PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

On 2004-03-31 14:50, Shayne White wrote:
3 -- bad. 4 -- good.

yeah, i've always had a problem with that number as well. "3", what is that? "4" now THAT'S a sweet number.

I love using the zero latency features of the SCOPE native system; however, I would like to be able to use a few pluggins in a non-zero-latency VST environment while still having the option of using the non-latency mode as well. Would anyone other than me have a use for a module within SFP that would allocate a certain amount of processing power to be able to run XTC versions of pluggins while in native mode?

What ends up happening for me is I record all the tracks dry and play them back all on separate asio sends through same effects I recorded through. It's exactly the same signal path as if SFP were an analog console. I run any bounced tracks through a stereo output to the monitor input. Sometimes though I will have a track that all I want to do is throw a little vinco compression on it without running it through its own channel on the mixer. It would be sweet if there was a module in SFP that would set aside the processing power to run XTC mode for a few plugins and not allow the native mode to use that processing power. If this were the case then you could use 10 of your sharcs for realtime processing, and 4 for XTC. I am just one guy talking, but I would use the hell out of that. I would actually probably buy another powerpulsar chip or whatever they are called now just to run XTC while I used the other one for live mixing.

I do the bulk of my automation through Cubase because I don't like the midi automation but that basically means I do all of my automation pre-fader which wreaks havoc on my gates for drums. This feature would save me from having to worry about that. The day I have that is the day that product goes from being really good to being nearly flawless.

On 2004-03-31 14:48, Immanuel wrote:
Big or small update - no matter what it turns out to be, I find it good, that they start be a new number. It is symbolic of a new start.

Good point. I agree - I just would hate to see quotes from reviewers saying:

"There's nothing really new with version 4.0. It's really just a slick marketing gimmick to get more sales with a few bug fixes thrown in (which really should have been taken care of as an update to the existing software). A new version implies major enhancements... so is Creamware being slightly dishonest here?"

I really hope we will not see quotes like the above from reviewers. Any improvement is really much appreciated regardless of the version number used. I'm just afraid reviewers might not view it the same way (especially if they feel their time is being wasted by Creamware just trying to get published again without any real differences that would warrant another review).

I don't think we will se such reviews. What is dishonest by sending out a free upgrade - be it big or small?

On 2004-03-31 16:06, Immanuel wrote:
I don't think we will se such reviews. What is dishonest by sending out a free upgrade - be it big or small?

The dishonest part would be making it look like you have made some major enhancements to your product to offer to the market when you really haven't done much at all just to try to spark some more interest for sales, get your product re-published in magazines for review, etc. It's like creating a PR compaign when there really isn't anything newsworthy (and this usually backfires or just gets ignored).

There's definitely no negatives for current users. Like I said, any update is definitely welcome, especiallly when its free. There is just the potential of it being viewed very differently outside our community.

Of course, it really is all speculation at this point. So I won't say another word until 4.0 is available and we can all see what it includes.

it really is all speculation at this point. So I won't say another word until 4.0 is available and we can all see what it includes

Yes it is, and I am sorry for "putting up a fire" with my personal speculation!

We have to calm down and wait! WHATEVER comes will be welcome!

The new CWA.de... Simply... WOW!

I think the new CW is on the right track... Albeit, technologically no quantum leap yet; the new SCOPE 4.0 is a definite welcome! Now, hoping that Cutmaster Pro will follow soon!

Thanks and welcome back, CW!

On 2004-03-31 15:26, siberiansun wrote:
... "3", what is that? "4" now THAT'S a sweet number.

not everywhere
the version number 4 has been avoided frequently - on much larger scaled products than SFP, because in Japan the 4 may be associated with death...

cheers, Tom

In China, too ...
All chinese people will wait to version 8, the number of good luck

I've read on cwaudio.de, that scope 4.0 requires win ME! Does it mean, that win98se is no longer supported? Could be a lot of work for me ...
Maybe it's the occasion to turn to xp.

On 2004-03-31 17:45, Herr Voigt wrote:
I've read on cwaudio.de, that scope 4.0 requires win ME! Does it mean, that win98se is no longer supported? Could be a lot of work for me ...
Maybe it's the occasion to turn to xp.

I'd say it's about time people who still use '98 should upgrade to XP.
But also note: Cubase SX was advertised as needing ME/XP to run but I think it still runs on '98, it's just not supported. Maybe that will be the case with Scope 4.0 as well.

Oh oh, my old beloved system, running so well: win98se, cubase5.1, scope3.1c.
Next month I will think about it.

With any luck it only requires a minimum of WinME. Otherwise we're all in trouble. ;P

There isn't anything spectacularly different between ME and 98SE, so I'd be surprised to find out that 98SE has been dumped. As has already been mentioned, we'll really just have to wait and see.

Sam

On 2004-03-31 17:57, dehuszar wrote:
...There isn't anything spectacularly different between ME and 98SE, so I'd be surprised to find out that 98SE has been dumped. ...

yeah, I guess it's just a simplification like the avoidance of the term 'Pulsar One'.
People might ask '...hell, what's a Win98 ? a Pulsar One ???'

Herr Voigt, '...we will go down with this ship - but we won't put our hands up and surrender...'
I'd rather eat the Open Source pill before XP enters my place...

cheers, Tom

Windows ME is an aweful OS, so I am suprised they didn't just skip over that in go straight to supporting just Windows 2000 and XP. Why continue to support ME with all of the bugs and stability issues that OS is troubled with, but get rid of 98 support? It just seems like more of a headache for Creamware than it is worth.

Plus, many companies now are just supporting Windows 2000/XP (like Native Instruments and Cakewalk), so it's not like they would be out of sync with what the market as a whole is doing.

On 2004-03-31 18:10, astroman wrote:
I'd rather eat the Open Source pill before XP enters my place...

cheers, Tom

awwww come on now,xp isn't that bad...

On 2004-03-31 17:24, Herr Voigt wrote:
In China, too ...
All chinese people will wait to version 8, the number of good luck

Wrong, it's the number 9 you're looking for.
(Remember all those wedding on 09-09-1999?)

On 2004-03-31 18:10, astroman wrote:
I'd rather eat the Open Source pill before XP enters my place...

cheers, Tom

Even if it's your birthday present?;-)

I'm glad to read the 4.0 software still supports us Maccers Even if it's still 9.x support only.

_________________
Sir Sam Plaire Scopernicus

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: samplaire on 2004-04-01 04:01 ]</font>

On 2004-03-31 13:56, Shayne White wrote:
Undo function, stereo cabling, better 96k functionality? My top three.

I'd opt for the first 2