Got the ASIO going, now need to know how to export audio

[emotive]

I've learned how to create a default project, which has no MIDI and only one S/PDIF out and I've used the environment to create 48 ASIO sources (24 stereo channels) which go to a 48 channel virtual console.

I know how to patch in effects but at this stage will still use UAD from within Cubase as my work does not involve latency and ULLI is set to maximum.

What I am wondering is how to create busses, similar to Cubase where I can create renders, eg. Rhythm, Basses, Guitars and Orchestral while having the flexibility to mute from within Cubase or Scope while writing.

While I like scope it is rather archaic and my hope is that version 6 will bring some nice touches to this rather mundane situation because I can bet that I won't be able to render directly to mp3 for upload to a website and simple things like labelling channels is a complete boring task.

[JoPo]

If I understand well, now, you just need to use asio dest module connected on you mixer and route it back within cubase to record your tracks (after muted whatever you want). You can't export audio thru Scope, you need to record.

[emotive]

Thank you JoPo, that is what I needed to know.

I tried loading a sampler to see if it was worth recording in Scope, but I suspect it would be a hassle.

For all it's worth, it is good having individual (mono) hardware channels but I still must create Groups in Cubase, just to Batch Export.

I really wish Sonic Core was up-to-date with how people actually use computers rather than relics of the past.

[JoPo]

... Well ... It's not that simple, most of people using Scope use also external hardware devices such as reverbs, synth ... etc. As soon as you do so, you can't export your audio and I don't think it's relic of the past. That's Scope way of life : open to outside of the computer.

I don't see much pain to record instead of export, just 2 or 3 mn of difference ; unless you create more than 40 tracks a day...

[emotive]

There are for and against, for example:

Pros:

- Hardware monitoring, allows easy muting without scrolling down cubase project page or opening MixConsole
- Separate monitors, one for the sequencer, one for the mixer
- addition of effects, although for mixing only UAD is enough for most things
- DSP synthesisers, only in Scope, PowerCore effectively dead in water

Cons:

- No simple way to render audio, must all be real-time
- No internal recording mechanism other than a sampler
- Patching is all manual

I am no purist but it seems Scope is all about the old way, albeit using a DSP architecture. If I am even to consider purchasing Xite, there will need to be way more mod con's in this system because as I say Scope is at best an archaic production paradigm and there's no wonder that it cannot attract new users.

[garyb]

exporting really isn't quicker. you must still listen to the finished file to be sure that everything went right. it's actually easier to do this while recording the mix.

but, if you are mixing in Cubase and if any Scope processing is returned to Cubase so that it is in the Cubase mixbus, then you can do a realtime export, no problem.

Scope devices are NOT in the computer! they're only controlled by the computer. Scope devices are external hardware.

[emotive]

My songs only go for max 1.5 mins so it is quicker for me and I am only rendering to mp3, so nothing professional at this stage.

I did try to run back into Cubase but got what appeared to be phasing issues.

Also, I don't understand how to get 48 channels back to cubase using a 48 channel mixer.

In addition I am wondering since I have 3x Pulsar II (which you told me to obtain ) can I run 48 channels in and out via ADAT and call it a day on that, and then use e.g. AES or S/PDIF to run a VST system link so I can transfer audio back to the Native world?

Thanks again for writing.

[hubird]

Cons:

- No simple way to render audio, must all be real-time
- No internal recording mechanism other than a sampler
- Patching is all manual

- I never render a mix or even a track.
With Garyb I say it's pointless.
- VDAT: Scope's virtual dat recorder.
- patching: use pressing 'n' for next connection on same module.

You found the busses on the stm mixer?

Scope would need an overhoal on many details, I agree on that.
But the real life analogy of the studio system is still exactly how I would want it.

Don't expect any changes in v6 in the way Scope presents itself to the user (concerning annoying details, messages, preset and file handling, and more).
Won't happen anymore, that's at least what I think (not even talking about OSX).
Even the birth of Xite wasn't reason enough to have a close look again to some work processes.

Yet...there's nothing else what can compete in sound quality and completeness

[fra77x]

You are getting too fast on your conclusions. How is that? Do you try to prove something? Spend some time try to learning what you have and then discuss on it. Also try to compare with other similar products if there are any. Also scope isn't "archaic" at all. All the native daws are just toys. Functionality on these is useless because it is for amateurs anyway and "non professionals". So try to make your daw working it is very easy for any engineer and stop trying to contribute "in a positive" way because you are saying nothing at all.

[JoPo]

I did try to run back into Cubase but got what appeared to be phasing issues.

Also, I don't understand how to get 48 channels back to cubase using a 48 channel mixer.

You need to not set your track in monitoring to avoid phasing issues in cubase. There is also on PCI card mixer a 'phase' button which avoid phase issue in the mixer.
I don't see why you want 48 channels back into Cubase but it's possible : switch on 'direct output' on Scope mixer and then connect them to 48 asio dest module. Set up your 48 input in cubase.

As I mix my music in Scope, I just need 1 asio dest module connected at the mix Scope mixer output, so the track I obtain is my master. And Scope devices are perfect for mastering. You can have busses in STM mixers.

You have devices for recording in Scope in 'plugin' folder. It's a bit strange to try to record a track in a sampler...

--->fra77x, maybe Emotive is a Scope beginner who doesn't read much manuals and who hasn't yet realize all Scope possibilities...

--->Emotive, read the manuals !! It take time but you won't believe all you'll be able to do !

[fra77x]

who doesn't read much manuals

Sorry i'm also not reading each person CV...

[petal]

I smell a troll in here...

[garyb]

as mentioned above, do NOT monitor inside Cubase, no software monitoring. instead monitor the Scope mixer. recording back to Cubase is stupidly easy and it does not introduce phasing...or just do a realtime export. just make sure that any external hardware, like Scope, is going back into Cubase before exporting.

[emotive]

Scope would need an overhoal on many details, I agree on that.
But the real life analogy of the studio system is still exactly how I would want it.

Don't expect any changes in v6 in the way Scope presents itself to the user (concerning annoying details, messages, preset and file handling, and more).
Won't happen anymore, that's at least what I think (not even talking about OSX).
Even the birth of Xite wasn't reason enough to have a close look again to some work processes.

Yet...there's nothing else what can compete in sound quality and completeness

G'day Hubird,

At least someone understands where I am coming from.

Something Steinberg realized a long time ago, that is; if you don't get the newbies and bedroom guys on board your company may die. It was only Yamaha who saved the best DAW on the planet.

Without Cubase I could not compose music period. The reason is because of the way it handles note information and in particular drum details in terms of MIDI information, as well as Time Signature and Tempo mapping.

Scope is a great addition to my setup and I will probably get on board with X-ite but not until I see what Scope 6 actually does, that is for certain.