing. But i use cubase as a tape recorder for old skool music (drum guitar bass etc..) If i was making electronic music, i think i would be using sfp mode.
HAPPY TESTING!
SCOPE IS AMAZING!
of course, if you use sfp mode ( normal scope mode), then the internal latency, in the scope program is next to nothing! which is brilliant!!!
and if you use xtc mode, the vst instruments and effects and the xtc instruments and effects have latency. But you can monitor in xtc mode without latency, and apply fx on the monitored track with no latency.. and you can monitor the output from a xtc synth and play it without latency.
Sounds confusing?? well... try it out as other people said. Find out what you like!
I personally use XTC mode. The workflow is faster for me. I spend more time making music, than routing. But i use cubase as a tape recorder for old skool music (drum guitar bass etc..) If i was making electronic music, i think i would be using sfp mode.
HAPPY TESTING!
SCOPE IS AMAZING!
-
Mr Arkadin
- Posts: 3283
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 4:00 pm
i often use Cubase old skool like a tape recorder and i find that Scope mode suites this better than XTC (because in old skool i like to see the cablesthe19thbear wrote: I personally use XTC mode. The workflow is faster for me. I spend more time making music, than routing. But i use cubase as a tape recorder for old skool music (drum guitar bass etc..) If i was making electronic music, i think i would be using sfp mode.
), so it shows there's no single correct method.-
studioblabla
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: Belgium
I used XTC successfully in my latest project.
In nuendo (3.2) I can change routing inside the program.
pros:
- total integration in one application
- I can use my motormix controller
- you can use Dx or VST with scope plugs in a normal signal flow (I mean as inserts, sends etc)
cons:
- Much more load for your computer, I think
- not all the sfpplugs work
- things like freeze(rendered FX) does not always work in nuendo with scope plugs
- latency
Thanks Andy, I was thinking about writing a similar question to the forum.
Is there a way to do the same with SFP and cubase/nuendo.
I mean, when using the scopemixer, can it be automated by cubase/nuendo's automation? (And if midicontrolable, can you edit it as simple as the volumeautomation in cubase/nuendo?)
With a chain, lets say:
autotune -> channelstrip as insert -> volume automation from cubase/nuendo -> FX on aux sends.
Is this possible?
And using vstplugs as fx in SFP? or even fx teleport?
thanks all,
Bart
In nuendo (3.2) I can change routing inside the program.
pros:
- total integration in one application
- I can use my motormix controller
- you can use Dx or VST with scope plugs in a normal signal flow (I mean as inserts, sends etc)
cons:
- Much more load for your computer, I think
- not all the sfpplugs work
- things like freeze(rendered FX) does not always work in nuendo with scope plugs
- latency
Thanks Andy, I was thinking about writing a similar question to the forum.
Is there a way to do the same with SFP and cubase/nuendo.
I mean, when using the scopemixer, can it be automated by cubase/nuendo's automation? (And if midicontrolable, can you edit it as simple as the volumeautomation in cubase/nuendo?)
With a chain, lets say:
autotune -> channelstrip as insert -> volume automation from cubase/nuendo -> FX on aux sends.
Is this possible?
And using vstplugs as fx in SFP? or even fx teleport?
thanks all,
Bart
i just tried to set up a simple tutorial for scope
http://www.alchemystudio.it/tutorial/cr ... ial_en.htm
just one page for now, with the basic concept
i hope to extend in the future.
please suggest what you'd like to read!
http://www.alchemystudio.it/tutorial/cr ... ial_en.htm
just one page for now, with the basic concept
i hope to extend in the future.
please suggest what you'd like to read!
Andy, XFP is the best !
I use XTC in the DAW comp for all the reason 19thBear so eloquently put. The xtcproject.pro can be as elaborate as you want and indeed gives you a sort of mixed mode beetween the two solutions. Read no latency on monitoring, front mixer while using dsp and native plugins together in the host. Convenience is the key word in the XTC approach.
I use SFP in a second comp but I have to admit my default setup never changes (I just load synths).
Actually xtc mode is more or less the SFP whithout the routing page and it's bound to the Asio 2.1 limitations. All the plugs work in XTC using a multiFX insert.
Other than the good starter link that Stardust gave you (which is a bit dated now) a lot of inprovements have came to light to the way you can use the plugins, modular, the routing, a mixer etc in XTC mode. Just read the XTC section of this site.
I use XTC in the DAW comp for all the reason 19thBear so eloquently put. The xtcproject.pro can be as elaborate as you want and indeed gives you a sort of mixed mode beetween the two solutions. Read no latency on monitoring, front mixer while using dsp and native plugins together in the host. Convenience is the key word in the XTC approach.
I use SFP in a second comp but I have to admit my default setup never changes (I just load synths).
Actually xtc mode is more or less the SFP whithout the routing page and it's bound to the Asio 2.1 limitations. All the plugs work in XTC using a multiFX insert.
Other than the good starter link that Stardust gave you (which is a bit dated now) a lot of inprovements have came to light to the way you can use the plugins, modular, the routing, a mixer etc in XTC mode. Just read the XTC section of this site.
Thanks for all the replies etc...
I am running the card (or should I say experimenting) in SFP (with three monitors 2 for Cubase + 1 for the Creamware).
I am having major probs with XTC mode in Cubase - I have been trying to mix down a MIDI file using some plugins etc and the Computer shuts down, I also have to make sure the latency is at least 24m.s. before I load up a project or I get no Audio etc.... In SFP I only get the Shut down with the MIDI File..I will try another file for test reasons even though this is a legit one.
I was only using the MIDI file to make a minus drums backing track.
I am getting concerned about the support thing with Creamware & Steinberg, I guess I will hang on for V.5 creamware update & then make some desisions then.
By the way - I have rolled Cubase back to V4.02 It is better but still unable to get better latency with existing songe - Only if I start a fresh one.
Andy
I am running the card (or should I say experimenting) in SFP (with three monitors 2 for Cubase + 1 for the Creamware).
I am having major probs with XTC mode in Cubase - I have been trying to mix down a MIDI file using some plugins etc and the Computer shuts down, I also have to make sure the latency is at least 24m.s. before I load up a project or I get no Audio etc.... In SFP I only get the Shut down with the MIDI File..I will try another file for test reasons even though this is a legit one.
I was only using the MIDI file to make a minus drums backing track.
I am getting concerned about the support thing with Creamware & Steinberg, I guess I will hang on for V.5 creamware update & then make some desisions then.
By the way - I have rolled Cubase back to V4.02 It is better but still unable to get better latency with existing songe - Only if I start a fresh one.
Andy
-
rhythmaster
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Danube Town
- Contact:
Sorry. I don't understand the selectable answers. 
XTC runs perfect with me here. Config see in my signature.
The only con is that the tempo is not adjustable in many SCOPE-synthesizers within Cubase.
So to do this I have to open the SFP separately, load the intstrument, alter the bpm and save
the preset, start Cubase again and load the preset.
Hopefully this will be fixed in SCP 5.0
XTC runs perfect with me here. Config see in my signature.
The only con is that the tempo is not adjustable in many SCOPE-synthesizers within Cubase.
So to do this I have to open the SFP separately, load the intstrument, alter the bpm and save
the preset, start Cubase again and load the preset.
Hopefully this will be fixed in SCP 5.0
-
Mr Arkadin
- Posts: 3283
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Yes the poll doesn't really work - both have XTC in the answer . There are only two modes to Scope - Scope or XTC, so those should be the options. Of course those that prefer to use XTC will vote XTC and those that prefer Scope will vote Scope, so you can't ascertain which mode is 'better', just how many people use each mode.
Me i use Scope mode as i'm old fashioned and like to see what i'm wiring together.
. There are only two modes to Scope - Scope or XTC, so those should be the options. Of course those that prefer to use XTC will vote XTC and those that prefer Scope will vote Scope, so you can't ascertain which mode is 'better', just how many people use each mode.Me i use Scope mode as i'm old fashioned and like to see what i'm wiring together.
Scope mode is superior to XTC mode, it allows more interesting kinds of interaction with the rest of the world. the downside to Scope mode is that it requires you to know something(or learn something) about how real gear works. Scope mode leads to real mastery of the recording and production process. most users are kind of just wanking though(c'mon it's true ), so for them it likely doesn't matter if they really get the most out of the system or not. this type of user/"engineer", is more likely to be more concerned with how many plugins he uses rather than why or how he uses them, and more concerned with bragging about having the latest processor, rather than a having great production machine that once built can be used for many years. spending money on the toy is often more important than working with sound, rhythm, harmony and melody ....
), so for them it likely doesn't matter if they really get the most out of the system or not. this type of user/"engineer", is more likely to be more concerned with how many plugins he uses rather than why or how he uses them, and more concerned with bragging about having the latest processor, rather than a having great production machine that once built can be used for many years. spending money on the toy is often more important than working with sound, rhythm, harmony and melody ....
-
nightscope
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:24 pm
- Location: UK
Indeed.stardust wrote:Pros will use PT instead
“Every room has a Pro Tools system for recording and mixing music and playing back video,” says Zimmer. “For us to work with one another and with studios, there simply has to be standardization, and for all sorts of reasons the industry standard is Pro Tools.”
"Three Pro Tools systems currently reside in Zimmer’s home studio. “We’ve got Pro Tools everywhere”, he says. “But it’s only a matter of time before things like VST systems link are going to encroach on that DSP-based stuff.
“I’m totally impressed with the idea of Pro Tools”, he adds. “But the more I look at things, I think it’s all going to go native. That’s really where it’s at”.
"Zimmer continues, “I think we have every Pro Tools plug-in known to man. I also really like GRM Tools, and we use software like Reason and Live”, says Zimmer. “But I personally don’t have a lot of time to learn new things, because then I’m not working on music, I’m looking at manuals.
“We are very used to dealing with literally hundreds of tracks at a time,” says producer Al Clay who mixed Hans Zimmer’s score for the Da Vinci Code. “With Hans Zimmer, keeping track of hundreds of tracks is not uncommon. [Pro Tools] is the only way we could make it manageable. I can’t imagine another way of doing it.”
ns