Scope working like a DSP only dedicated card (no I/O)

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:04 am

On 2005-06-16 03:10, Bifop wrote:
... It's funny every time somebody mention xtc on this board, you have somebody coming to endorse the scope sfp saying how better it is blah blah...

well, obviously that 'someone' refers to me - yet I haven't mentioned XTC mode at all in my post above

In fact Man-Machine even assumes it's not running in that mode.
Since Scope ASIO is not involved either (another ASIO driver is active and XTC is locked to Scope ASIO afaik) it's a complete mystery how the bits get shoveled into the sequencer - which it obviously does as it seems to record something useful...

You may not share my opinion (which is NOT supported by demographic facts anyway

), but I assume VERY FEW owners of a high quality (non-scope) card would spend their cash on the synths alone - opposed to those who (are supposed to) buy the complete package.
It's a pure quantitative and 'bang for the buck' statement.

And if you assume that this would reduce production costs for CWA, then you're as wrong as can be - the DEVELOPEMENT defines the costs, not a bunch of chips.

For such a product CWA had to reduce the price significantly - a really bad deal

finally you simply overlooked the most significant argument - how do you want to (clock-) sync the software output of the 2 cards ?
a non-common-masterclock digital mixture from various sources is highly suspectable to jitter/phase problems, isn't it ?

cheers, Tom

Post by **Guest** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:09 am

Quote:
-----------------------------
Another thing when you tie stuff into VST is that you're totally under the control of the host manufacturers - this leads to a pretty constant need to update the code to accomodate new features and spec changes
---------------------------------

Very well put.That alone would be why CW is moving away from XTC at the present time.

Man-Machine · Post by **Man-Machine** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:41 pm

I strongly believe that there's a big potential market for Creamware devices (specially the synths) detached from the whole Scope system. These are the highest quality instruments I've heard in software format and a bargain when you compare them with the current prices of vintage synths like the Minimoog, Prophet 5, Odyssey, Pro-One, etc. How much money would I spend on the real ones? For about $1200 Scope system I got all these plus a lot more stuff like the Modular III, several FXs, etc.

The main complaints I hear about Creamware cards are never related to the devices or hardware quality. In fact, I always astonish people every time I demo these synths to them. But then they always ask either of these two crucial questions: "Creamware? Who's that?" or "Do I always have to use this host to use these synths?"

Marketing and availability of these products outside of SPF in either DSP card format, DSP box, ASB or whatever are the keys IMO. Obviously I think that Creamware already sees some of this demand because of their new ASB line, so I don't think I'm a minority here when you consider current and potential customers that are looking for these devices. Anyway, this is just my opinion with the information I currently have

_________________
L8ter Oscill8ters!

[ This Message was edited by: Man-Machine on 2005-06-17 14:45 ]

Post by **garyb** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:38 pm

go ahead and use your maudio or soundblaster cards if you like. it still makes no sense.(just my opinion)

Man-Machine · Post by **Man-Machine** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:05 pm

Yep, Soundblasters, that's the only option everybody else has outside of Scope for a professional DAW...

Post by **garyb** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 pm

o.k., use your rme even though there's no advantage, it doesn't matter to me. use a digidesign card or a layla, i still see no advantage. maybe if i was doing what you are i might feel differently, but i don't think that there is much logic to any of this, just consumerism. once again, just my opinion, not nessessarily fact. also, i don't think that many who claim to have a professional daw actually use it to pay their rent. mine does. working in a music store the rest of the time, i see a lot of guys whose systems are pretty useless if it comes down to working for clients, yet they still swear by the crap that a marketing department made them buy, in other words that stuff that everyone's begging for, but that's another issue.

actually, when i do a demo, people's eyes bug out of their heads in amazement at what is possible and how well it works, the high number of i/o etc,but also most have already heavily invested in crap from guitar center that doesn't really work...i really hope that cwa doesn't give up on this platform, but just brings it current in the next year or so. this is still the ONLY platform of it's kind and imho, it is superior to the even the most current solutions in ANY format, STILL.

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2005-06-17 16:53 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:55 pm

On 2005-06-17 14:41, Man-Machine wrote:
... The main complaints I hear about Creamware cards are never related to the devices or hardware quality. ...

... "Do I always have to use this host to use these synths?" ...

righty right - they say it's the card or an obscure thing they call the driver, but in fact it's a pile of sh*t called an operating system
... spiced by endless lists of 'fixed' BIOS versions (by whatever manufacturer) telling their own story about developement quality in general

which host ?
that's nothing but the control software of the synth/audio engine.
You find this on 'usual' hardware in shape of tiny LCDs showing lines of text. I'm sure CWA's user interface would be praised if coming as a touch screen on a true hardware box.

Exactly that was originally planned in 1997 (according to press pics from that time), but obviously given up due to production costs - those panels were extremely expensive once.

So the reason for CWA going hardware the ASB way is pure stupidity of some folks who are only able to judge a book by it's cover

As has been pointed out by GaryB a million times all SFP stuff is pure hardware in the context 'hardware' is defined today.

cheers, Tom

darkrezin · Post by **darkrezin** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:01 pm

One more point to make:

You don't have to feel weird if you're the only person in your musical circle of friends who has a Scope system... and you don't have to convert them

If they want the synths badly enough, then they will put up with the Scope environment. Unless of course they don't care about the synths, in which case they'll carry on using what they're using.

As I said in other threads, most people in the native world really don't care about sound quality. It would be crazy for Creamware to throw their resources after chasing a fickle market.

Bifop · Post by **Bifop** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:44 am

Okay, reading all these testimonies I decided to give my Pulsar II a second chance..
I've spent the last four days experimenting various setups.
Sfp works tightly as expected.

XTC mode with CW I/O works quite well with most of the plugs (including fx's and the Modular) with the Adern wrapping tip.

And last, but not least thanks to Man-Machine ; taking off the I/O plate did it !!

Partially...

I've got cyclic glitches. I've tried all combinations of hardware (I've got no Irq sharing at all) with an RME 9652 or an EMU1820M (yeah Garyb, a soundblaster..). All combinations of latency settings, different ASIO dest/sources in the XTCproject.pro.
I've never been that close...

Quoting Astroman ;
"finally you simply overlooked the most significant argument - how do you want to (clock-) sync the software output of the 2 cards ?
a non-common-masterclock digital mixture from various sources is highly suspectable to jitter/phase problems, isn't it ? "
makes me wonder if it's not actually the problem I encounter, a synchronization problem beetween the two digital components...
But CW has released an XTC line of cards in the past, they must have had a working solution at the moment !!

Whatever some of you guys think, I would really like to get this working. If Man-machine reports success (you don't have any glitches do you ?), it MIGHT be feasible on my rig. A few month ago I swore it was impossible to get even past the "plug in not installed" message. At least I've got some encouraging signs now.

I know these efforts might seem weird for most of you long time SFPulsarians, but please bear with us XTCPeople,looking for simplicity...

Man-machine I've got a couple of questions ( wich host do you use, wich size is your buffer preload on the pulsar..etc)and I could maybe PM you, but I think it would help others if we do it in public. As it's a post from you in another thread that made me understand about the REMOVAL of the I/O plate.

I give myself another day of tweaking and then If It fails, It'll be XTC mode with CW I/O.

@ GaryB, I don't know who you're targetting with your amateur allusions. My money comes exclusively from the music world (composer for TV at the moment, I do 5/6 cds each year as a SE, I've worked in music shops, been a co-editor of an audio pro magazine...). These said, the more I learn, the longer the road seems to be...
Please guys, no flames.

PS : Man-machine, I used the original backplate from the computer and joined it to the card with some masking tape. Just perfect.

[ This Message was edited by: Bifop on 2005-06-20 09:18 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:08 am

On 2005-06-20 06:44, Bifop wrote:
...
makes me wonder if it's not actually the problem I encounter, a synchronization problem beetween the two digital components...
But CW has released an XTC line of cards in the past, they must have had a working solution at the moment !!
...

exactly - the solution is simple: the ASIO driver provides the sync. Hence XTC mode requires Scope ASIO (if I understood this correctly)

now Man-Machine gets this running without XTC mode and without Scope ASIO, or possibly his system IS in XTC mode but for obscure reasons manages to get along with another card's ASIO driver - really strange...

cheers, Tom

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:23 am

additional food for thought:

the (idea of the) setup described above may be workable for a 'live played' synth - it will NOT work for anything that needs precise timing.

Afaik not even a SINGLE app (Cubase for example) is capable of a constant timing without external help.
a quote from a review '... don't rely on the metronome - it's the most unprecise timimg source ...'

so you would NOT be able to reproduce a miditrack, NO layering possible for pads and drums(!).

imho the tremendous precision in the sub-miliseconds range (and it's easy application) is a big advantage in SFP

it doesn't always need clicks and pops to be unusable - I remember well that sound of the audio cables I originally used for digital input...

cheers, Tom

Bifop · Post by **Bifop** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:41 am

Thanks Astroman !
Although I don't like what I'm reading, it sounds pretty obvious to me explained that way... I expected that the synchronization could maybe happen through ASIO2 protocol, but nope...

One crazy thought I had ; two CW cards = one for sfp, one for xtc... But I'm really in dreamland with that I think. Sfp would grab both at start.

[ This Message was edited by: Bifop on 2005-06-20 07:42 ]

Man-Machine · Post by **Man-Machine** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 7:51 am

I'm using Cubase SX 2 as host and a Tascam firewire audio interface. My Pulsar software is installed with the default settings. For some stupid reason I didn't keep my previous settings when I re-installed the software. Previously everything worked but Profit 5. Now with the default settings, Minimax and Profit 5 don't work so I bet my previous (XTC???) settings had something to do with it. Just to let you know I'm not using SPF when working in this mode, I'm just using as if it was XTC mode but of course with my Tascam ASIO drivers and I/O. I don't know what the latency is exactly but I don't notice anything while playing the Pro-Tone or Prodyssey live in Cubase.

Just to let you guys also know, I have a different day job but this electronic music "hobby" of mine makes a good extra 5K a year in side projects so I don't take some of this technical decisions lightly either...

_________________
L8ter Oscill8ters!

[ This Message was edited by: Man-Machine on 2005-06-20 09:17 ]

Post by **garyb** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:11 am

look, don't get all personal on me.
i'm not making ANY shots at ANYONE in particular.

the point is not whether you make money, rather it was a question of studio or sketchpad.

a lot of people talking about pro studios, treat their computer as sketchpads(hey, an oil canvas if you prefer

), having only one SPECIFIC use instead of as the studio which has sketchpads as well as other materials for making an image. i need a studio, so i don't want those who would limit the function to have the only say.

i don't call anyone a fool, and yet, i would say that not using scope mode and the scope i/o is foolish. the computer will work much better and be compatable with more situations and possibilities. it's WAY easy and makes all your tools available. some don't really seem to want $100,000s of dollars of gear and the ability to use it. whatever.......

if the cw i/o was poor quality, it would be a different matter.

don't think that i don't support ANYONE'S right to use whatever works for him/her, though. i'm just expressing my opinion.

Bifop · Post by **Bifop** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:21 am

Thanks Man-machine,

I just gave it another go but it doesn't go any better. As soon as there is a Pulsar plug on the signal path, it's glitches/popples land... Electronic Voodoo must be involved here...

Well, I give up for now since I need it to work now. Thanks to Norton Ghost, it only takes me a couple of minutes to be back on tracks !!

As a side note, and to give credit where it's due, I have to thanks GaryB, Astroman, Symbiote and all the XTC naysayers for their firm believes on the scope platform... Those last days made me realize the poor use I was making of my CW card... I put the card back in my main daw for testing purposes, and it seems like it's there to stay now...
The sound quality of these synths is absolutely incredible !!!... I'm back on XTC (with I/O) but I'm planning to do the next couple of tunes with the SFP just to see if I can get used to it finally. And I've noticed how much hotter is the sound in sfp compared to XTC mode

Back to music now...
Peace

JL · Post by JL » Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:00 pm

Realtime(almost). That's why I use SFP. Of course it would be easier, if it was all integrated to Cubase(including free routing). But as long as there are latency involved I'm not going to use XTC.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:44 am

seems the main topic got a bit out of focus, so here's the start of the original thread

On 2005-06-14 13:20, Man-Machine wrote:
I got my Scope 2 card working like a dedicated DSP card with no I/Os and using the ASIO drivers and I/O of another audio interface. ...

unfortunately Man-Machine cannot verify it now because the setup got lost, but the core sentence is ASIO drivers and IO of another soundcard which is a nogo according to CWA's documentation.

it would of course be an interesting option and useful in certain setups - I just disagree with him about the possibilities of commercial exploitation of this fact.
Nothing big, just a quantitative estimation (pure speculation anyway) - his opinion is as valid as mine

I've just explained a few techie details that got messed (imho) on the way, it was no argueing pro or con XTC mode.

On 2005-06-21 22:00, BLUEmotion wrote:
Realtime(almost). ...

while we're at it - that can be quite misleading, and is not restricted to the digital domain ...

You can 'afford' any (reasonable) latency as long as you can guarantee those samples you want to match are positioned accurately on the timeline up to the sample's precision.
Anything else is pure nonsense and randomisation of the audio (mix)output

DIY: 2 mixer channels, same source (arbitrary), one channel includes the sub-millisecond sample delay compensation plug.
Now add a few sample delay and listen to the output - you'll never worry about latency anymore...

welcome to the forum, btw

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-06-22 01:59 ]

sharc · Post by **sharc** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:44 am

On 2005-06-17 16:55, astroman wrote:
So the reason for CWA going hardware the ASB way is pure stupidity of some folks who are only able to judge a book by it's cover

Perhaps, but they might not be looking so stupid 5/10/15 years down the line when their ASB has most likely held it's value about as well as other hardware minimoog clones. (Studio Electronics SE-1)

Meanwhile how useful OR valuable will our Scope systems be?

[ This Message was edited by: sharc on 2005-06-22 11:46 ]

symbiote · Post by **symbiote** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:10 am

On 2005-06-22 11:44, sharc wrote:

Perhaps, but they might not be looking so stupid 5/10/15 years down the line when their ASB has most likely held it's value about as well as other hardware minimoog clones. (Studio Electronics SE-1)

Meanwhile how useful OR valuable will our Scope systems be?

[ This Message was edited by: sharc on 2005-06-22 11:46 ]

Same as right now. Given the millions of motherboards, CPUs and memory chips produced in the last 5-ish years that support Scope cards, it shouldn't be a problem to build a system that supports Scope in 10-15 years. I have no trouble building a functionnal 486 right now, I can't see how this is going to be different in 20 years.

sharc · Post by **sharc** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:14 pm

On 2005-06-22 12:10, symbiote wrote:
I have no trouble building a functionnal 486 right now...

????????

[ This Message was edited by: sharc on 2005-06-22 13:15 ]