## unison

Scope and XITE Development

Original topic on PlanetZ: https://forums.scopeusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=19422

####

Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:05 am
by olase
Does anybody created a synth with detunable unsion mode with the SDK?
As far i know the modeles and atoms do not support it. I read long time ago in a thread that the third party
developer like "Zarg Music" also do not have the real SDK with source code. But how you can create you own synthi with unison.
IMO you need the real SDK with the libs, the compiler or assembler and the linker to create your own modules to implement such features.
But to pay tons of money to get a license for the real SDK makes no sense.
But may be i'm wrong and there is another way to make me happy...

####

Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:22 am
by astroman
yes, you're pretty wrong all over the place
I have half a dozen synths with unison - and it's always 'detunable' as otherwise one wouldn't notice it
there is no such thing as a 'real' SDK - it is what it is and that for good reasons.
You can only develope for SFP in the SFP environment, with SDK (formerly called DP).
It speeds up developement time for a factor between 20 and 100.
That's no typo and it means multiplies, not percent.
There is no libs, compiler, linker or assembler as in C programming it simply doesn't exist.
From a programmers viewpoint this stuff is called meta-programming at best.
afaik no licenses for commercial developement are granted, not even for tons of money.
If the former 5k Euro (incl hardware) are 'a ton of money' in your consideration, well - look around what industry prices typically are
SFP doesn't suffer from a limit of extensibility - it suffers from no local memory on the PCI card.
That is it's only (severe) flaw.
People generally underestimate the quality of supplied code in SFP/SDK because it's got the 'stock' label.
It isn't encrypted for nothing, as it has been put together most likely by highly specialzed engineers. You may have noticed that Analog Devices is a leading supplier for high end audio gear in both 'consumer' (if a $2k CD player matches the definition...) and professional market (Fairlight, LiquidChannel, Axe-FX for example)
the latter is a $1.5k guitar fx processor based on 'custom' routines - imho Dynatube based on SFP standard stuff keeps up pretty well ...
'Custom' in this context doesn't mean anyone wrote it from scratch - they've used Analog's basic audio lib - which I can safely assume because otherwise they'd still code and debug...
Anyone insisting of custom DSP assembly code would have to proof his (or her) competence versus Analog's (and 3rd party) specialists first
cheers, Tom
if this doesn't make you happy, avoid thunderstorms and check out parties and girls over the weekend, lots of action supposed to happen. Or a good book or some music...

####

Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:59 pm
by dawman
Man Or Myth,.....Astroman.

####

Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 9:30 am
by olase
Thanx astroman for these information. :-/
It think i was wrong with my statements and my question was not on this level you expect.
Erster Post und schon ne Schelle...

####

Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:49 pm
by astroman
no Schelle at all, Olase
I really didn't intend to sound harsh, it's just that this kind of questions (in context with the SDK) is asked frequently, and often paired with unreflected demands.
Of course the label 'SDK' is misleading if one compares it to anything that's called 'SDK' elsewhere.
Software design and developement is a part of my job for decades, but I still wouldn't expect a certain 'level' on any question.
This is not an elitist board at all and be assured that I learn a lot here about a ton of PC config stuff (for example) and studio experiences that others share.
This topic just happens to be in the domain of my 'special interests' and since I've even considered to spend a few k Euros on a commercial license (which isn't available currently as a 'regular' product) I tried to collect as much information about the system as possible.
The Scope developement environment is generally underestimated, as 'power' and 'flexibility' are usually associated with low level coding.
To a degree that is of course correct, as you CAN do anything that comes to your mind - the flipside is (unfortunately) that you actually HAVE TO...
Which is equivalent to you'll never be able to finish a sophisticated project in any reasonable amount of time - unless you're among the one-in-a-million supertalents...
But in that case you'd hardly bother with such questions
For regular folks like you and me the SDK is the perfect solution to get ideas coded, even if the code is 'pseudo' and doesn't deal with items on chip and register level.
It was good enough to create Flexor (as an outstanding example that does a pretty 'low level' approach), so it should be good for a lot of things to come...
cheers and welcome, Tom
(sorry that I forgot it in the post above)