how many DSP for modular IV ?

[astroman]

well, imo he's just trolling
first asking bla bla how much power dunno bla then comes up with that he actually HAS a 6 DSP xtc-card in his PC aside with 3 UAD cards.

10 year old software ?
people actually PAY big for that stuff, if it's in a Lexicon or Neve box - hopefully he's not gonna declare those boxes 'analogue reverbs'
That REALLY IS 30 year old software ticking in them and the guys from UAD are only TRYING to yield similiar results.
Eventually those folks choose a more 'musical' DSP after ripping people (according to quantic's logic) with a totally outdated and otherwise unsellable GPU (which the UAD1 is after all).
The 'methods' behind the models are even older ...

Add the price argument which strangely returns time and again in this section, postet time and again via similiar newbie accounts - sorry, I've fooled too. It's just plain bullsh*t.

cheers, Tom

[quantic]

well, imo he's just trolling
first asking bla bla how much power dunno bla then comes up with that he actually HAS a 6 DSP xtc-card in his PC aside with 3 UAD cards.

I have never said that, guy... Only my XTC is not any more in the computer, it rots at the bottom of a drawer... and i kept the 3 UAD-1

& I do not even speak about conflicts between my pulsar and cubase, despairing....
I thought only that since, sonic core / creamware had developed his cards by changing dsp, but that also, as plugs, that did not change, it was the object of my initial question because I was convinced that the card equipment had evolved.

[garyb]

your ignorance knows no bounds.
the code is what's important. old or new, the dsps work pretty much the same. please send me your rotting card. there are NO problems with Scope and Cubase. Cubase is my main sequencer, and a lot of others use the same. the problem is that you don't know what you're doing, you sure don't sound like an engineer, and you're probably not even a musician. please troll elsewhere.

if you wanted some help, you're welcome to it, it would be my pleasure, but if you just want to make trouble or speak about things you don't understand, i don't think anyone here has much patience for that.

[quantic]

the code is what's important. old or new, the dsps work pretty much the same.

ok, it's why i keep my 1979 texas instrument calculator for everyday ....

[garyb]

well, that seems smart, but actually it shows that you just don't know anything about the ad sharc processors in question. it's about algorythms not processors. if that WAS a calculator, it would certainly be as useful as ever. that's how instruments and tools work.

sorry sonny, it's past my bedtime. if you seriously troll here, we'll just make fun of you and then you'll flame back and then you'll get banned. if you are interested in Scope or you need help with your system, then i think i speak for everyone here in saying that you're most welcome and we'd all love to talk and help. i think i'm safe in saying that if you are only here to be a wisacre and make trouble, that you should not post.

[quantic]

well, that seems smart, but actually it shows that you just don't know anything about the ad sharc processors in question. it's about algorythms not processors. if that WAS a calculator, it would certainly be as useful as ever. that's how instruments and tools work.

so could you explain to me why the XITE contains new DSP, if the old sharcs are so good ?

I believe that I was understood here. I do not say that creamware / sonic core is bad, on the contrary I think that the duet XITE + modular (with Flexor) is the most accomplished and the most creative product actualy on the market.

Simply, I find that the offer is badly conceived, and that a rack less expensive is missing, a rack some people could use with only the modular, comfortably... without being necessarily interested to pay for old plugs for mastering / effects, in my opinion.

The modular would justify the creation of a less expensive machine and less power, specially dedicated to this plug. Free to people to add, after by paying, additional power.

[quantic]

well, that seems smart, but actually it shows that you just don't know anything about the ad sharc processors in question. it's about algorythms not processors. if that WAS a calculator, it would certainly be as useful as ever. that's how instruments and tools work.

so could you explain why the XITE contains new DSP, if the old sharcs are so good ?

I believe that I was misunderstood here. I do not say that creamware / sonic core is bad, on the contrary I think that the duet XITE + modular (with Flexor) is the most accomplished and the most creative product actualy on the market.

Simply, I find that the offer is badly conceived, and that a rack less expensive is missing, a rack some people could use with only the modular, comfortably... without being necessarily interested to pay for old plugs for mastering / effects, in my opinion.

The modular would justify the creation of a less expensive machine and less power, specially dedicated to this plug. Free to people to add, after by paying, additional power.

[garyb]

more power, to run more devices.
dsps are REALTIME processors, unlike the cpu in your computer. the REALTIME algorythm doesn't change. the quality and complexity of a device determines how much power it requires, so more processors=more devices. dsps are what run more hardware audio devices and most synths, too. there are many older reverbs that are just as excellent as anything made today. real gear doesn't become obsolete because if it ever really sounded good, it STILL really sounds good. people still use compressors made in the 60's, synths made in the 70's, tape machines made in the 70's and 80's and microphones made in the 30's.

the older dsps can do EXACTLY what the newer ones can do, but it takes more of them to do the same job. the new XITE is stupidly, crazily, massively powerful. it runs what is basically the same Scope software as the cards, though.

actually, the cpu is capable of doing quite an astonishing amount of work in near realtime, but it has so many functions to do, that really intense algorythms make a fast system crawl. that's the nice thing about the dsps, they only do one job at a time, so while you are limited in how much you can run, still(there are always limits), you can run some really high quality stuff without slowing down the rest of the system. the new dsps just allow the XITE to be so powerful that most will not use all the power available even if ALL the audio processing for a BIG mix is on the dsps. there is a limit to how many dsps can run at the same time. the XITE is beyond the limit, with the older dsps, it would have to be less than 1/3 of the power(at roughly the same price).

[garyb]

well, that seems smart, but actually it shows that you just don't know anything about the ad sharc processors in question. it's about algorythms not processors. if that WAS a calculator, it would certainly be as useful as ever. that's how instruments and tools work.

so could you explain to me why the XITE contains new DSP, if the old sharcs are so good ?

I believe that I was understood here. I do not say that creamware / sonic core is bad, on the contrary I think that the duet XITE + modular (with Flexor) is the most accomplished and the most creative product actualy on the market.

Simply, I find that the offer is badly conceived, and that a rack less expensive is missing, a rack some people could use with only the modular, comfortably... without being necessarily interested to pay for old plugs for mastering / effects, in my opinion.

The modular would justify the creation of a less expensive machine and less power, specially dedicated to this plug. Free to people to add, after by paying, additional power.

sure! the thing is that the cards still work great, even if S/C currently has none, there are used ones that can be found. Scope cards last a long time, my first card is iver 10 years old and still works great. your xtc card could be used with another card and both could share dsps.

there will most likely be a smaller version of the XITE, but S/C had to start somewhere with the new pci-e product. there are some 15 people total at S/C, there are not yamaha they can't make everything for everyone, but i'm sure that they'd love to get your business, and if that meant a cut down version, that'd be in the plans, but it might be a while....

btw- UAD is a great product, but did you realize that Scope cards were the effects processors and Scope plugins were the stock effects on the $250,000 Fairlight Constellation? also, did you know that the movie Gladiator was mixed in Scope? Scope is not inferior to UAD, they are, if anything, complimentary, both just tools.

[Mr Arkadin]

btw- UAD is a great product, but did you realize that Scope cards were the effects processors and Scope plugins were the stock effects on the $250,000 Fairlight Constellation? also, did you know that the movie Gladiator was mixed in Scope?

Obviously Fairlight are deaf and Zimmer is a hack without a clue.

I have never said that, guy... Only my XTC is not any more in the computer, it rots at the bottom of a drawer... and i kept the 3 UAD-1

So you already have 9 DSP at your disposal and haven't even tried Scope 4.0. Why ask about 3 DSP when you have a 6DSP card?

[astroman]

so could you explain why the XITE contains new DSP, if the old sharcs are so good ? ...

for the simply fact that they offer 5 times the processing power for roughly the same price.
Right out of the box.
The new chips may offer another 100% increase by processing twice the amount of data per clock cycle (SIMD).
While this doesn't apply to all instructions, it's an important improvement.
Sonic Core has to adjust the base software to take advantage of this feature, which is a major enterprise.
There's a serious amount of code to be considered - that's why they are really busy.
The Scope environment isn't even remotely comparable to UAD plugins even if parts of the (plugin) code might well be identical (on UAD's version 2 cards).

UAD's plugins are 'snapped' into the VST host interface, one at a time and totally independent.
Scope plugins have to comply with a much wider context, as you might know from your XTC card.
To the sequencer this looks like one single device, but under the hood it's an environment even more complex than the sequencer itself.

As a rule of thumb you can assume about any code that the more abstract (reusable) it's supposed to be, the higher demands regarding software quality.
I'm in the commercial software business for > 20 years and I know a lot of developement systems.
Scope is one of the most outstanding for sure.

Yes indeed - the SFP environment isn't a fixed piece of software. It uses graphical objects to at least arrange audio processing functions in the way the user wants them, possibly it even compiles the stuff on the fly.
That's why it is so powerful and why you don't find any equivalent with any software supplier.
Not even Yamaha could do it. There is just too much manpower behind the system.
Reprogramming is beyond any economic means.

For one this is the reason that it has it's price, but also that it needs relatively few updates.
Scope 1 was almost experimental, version 2 had somewhat 'usable' devices in their basic form, version 3 improved audio quality in a tremendous way, version 4 was more or less ironing out a few things and re-bundle software.
Scope 5 will support the improved Sharc architecture and... yes, support of extended adressing modes of the OS.
It will also improve audio quality as more powerful algorithms are possible, independance from host memory and the PCI bus in that context and it will avoid 44.1k aliasing by providing enough 'sustained power' to run at 96k.
That's a big step forward with a relatively small update fee - as mentioned compare UAD's price tags for just a fraction of the functionality.

I only trust my ears and I don't buy into any marketing hype.
See the comments regarding a totally overhyped reverb above.
IT IS a good device (and useful) - no question at a $250 price tag, but it's lightyears from the holy grail of reverbs.
People may diss Scope's stock compressor, but well... for me it does the job on the electrical bass just fabulous.
I really like that piece of crap

cheers, Tom

[dawman]

I have never said that, guy... Only my XTC is not any more in the computer, it rots at the bottom of a drawer... and i kept the 3 UAD-1

Seems like you solved your question about the power of a 3 x DSP card prior to posting.
XITE-1 and Modular are beyond any platform or plug out there.
I use one live, and love it's new sound quality and power.
You're right though, all of the " Pros " use UAD and ProTools.
But you'll never see them on a stage.
They are not realtime applications, but I am sure you know that too.
I will never be seen staring at the DAW waiting for weak VSTi's or UAD cards to load their presets.
I only wanted to replace a B3/Leslie and rack of hardware samplers years ago.
Were way past that scene these days.
I recently went from a small 16U ATA to a 2U Gig bag.
I am emulating a stage full of hardware I use to use.
You're right though, the XITE-1 was definately not targeted correctly according to the consumer market.
But for guys who want an entire PA system for a live band, or just replace an entire hardware keyboard rig............the XITE-1 is the real deal.
Well its what we use on the big jobs.

[wayne]

It's an oft repeated thread. Someone chimes in saying "scope should be tailored to my needs. I don't care that it can do just about everything else."

There is also a vibe that hard & software in computers must be replaced every year or two. Fair enough, in some cases.

From my life in music, I've seen that good quality instruments appreciate over time.

Scope is a classic instrument - trust an experienced musician on this. It's my secret weapon, and earns a considerable amount of my crust - same as Xite4live and garyb.

We are biased i suppose, as older cats, 'cos we dig the way you can work it like a hardware studio, where we feel at home.

[Sounddesigner]

well, imo he's just trolling
first asking bla bla how much power dunno bla then comes up with that he actually HAS a 6 DSP xtc-card in his PC aside with 3 UAD cards.

I have never said that, guy... Only my XTC is not any more in the computer, it rots at the bottom of a drawer... and i kept the 3 UAD-1

& I do not even speak about conflicts between my pulsar and cubase, despairing....
I thought only that since, sonic core / creamware had developed his cards by changing dsp, but that also, as plugs, that did not change, it was the object of my initial question because I was convinced that the card equipment had evolved.

The dsp's on the scope pci cards may be old but still usable and 1 or 2 14dsp professional cards can accomplish quite a lot (much like the old protools dsp's still being sold that you mentioned pro's would buy, people still accomplish alot with protools}. There really is'nt too many dsp platforms out there with upgraded dsp's and it takes a long time for all of them to upgrade them (much harder to upgrade scope and protools then most others because they are far more complex platforms).

Actually with 3 uad-1's in your system it does'nt appear you are too concerned with old dsp's. Why do you need 3 cards and not 1? Why can't you run the latest uad plugins on them? Good luck with keeping a stable system when you upgrade to newer motherboards with your 3 cards, you complain about compatibility with scope and cubase, i assure you the uad-1's had their problems.


If your truly not interested in scope then why ask all the questions? Especially since you seem to already have all the answers. Why waste your time here if the other gear you own is so good? I personally don't hang on forums of gear i'm not interested in generally. Since i bought SCOPE i really don't buy much of anything else anymore, not like i use to any how. Actually i sold off most Native and all uad's, aswell as some hardware.


EDITED

[quantic]

Why waste your time here if the other gear you own is so good? I personally don't hang on forums of gear i'm not interested in generally. Since i bought SCOPE i really don't buy much of anything else anymore, not like i use to any how.

I made an error, I admit it: I believed by posting my first message, that after all these years S/C had developed their products.
I imagine (stupidly) that some new cards had been conceived with 3 more powerful DSP, so that the modular could work with some good basic patches.

Now it is not the case...
it is always the same old DSP as ten years ago, and the modular always cannot work suitably with 3 little powerful sharcs.

I was a little bit optimistic, sorry...

[Fluxpod]

Sell 3 dsp card and xtc card.Buy 14 dsp card.Done.No need for the xite if you just want to run the mod 2-3-4. 14 dsp cards go from 450 to 600€ depending on plugs.
Its really not that hard to get the right tools for your needs.

[quantic]

not possible, The card (pro) is too big for my computer...

[Fluxpod]

Well thats...not so good then.There is still the 6 dsp card option left which is ok for the modular.

Edit: How did you figure that out btw..that it is too long.Its not much longer then a 6 dsp card.

[quantic]

it's a new (little) PC, my old computer was OK for the XTC

[Fluxpod]

Ok then dont moan when you buy such a pc.You would have the same problem with poco-pthd process cards.