Scope and Windows Vista?

VeryPSB · Post by **VeryPSB** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:51 pm

Well, according to Creamware's reply, it shouldn't be too difficult to make SFP 4.5 Windows Vista compliant, I think. I hope they will make the effort to create a SFP 4.5 package that is Windows Vista compliant, without workarounds.
But in the meantime there's a workaround available

ARCADIOS · Post by **ARCADIOS** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:49 pm

astalavista

beerbr · Post by **beerbr** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 3:56 am

Seem the workaround is not possible to make ASIO driver be seen by Vista.

No ASIO possible..

Anymore workaround to make ASIO usable in VISTA?

areptiledysfunction · Post by **areptiledysfunction** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:13 am

lagoausente wrote:Well, there are two posibilities,
one: in these few years, we´ll have Scope drivers for Vista.
two: will have no drivers never.

In the posibility number two, you´ll have to decide, take your Scope to rubbish and use pretty VSTs, or keep using Scope on a old system like XP. It will just an individual decision.
I think Cubase SX3, XP, and Scope4 will be old, but sure much more a mucisian need, or in my case, more that I need.
I think there is a underground issue here, IMO, when the musician has much inside, will take out much even from one only one instrument.
When there is not much inside, we need to get entertaiment anywhere, like in new features of last version of a sequencer, new drivers for Vista etc.
With STS only, you have a inlimited fount of sounds, as many as you load into it,
there are lots of synths to can build sounds, sounds and sounds,
and we have effects to add sugar to it,
and have sequencer to record tracks and tracks and tracks, of sounds sounds and sounds, instruments and instruments, from pianos, to congas, Sax, etc etc etc.
Just perhaps the problem is inside us, and in this case I don´t agree with some opinions here. Even on 2015, there is a Cubase SX8, I will be doing the same, play and record, the thing before was done with a tape recorder, what can be done with first cubase version avaible.
Seems, as more posibilities we have, more we need, or more bugs we find, maybe the bug I just in our own. In the past was made much better music than now, with 4 instruments, and a tape recorder.

I have thought about this quite a bit myself. I agree with you in your philosophy of making the most of what you have available *right now*. I have been down this road with other systems that eventually died (the Paris system) because it was discontinued and the feature set was eventually outdated. I still use it, but I use it with cubase SX and Pulsar because it still has the best summing I've ever heard in a DAW. The mix bus is DSP based, 56 point fixed and there is a bit of analog emulation written into the DSP. This kind of summing will begin to be available on native systems once they evolve to 64 bit and developers have the time to rewrite the native code and drivers. I know that RME will be all over the 64 bit driver issue and if Creamware doesn't do this, it won't be able to interface with 64 bit software that is sure to become popular. That is one reason I'm not selling all of the RME hardware that I own. I may need it in the future if Creamware stops development and doesn't write Vista drivers. UAD has already written 64 bit drivers for their DSP cards. I think it would be suicide forCreamware to stop driver development for two main reasons. They will not be able to keep up with the new software DAW offerings and also much larger Creamware systems than can be used now on PCI based systems will be possible in the future with PCIe based mobos using Magma chassis with PCIe host interfaces, The PCIe bus can handle quite a bit more bandwidth than the PCI. If what I'm thinking is reality, and I don't know why it wouldn't be if PCI bandwidth is solely the issue with Pulsar card count, it would break the 3 x card limit and allow users to buy more Creamware cards. I remember seeing the Pulsar cards many years ago and being interested in them but hearing horror stories about drivers and configuration issues. I can attest to the fact that these have been solved, in spades. I've never had a more stable DAW running native software. It's amazing to me how stable the drivers are and I'm loving my 3 x card system here but it is limited to 3 x cards. I have only had it a month and I would buy another card right now if I thought I could use it. If Creamware doesn't sell enough hardware to keep the doors open, they will eventually become dust on the road, just another antique like Paris, DAL Opcode.etc. That would be a real shame for a system that has fought so hard to survive and has, so far, succeeded, IMO.

powerpulsarian · Post by **powerpulsarian** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:12 am

IMO - One of the smartest things Creamware could do is get the drivers and interface up to date with Vista and OSX (Universal) - then release an external hardware box that will allow you to fit your Scope PCI cards and convert to a number of formats (PCI Express, ExpressCard, etc.) - whichever you chose (much like Magma but made specifically for Scope and with a more reasonable price tag).

There are enough existing Scope users out there that Creamware would have a pretty big customer base for this new hardware right from the start (with not much marketing effort/costs). It may even bring them more profits than the KIangbox and ASB stuff. And it may be smarter than releasing updated cards because there are probably a good number of people who would resist getting rid of all their cards they have already invested much $'s in to updgrade to the new ones vs. many who would probably be willing to shell out some cash to get a hardware box to make their existing investment work with the latest computer hardware (assuming the box was sold at a reasonable price).

Also, for people who don't need the box, I am sure Creamware could get away with charging an upgrade fee for the Vista and OSX compatibility update alone. Again, with the number of users in existence, this could be very profitable.

Post by **hubird** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:56 pm

agree!

lagoausente · Post by **lagoausente** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 10:34 am

It's amazing to me how stable the drivers are and I'm loving my 3 x card system here but it is limited to 3 x cards. I have only had it a month and I would buy another card right now if I thought I could use it. If Creamware doesn't sell enough hardware to keep the doors open, they will eventually become dust on the road, just another antique like Paris, DAL Opcode.etc. That would be a real shame for a system that has fought so hard to survive and has, so far, succeeded, IMO.

Agree. But continuing with my phylosophical tone, I think we all must accept the dead y general. Creamware will dead, anyway, don´t know if will die within 5 years or 500 years, but will dead. And we also will dead. Even all our music will dead one day, maybe when the dead of humanity, or when the sun will exlote.
What I mean, is that, I think to worry too much about this things, even is logical, is unuseful. It´s nice your still use Paris (I didn´t know at all), and it´s have been nice for all us use creamware, and will be nice while we keep using, and while we can use it. Hoping will can be much more time, it have been nice while till today. That´s all we have. Future doesn´t exist, yet.

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:09 pm

VeryPSB wrote:Well, according to Creamware's reply, it shouldn't be too difficult to make SFP 4.5 Windows Vista compliant, I think. I hope they will make the effort to create a SFP 4.5 package that is Windows Vista compliant, without workarounds.
But in the meantime there's a workaround available

I`m sure there will come a SFP 5.0 package fully vista compliant with an integrated Oberheim SEM emulation plug-in, you get freely shipped.

hahaha
lol

areptiledysfunction · Post by **areptiledysfunction** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:06 pm

lagoausente wrote:
It's amazing to me how stable the drivers are and I'm loving my 3 x card system here but it is limited to 3 x cards. I have only had it a month and I would buy another card right now if I thought I could use it. If Creamware doesn't sell enough hardware to keep the doors open, they will eventually become dust on the road, just another antique like Paris, DAL Opcode.etc. That would be a real shame for a system that has fought so hard to survive and has, so far, succeeded, IMO.

Agree. But continuing with my phylosophical tone, I think we all must accept the dead y general. Creamware will dead, anyway, don´t know if will die within 5 years or 500 years, but will dead. And we also will dead. Even all our music will dead one day, maybe when the dead of humanity, or when the sun will exlote.
What I mean, is that, I think to worry too much about this things, even is logical, is unuseful. It´s nice your still use Paris (I didn´t know at all), and it´s have been nice for all us use creamware, and will be nice while we keep using, and while we can use it. Hoping will can be much more time, it have been nice while till today. That´s all we have. Future doesn´t exist, yet.

My point has less to do with philosophy and more to do with reality. If you are trying to operate a commercial studio then you are most likely dealing with a client base that has a computer and a sound card in their bedroom studio and that computer and sound card will be running Windows Vista and Windows Vista drivers. If your commercial facility cannot provide a level of compatibility with their bedroom studio because it cannot run at 64 bit on Vista, they will go to another studio to finish their project because of the *perception* that they are not getting as much value from your studio/services as someone else can provide who is already compatible with their needs. It is less about actual sound and more about *perception*. I have taken entire projects here and downsampled the individual 96k tracks to 44.1 and mixed them in Paris and then mixed the same tracks at 96k in Cubase SX, then SRC'ed the files down to 44.1, dithered both mixes and played them both side by side for a client. He preferred the Paris mix that was downsampled and then mixed (a terrible thing to have to do before mastering, but anyway.......

) to the one that was mixed at 96k, then downsampled and burned to CD. I had to be honest about it though and so when I told him what I had done with the mix that he liked, he suddenly preferred the Cubase mix that he *didn't like as much" before. Stupid,I know, but it is the reality of the business these days.

Regards,

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:11 pm

everything counts in large amounts ...
great story - hit's the nail where it hurts

cheers, Tom

lagoausente · Post by **lagoausente** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 5:21 pm

My point has less to do with philosophy and more to do with reality. If you are trying to operate a commercial studio then you are most likely dealing with a client base that has a computer and a sound card in their bedroom studio and that computer and sound card will be running Windows Vista and Windows Vista drivers. If your commercial facility cannot provide a level of compatibility with their bedroom studio because it cannot run at 64 bit on Vista, they will go to another studio to finish their project because of the *perception* that they are not getting as much value from your studio/services as someone else can provide who is already compatible with their needs. It is less about actual sound and more about *perception*. I have taken entire projects here and downsampled the individual 96k tracks to 44.1 and mixed them in Paris and then mixed the same tracks at 96k in Cubase SX, then SRC'ed the files down to 44.1, dithered both mixes and played them both side by side for a client. He preferred the Paris mix that was downsampled and then mixed (a terrible thing to have to do before mastering, but anyway....... ) to the one that was mixed at 96k, then downsampled and burned to CD. I had to be honest about it though and so when I told him what I had done with the mix that he liked, he suddenly preferred the Cubase mix that he *didn't like as much" before. Stupid,I know, but it is the reality of the business these days.

Regards,

Sorry, I haven´t thought about the business issue. Maybe because I have already forget it. I really think that this type of business with this type of clients maybe have less future than Scope platform. Hope I´m being wrong. [/code]

valis · Post by **valis** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:13 am

Man I should get rid of my old synths, I bet they're not compatible with the upcoming vst 3.0...

Seriously though, if you're a commercial studio and have needs that extend beyond your Scope system, you really should think about getting more than 1 system. The downside, that you'll need to route analog & digital audio and midi as you would with other professional gear? Bah, Scope works very well in a secondary machine. While it may not have the 'Level of Integration' that certain systems may have what it does it does quite well.

Scope is *especially* useful in a commercial recording studio since it has near 0-latency, something which UAD/Poco and VST in general do not have.

areptiledysfunction · Post by **areptiledysfunction** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:48 am

valis wrote:Man I should get rid of my old synths, I bet they're not compatible with the upcoming vst 3.0...

Seriously though, if you're a commercial studio and have needs that extend beyond your Scope system, you really should think about getting more than 1 system. The downside, that you'll need to route analog & digital audio and midi as you would with other professional gear? Bah, Scope works very well in a secondary machine. While it may not have the 'Level of Integration' that certain systems may have what it does it does quite well.

Scope is *especially* useful in a commercial recording studio since it has near 0-latency, something which UAD/Poco and VST in general do not have.

Will Scope be *especially* useful if it cannot deal with 64 bit project files that are sent here for mixing? I already have more than one system now. If Creamware doesn't develop 64 bit Vista drivers for the Scope platform then both systems will be obsolete. I don't thnk this will be an issue for quite a while and I do think that Creamware has enough good sense to continue driver development, but if they don't I will be looking for other options.

Regards,

Post by **garyb** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 10:59 am

there is work being done.
we'll have to wait to see if there are positive results.

siriusbliss · Post by **siriusbliss** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:40 pm

Do I hear Scope 5.0 being Vista ready???

Cool!

katano · Post by **katano** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:02 pm

scope 5.0 will be delivered with the new pci-e card only... and of course with the 300mhz sharcs.

valis · Post by **valis** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:14 pm

DJ wrote: Will Scope be *especially* useful if it cannot deal with 64 bit project files that are sent here for mixing? I already have more than one system now. If Creamware doesn't develop 64 bit Vista drivers for the Scope platform then both systems will be obsolete. I don't thnk this will be an issue for quite a while and I do think that Creamware has enough good sense to continue driver development, but if they don't I will be looking for other options.

Regards,

Why can't you keep the Scope box to the side running Xp? Because it's too costly? And how will 'both systems' be obsolete? You have 2 scope boxes? Not very clear from your responses...

If Creamware does release another product (and they will), I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that it's not compatible with your existing hardware & OS, even if it uses a lot of the same low level code. Having 333mhz PCIe cards that can co-exist with the original PCI hardware (v1 & v2) and run ALL your current plugins is really asking quite a lot from a small company, especially in their current form.

Oh, just so you know it IS possible to get 'legacy' hardware to work under Vista with WDM drivers as well, but since Scope isn't 64bit (and buzzword friendly!) that doesn't really address your post.

powerpulsarian · Post by **powerpulsarian** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 6:55 am

katano wrote:scope 5.0 will be delivered with the new pci-e card only... and of course with the 300mhz sharcs.

That may be the case - but if Creamware goes this route, I really think they would be passing up a lot of potential profit by not taking advantage of the current user base.

While I am sure that there are plenty of current users who might ditch the old hardware to upgrade to the new, I think it may be a pretty slow migration (meaning that profits are not going to immediately happen and it will be a longer period to recoup development costs).

On the other hand, I can bet that many current users would very quickly purchase a software upgrade that allows them to use their current hardware on the latest operating systems – and many who would be willing to spend a few hundred dollars (as opposed to thousands to buy new cards) to purchase a box that would allow them to use their current hardware with a newer technology (for example, a box converting PCI to PCI-e or another current format). In my opinion, this would be a better bet for Creamware as far as recouping development costs and making profits right away.

katano · Post by **katano** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:11 am

i wouldn't spend anything for just a vista driver update. but yes, i would spend for a new hardware and yes, for new plugs, scope 5.0 whatever with new and improved functionality...

btw., just got my 2 brand new bass amps

and they fit in my studio without a problem

powerpulsarian · Post by **powerpulsarian** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:39 am

katano wrote:i wouldn't spend anything for just a vista driver update. but yes, i would spend for a new hardware and yes, for new plugs, scope 5.0 whatever with new and improved functionality...

btw., just got my 2 brand new bass amps and they fit in my studio without a problem

Agree that an update that requires a purchase probably needs to be more than just a driver update (although, this may be arguable for a Mac OSX compatibility - even many software companies are charging a fee for universal plugins because of the extra development).

Obviously, there are some very good reasons to move to new cards, but I again think Creamware would be missing an opportunity to cash in on the current user base. With many likely being hesitant to make this leap right away because of the significant cost involved in replacing old cards, Creamware would have to rely heavily on attracting new users to the platform to recoup costs and make profits (or waiting a good while for a good number of current users to convert). I think many current users would be less hesitant to purchase an additional piece of hardware (if offered at a reasonble price) that allows them to continue to take advantage of thier current investment in cards with the latest computer technology. This would likely be a faster conversion to profits for Creamware.

However, if the new cards were able to offer something extraordinary that is simply not possible on the current cards, then there may be a more compelling reasons to go that route.