Group support

[Music Manic]

Would it be possible for us to ask the programmers to build and fix certain things for us If we all chipped in? I see a lot of developers use this system to reach a target.

Lots of people want STS fixed here. I want VDat plus other things. It's great we've got dNa still on it..

Your views......

[djmicron]

there are things that can be fixed over scope sdk and some creativity, other things could be fixed over scope sdk if we are provided with the unlocked devices and some other things that can only be fixed by re-programming drivers and the scope application.

The last one is the most expensive and time consuming, the first two are opened to most of us sdk users, but it's a hard decision for S|C to give us some unlocked devices to apply some mods.

The sampling/vdat stuff is strictly related to scope os and driver re-design, while some other things such as zarg synths not runnig well on xite, can be fixed with the actual sdk if an unlocked module is provided.

From my personal point of view, i'd like to see a linux driver to use the xite on it, but it requires some money investment, developers must be provided with the proper hardware, source code, etc.

I'm fine using it on 32 bit with pae enabled to override the ram limitation.

Crowdfunding could be a nice idea, but first we have to make a an approximative money calculation per task and see if it makes sense.

[petal]

...while some other things such as zarg synths not runnig well on xite, can be fixed with the actual sdk if an unlocked module is provided.

I'm afraid this is not entirely true, although maybe in principle. Here's John Bowens explanation taken from this thread:

http://forums.planetz.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31740

While on this subject is there any news from John Bowen regarding optimising his devices for XITE?

Cheers lads

Hi All,

While I do understand the frustration of not being able to run my bigger plugins (Solaris, Quantum Wave) with more polyphony on the XITE systems, the situation is that these 2 plugins require more connections internally than the XITE system can provide, so there is no way to optimise them further. The only thing I could do would be to reduce the number of modulation options for each plug-in, so that they would not be anywhere as flexible as they are now (which is a big part of their appeal, it seems!).

I don't know if anyone has tried the smaller version of Quantum Wave (the Quantum Wave SE) and checked the polyphony with an XITE system, but this does reduce the interconnections (being one of four synth modules of the Quantum Wave). Aside from that, I would have to make a new version of both, severely reducing the number of connecting pathways internally for them to give greater polyphony....but then you wouldn't have all that the synths are capable of.

john b.

[RA]

Hi guys,

i have had some insight to CW / S|C original plugins. The thing is....a lot of documentation is GONE FOREVER.
Not all connections etc and internal circuits are easily understandable...they are rather complex, and thus not all
would be a simple fix etc...

What is the thing with the VDAT btw you're mentioning....(PM me)

[hubird]

Hi guys,

i have had some insight to CW / S|C original plugins. The thing is....a lot of documentation is GONE FOREVER.
Not all connections etc and internal circuits are easily understandable...they are rather complex, and thus not all
would be a simple fix etc...

Thanks for that. Is it true only for (some) plug-ins or also for the environment itself?

[Music Manic]

Hi guys,

i have had some insight to CW / S|C original plugins. The thing is....a lot of documentation is GONE FOREVER.
Not all connections etc and internal circuits are easily understandable...they are rather complex, and thus not all
would be a simple fix etc...

What is the thing with the VDAT btw you're mentioning....(PM me)

Thanks for keeping it alive.

PM you

[djmicron]

...while some other things such as zarg synths not runnig well on xite, can be fixed with the actual sdk if an unlocked module is provided.

I'm afraid this is not entirely true, although maybe in principle. Here's John Bowens explanation taken from this thread:

http://forums.planetz.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31740

While on this subject is there any news from John Bowen regarding optimising his devices for XITE?

Cheers lads

Hi All,

While I do understand the frustration of not being able to run my bigger plugins (Solaris, Quantum Wave) with more polyphony on the XITE systems, the situation is that these 2 plugins require more connections internally than the XITE system can provide, so there is no way to optimise them further. The only thing I could do would be to reduce the number of modulation options for each plug-in, so that they would not be anywhere as flexible as they are now (which is a big part of their appeal, it seems!).

I don't know if anyone has tried the smaller version of Quantum Wave (the Quantum Wave SE) and checked the polyphony with an XITE system, but this does reduce the interconnections (being one of four synth modules of the Quantum Wave). Aside from that, I would have to make a new version of both, severely reducing the number of connecting pathways internally for them to give greater polyphony....but then you wouldn't have all that the synths are capable of.

john b.

this is the JB response in relation to the plugins as they are developed, and in relation to the fact that he is busy in the development of the solaris hardware, but the plugins can be re-arranged for the xite and i have actually fixed the solaris polyphony by using multiple instances with pre-assigned dsp, but it's not practical for everyday use, while with access to some of the internal solaris circuit, it can be re-arranged in a proper way.

[RA]

Hi Hubird,

There is no documentation as far as i know for specific plugins (for the dNa plugins i don't have design docs....well, actually...i have tons of notes )....you would just have to understand all the internal dsp blocks / modules, and sorta reverse engineer the plugin. And that leads to trial and error when developing. Of course with the sdk there is some docu, but desciptions for ALL the dsp files isn't available. But....you grow into it with the years. I guess for the environment that doesn't go, because that is basically not dsp coded. Scripting, DLL's....mainly the usual stuff.

[dante]

RA - for extra background, the issue with the STS on 64 bit is the non-existance of a 64 bit version of AKAI.DLL

http://forums.planetz.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=32903

That is probably a similar problem with VDAT - in that some code needs re-engineering / recompilation for 64 bit.

[Music Manic]

RA - for extra background, the issue with the STS on 64 bit is the non-existance of a 64 bit version of AKAI.DLL

http://forums.planetz.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=32903

That is probably a similar problem with VDAT - in that some code needs re-engineering / recompilation for 64 bit.

Your exciting us now Dante! As serious as you always are.

[petal]

DJMicron, I'd love to believe you, but I think that John is pretty clear about whether Solaris and Qwave are suited for the XITE or not:

Hi All,

While I do understand the frustration of not being able to run my bigger plugins (Solaris, Quantum Wave) with more polyphony on the XITE systems, the situation is that these 2 plugins require more connections internally than the XITE system can provide, so there is no way to optimise them further.

john b.

[garyb]

there is a misunderstanding.
no, i can't elaborate.

suffice it to say that old plugins made before 64bit computers were even thought of(by anyone not involved in computer sciences research), may be limited in new environments. it's nobody's fault, nor does it involve bugs.

actually, the op's idea is exactly the thought behind the stalled v6. opened source code is still something that is in the works.

[djmicron]

DJMicron, I'd love to believe you, but I think that John is pretty clear about whether Solaris and Qwave are suited for the XITE or not:

Hi All,

While I do understand the frustration of not being able to run my bigger plugins (Solaris, Quantum Wave) with more polyphony on the XITE systems, the situation is that these 2 plugins require more connections internally than the XITE system can provide, so there is no way to optimise them further.

john b.

he just said to have not the time to modify the device for the xite, so it doesn't work perfect on the xite right now, because it has been developed with previous version of the sdk for pci cards, i have pointed out that i have modified the device by using the protected one, but this limited me to use several solaris instances instead of just using the needed circuit parts and forced me to manage voices on the midi side, so what i'm saying is that it can be optimized for the xite as i can use my self modified version with 10 voices of poly and complex patches.
It's not as it appear that the xite can't provide the connections, it's just a problem with the dynamic dsp allocation on the xite that can cause troubles, so using pre-assigned dsp allocation per voice solves that problem on the actual scope software.

[petal]

OK, if the plugins can be "fixed" to work better on the Xite, that is just great then.

Now for the actual event of this happening anytime "soon", being a long time user of SCOPE, I know how high I can set my hopes

I think I'm gonna hold on to my PCI-cards - From my cold dead hands I tells ya!

[garyb]

PCI cards are still GREAT!

the reason SC made v5.1 for the PCI cards is that they are certainly still worth using.

[dante]

+1 on that !

[Music Manic]

PCI going strong here too.

Want 15Dsp for development kit.