PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Personally what I'd like to see is a system like this:

1 standard external box, with upgradeable DSP on it, and upgradeable I/O in ADAT and other analog/digital formats. It would also have a firewire or USB2 connection for controlling the DSPs. Therefore, the PCI-heavy task of delivering multiple channels could be done with a standard ASIO/CoreAudio soundcard with ADAT. The USB2/Firewire connection would be purely for controlling the routing etc, and maybe transmitting MIDI.

If Creamware was to take this further, I think they could produce a more simple soundcard than their current cards to handle ASIO/CoreAudio etc, which is much simpler and cheaper to change with new PCI formats than current cards. It would ideally have a proprietary interface (but not necessarily a proprietary connector type) to connect to the external box which would carry multichannel audio and MIDI to/from the computer, do things like VST integration etc.

There's probably serious flaws in this plan, and it's probably ridiculously expensive to produce, but it would be cool

On 2005-06-19 10:36, astroman wrote:

On 2005-06-19 10:00, sharc wrote:
...But what sort of PC standard are we talking here. By the same note, I could call my Noah a PC. ...

I'm afraid not
Your NOAH has a USB based communication interface which feeds a graphical representation on a remote computer's screen.

It's not an independant networked box, as the Wave things obviously are (and a Linux based SFP would be).

Yes, but would I be right in saying the Noah's USB connection is not too different from the likes of the Nord Modular communcating over midi. Personally, I would go for the LAN option as it's likely to stay standard for a longer period. But there may be other things to take into account

Basically, all I'm saying is that for too long the Scope platform has been held back and hampered by the limitations/bugs of the platform on which it is based (inside yer Computor). Do you have any hardware in your studio? Surely you wouldn't suggest that you spend any less time cursing your computer than any other studio kit...If so you must be one of the lucky few.

While I agree that sequencers have to be taken into account, it's for very different reasons. In my opinion one of the best things that could be developed for the CW platform at this momnet in time is a VST wrapper of some sort. This way cw card (and hopefully external box) users could run have the best of both worlds. Did somebody say 'Muse Receptor'.

Then there's the new wave of palmtop computers that look set to revolutionise music production - Oh, but wait a minute...I don't see a PCI slot!!

Like NOTbob was saying, this is all 'future prediction stuff' and should be treated as such. I'm not in any way rubbishing CW cards (or at least that's not my intention). I just simply wanted to respond to John's suggestion of a possible way forward for the platform.

On 2005-06-19 10:20, notbobmoog wrote:
Astroman.. I think you're also missing the point. The STDM bus will be no longer be an issue in external units...

...Thanks to John for getting some of us thinkers thinking !

maybe you're a good thinker, but it looks like you're not such a good reader...
I mentioned the S/TDM bus in context of inter-card-communication because Sharc deduced the '3 cards limit' from PCI bus communication, and obviously asked for confirmation.

slight sarcasm intended for the elitist statement that closes your post

btw my comment about about a Linux based SFP box is pretty much in line with the Wave thing and I've posted the same months ago in the discussions about WHY SFP should be ported to Linux.
I'm probably known to be a confessing Open Source opponent - but I'd be a*shole enough to take advantage of it...

imho John's post pointed to market chances of such boxes in the first place, as obviously people are willing to pay significant amounts for them.
Wouldn't it be nice if they did for SFP based ones to fill CWA's wallet, so those could continue developement ?

cheers, Tom

On 2005-06-19 12:01, sharc wrote:
...Then there's the new wave of palmtop computers that look set to revolutionise music production - Oh, but wait a minute...I don't see a PCI slot!!

Sharc, I'm in no way interested in 'defending' the PCI slot.
But there IS NO performance reason to replace it for audio apps in the current sense.

This has nothing to do with innovation - it's production efficiency (only 3.3V) plus new sales triggers.

cheers, Tom

There is much to think about in regard to this interesting suggestion that John poses us here. I think that there are many things to take into account before even thinking of moving a finger… it’s a big challenge CWA is facing up nowadays, and this thread is not by chance… I’m sure…

The fist thing I would like to state, is that these guys at Creamware, and quite a few of the plug-in makers for the platform like John Bowen himself, are a bunch of amazing creative people, extremely talented and capable, as it has been demonstrated through all these years. I have to particularly stress the “brilliant genius idea” that Frank Hund had, to conceive the SCOPE platform – (nobody should take if for granted). YOU PEOPLE CAN DO BIG THINGS!!! I’m more than certain. Said that, I think the most important is already there: “Creative People”.

Next, what comes to my mind is: should CWA go for a solution that includes the current users and their old boards, or should they go for a completely new market? If the solution, whatever it may be, does not include a “link” between the old and the new, thousands of costumers will be lost, as they will start watching all around before getting into another CWA proposals again. This is basic in human nature; people like trying new things if the have the opportunity. I would include here the “continuation” of the SCOPE software itself, i.e., if people can still use what they have learned with much struggle for years: complex platform connectivity between software and hardware, work-flow, use of plug-ins, the STS series, etc., etc., that would be a great point, otherwise, again, many current costumers would simply leave CWA, looking perhaps for simpler solutions.

Another point, these boxes should be much, much more powerful than current SCOPE boards to be attractive enough, against the CPU world, and they “must” be upgradeable at reasonable princes, for as long a time as possible.

A third point with this future external boards should be to be able to run VST and DirectX plugins, which would be a big plus and that could sell the boards to a wider range of costumers. There are no new recording studios in the world without VST plugins and the need for more power to use them.

Anyway, I think taking a decision to build a revolutionary board like proposed here, needs a deep insight into the music market and emergent technology by CWA team themselves, and us too, the musicians and users of all kind and budgets.

Despite what I have said about people liking the “new” at every moment, this is not my case, I of course, like new things, but in no way I would change my Pulsar for anything else, as I have all I need, and I already know how to work with it. I have joked a few times saying that there is just one thing better than a Pulsar, and this is two Pulsars!

Sharc, I'm in no way interested in 'defending' the PCI slot.
But there IS NO performance reason to replace it for audio apps in the current sense.

This has nothing to do with innovation - it's production efficiency (only 3.3V) plus new sales triggers.

I'm sorry, but what do the volatage requirements have to do with what I'm talking about? A LAN device would obviously need to be externally powered. Furthermore I think I've put forward a few decent points with regard to sales in terms of diversifying the market and reaping the benefits of all that virtual studio technology has to 0ffer. After all, it's all there in the Scope Platform. It just needs to be properly implemted in it's own right. That's how I feel CW are on the right track with the ASB boxes.

On 2005-06-19 12:48, Nestor wrote:
should CWA go for a solution that includes the current users and their old boards, or should they go for a completely new market? If the solution, whatever it may be, does not include a “link” between the old and the new, thousands of costumers will be lost

Surely, an external solution would again be the best option as, assuming that CW has started using faster DSP's, an internal expansion of an old CW card sytem would be forced to run at slower speeds?

The external solution could meanwhile run as fast as it's supposed to, while communicating with the card based system.

an external box is NOT a better solution for me. one box intstead of two is better for me. i STILL like the cards! for obvious reasons(cable length and latencies with high bandwidth tranfers, for example) the card is superior in performance and in a desktop, it is easier to transport. those with laptops may prefer a box and i can understand that, i'm not against it, but i would like to see the cards continue. no laptop is going to rival any desktop in real world performance soon and for obvious reasons again(heat and power usage for starters...).

On 2005-06-19 12:50, sharc wrote:
...
I'm sorry, but what do the volatage requirements have to do with what I'm talking about? A LAN device would obviously need to be externally powered. ...

above you wrote 'oh, but wait I don't see no PCI bus'
I was trying to explain WHY you don't see it (at least partially - if you remove the 5V supply line from the mobo, it straightens design, you spare rectifier, regulators, capacitors and filters AND you generate much less heat, ergo you either can simplify cooling or drive the CPU hotter - etc.

On 2005-06-19 03:04, Stige wrote:

On 2005-06-18 19:26, garyb wrote:
i still like the cards over a stinkin' box...

...And I don't . pci bus is dying. It's already choking and unusable, as we can see in the newest generation of mobo's.

and my statements (about PCI) refer to the quote above, which implies that there are technical reasons, 'progress' that makes the bus obsolete - and as the usual subconcious association all PCI devices are obsolete as well.

cheers, Tom

On 2005-06-16 17:49, johnbowen wrote:
...
This is an expensive solution, ...

(shortened: no need for DSPs as CPUs get more powerful)
...and yet, here you have a very sucessful company producing something that, to my mind, is very similar.

Is this something like what CWA should be looking to produce for Pulsar/Scope products?

Consider the price Waves is charging ($1600 and $2400). ... But, oh, that would be "too expensive" for the majority of the Creamware audience...
... It IS a problem of hobbyist versus professional perception, as Spirit pointed out re: VST plugs and Creamware plugs.

...but why didn't/couldn't CWA have this possibilty? What can the company do to change this?
...
I suspect these boxes use Motorola DSPs....I'm awaiting something similar to run my Scope devices!
...

to bring this back to the original topic: there is not a single hint about any techie features in John's original post, which is quoted in parts above.
It's about market chances and that he'd be happy to put his stuff on such a box if CWA provides one.

cheers, Tom

Agreed, Astroman.
<br>
& BTW my comments were more sarcastic than elitist >;-)
<br>
I was simply pointing out the tangential nature of the posts on John's thread.
<br>
He sowed a seed, he sparked imaginations, mine included. (all be it with a techie wonder box)
<br>As John pointed out in another thread, he can't port Solaris to ASB or NOAH because they have no host CPU. Scope in a box boxes be they rackmount or desktop, would solve this issue & unlike the ASB's, would run a whole scope platform if they contained a custom host rather than relying on an external one.
<br>
As mentioned by someone earlier, the only drain on your Scope would be for remote software editing done via whatever, oh & of course, for mixing & mastering all those I/O's from the box, should you wish.
<br>
Of course, full system integration with our current cards & the Noah would be nice, but i fear the worst on that front. I'll be frank here. I reckon it'll be a bloody miracle
if CWA get this lot fully integrated with a new OS & hardware integrating seemlessly with old cards without the new ones being slowed down. Not to mention Noah & ASB.
<br>
A total miracle.
<br>
But bring it on tho, i can't wait to see how it pans out CWA ??? .... >;-)

OK then. What really was the point of this thread? If it was just looking for a yes/no answer. Then yes, I think external hardware boxes would be good way forward.

If it was asking what we think CW will ACTUALLY produce next then your guess is as good as mine. The thread just gave me (and it would seem some others too) some ideas. I'm sorry if I've wasted any of your time by sharing them. I appreciate that everyone doesn't share the same viewpoint though.

The point ??
<br>
the Waves boxes
<br>
my view? >>> A nice idea me thinks.
<br>
It's quality looking hardware
<br>
Up to 8 networkable units ...
<br>
Each box runs a load of Waves plugs ...
<br>
Quality stuff
<br>
Just need to go & ROB A BANK
<br>
Or maybe a Post Office would do the job.