Page 1 of 3
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 7:55 am
by Kymeia
What PC sequencer has the best compatibility with the Scope platform? At the moment I use Logic 5.51 but if I was to migrate to another, as I will eventually need to, now I have Scope, what would be my best choice? Are there any that definately don't work well with it?
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 8:41 am
by genoxcide
in the SFP mode there are no problems as far as i recognized with different Hosts supporting ASIO.
Cubase, Nuando, FLStudio and Orion Platinum are working good with it.
In XTC mode it's very different.
Cubase, Nuendo working good.
FLStudio cannot support the latencies of the XTC plugs
Orion Platinum won't load XTC at all...
cheerz,
GenoX
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 9:04 am
by Kymeia
Thanks that's useful - I know what to avoid then
How well does Logic work (considering it's getting a bit elderly - though still love it)?
Sonar would be my first choice at the moment for a new host - closely folowed by Samplitude (but a bit too expensive perhaps) not keen on Cubase tbh - anyone working with Sonar, do they hit it off OK?
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 9:27 am
by phatbob
Logic 6. On a mac. They work together perfectly.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 9:32 am
by Kymeia
Aah yes - but that's still being updated. I'm stuck with the windows cul de sac.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 10:13 am
by Basic Pitch
I know some people here use Sonar,
Not sure who exactly, try a search for sonar. Also if you plan to work in SFP mode, I see not reason why "ANY" modern sequencer would not work with a scope card, its when you try and go into XTC mode your gonna find the differencer, Steinberg being a leader in the pack for a PC solution due to its PDC, this is surely a handy thing to have, not sure if Sonar supports PFD or not, dont think so though.
Cheers!
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 10:50 am
by BingoTheClowno
The problem with OrionPlatinum is that when OP is scanning the VST folder for VST pluggins and XTC is not enabled, the VSTs won't be added to the list. Otherwise OP is a fine sequencer.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 11:11 am
by Plato
Cubase SX2 rocks
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 11:51 am
by Shayne White
Sonar works awesomely with Scope. XTC plugins will work OK *but* you may not be able to access the I/Os (I know of one person who did, but I couldn't figure it out myself). However if you plan to work in Live Bar mode it should work just fine. You may or may not get WDM to work, but there's always ASIO to fall back on.
There are just a couple of issues with ASIO: recorded audio gets shifted ahead of where it's supposed to be, so you have to put a delay corresponding to the ULLI latency on the recording channels; and you may get some clicks and pops when using lots of envelopes. However if you set envelopes to "jump" when they're not actually changing values, it'll work just fine.
This will probably scare you away, but really, I am using Sonar and Scope and producing lots of music without hiccups. Sonar's new bus architecture and monitoring system makes it very easy to integrate DirectX/VST effects into my Scope projects; it also has a lot of other nifty features. The interfaces match too!
Shayne
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 12:46 pm
by garyb
i use sonar3, cubase sx 2.0 and logic platinum 5.5.1.
my sonar use is very limited but it works fine. of the three,it is the least "solid".
cubase sx is my current favorite. it REALLY sounds good! downsides are that it is a resource hog and the stock plugin assortment is thin(but good!).
logic was my first sequencer and the features and built in effects still are among the best(add a program like fx freeze and it's only disadvantage over the others that i see is it's lack of beatslicing ,not the end of the world).i really like logic's mixer and routing much better than the others..unfortunately,the "hardness" of the sound compared to cubase sx's "warmth", "body" and smoothness have caused me to use logic less and less......
functionally most everything plays pretty well with scope that i have seen.
oh yes! i almost forgot i use samplitude 6 for mastering and it works very nicely.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 6:26 pm
by bassdude
On 2004-05-04 13:46, garyb wrote:
..unfortunately,the "hardness" of the sound compared to cubase sx's "warmth", "body" and smoothness have caused me to use logic less and less......
......
oh yes! i almost forgot i use samplitude 6 for mastering and it works very nicely.
Is the difference really that noticeable? I wonder if it's because there is some integrated plugin technology trickery(e.g. true tape style) which might also explain why it is a resource hog?
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 6:56 pm
by Guest
without a doubt, cubase SX 2.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 7:57 pm
by garyb
On 2004-05-04 19:26, bassdude wrote:
Is the difference really that noticeable? I wonder if it's because there is some integrated plugin technology trickery(e.g. true tape style) which might also explain why it is a resource hog?
yes, it's that noticable and yes, i think that is why it's such a resource hog.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 8:05 pm
by Shayne White
Well, if Cakewalk went around putting tape architecture into Sonar, I'd write them a flame message and switch to something else. "Warmth" simply means "cutting out the high end" and is something I NEVER use on ANY of my recordings. I always use the purest, cleanest signal I can possibly find. No bells, no whistles. A little EQ *after* recording, and that's about it.
I know now why I've never switched to Cubase...
Shayne
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 8:40 pm
by garyb
cubase sounds very natural and musical.
sonar sounds good too.
Posted: Tue May 04, 2004 9:10 pm
by valis
Are you sure the 'warmth' and 'harshness' you're ascribing isn't the result of the stock plugs that come with each? Having used both myself I think that the most noticeable differences are the way the engines treat panning and dithering when you bounce UNTIL you start using stock plugs (and by this I mostly mean the EQ on Cubase's channels). I used to avoid the EQ on Nuendo (I own 1.x) but my friend with 2.x has proven to me that it sounds much better (less ringing). Logic's eq's are decent tools for doing subtractive work (hipass lopass etc) but when I need to do more complicated things I usually revert to Waves or Sonalksis (or SFP!) etc.
Posted: Wed May 05, 2004 12:36 am
by garyb
yes,i'm sure. many people have commented on how much better things sound. the difference is most apparent with NO plugs of any kind. the difference is one that can be heard regardless of the type of material or mix(and there have been a few very different examples lately)
the difference is not the difference between crap and nice.the difference is between nice and nicer(imho). sx does a much better job(more realistic) summing tracks to a single bus.
Posted: Wed May 05, 2004 12:41 am
by spacef
SX is the easier. Sound is pretty fine, much much better than in cubase VST (crap mettalic sound). Make sure to give a try to Samplitude. I don't know any samplitude user who would revert to any other sequencer.
Posted: Wed May 05, 2004 4:31 am
by kwild
On 2004-05-04 12:51, Shayne White wrote:
Sonar works awesomely with Scope. XTC plugins will work OK *but* you may not be able to access the I/Os (I know of one person who did, but I couldn't figure it out myself). However if you plan to work in Live Bar mode it should work just fine. You may or may not get WDM to work, but there's always ASIO to fall back on.
There are just a couple of issues with ASIO: recorded audio gets shifted ahead of where it's supposed to be, so you have to put a delay corresponding to the ULLI latency on the recording channels; and you may get some clicks and pops when using lots of envelopes. However if you set envelopes to "jump" when they're not actually changing values, it'll work just fine.
This will probably scare you away, but really, I am using Sonar and Scope and producing lots of music without hiccups. Sonar's new bus architecture and monitoring system makes it very easy to integrate DirectX/VST effects into my Scope projects; it also has a lot of other nifty features. The interfaces match too!
Shayne
Im working with sonar 3.1.1 with asio,rocksolid and great sequencer.
Shayne i have this problem too,so,what i must do to solve it?
If i have a latency (for example) of 21.7 msec. i must put a delay before the asio dest giving it a delay of 21.7?
Is that correct?
Another question....
What kind of ASIO are u using on sonar?
ASIO 1 or ASIO 2?I've read a post weeks ago sayng that ASIO 1 is better for sonar.
I don't use direct monitoring...
Regards...
http://www.kwild.com
Posted: Wed May 05, 2004 2:36 pm
by spacef
To Garyb : you prefer SX over samplitude ? why is that ? the sound ? (i don't have samplitude, I'm just very attracted to it).