I am looking into purchasing a Scope 4.0 Professional package. I've been looking at the UAD-1 and TC Powercore Firewire and it just seems that this packages gives 1000 times more than these do for the price. I am just not sure of the bugs and reliability of the Scope 4.0 Professional hardware/software.
I have a Mac G4 Dual 450mhz processors, 1.5GB Ram,Mac OS 9.2.2, external 40gb hard drive and the usual stuff that comes with the G4.
My sequencer I am running is the Cubase VST 5.2.2. I have been wanting to upgrade to Cubase SX2 OR Cubase SX3, But I have been considering purchasing Logic PRO 7.0(considering apple now owns emagic it shouls run pretty good on their OWN system and seems to be the best bet). I just have been using Cubase for about 4 years and did not really want to learn a new sequencer. But I will If I think it will run good and help me with my productivity.
So the question I am asking which Mac G4 should I purchase to run the Scope 4.0 Professional card? Will there be any changes that I will have to make to the computer in order for the Scope Platform to run on the recommended mac. I also plan on running 2 "19 monitors.
I have been planning for awhile to upgrade my mac to a faster G4(unfortunately I cannot afford a G5 at the moment). I was looking at purchasing the PowerMac G4 Dual/1.42 processors, 1.5-2.0GB Ram running OSX and possible running either Cubase SX2/3 or Logic Pro(Leaning more toward Logic Pro) to run the Scope 4.0 Professional Platform on.
Would this be ok, with minimal problems? Please give any recommendations or help that would better help me made my decision on what to purchase that will work with the Scope 4.0 Professional Platform.
Any help would be greatly appreciated considering I am NEW when it comes to Creamware products.
Thanks,
Russell
I
Spec Recomendations for a mac for a Scope 4.0 Professional
-
Mr Arkadin
- Posts: 3283
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Well, first off you do know that SCOPE 4 does NOT run in OS X, OS9.2.2 is the OS of choice. To give you some idea here is my system which runs very smoothly:
Mac AGP G4 500MHZ single proc (no snickering at the back) with OS9.2.2, OMS2.3.8, 768MB RAM, Cubase VST/32 5.1r1
SCOPE Project (balanced jacks) and SCOPE Booster (giving 20 DSPs)
As you're stuck with OS9.2.2 to run SCOPE, you're stuck with VST 5.1, but to be honest Cubase's SX Mac support seems very poor and i am certainly not thinking of continuing on Cubase if OS X becomes an option.
Yes, you're right in terms of SCOPE offering more than the others in some respects (though you'll want some of the nice extras to really make SCOPE shine). It is certainlt the most flexible system i've used, more akin to hardware patching, where anything can be plugged into anything, including itself if needs be.
So there you have it, the SCOPE system is designed to take the load off you're computer (hence my 500MHz proc being OK - i only use three VSTi and no native processinf - SCOPE sounds much better).
It might be an idea to tell us you're objectives musically etc. Do you want lots of synths, or are you more interested in tracking external/acoustic sources, sampling, mixing, mastering or what? SCOPE can do all these but people could highlight strengths and weaknesses depending on your designed usage.
Regards,
Mr A
PS. It might be an idea in future to break up your posts into smaller paragraphs for ease of reading
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2005-02-11 07:42 ]</font>
Mac AGP G4 500MHZ single proc (no snickering at the back) with OS9.2.2, OMS2.3.8, 768MB RAM, Cubase VST/32 5.1r1
SCOPE Project (balanced jacks) and SCOPE Booster (giving 20 DSPs)
As you're stuck with OS9.2.2 to run SCOPE, you're stuck with VST 5.1, but to be honest Cubase's SX Mac support seems very poor and i am certainly not thinking of continuing on Cubase if OS X becomes an option.
Yes, you're right in terms of SCOPE offering more than the others in some respects (though you'll want some of the nice extras to really make SCOPE shine). It is certainlt the most flexible system i've used, more akin to hardware patching, where anything can be plugged into anything, including itself if needs be.
So there you have it, the SCOPE system is designed to take the load off you're computer (hence my 500MHz proc being OK - i only use three VSTi and no native processinf - SCOPE sounds much better).
It might be an idea to tell us you're objectives musically etc. Do you want lots of synths, or are you more interested in tracking external/acoustic sources, sampling, mixing, mastering or what? SCOPE can do all these but people could highlight strengths and weaknesses depending on your designed usage.
Regards,
Mr A
PS. It might be an idea in future to break up your posts into smaller paragraphs for ease of reading
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2005-02-11 07:42 ]</font>
-
hubird
G4/733/896 here 
Pulsar2+XTC card (12 Sharcs), OMS and Cubase VST5.
I use also VST(i's), so I have to bounce tracks to audio to save CPU.
733 Mhz is getting less and less...
It works, but it limits anyway.
System as a whole works great, Scope is ultra stable and sounds great.
Cubase sometimes crashes, but we all have bad days
ASIO isn't perfect, OSX does have advantages...
Alltogether it's a great set, yet I really hope Creamware is working hard at OSX and G5 hardware support
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2005-02-10 23:33 ]</font>
Pulsar2+XTC card (12 Sharcs), OMS and Cubase VST5.
I use also VST(i's), so I have to bounce tracks to audio to save CPU.
733 Mhz is getting less and less...
It works, but it limits anyway.
System as a whole works great, Scope is ultra stable and sounds great.
Cubase sometimes crashes, but we all have bad days
ASIO isn't perfect, OSX does have advantages...
Alltogether it's a great set, yet I really hope Creamware is working hard at OSX and G5 hardware support
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2005-02-10 23:33 ]</font>
a wintel machine might be worth it if you are going to run sx. the current hard/software is fast and, if set up properly, as stable as a mac. if you're willing to set it up yourself(happy to give a parts list), you can build a top notch machine w/1gb of the best ram, a 3.2mhz cpu, 2 big hard drives, dvd writer, nice case etc, all top quality parts for about $1000u.s....
the mac option is certainly a good one, however, the lack of osx support may slow you a bit. personally, i don't care if it's pc or mac as long as i can get work done.
i would say that this platform is worth every bit of whatever compromises you must make. the sound quality is unsurpassed except maybe by $40,000 systems and the flexibility and functionality are unrivaled...
just mho...
the mac option is certainly a good one, however, the lack of osx support may slow you a bit. personally, i don't care if it's pc or mac as long as i can get work done.
i would say that this platform is worth every bit of whatever compromises you must make. the sound quality is unsurpassed except maybe by $40,000 systems and the flexibility and functionality are unrivaled...
just mho...