Considering a Pulsar II purchase, many questions if any one

Basic Pitch · Post by **Basic Pitch** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 4:58 pm

Greetings all,

A quick background of my situation. I currently use a Lynx L22 Card with a UAD-1 and Nuendo 2.1, I am really looking to get more into DSP processing hence the interest into the Pulsar II or PowerPulsar, I have a few questions I am concernd about and 2 options I am considering, first the options.

1) Replace The lynx L22 with the Pulsar to compliment my UAD for a complete DSP soltution.

2) Not go with a CW card and just buy a TC powercore to use with my UAD-1 and Lynx L22.

So now for the questions, keep in mind I have no idea how the CW cards work or sound and especially the quality of the card etc etc.

- With full PDC in N2, I assume I can run all effects and synths with XTC mode in realtime as if they were native plugs?

- Can the Cards effects be used in Soundforge or Wavelab for mixing down a project after its been bounced to .wave? I ask because I would be purchasing the mastering plug "forgot whats its called" but would want to apply those dynamics to the mixdown in wavelab so I can EQ with the Plutec and such and maximize and Multiband compress the file with the CW pluggin.

- Concerning the effects, how would you rate these compared to say Waves or TC plugs, especially the reverbs, compression is not an issue since I have the UAD.

- Over sound quality and construction of the card How would you rate it?

- How do the synths sound? is there a noticible difference vrs. native plugs such as Reaktor, Pro63, Pentagon etc?

- Concerning the 6 SHARK DPS's, in a basic scenario, how many effects and synths could I expect to use simultaniously with out hindering the quality of the sound or performance of the card? I mostly bounce my audio for VSTi's but I would like to be able to audition the synths in the tracks, apply effects then bounce dry and during composition apply effects after each bounce.

- Converters: I mostly do electronic music but have been known to record guitars and vocals, I am considering the 2/2 Analog I/O with the ADAT option incase I need an additional 8-16 I/Os, how does the card sound in comparison to some of the higher end cads such as the Lynx and RME cards? This is a somewhat of a concern since the card offers so much at such a reasonable price, there has to be somewhere they had to compromise, where is the question..

- Latency - While reading how the CW cards are designed for zero latency in realtime, how are the drivers for ASIO routings?

- Support: How is CW's support, can you actually speak with a live human other than an email or a series of annoying phone options?

- More on the 6 SHARK DSP's, is 6 enough to get alot out of the card or will I be itching for 15 after a weeks use with the card?

- Audio Bouncing: I can not remember where I read this, but I read there was an issue about bouncing audio -or- effects, is there any truth to this?

- How is the learning curve, can I dive in and play or do I need to read a dictionary sized manual, and most important how is the manual, helpfull, or written pore?

- PCI Conflicts: Any one using this card in conjunction with a AUD-1? Any crackles or pops?

These are just my basic concerns, I am really impressed by the rather large feature set of the Pulsar II card, just seems you get so much for the money dollar for dollar value, they had to compromise somewhere to get all that for that price.

If any one just wants to add extra about the quality of the sound of the card and the effects I would appreciate it greatly. I have exactly 12 days left to decide what I am going to do before my return policy expires on the Lynx card, so I am really torn, I just want to have a complete DSP solution to compliment Nuendo and my UAD-1, after getting involved with the UAD I am in love with DSP processing, it sounds real nic and my CPU just loves the extra room it now has to breath on large scale projects!

Thanks in advance!

Basic Pitch

[ This Message was edited by: Basic Pitch on 2003-08-16 18:08 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:53 pm

welcome Basic Pitch,

well, that's quite an interview...
Let me start from bottom, as I'm not the Nuendo and XTC expert.

There's absolutely no trick about that huge number of features the Pulsar offeres.
CW simply has an outstanding piece of software for controlling the DSPs.
Both from the user's and developer's point of view. And this software has continously grown since 1998.

The system is designed with nothing but (audio) quality in mind, so 6 DSPs are used up pretty fast on sophisticated synths.
You've probably noticed the totally unrestricted audio routing of SFP which let's you use about anything, even a synth, as an FX unit, and that on several channels parallel.
On the other hand even a small card like a Pulsar one with only 4 DSPs is usable for rather sophisticated setups. Just distribute the job on a couple of preset 'environements' loaded one after the other.
Takes time, but spares money - make your choice.

There is NOTHING in native sound generation that can compete with the audio quality of the SFP synths, no kidding.
The various 'brands' of 3rd party's and CW's own stuff all feature a different basic soundflavour, but all with full and rich tone, which makes a great palette of tools to choose from.
With the exception of Modular III there are demo versions of every synth, so trust you ears and try yourself - once you have a card

Sonic Timeworks make a very good studio package you might want to consider even though you already have some tools in that direction.
Reverb is a matter of taste (as always), but SonicTimeworks, EarlyFirst and CW's Masterverb Pro are worth checking.
General FX are great, but personally I'm frequently tempted to include some trashy or LoFi units - too much beauty

SFP soundgeneration is indeed a realtime thing (when the midi note arrives), but of course the ASIO driver takes it's time, afaik the UAD is in roughly the same range.
I've never been really interested in all those latency numbers because the system can be arranged in a way that all signals arrive synced at the monitor.
If they are 1, 5 or 25 ms late doesn't bother me at all, as long as the whole pack is together

Many users prefer the routing via ASIO channels instead of XTC, which is indeed not supported some synth.

The manual is pretty good imho, if you have some idea how a hardware studio works. Rather comprehensive and good to browse to quickly get an idea of the system's philosophy. In PDF format, more pictures than text.

The converters of Pulsar are extremely good according to those users here with the appropriate studio gear to judge it.
Imho the Pulsar offers much more bang for the buck than the Lynx, but I'm already addicted to it - though I try my best to be objective in technical items.

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2003-08-16 21:15 ]

bassdude · Post by **bassdude** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 8:49 pm

Bloody hell! Someone who who seems to understand the value of these cards!

Sorry about that. It's just that there have been complaints that these cards are still too expensive for what they offer.

I can't answer all your questions but here are a few of my opinions:-

"- Concerning the effects,......."

There are some duds and there are some very high quality effects in there as well. This can be a very subjective area too.
I've also found that what may appear to be a dud effect just has poor presets.

"- Over sound quality and construction of the card How would you rate it? "

Very high quality. IMO results are only limited by the person in the drivers seat.

"- Converters: ......This is a somewhat of a concern since the card offers so much at such a reasonable price, there has to be somewhere they had to compromise, where is the question.."

I only use these for monitoring and talkback. I run every thing via ADAT. The converters sit inside the computer and are subject to that very bad RF noisey environment. However they do reject noise very well and are nice and quiet.
Compromise? No catch

They are just good value when you look at what you get and there is no other card out there like them.

" Support: How is CW's support, can you actually speak with a live human other than an email or a series of annoying phone options? "

About as good as you can expect for a small company with very limited resources. Expectations need to be realistic. Sometimes you'll get prompt support and sometimes you won't.
(To date they have always responded to my few emails. But in my case I haven't needed to contact them for actual support, as the pulsar concept was very easy for me to understand coming from a hardware sound engineering background and I am also fortunate enough to have very good computer technical background as well)

"- Latency - While reading how the CW cards are designed for zero latency in realtime, how are the drivers for ASIO routings?"

ASIO drivers are very good and stable over here. In fact, in the pulsar environment you can disconnect change things around and reconnect items (mixer channels/effects synths/connections to other software/connections to outboard gear) without losing ASIO to the sequencer.
Routing is definitely one of the high points of the pulsar. It can interface software that wouldn't normally be able to talk to each other).

"- How is the learning curve, can I dive in and play or do I need to read a dictionary sized manual, and most important how is the manual, helpfull, or written pore? "

Depends on your background. For me it was very easy to get up and running and start working with it once I sorted out the basic concept. But there is no denying that the product is very complex due to the amazing way it integrates everything.

It's not a beginner card.

There are people here successfully using a UAD alongside there pulsar setups.

Get the 15 DSP card if you can afford it.

Do a deal where you can try it out for a couple of weeks to see if it's for you and return it if not.

The RME is a basic I/O card
The UAD and TC Powercore cards are DSP plugin cards (very good of course)
The pulsar is both these with more.
(Full outboard/software integration, synths, effects, mixing)

The pulsar cards are not for everyone though, so see if you can do a deal where you can try it out for a couple of weeks to see if it's for you and return it if not.

I'm sure you'll get more answers from others!

PS Seems Astroman beat me to it!

[ This Message was edited by: bassdude on 2003-08-16 21:50 ]

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 9:40 pm

Answers to just a couple of points:

* SYNTHS:
The synths blow away almost all native synths. The sound quality is better, the workflow is better (good, simle GUIs), and there are dozens and dozens of excellent devices. New ones are coming out all the time.

BUT...

You won't find anything like Absynth or Xphrase. On the other hand the Modular-III system enables you to build some pretty innovative devices - there's a lot listed on this site. And all free for Mod users. If you get a Pulsar make sure you also get Modular-III (extra cost).

* BOUNCING AUDIO
Is there an issue with this ? YES A HUGE ISSUE! You can't bounce anything. This is my big gripe with the entire platform but neither Creamware or any developer gives a rat's arse about the problem. This one aspect is driving me back into the native/VSTi world.

The monotonously quoted solution to is either record in Soundforge or record that midi channel back as audio. Hopeless functionality IMHO opinion compared with the convenience of the VSTi world's "export audio".

* EFFECTS
Very good. The standard reverb might need supplementing by one of the extra available commercial plugs.

* SUPPORT
The latest version of the SFP software is robust and stable. People sometimes feel a bit lost when they first install the card and are trying to customise the environment for their particular set-up. But it's this flexability which is a real strength.

I've found CW support to be pretty hopeless - I've sent about six or seven emails to them over a two-year period. They've answered two. But you'll find the answers to virtually all your questions in this community - sometimes answered within minutes of posting. Support is not an issue.

* HOW MANY DSP:
A Pulsar-II is the power equivalent of a single synth, not a small studio. If you want studio processing power you want 12 or 15 DSPs.

S

Basic Pitch · Post by **Basic Pitch** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 9:44 pm

Great replies!

Thanks for the input so far, any one else care to chime in? I am still wondering about the 6 SHARKs, appoximately how much in the way of plugs can these handle at once? Being that I am unfamiliar with the way the Pulsar series works, lets say for example " does each process take a DSP or can multiple processes be used per DSP, clearly its obvious some will take more DSP than others, but in a round about way, what could one expect to load up on lets say the 6 DSP card.

My thoughts are, if I were to start with 6 DSPs, I would always get the upgrade that adds an additional 15 DSPs for what $1600.00 US? if the card is that good I am quite certain the added DSP is well worth the difference. In my particular situation and the way I work, is I like to build as I go and mix as I work, some care to mixdown at the end, but in my case, I mix down as I go and do moderate tweaks at the end, just a personal style I suppose.

I like to open synths, one at a time, build the foundation and add layers as I move along through the concept of the track, each time I decide on the particulars of the synth I am using I get it set and bounce a dry section to audio, then I go back and apply effects.

So what I truely need to be able to do is have effects running, and have enough DSP power to run complex synths for a short period of time before they get bounced and then processed after the fact.

Anyways, keep em coming and thanks for the welcome to your community!

Ps. If you have not heard the sound quality of the Lynx cards, it really is a thing of beauty, these cards sound incredible, and my first thought was to just buy the Pulsar XTC for the DSP power running through my Lynx, but unfortunately CW has decided it was cutting into there sales of other cards I suppose and dropped the line =/

So now I am trying decide on the best value for my needs. This has been quite the expensive month so far lol. and with N2s full PDC, running DSP cards is a dream hence the reason I wanna move heavily into DSP processing..

Cheers!

Basic Pitch · Post by **Basic Pitch** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 9:50 pm

Yikes!

No way to bounce selections? what about render VSTi in Cubase/Nuendo? does this feature work in XTC mode? having to record in Soundforge is a major drawback, I really dislike having to release the ASIO drivers in background as it can cause the drivers to become unstable at times, in a large scale project with loads of effects, audio, midi and DSPs running, throw in multiple software and SFPs routing programs, that sounds like its just asking for trouble

I am going to assume if your can not render a VSTi that goes the same for effects on audio tracks? or am I off base with this issue?

Well, lets see what else I can learn about the card before I make a decision, I have like 12 days to decide basically, so its not a HUGE rush, but its getting closer each day =)

Cheers!

[ This Message was edited by: Basic Pitch on 2003-08-16 22:52 ]

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 6:11 am

OK, as a Mac user we never had XTC mode, and frankly i don't miss it, the SFP environment is far more flexible and sophisticated than my crappy VST environment.

You say you would build up synth sounds as you go, so probably 6 DSPs would be enough if you offload the synth from the project before loading the next synth.

Also if you're recording lines as you go what is the big deal with non-rendering/bouncing anyway, why don't you just record the line in Nuendo as you go, that's what i do with VST all the time, even though i run as much 'live' in SFP for the final mix as possible (the opposite of how you work

). i don't see that playing back your track for five minutes whilst recording your SFP synth is such a hardship, unless you don't like listening to your own music or you're writing 30 minute prog rock epics.

Hope you get to try one out soon. If you can get a two week trial try and learn as much about it beforehand (download the manula and bug us here), and try and make it when you're not busy at work as you may be hard pushed to understand it in that amount of time (it would be worth taking a holiday for - send the missus away if you have one

).

[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-08-17 07:12 ]

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:39 am

On 2003-08-17 07:11, Mr Arkadin wrote:
...what is the big deal with non-rendering/bouncing anyway...
[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-08-17 07:12 ]

Because export/bounce is an industry standard feature. If you're used to working with an easy "bounce" function to create audio parts then I think the SFP environment could be a disappointment.

And when you have limited polyphony then "bouncing" to audio is usually fundamental to the workflow.

Sure, this isn't an issue at all to many people - it depends entirely on what other applications you have and how you like to work.

arela · Post by **arela** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 8:03 am

A workaround for audio bouncing, might be, as I found very usefull, to record audio between Cubase and CoolEdit. I use a prosject with 8 asio i/o and 8 wave i/o.

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 8:48 am

Because export/bounce is an industry standard feature. If you're used to working with an easy "bounce" function to create audio parts then I think the SFP environment could be a disappointment.

Perhaps you're right, my background dates from the early 80s so i don't always bother with certain 'new-fangled' ways of recording and i've never even looked at the export function. Am i missing the point here? i thought export just created and audio track of say a MIDI tracked VSTi, so it saves you five minutes. i just don't see the big deal of hooking up the output of SFP to the ASIO inputs and recording it in VST. Why is everyone going on about recording in Samplitude or Cool Edit or whatever when you can just record it in your host as an audio track? Please explain this to a dumb Mac Luddite.

Round1 · Post by **Round1** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 10:37 am

I have to agree.....it's really no big deal to route the output of a CW synth into (in my case Logic) and record it to an audio track. I do the same thing with my Triton all the time.
Yes, the bounce type function of Logic 6 and others is nice (it still takes time...albeit less), but it's only a samll price to pay to avoid XTC mode!

Dave

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 11:24 am

Yes, you're both 100% correct. Using Cubase or Logic it's no big deal at all. As I said, depends on the apps and workflow you use. Using FL Studio it's painful, with Project 5 or Orion Platinum you're basically stuffed.

kensuguro · Post by **kensuguro** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 11:38 am

and about the dsp issue. I use 6dsp and I'm quite content with it. Probably because I mainly use my triton as sound source, and only use pulsar for mixing. (or for minimal additional synth parts)

If you're looking into using pulsar as a synth engine, you'd definitely want the 15 dsp. think 6 for synth, 6 for effects, and 3 for lunch.

King of Snake · Post by **King of Snake** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 11:44 am

Spirit, how would you see such an audio export function work in SFP? Since SFP does not have it's own sequencer, any audio export should still be getting info on what notes to play from another sequencer soft right? So there should be some sort of sync protocol between the midi sequencer and the SFP "recorder". Maybe this can be done with a combination of midi and ASIO or something like that. And then just write a trimmed/looped file to harddisk.
Yes this would be a nice addition, although I'm a cubase VST user myself so I can record in that if I have to, this still can be tedious if you have to trim or edit the sample audio manually.

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 12:08 pm

Hi King of Snake, how would it work ? That's the Big Question. I really don't know - it's way beyond my level of expertise. But I'd love to see it.

Usually all I hear about this is "it's impossible because..." or "Why would anyone need that".

Creamware originally made its reputation with TripleDat audio recording - there must be something in that which would get us halfway there.

To me your idea sounds very good ...

[ This Message was edited by: Spirit on 2003-08-17 13:11 ]

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 12:13 pm

Getting back to Basic Pitch's needs, i'd imagine he could just record direct from SFP to Nuendo like you can in VST, or is Nuendo very different?

[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-08-17 13:13 ]

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 12:16 pm

Basic Pitch · Post by **Basic Pitch** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 1:14 pm

Awesome replies all,

Let me just add a little bit on what I was hoping to expect with nuendo's full PDC and XTC mode, I was under the impression XTC mode allowed plugs such as Pulsar effects and synths to be assigned as a standard native plug.

In nuendo you assign a FX track then add the plug as an insert and with synths you open up the VST panel and insert the synth from a list same as effects, then in a midi channel you just set the output of the midi to be routed to the VST synth with is an option in the output drop downs, this happens for each synth that is loaded, with exports, renders, or bounce all info that is applied to the source is rendered with the channel..

Now in the case of bouncing or rendering VSTi's the simplicity of the system is what makes it an beautifull thing, once I have the part done, automation what ever, I then just right click in the track and click render VST, and the track is automatically placed in the exact position as an audio track, the that simple, no need to create a track record the audio, then save, then import, place on the track, edit its properties to be the precise lenth etc etc, rendering does this all in a matter of seconds on its own, call it lazy, but I call it a fast way to work ;0

Now, I guess I could always just rout output of SFP to an input in the system to record in, but then what about effects? The way I use my effects and such is all things like lets say voacs, these are obviously audio tracks, where effects are applied and always used, not rendered, so if I were to apply pulsar effects such as a rever or chorus, would I then need to re-record the audio for the vocal the same as the synths?

I may have gotten of the beat and patrh and confused myself here in my own post (my mind is running), but, aside from renders and bouncing there is also the export, the way I work at the end of a completed track is to just set markers from the starting point of the track to the finish, hit export, decide how I want to save and export the track as an audio file, this file is complete with all VSTi's and effects aswellas automation and all, it is processed VERY fast in comparison to the lenth of the song, and then makes for simple editing in your editor of choice.

Sorry for all the questions, just wanna be 100% before I make a 1-2k dollar purchase is all..

Cheers!

[ This Message was edited by: Basic Pitch on 2003-08-17 14:20 ]

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 1:44 pm

OK i may be getting a little confused too

but here's how i work:

From VST i route all audio (including VSTis) to SFP via ASIO busses. i then apply any SFP effects via the SFP mixer, also adding any 'live' (ie. sequenced) synths into the mixer. i can then play the entire sequence and do all my mixing in SFP (there's no direct automation as such in the SFP mixers but there are ways round this) and record in VST to stereo, inserting OptiMaster on the output if required. After using SFP for a while you may find you use native effects less and less as a) they eat up CPU and b) they often don't sound as good as the SFP effects.

If you want to export your mix via Nuendo then you will have to record any synths or effects you've added from SFP into Nuendo and mix in there. The way i look at it is that yes, maybe it's a bit of a chore to wait five minutes to record each part, but these are quality instruments. For vocals and guitar you have to wait around getting the right performance and doing it in real time etc. so why not the synths?

For the sound advantages that SFP gives me over a totally native system i think the 'hardship' of not having an export function is really a non-issue.

decimator · Post by **decimator** » Sun Aug 17, 2003 4:44 pm

My WE 2 cents : worse than week service !!

If you have the money : powerpulsar !! the pulsar II with it's 6 DSPs is just a survival kit !
Thus a powerpulsar is not a rockstar suite : you aren't allowed everything, just decent comfort ...

Soundwise : clearly a ligue above VSTi's, like Terminator entering a club or bar !

I like the unique synths and sounds that complement my native setup ...

In return : if Planetz didn't exist, what are your thoughts about the Creamware plaform as a whole with the data you can gather in their site ?

Just curious ...