PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

On this topic just a thought. It is very visible that a separation of the DSP and DAC/ADC from the computer case improves the S/N ratios in XITE and already the usage of a breakout ADC/DAC like A16 shows that with the PCI cards.

Yes. You'd not have a PCI-e card if it was to have any IO otherwise ...

well, the product you're looking for is an UAD Quad Omni, 4 DSPs with a massive software bundle for about 4 grands.

cheers, Tom

Hi,

Actually I have UAD/SSL & TC powercore. All are good at what they do as mix tools. I'd not give these up even if someone gave me an x-ite sytem since they are all ...

I apologize if I've offended anyone here I am simply trying to find my way through this maze of technology.

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to ascertain, as much as anyone on the "outside" is what the next step will be.

Obviously X-ite would be as good (if not better) than anything what is going ...

@gary b

I do believe you have missed something?

Not all soniccore cards come with i/o modules or are you only used to one way of working.

Maybe I take back my advocacy comment?

mausmuso wrote:
Hey Gary,

You are answering some basic fears that people have before shelling out their hard earn for a SCOPE system.

regards
ron

He is a good writer and advocate for S/C platform isn't he, but I do hope he can touch type.

they aren't right now, and most use the same pc for the cards and the sequencer.

Well that's the thing, if you have only a PulsarII for example, you need another audio interface and I am no hardware expert by any stretch but when the specification speaks about "transaction latency limits" I take ...

I am using 1 pc for cubase with a rme multiface and 1 pc for scope with 2-14 dsp cards.

That's right and likely the way most S|C people would use it, eg scope only card(s) on one system.

If it is true as GaryB says that scope aren't making new cards, then how is it they are selling them on their ...

Hey Fluxpod

I think what you are saying is right but to add ..

PCI 2.1 adds transaction latency limits, which I suspect would be useful if you also use other PCI devices which for me I certainly would so there is a valid argument here for SonicCore to provide more compatible and updated hardware ...

I'm talking about Form Factors here not comparing technologies.

The PCI specification is still maintained and is up to version 2.3.

Regarding PCIe, I'm sure due to evolution the PCIe "cards" would be 1.1 or 2.0 but being 1.1 compliant means no compatibility issues but as the buss architecture in ...

Yes, definately worth considering if you are in the market.

True but why not make some desktop only parts as well?

Surely the machines can be made to alter the form factor for lower voltages, or provide a new form factor via a bridge.

The UAD 1-e is really a pci-e to pci bridge card and works ...

I understand, I was actually anticipating that would be the situation, as I had a mate in the same situation and it was offered at 98 euro (additional software packs to cover other cards) so I guess this is the norm and understandably SonicCore would still need and be making money.

I only hope one ...

hi stardust

Thank you for writing.

Would it be a standard fee and is it written anywhere do you know?

regards

Hello all

I'd like to know if anyone can tell me, if a card is registered to run 4.5 software and it stops working (hardware) is it possible to transfer that software to another "replacement" card?

Thanks again

Hi astroman

My statements were not intended to diminish any one particular technology, all I am saying is that it is the VST specification that uses standard C+ headers and all other technologies are "mere" derivatives as additional headers must have been programmed somewhere and Steinberg have it ...

No worries mausmuso .. I like my topics being taken over by intelligent types (and I mean that as you can even learn about general audio principles in this place, which is unique to forum world, hence my name ;)

no, Scope mode plugins have nothing at all to do with vst. they are identical to ...

nightscope wrote:

garyb wrote:they're vsts and vsts belong in the sequencer.

Quite right too. Heaven forbid they should ever escape!!

ns

Maybe true, but even scope mode plugins are based on the VST Specification, as is UA, RTAS and DXi.

In normal Scope mode your UAD plugs would go on your host tracks. Host tracks go by ASIO to Scope environment & mixer however you want. Via a single stereo buss or up to 64 mono or 32 stereo multi channels[or a selction of mono and stereo]. You can then mix the ASIO host stuff with Scope synths and ...

yes, you can use the UADs all you want in Scope mode. they will just be inside the sequencer mixer as always. it's a perfectly fine place for them as the compressors might as well be inserted as far up the chain as possible and reverb outputs can have their own ASIO channels out of the sequencer ...

Scope has also a second mode: XTC (or VSTIM in V5). In this mode, scope FX run inside the host (Cubase, Sonar, etc), just like an UAD or Duende card.. so basically you load scope plugins just as any other VST/VSTi plugin in your host, and you can access Sope I/Os (if any) directly from the host ...

You seem to provide a lot of answers in this place so I guess it's up to us "forumers" to keep up the questions :)

I pictured scope mode as having cubase inside it literally but I guess thinking about it now that was rather a bit naive.

Anyway now I am wondering if Scope is more like a system tray ...