how many dsp does one need to really get the most out of solaris.....I have nine currently.
are there other quality 3rd party synths that will run optimally in my system?
dsp and solaris
well, nine is ok (I have 8 ) - but it's no problem to fire up a dozen more.
On the other hand not all that glitters is gold, and those hi-poly-monster-presets may just cover a lack of creativity and knowledge in sound design.
It doesn't get better just because one is using all and every feature of the synth in a single patch. The Solaris is a particular danger in this context, because it easily covers the range of at least 4 dedicated synths under one surface - plus those ad infinitum 'modular slot extensions'.
While it's probably possible to technically generate almost any imaginable synth sound from the Solaris, it's sometimes easier to switch to a dedicated model for a certain idea.
Wavelength's OP8 and SparC, the PythonPro, SpaceF's Blackbox and Adern's Flexor come to my mind - the latter 2 even (to a degree) integrateable into the Solaris.
Not to forget CWA's SixString plus Minimax and Profit5 for their osc and filter modelling.
That should give you tweaking food for at least the next decade then...
you might want to continue with FX, and the awareness that you can interconnect and combine all the stuff...
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-05-06 11:33 ]</font>
On the other hand not all that glitters is gold, and those hi-poly-monster-presets may just cover a lack of creativity and knowledge in sound design.
It doesn't get better just because one is using all and every feature of the synth in a single patch. The Solaris is a particular danger in this context, because it easily covers the range of at least 4 dedicated synths under one surface - plus those ad infinitum 'modular slot extensions'.
While it's probably possible to technically generate almost any imaginable synth sound from the Solaris, it's sometimes easier to switch to a dedicated model for a certain idea.
Wavelength's OP8 and SparC, the PythonPro, SpaceF's Blackbox and Adern's Flexor come to my mind - the latter 2 even (to a degree) integrateable into the Solaris.
Not to forget CWA's SixString plus Minimax and Profit5 for their osc and filter modelling.
That should give you tweaking food for at least the next decade then...
you might want to continue with FX, and the awareness that you can interconnect and combine all the stuff...
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-05-06 11:33 ]</font>
-
moosethree
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:00 pm
oops, me again ...
same as above - it's a great example of the 'focussed instrument approach', you don't need it technically (if you own Solaris), but it's just much easier to get certain sounds straight. See also:
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... orum=16&10
cheers, Tom
same as above - it's a great example of the 'focussed instrument approach', you don't need it technically (if you own Solaris), but it's just much easier to get certain sounds straight. See also:
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... orum=16&10
cheers, Tom
-
moosethree
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:00 pm
yep looks like I'll get special purpose synths and use Flexor, Phil, and Space F Echo Filtering......somewhere I got the illusion that complex things are better than simpler ones! Not if you avoid working with them! With all the free devices and modular patches coming out all the time....its hard to use lack of new sounds as an excuse to keep cluttering up my work flow!
I have problems with Solaris on a 23 dsp system. It loads weirdly sometimes and is unreliable, I have stopped using it at all.
They are very good at customer support though. They say I am the only one with this problem.
As for nice small synths, the WS101 is fun (a Roland SH09 clone); the free 303 is good but loses midi channel occasionally; and the Creamware ProTone is fantastic.
Nikko (Dadev) do a very good distortion/feedback unit called Disto.
Celmo have the best stuff, his tape echo boxes are great for unusual textures etc. I have not tried his synth Bluewave.
Orbitone Synchrome is also very good, unusual timbres.
HOWEVER most fun recently in my little studio has been from native synths, ie VSTi, such as ImpOSCAR (incredible), Oddity, M-Tron (all from GMedia), and the Novation Vstation.
Also various samplers such as the VSampler, some other romplers etc - these are all very cheap and have a massive range of sounds.
I would prefer in some ways to go VSTi native and forget all the endless tech problems with Creamware - my system is now *almost* stable, but I lost a file yesterday (with Solaris in it) and had to go back a version, losing some work - it seems that native VST type stuff either works, all fine, or doesn't.
Whereas Creamware can collapse mid session (like, on this one yesterday, I got some weird sample rate problem - yet nothing had changed - and the previous file (same settings) was OK. ???). I have spent a small fortune changing my PC hardware around.
Moral of tale: try some cheap(ish) VSTi out first before spending 1000s on Creamware synths. Use Creamware as effects/mixing/mastering.
(Not that I do but I have already invested loads of money in CW systems).
They are very good at customer support though. They say I am the only one with this problem.
As for nice small synths, the WS101 is fun (a Roland SH09 clone); the free 303 is good but loses midi channel occasionally; and the Creamware ProTone is fantastic.
Nikko (Dadev) do a very good distortion/feedback unit called Disto.
Celmo have the best stuff, his tape echo boxes are great for unusual textures etc. I have not tried his synth Bluewave.
Orbitone Synchrome is also very good, unusual timbres.
HOWEVER most fun recently in my little studio has been from native synths, ie VSTi, such as ImpOSCAR (incredible), Oddity, M-Tron (all from GMedia), and the Novation Vstation.
Also various samplers such as the VSampler, some other romplers etc - these are all very cheap and have a massive range of sounds.
I would prefer in some ways to go VSTi native and forget all the endless tech problems with Creamware - my system is now *almost* stable, but I lost a file yesterday (with Solaris in it) and had to go back a version, losing some work - it seems that native VST type stuff either works, all fine, or doesn't.
Whereas Creamware can collapse mid session (like, on this one yesterday, I got some weird sample rate problem - yet nothing had changed - and the previous file (same settings) was OK. ???). I have spent a small fortune changing my PC hardware around.
Moral of tale: try some cheap(ish) VSTi out first before spending 1000s on Creamware synths. Use Creamware as effects/mixing/mastering.
(Not that I do but I have already invested loads of money in CW systems).
yeah, you've spent some cash and an incredible amount of time (I remember)...
...by ignoring simple facts that people have been telling you (here and elsewhere) and instead insisted on your own point of view.
We all have our lessons to learn (I'm NO exception to this), but it's really bad style to blame a system, a company or whatever for own personal imperfection. As mentioned, we all suffer from this from time to time.
95% of the readers will have no idea at all about your (personal) setup and probably take the word for what's written - that it's a complicated, difficult to setup and unreliable system, which finally costs a lot of money and ends with worse results than the usual VTSI stuff anyway.
There is definetely no VSTI stuff that can compete with SFP's sound quality, unless eating up at least 50% of the resources of a 3 gig PIV.
As there is definetely not the wide range of sounds - I mean the basic, fundamental sounds of the synth engines - you find at Zarg, Wavelength, SpaceF, Celmo and Adern.
All VSTI synths I've tried did sound almost identical in their raw waveforms, usually drowned in a ton of FX stuff.
You may prefer whatever you like, but this is not just a matter of taste.
Your audio spectrum looses BIG TIME when you (try to) replace SFP by native synths. Of course one could try to beef it up again later by post-processing, but why so complicated if there already IS a sound source that can do it on it's own ?
SFP may in fact not be everyone's cup of tea, but even 6 years after it's release you still don't find it's main features in a competeting product.
The synths are a class of their own, the routing flexibility is still unmatched and I'm even certain the FX would get raving reviews with a different label sticked on them - definetely.
cheers, Tom
...by ignoring simple facts that people have been telling you (here and elsewhere) and instead insisted on your own point of view.
We all have our lessons to learn (I'm NO exception to this), but it's really bad style to blame a system, a company or whatever for own personal imperfection. As mentioned, we all suffer from this from time to time.
95% of the readers will have no idea at all about your (personal) setup and probably take the word for what's written - that it's a complicated, difficult to setup and unreliable system, which finally costs a lot of money and ends with worse results than the usual VTSI stuff anyway.
There is definetely no VSTI stuff that can compete with SFP's sound quality, unless eating up at least 50% of the resources of a 3 gig PIV.
As there is definetely not the wide range of sounds - I mean the basic, fundamental sounds of the synth engines - you find at Zarg, Wavelength, SpaceF, Celmo and Adern.
All VSTI synths I've tried did sound almost identical in their raw waveforms, usually drowned in a ton of FX stuff.
You may prefer whatever you like, but this is not just a matter of taste.
Your audio spectrum looses BIG TIME when you (try to) replace SFP by native synths. Of course one could try to beef it up again later by post-processing, but why so complicated if there already IS a sound source that can do it on it's own ?
SFP may in fact not be everyone's cup of tea, but even 6 years after it's release you still don't find it's main features in a competeting product.
The synths are a class of their own, the routing flexibility is still unmatched and I'm even certain the FX would get raving reviews with a different label sticked on them - definetely.
cheers, Tom
It doesn't loose MIDI channel, it saves MIDI channel in the preset. The stock presets are on channel 5.the free 303 is good but loses midi channel occasionally
more has been done with less
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
oops, not to be misunderstood - that's not a statement against other sound sources than SFP, no way...
I still like my original DX7 or Proteus or K4 or the 8bit Casios or some native synths.
It's just that one simply cannot do the SFP sound the 'native way', but the opposite is fairly easy.
cheers, tom
I still like my original DX7 or Proteus or K4 or the 8bit Casios or some native synths.
It's just that one simply cannot do the SFP sound the 'native way', but the opposite is fairly easy.
cheers, tom
I do not have solaris but I am almost sure that :On 2005-05-09 07:56, geoffd99 wrote:
I have problems with Solaris on a 23 dsp system. It loads weirdly sometimes and is unreliable
1. You are on mac
2. your sfp install is not perfect (a mac user of the blackbox had abnormal behaviour but told me all was fine after a complete reinstall of his sfp, omething to do with pathes and/or SFP reference resolver)
3. may be you changed the default location of the rd modules and/or may be it is a preset problem that you don't save as it should (store, and then save the list as... on the disk). even on mac, if it does not work with your own preset, you certainly have something wrong in your system and the problem would not be limited to solaris.
5. or it could be a communication problem of several card (?)
if none of the above applies to you, then, yes, you are indeed an exception (well, may be not you, but you sfp install). eventhough, i neither own solaris nor RD stuff, they work the same as the BB (or the contrary if you prefer
) i'm pretty sure you either overlooked something in the way those things work, or there is something wrong in your install.6. if you are on pc, well, you do have a serious problem
7. i agree for the oddity though, imposcar is good, but still has something of that sound that some people dislike with some waveforms (don't ou agree Mr Arkadin ?
but i neither have the real oscar to compare, nor the imposcar).Kind regards
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2005-05-09 20:31 ]</font>
Hi again my friends!
Yes, I absorbed all the tech advice a while ago, bought a new 3 gig 1 gig RAM PC, then changed the motherboard (as it was not the right one), added the 13 dsp upgrade, and all is stable ... except Solaris and some third party plugins, mainly Dadev ones. This is probably some quirk of my PC, but I only have one lifetime so am fed up with investigating.
I do use them all occasionally - I like to live dangerously - within my computer comfort zone of course
The only thing I find annoying about SFP is the dsp overload when adding a synth etc when nearly full up. This causes a crash of the system and the sequencer, have to reload everything, zzz. And it is all a bit clunky, slow, or 'old' as they say in the UK press. But that is part of the fun. However I see it as a pile of computer components and software, not some mystical system that is superior to all else.
It is reasonable value for money, but you have to take on this awful computer techy mode to get it all working properly, which is NOT the way the world is going at all (sorry guys...)
As for synth sound quality, to quote the editor of Sound on Sound mag, a synth is an organ put through a wah wah pedal...
By the way, gloablisticos, what do they say in the non-UK press about Creamware? I read Sound on Sound and Future Music here in Blighty, and they never even mention new products (like the Scope effects boards - well new packaging) - it is as if SFP does not exist. Why is this? They do advertise sometimes.
I like the SFP set up, it is fun to fiddle about with routing, tweaking, etc, but this can be distracting from making music, whereas a native / VST setup (or Reason etc) just goes. For track laying, anything will do these days, and good interfaces are very cheap. Pros use a different set up altogether where the computer is only part of the whole, and reliability is most important.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: geoffd99 on 2005-05-10 12:34 ]</font>
Yes, I absorbed all the tech advice a while ago, bought a new 3 gig 1 gig RAM PC, then changed the motherboard (as it was not the right one), added the 13 dsp upgrade, and all is stable ... except Solaris and some third party plugins, mainly Dadev ones. This is probably some quirk of my PC, but I only have one lifetime so am fed up with investigating.
I do use them all occasionally - I like to live dangerously - within my computer comfort zone of course
The only thing I find annoying about SFP is the dsp overload when adding a synth etc when nearly full up. This causes a crash of the system and the sequencer, have to reload everything, zzz. And it is all a bit clunky, slow, or 'old' as they say in the UK press. But that is part of the fun. However I see it as a pile of computer components and software, not some mystical system that is superior to all else.
It is reasonable value for money, but you have to take on this awful computer techy mode to get it all working properly, which is NOT the way the world is going at all (sorry guys...)
As for synth sound quality, to quote the editor of Sound on Sound mag, a synth is an organ put through a wah wah pedal...
By the way, gloablisticos, what do they say in the non-UK press about Creamware? I read Sound on Sound and Future Music here in Blighty, and they never even mention new products (like the Scope effects boards - well new packaging) - it is as if SFP does not exist. Why is this? They do advertise sometimes.
I like the SFP set up, it is fun to fiddle about with routing, tweaking, etc, but this can be distracting from making music, whereas a native / VST setup (or Reason etc) just goes. For track laying, anything will do these days, and good interfaces are very cheap. Pros use a different set up altogether where the computer is only part of the whole, and reliability is most important.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: geoffd99 on 2005-05-10 12:34 ]</font>
Well, get some folks to help set it up! I've been wrestling with computers & music since Atari/Cubase days, like many here, and for me, Scope's as good as it gets. It's a real studioOn 2005-05-10 12:27, geoffd99 wrote:
It is reasonable value for money, but you have to take on this awful computer techy mode to get it all working properly, which is NOT the way the world is going at all (sorry guys...)
...uh-huh...
As for synth sound quality, to quote the editor of Sound on Sound mag, a synth is an organ put through a wah wah pedal...
Nothing much said here, not part of the hype (an attractive feature to meBy the way, gloablisticos, what do they say in the non-UK press about Creamware? I read Sound on Sound and Future Music here in Blighty, and they never even mention new products (like the Scope effects boards - well new packaging) - it is as if SFP does not exist. Why is this? They do advertise sometimes.
)Although an Australian company called Fairlight do use Scope setups in their gear...
You get used to it.I like the SFP set up, it is fun to fiddle about with routing, tweaking, etc, but this can be distracting from making music, whereas a native / VST setup (or Reason etc) just goes.
I use Scope professionally, as do many others here, and it secures a large chunk of my income, as well as playing live with NoahPros use a different set up altogether where the computer is only part of the whole, and reliability is most important.
Thanks for the contact, I will do so. As I said, it is probably a quirk of my PC. I tried out the demo version which was the same, and bought it anyway, so I am not applying anti-advertising here. It sounds great. See all the above comments re. size, type of synths etc.
So I'd advise people to check out the demo and then decide.
So I'd advise people to check out the demo and then decide.
well, that's part of the freedom that SFP tries to exploit each and every corner of the DSP's processing power.On 2005-05-10 12:27, geoffd99 wrote:
...
The only thing I find annoying about SFP is the dsp overload when adding a synth etc when nearly full up. This causes a crash of the system and the sequencer, have to reload everything, zzz. And it is all a bit clunky, slow, or 'old' as they say in the UK press.
...
but you have to take on this awful computer techy mode to get it all working properly, which is NOT the way the world is going at all (sorry guys...)
...
Since you've probably checked Digidesign's systems, you may have noticed they have a completely different approach.
In Protools a device often needs control over the complete DSP and blocks it, even if (quite) some processing power would still be available (theoretically).
Needless to mention their approach is much more failsafe, but it sacrifices flexibility and resource efficiency. As you've written, this is sometimes preferred in highly professional applications, when time matters because it costs.
to the 2nd part of the quote above I totally disagree, specially to the last sentence
just look around and you'll see that THIS IS in fact the way the world is going today...
but I totally agree with you that it's as superfluous as can be, well - not exactly in commercial context - as the Apple billions proof...
but I don't appreciate it for shure.Nevertheless I do understand your point and even made some similiar experiences.
On the PIV my SFP did crash much more than on it's former PIII/Celeron system.
And it crashed deeply, as deep as it gets - it simply rebooted the machine, which was much appreciated as the stupid Windoze didn't even notice what happened and never complained
But this wasn't restricted to SFP, the same could happen (and it did) when a simple link on a web page was clicked.
Since it wasn't too often I never worried about it, but I will finally put the Pulsars back on a PIII. Recently I saw someone sold a 900 MHZ PIII plus 256 MB in a 19" rackmount for 68 Euro...
I really don't think SFP is too techy - it's more like one of those simulation games featuring a mini studio.
It gets techy if you get the OS/BIOS/Chipset blues, tho - but well, a 400 MHZ G4 may not be a box for bragging, but it definetely spares THAT part of the setup.
as an idea for your Solaris problems: it really does a lot of housekeeping on loading patches - that does take time.
Is your sequencer 'overrunning' the synth ? (don't use sequencers myself - to techy for me).
And then there's the 'idle bug' - if the system was idle for some time and you load a new synth, SFP just hangs. Never found out the cause of this, but it exists for shure.
Again it's one of those things that can be easily worked around, no showstopper for me.
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-05-10 15:41 ]</font>
my scope system is the most reliable computer the YOU'LL ever see. this unreliable bs is just that(bs), thank you. there are some VERY professional types using scope including lucasfilms and hans zimmer, neither of whom can afford to mess with anything flaky. if one complains about having to be an engineer, then that's just stupid. by definition the one who runs a studio is an engineer. a monkey can pull the lever to make the train go, but only an engineer can be trusted to run the train. if one wants cutsey toys, one can have the average daw, but if one wants a real studio, mostly in a box, then scope is the only alternative.
this comes from one who uses scope professionally and who has realworld studio experience, not fanzine mag(you know, those mags trying to sell gear to consumers) knowledge.
Geoff, you're right about this: it is just a pile of gear, not some religious icon. none of this matters if you don't get work done, which is good bad or best. if something else or simpler works for you, great. i just don't think that your reasoning is based on fact(although i know you've had problems), but rather opinion, to which you're entitled.
this comes from one who uses scope professionally and who has realworld studio experience, not fanzine mag(you know, those mags trying to sell gear to consumers) knowledge.
Geoff, you're right about this: it is just a pile of gear, not some religious icon. none of this matters if you don't get work done, which is good bad or best. if something else or simpler works for you, great. i just don't think that your reasoning is based on fact(although i know you've had problems), but rather opinion, to which you're entitled.
Well this seems to have stirred it up a bit.
I am a big fan - ok, regular user and huge investor - in the SFP system (and 3rd party suppliers) and enjoy it by and large. But there are big problems with it, which are NOT being addressed by Creamware, who seem to have ignored us users. Apparently CW's work is not in this area anymore, more general pro audio systems, rather than consumer stuff. They did the audio for the Euro parliament I read somewhere, and video type stuff.
I enjoy the 'tweaking' side of the SFP system (although I wouldn't really call it engineering - don't forget we are all USERS of a commercial system, which requires a lot of user adjustments). Engineering is bridge building, cars, trains, etc, not software design).
My background is software (from COBOL to web technologies, and management) although now I am in construction management (building houses ie we use actual qualified engineers). I also have an MA in computer interfaces and usability, so please don't get me started on the SFP/computer 'experience'.
I seem to remember my old P3 system was more stable... hence the designation of Creamware tech as 'old' by the so-called consumer mags (the line is very blurred now).
I have also have the instant reboot problem, even now on a more less stable system. I didn't like to mention it as it seemed impolite (!). I only get it with SFP, not anything else. It is just part of the user experience...
Put it this way: if I was a complete newbie, looking around for a music production system, which way would I go?
Hey this sounds negative... perhaps we are like people with trusty (or not) classic cars that we like... and our relatives have to put up with.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: geoffd99 on 2005-05-10 18:11 ]</font>
I am a big fan - ok, regular user and huge investor - in the SFP system (and 3rd party suppliers) and enjoy it by and large. But there are big problems with it, which are NOT being addressed by Creamware, who seem to have ignored us users. Apparently CW's work is not in this area anymore, more general pro audio systems, rather than consumer stuff. They did the audio for the Euro parliament I read somewhere, and video type stuff.
I enjoy the 'tweaking' side of the SFP system (although I wouldn't really call it engineering - don't forget we are all USERS of a commercial system, which requires a lot of user adjustments). Engineering is bridge building, cars, trains, etc, not software design).
My background is software (from COBOL to web technologies, and management) although now I am in construction management (building houses ie we use actual qualified engineers). I also have an MA in computer interfaces and usability, so please don't get me started on the SFP/computer 'experience'.
I seem to remember my old P3 system was more stable... hence the designation of Creamware tech as 'old' by the so-called consumer mags (the line is very blurred now).
I have also have the instant reboot problem, even now on a more less stable system. I didn't like to mention it as it seemed impolite (!). I only get it with SFP, not anything else. It is just part of the user experience...
Put it this way: if I was a complete newbie, looking around for a music production system, which way would I go?
Hey this sounds negative... perhaps we are like people with trusty (or not) classic cars that we like... and our relatives have to put up with.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: geoffd99 on 2005-05-10 18:11 ]</font>
scope is NOT antiquated. it is NOT unstable. that is factual. i have TWO p4 systems myself and have built many others that work 99.99999999999% of the time, so saying that scope doesn't work well with the current hardware is misinformation. your computer may be unstable, that may be factual. all the rest is your opinion, which is fine by me as long as it is not taken for fact. i just finished a session without a single hiccup a few minutes ago, as usual. i will do another 2nite and i expect no trouble...
...and in the REAL world of recording studios, things ARE built from scratch by those running the system. to some degree, if you want to work with audio and have a real production studio and not just amuse yourself with a fancy toy, you MUST be an engineer, one who understands how the stuff works. weak complaining about this won't make better productions. if you don't want to do pro work, then you don't need to be a pro, otherwise, the monkey and the engineer train analogy still stands.
...and in the REAL world of recording studios, things ARE built from scratch by those running the system. to some degree, if you want to work with audio and have a real production studio and not just amuse yourself with a fancy toy, you MUST be an engineer, one who understands how the stuff works. weak complaining about this won't make better productions. if you don't want to do pro work, then you don't need to be a pro, otherwise, the monkey and the engineer train analogy still stands.