PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

The June issue of Future Music has a roundup of six DSP systems (The editorial also makes the point that hardware systems are less open to software piracy):
CW Scope
Muse Research Receptor
Roland Varios
UAD-1
TC Powercore
Manifold Labs Plugzilla

They're all quite different beasts, but Scope comes out as "pricey" and "relatively underpowered".

I was a bit disappointed that there was no effort to compare the power the various offerings, although I know it's not possible to do this with any great accuracy.

However, it reinforces my feeling that CW should devote all their efforts to beefing up the platform, both HW and SW, and leave developing plugins, for the time being at least, to 3rd parties.

Totaly agree...

1 rack unit Firewire scope with IOs and lots of onboard memory for 1500€ including only basic studio package...

But must be backwards compatible with all current devices...

If it has to be backwards compatible, then it can't run on FireWire, because the devices access system memory and FireWire isn't fast enough -- it's slower than PCI.

PCI EXPRESS -- IT'S THE WAY TO GO!!!!

Shayne

You know, that's really crummy the way they compared Scope to the other DSP platforms. Nothing else has the kind of devices Scope has, and none of them have the kind of SDK we're going to have (very soon, I hope). UAD-1 and PowerCore can't mix live audio on the fly latency-free, and Plugzilla can't do anything except run crappy VST synths like the Pro-53.

You really can't compare Scope to ANYTHING out there, because nothing else EXISTS!!

Shayne

well that's the blessing/curse of reviews. the writer was obviously comparing a very limited scope(no pun) of behaviors. it's like comparing a ferrari to a bunch of astrovans and finding the ferrari to be overpriced and underpowered because it lacked cargo space. or toyotas and a bentley and finding that the bentley was a bad choice because is took up too much parking space.

both those comparisons are only true looking at a very limited set of circumstances and are only as useful as comparing the proverbial apples and oranges.

future music tells you right in it's name that it is primarily looking at the hobbiest and so it gives a hobbiest assessment. hobbiests would certainly find more under the hood of the scope system like anyone else, but hobbiests often are just consumers,needing the mostest for the cheapest and since consumers are basically children, they don't want something quality and deep, they want something flashy and full of fat(like mcdonalds )

funny to even think of comparing scope to those products, as though they were all mutually exclusive. the fact is, those other products could be used WITH scope and they'd be better with scope as well.....

Huh, they left out the world's best-known DSP system.

If they had reviewed Digidesign's HD1, I bet ya CreamWare would have come out looking cheap and relatively overpowered.

Johann
Victoria, B.C., Canada

On 2004-05-27 13:02, Shayne White wrote:
Nothing else has the kind of devices Scope has

To be fair, they mention the great quality and quantity of plugins but point out that, unlike say PowerCore, CW hasn't succeeded in attracting any really big name developers. If CW were to concentrate on the HW/SW platform it might encourage others to develop for it rather than compete against it.

C'mon, this is Future Music we're talking about - what do you expect? This rag is barely above kiddie level.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2004-05-27 14:44 ]</font>

On 2004-05-27 14:41, Mr Arkadin wrote:
C'mon, this is Future Music we're talking about - what do you expect?

I know what you're saying but this year they've gone up slightly in my estimation after getting interviews with Brian Eno and John Cale.

In that case doodyrh you might like to know i bumped into Brian Eno at a coach stop in Oxford a couple of weeks ago and even had a bit of a chat - he even waved good bye when he got off the coach - what a nice chap. Sorry couldn't resist that bit of name dropping.

Also worth noting is all his albums are coming out soon properly remastered - well worth getting.

FM have covered my hero Gary Numan many times but it still doesn't excuse their lame reviews (usually 2 pages to SOS's 7-8 seems to be the norm).

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2004-05-27 15:18 ]</font>

On 2004-05-27 15:18, Mr Arkadin wrote:
...i bumped into Brian Eno at a coach stop in Oxford a couple of weeks ago and even had a bit of a chat...

Cooolllll!!!!!

Did you prostrate yourself and wail "I'm not worthy"? (though of course you are )

Did you prostrate yourself and wail "I'm not worthy"?

Not quite i did call him 'Mr Eno' though as i thought using his first name seemed too familiar.

i have done an 'I'm not worthy' when Christopher Lee walked past my workplace once though. Needless to say i looked quite foolish


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2004-05-27 15:46 ]</font>

C'mon, this is Future Music we're talking about - what do you expect? This rag is barely above kiddie level.

Yeah, I know...they're like the Getout (I mean Guitar) Center of magazines.

In fact, I think Sound on Sound is the only magazine that is worth looking at, though they seem to focus more on hardware than software. (We don't get some of the German synth mags here in the U.S.)

Shayne

_________________
Discover Human Music by Shayne White at: http://www.shaynesworld.com

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shayne White on 2004-05-27 16:11 ]</font>

On 2004-05-27 16:10, Shayne White wrote:

In fact, I think Sound on Sound is the only magazine that is worth looking at, though they seem to focus more on hardware than software. (We don't get some of the German synth mags here in the U.S.)

Tape Op is kind of the "underground" SOS. Fantastic mag! Though again very little software - related stuff.

Mix occasionally has good reviews of SW...

We don't get most of *any* decent mags up here in Canada.

- Johann

I would tend to agree about FM. Those in doubt take a look at its 'sister' magazine Computer Music which tells you every issue how to 'get started with your own software studio.'

Tape Op is kind of the "underground" SOS. Fantastic mag! Though again very little software - related stuff.

Anything with the word "tape" in it I try to avoid...

On 2004-05-27 23:40, valis wrote:
I would tend to agree about FM. Those in doubt take a look at its 'sister' magazine Computer Music which tells you every issue how to 'get started with your own software studio.'

There's a market for that too.
A bit like that men's wedding magazine I heard was launched recently. You're not expected to read it forever cos it repeats itself ad nauseum, but it gets you started....

I subscribe to SOS but sometimes I'd rather have the executive summary on a piece of kit I'm never going to buy.

lol doodyrh

Having worked for a few hardware/software firms I'd say that many magazines are pretty biased towards the companies that woo them. Nothing so overt as bribing, but the things that our marketing 'reps' used to do for magazine reviewers went well beyond just trading business cards at trade shows.


Even for magazines that are able to remain a bit more 'impartial' they tend to lock in a specific subset of a market and if you stayed inside their pages you could easily miss out on many many many interesting products. I've seen this from PC's (the Ziff-davis empire and their 'favorites) to Graphic design (the 3d market) and in music.

Even thought SoS may still be long-winded its definately one of my favorites, even though its import cost is typically 2x that of every other mag.

Mr Arkadin wrote:

C'mon, this is Future Music we're talking about - what do you expect? This rag is barely above kiddie level.

Don't be so sure about that - last issue's join-the-dots and colour-by-numbers sections were rather advanced!

(aside: I know quite a few people who work @ Future, my pervious housemate is a freelance graphics designer who works for them as they're based in Bath, with their other divisions being in London)

Royston