Routing window for me, I just say no to latency and native mixing.
OT: the reason people use PT is for the editing. The HD system is nice because the audio engine, mixing and FX all happen on DSP (although a lot of TDM plugins cheat by running on the CPU). It's all very integrated and whatever you think of the cost and Digidesign's business practices (I despise both), it's a killer editor. VDAT for Scope is nice but it is to PT what an ADAT machine is to PT (although VDAT definitely sounds better than an ADAT). I was in the US recently and virtually everyone I met used PT... I really can't see that changing for the foreseeable future.
XTC mode or other please help
Bifop,
you noticed my smilies and good humor, right?
i talk a mean game, but i have no ill will towards anyone who disagrees with me on this point. i was only opinionating, not stating canon. i have noticed a significant lack of knowledge and experience from many who refuse to use Scope mode. if you really don't need Scope mode, don't use it, for sure.
use what works for you! you have every right to play with gear even if you really don't know how to use it, or even if your knowledge of music is lacking!
how else can your knowledge increase and deepen?
you noticed my smilies and good humor, right?
i talk a mean game, but i have no ill will towards anyone who disagrees with me on this point. i was only opinionating, not stating canon. i have noticed a significant lack of knowledge and experience from many who refuse to use Scope mode. if you really don't need Scope mode, don't use it, for sure.
use what works for you! you have every right to play with gear even if you really don't know how to use it, or even if your knowledge of music is lacking!
how else can your knowledge increase and deepen?
hey gary, did you know the paradigm, that a workflow with more than two clicks to load an instrument is unprofessional.
thats why everyone is using vsti these days.
even patching a virtual cable is too much time-lost in todays world.
I`m still waiting for the music-auto-generator for scope, like the auto-setup on optomaster.
maybe this comes with sfp5?
jokes by side, flexibility always comes with complexity and complexity always introduce the need to take the time to learn the stuff. For me this flexibility is the greatest part of scope.
If the next-gen scope card is just an xtc booster card for a vst host, I jump of the train.
thats why everyone is using vsti these days.
even patching a virtual cable is too much time-lost in todays world.
I`m still waiting for the music-auto-generator for scope, like the auto-setup on optomaster.
maybe this comes with sfp5?
jokes by side, flexibility always comes with complexity and complexity always introduce the need to take the time to learn the stuff. For me this flexibility is the greatest part of scope.
If the next-gen scope card is just an xtc booster card for a vst host, I jump of the train.
Hi
<
jokes by side, flexibility always comes with complexity and complexity always introduce the need to take the time to learn the stuff. For me this flexibility is the greatest part of scope.
If the next-gen scope card is just an xtc booster card for a vst host, I jump of the train.
>
So do I if it is a SFP only system
Cheers
Michel
<
jokes by side, flexibility always comes with complexity and complexity always introduce the need to take the time to learn the stuff. For me this flexibility is the greatest part of scope.
If the next-gen scope card is just an xtc booster card for a vst host, I jump of the train.
>
So do I if it is a SFP only system
Cheers
Michel
Hehe Gary, gone are the times I would go red face upon such word battles... 
I know you like to play the devil's advocate of some sort when it comes to this very matter (xtc vs sfp)....
I don't feel patronized any more, I feel amused.
Actually I'm more worried by replies ala Hifiboom who seems serious about what he says (but again, It might be humour.. who knows).
Michel if they go sfp only, I wouldn't drop shit, I'll instead just stick to what I've got.
Sometimes, the best protest is to stop the consuming/dependency race.
As it is, my Nuendo 3.2 with Scope 4.5 + Protools LE 7.4 rig could keep me busy doing music for years.
I know you like to play the devil's advocate of some sort when it comes to this very matter (xtc vs sfp)....
I don't feel patronized any more, I feel amused.
Actually I'm more worried by replies ala Hifiboom who seems serious about what he says (but again, It might be humour.. who knows).
Michel if they go sfp only, I wouldn't drop shit, I'll instead just stick to what I've got.
Sometimes, the best protest is to stop the consuming/dependency race.
As it is, my Nuendo 3.2 with Scope 4.5 + Protools LE 7.4 rig could keep me busy doing music for years.
Bifop, there was much joking in my last post but there is always something serious in joke you know.
I`m not against the xtc mode. XTC mode is good, but SFP just is better.
You have to decide xtc or sfp. I use sfp mode and I don`t see a reason to cut my flexibility away and use XTC mode instead.
I am a bit against some strange recommendations that have been made in the past: like xtc and sfp mode in parallel on one card and so on.
With a bit of technical undertsnading you will realize that such an idea will only lead to instability of the system and new bugs and no new features.
I'd rather like to see this small development team put their energy on other innovations that give more value to the enduser.
I`m not against the xtc mode. XTC mode is good, but SFP just is better.
You have to decide xtc or sfp. I use sfp mode and I don`t see a reason to cut my flexibility away and use XTC mode instead.
I am a bit against some strange recommendations that have been made in the past: like xtc and sfp mode in parallel on one card and so on.
With a bit of technical undertsnading you will realize that such an idea will only lead to instability of the system and new bugs and no new features.
I'd rather like to see this small development team put their energy on other innovations that give more value to the enduser.