Creamware: Read My Lips

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:11 am

On 2005-11-01 21:28, beerbr wrote:
I agreed that Scope has NO competing product for its powerful & sound.. yes.

If your work have to involve many studios and have to transfer in/out of your studio everyday then you'll know what the STANDARD is important. But if you only work in your own studio then it is Best already with scope. I know, they have the good way to work out for this, but it's just not that convenience, especially mixing engineer that want to transfer mix to edit later in another studio..

I love to mix in my scope better than Protools HD.. Yes., scope is warmer and more easy to connect with outboard gear via A16 Ultra. But if I want to transfer mix to another studio and can adjust balance later in another studio? I have to re-record the mix line by line, effect by effect (though, can record 8-10 tracks at once by powerful scope routing). But believe me it's not that convenience..

This is just different point of idea.. don't mean to offense anything.. May be I just look different angle.

You are making some confusion...Scope has to be seen as studio hardware, something external to a daw. Its special sound is a result of special code written for special dsp's.
What you say is like saying that you like your Hammond B3 or your Moog Modular but they should be compatible with ProTools format...it makes no sense.
If Scope were not tied to those specifical processors and that specifical code for them it would just be different, different sound, different feel.
Only thing you can ask for is that your Sequencer app could save in P.T. compatibile format, after you had recorded all the stuff in audio tracks.

Scope is an hardware instrument mounted inside a computer, not a native tool.
It can't be compatibile with P.T. more than a wooden marimba.

beerbr · Post by **beerbr** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:10 am

Oh no...

I'm sorry to make it confusing. As I said before about "DAE" in Logic Audio. Digidesign Protools HD make their hardware FULLY compatible with Logic Audio Platinum via "DAE" (Digidesign Audio Engine). Because Logic Audio is widely used all over the professional world for arrange, compose and MIX music. I mean it's great to have Scope FULLY compatible with Logic Audio (not Protools).

FULLY compatible in my meaning is like Scope Fusion Platform replace the audio engine in Logic Audio. Similar like you have VDAT recording engine intergrated in Logic Audio (to have VDAT sound but Logic Audio look). But the good is you can edit sound wave directly in Logic. You can monitor the input while assign Scope effect directly in the look of logic's mixer (but scope sound) & send effect all in realtime. But this will disable all VST effects. I try to say the way of "DAE" works in Logic Audio.

Or the difference can compare like "DAE" & "Direct IO". Both use Digidesign hardware but DIFFERENT Audio Engine.

Scope now have "ASIO" which I compare like having "Direct IO". But it's dream if Scope can have "SAE" (Scope Audio Engine) or "SFP" (Scope Fusion Platform) to compare with "DAE" in the same manner.

I'm sorry if it's hard to understand. But this is the best I can explain what I think.

I believe that this is not too far Dream. It's just the matter of co-develop with Logic (if possible) to port Scope system (which already have) in Logic.

If things can occur? I'll buy share of Creamware if they sell.. I'M NOT JOKING!! =)

[ This Message was edited by: beerbr on 2005-11-02 10:12 ]

[ This Message was edited by: beerbr on 2005-11-02 10:12 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 3:05 pm

On 2005-11-02 10:10, beerbr wrote:
Oh no...
I'm sorry to make it confusing.
...
FULLY compatible in my meaning is like Scope Fusion Platform replace the audio engine in Logic Audio. Similar like you have VDAT recording engine intergrated in Logic Audio (to have VDAT sound but Logic Audio look). But the good is you can edit sound wave directly in Logic. ...

now you make it even more confusing

VDAT is nothing but a stupid container to collect the bits that travel between the DSPs.
It does this in 32 bit integer, but of course also with reduced bit depth where appropriate (or desired).
There is no special engine involved.
The main advantage is a huge track count with minimal resources. No more, no less.
I honestly don't believe that you can distinguish a single VDAT track from it's ASIO representation in a blind test.

VDAT is before the mixing engine - if you prefer the 'sound' of the Creamware mixers, then use them - and file the stuff in Logic or Protools or whatever.

It would't make much sense to rewrite Logic (for example) for something that already exists.
I really don't see much obstacles regarding optimization of workflow. I never tried it, but if they don't lie completely in their ads even the cheapo versions of Protools are compatible with the big thing.

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-11-02 15:11 ]

beerbr · Post by **beerbr** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:15 pm

Sorry to say...

The VDAT does sound different from ASIO... Yes it DOES different. It is not from Scope Mixer that makes sound different. Try play same master audio file through 1. Logic, 2. Samplitude, 3. Wavelab, 4. VDAT (all use ASIA driver to the same Scope Mixer -except VDAT that route to the same Scope Mixer). I can blind test and tell the different. I really DOES sound Different!!

And if possible, go to try "DAE" in logic audio and you'll get more picture of what I mean "Scope Audio Engine"..

Protools Hardware if it's not "TDM", it is NOT GOOD.. They are non-realtime environment..

PS. how can I post some icon face in reply? Thanks..

[ This Message was edited by: beerbr on 2005-11-02 22:18 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:47 am

beerbr, my point is not to convince of some obscure facts, but to make things easier for you

if you like the sound of the Sharc DSPs (which IS different from the Motorolas imho, for whatever reason), then VDAT is of course the most trustworthy and reliable way to record and play it back.

What goes in, comes out and sounds identical to what you monitored - impossible to distinguish from original (because it's the data of the original).

if you want to pass the same datastream to another application, via ASIO there is a format conversion required, which almost certainly (as a side effect) will change the level of the signal in a (say) range of 1.5 db.

Since the human ear is a non-linear device, this will be percieved as a quality difference. You will not detect the increased level of loudness, but simply judge it as 'more transparent'.

As long as you prevent Logic or Cubase from processing the audio (by native plugs for example), you can perfectly integrate the Sharc 'sound' into anything - the 'abuse' of a sequencer as a pure multitracker with midi extension isn't that uncommon

There are tasks (like acoustical/jazz recordings) that seem to apply exceptionally well to SFP - but in a more global context a Sharc-only system is pretty boring, imho.
Boring on a high level, but finally boring

So why leave out all the other sounds ? no need for dogmatic restrictions here.
You already have it all ready to use

In fact CWA once did offend Digidesign (and others) by their 'we can do it better for less' slogans (1998/99) - they played high, and lost.
this chapter is closed - today it's coop and complement what sells (if it sells at all...)

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-11-03 02:53 ]

ScofieldKid · Post by **ScofieldKid** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:12 am

OK. I think #1 on the "Must Have" list is really a future generation card. So that would look like:

1. New PCIe Scope, with the new DSP's

then might as well do:

2. New A16 Ultra, just a refresh, but include some more standalone operational features, even possibly a 2-channel mix out capability

3. More ASB's

I expect Creamware is going to make money in this area, so while #1 and #2 may or may not be priorities, #3 seems like a good bet. The obvious one, as other threads suggest is an Oberheim clone: ASB Oberheim Matrix-12

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:38 am

On 2005-11-03 11:12, ScofieldKid wrote:

The obvious one, as other threads suggest is an Oberheim clone: ASB Oberheim Matrix-12

Hopefully with better envelopes than the original.

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:05 pm

I pray for the John Bowen version myself, since playing with Solaris and hearing spot on CEMs, I trust anything he makes. Don't know if I need Q-Wave, but I'm going to purchase it in hopes that the invested time/profit margin ( R.O.I. ), helps keep this genius in our camp.

darkrezin · Post by **darkrezin** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:27 pm

Doesn't Gibson own the Oberheim name? I doubt they're an easy company to do business with regarding branding. They're run by a bit of a brainless redneck from what I've heard - amongst other things they killed Opcode and crippled the last true Oberheim synth (which was designed in co-operation with Don Buchla) through crap business decisions. If they had anything to do with the existence of the monstrosity that is the 'OB'12 (I think this was the result of a dodgy licensing deal with a mediocre hardware manufacturer called Viscount) then they are truly evil.

[ This Message was edited by: darkrezin on 2005-11-10 18:32 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:25 am

of course it would be marketed as
Ueberheim
according to trendy germanization

scope4live, you'll be surprised how distinct the Q-Wave sounds, even if you know Solaris
It IS a masterpiece, but what else would you expect from John...

cheers, Tom
yes, I like Nietzsche, Wagner, King Ludwig... the whole gang

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-11-11 02:26 ]

chrisk · Post by **chrisk** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:23 am

Ueberheim! LOL!

I like Nietzsche too. Not sure about Wagner, but neither was Nietzsche.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:51 pm

On 2005-11-11 06:23, spectrum wrote:
...Not sure about Wagner, ...

well, his brass sections and pads are some of the best ever written imho
... and if you replace the fruits from Freya's garden (source of the gods' power) with a more contemporary item like oil, consider the contracts built and broken by the 'world's leader' (Wotan), the greed of his wife, the sex appeal of the Rhinemaidens - then Rhinegold looks like a pretty timeless piece

The Ring elaborates those 'ideas', driven by the prototype of all politicians (Loge), etc.

people accused Wagner and his Sponsor for burning enormous amounts of cash - but hasn't it turned out to be the best investment for the Bajuwarian region and for the city of Bayreuth ever ?
Pictures of those fairy tale castles have even been posted <a href=http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... 19>here</a> on planetZ recently

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-11-11 15:01 ]

lagoausente · Post by **lagoausente** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:23 am

I think that could be interesting to remember old wishes.

wayne · Post by **wayne** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:52 am

astroman wrote:]
well, his brass sections and pads are some of the best ever written imho

I believe Wagner is indirectly responsible for the invention of the tuba also

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:50 am

astroman wrote:of course it would be marketed as
Ueberheim
according to trendy germanization

muahhh, great! you made my day

seems I joined the planet too late to see that...

-greetings, markus-

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:28 pm

stardust wrote:oberheim sounds german already. But he seems born in Manhattan......Kansas

nevertheless he may have german ancestors