## About Scope DP ??!!

Scope and XITE Development

Original topic on PlanetZ: https://forums.scopeusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=8108

####

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 7:29 pm
by prokium
Hello,
i m new creamware user, and i m a developper
i want to know where i can get Scope DP (the Scope Developpement kit) .. if its free ?
or how much is it
thanks a lot

####

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:45 pm
by kensuguro
This is probably the number one question on the scope forum. please look a couple of posts down and you'll probably find the same question.

####

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2003 7:37 am
by prokium
Hello everybody,
well, i dont understand here .. its TOP-SECRET or what ? hehehe ..
here there are developpers and they dont answer anything about info of Scope/DP software or SDK ... i search information about that ...
thanks

####

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2003 7:57 am
by kensuguro
well, it's no top secret... it's more of "everybody's seen this question answered a zillion times" type of thing.
Anyway, to save you some searching trouble, the DP package is definitely not for free. Will only run on Scope boards, and costs around $4000. (prices vary, so people aren't sure) Whatever it is, it seems like there's not much of a chance in an end user getting hold of a copy of DP. In the meantime though, use mod III. it's the best you can buy.
Sorry to have been a little sarcastic by the way. I was in a giggly mood.

####

Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2003 2:59 am
by casevanrij
Given the free software that's available for SHARC development I'm a little surprised I havent been able to find much, if any, references to the differences between say, the Analog devices SHARC board (EZKIT) and a pular II board; Specifically re. loading the sharc code into the DSP, routing the audio inputs to the SHARC inputs, and setting up DMA from the SHARCs on a pulsar to the PCI bus. It seems like finding out these 3 things would open up a world of free/open pulsar development.

####

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:48 am
by asktoby
I'm programming one of these SHARC ADSP 21065L boards now, coming up with samplers, pitchshifters, drum machines etc.
I wish I could somehow apply these skills to the Pulsar. But 4000 just to get started??!

####

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 10:28 am
by kensuguro
from what I can see though.. CW doesn't seem to be too interested in getting third parties involved... not sure. It's just very hard to be motivated when there's so much mystery. Of course, even if you got DP you're set with the atoms CW provided you with. Not much dsp programming there.

####

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 1:36 am
by asktoby
But people write new atoms, don't they? I can't see the point in spending 3 or 4k on a system that lets you build synths like reaktor and skin them nicely, I'd want to experiment with my own DSP code.

####

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:52 am
by at0m
You need an Analog Devices kit i think, which costs *loads* more, to make atoms.

####

Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:14 pm
by Shayne White
Yes; isn't it $30,000 or something like that?
Shayne

####

Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:36 am
by kimgr
What you need is VisualDSP++ from Analog Devices: $3,745.00
Plus off course Scope/DP and ScopeSDK. There's no official price on those, but when you could buy the /DP software from dealers is was around $3,500.00 ...
Kim.

####

Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:15 pm
by Kamurah

> On 2003-06-20 05:36, kimgr wrote:
> What you need is VisualDSP++ from Analog Devices: $3,745.00
> Plus off course Scope/DP and ScopeSDK. There's no official price on those, but when you could buy the /DP software from dealers is was around $3,500.00 ...
> Kim.

Kim...
So you are saying that unless one has the Analog Devices VisualDSP package, there is no way to code new DSP algorythms? And you need the DP software on top of that?
Forgive me, but this seems absurd. Why is CW closing it's system like this?
Don't get me wrong, I love some of the devices that have come out of the regular developers.....
However, it seems to (my ears) that there is a bit of a 'similar sound' to many devices.
Do devices like Minimax and the Pro One use the regular Atoms or are these different? (If I am asking this wrong please forgive my ignorance)
They SOUND different to me....but what do I know?
Cheers and thanks for the info.

####

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:52 pm
by kimgr

> On 2003-06-26 21:15, Kamurah wrote:
> Kim...
> So you are saying that unless one has the Analog Devices VisualDSP package, there is no way to code new DSP algorythms? And you need the DP software on top of that?
> Forgive me, but this seems absurd. Why is CW closing it's system like this?

I'm sure you can "hand-code" Sharc-assembler in notepad, but would you really want to ?
And from what I can see on ADI's homepage, there's no free development software for Sharcs ? That's hardly Creamware's "fault"...

> Do devices like Minimax and the Pro One use the regular Atoms or are these different?
> They SOUND different to me...

They both have their own Atoms for osc's and filters.
(And I think even env's & lfo's.)
Kim.