Pretty disappointed with V5 so far :-(

[dawman]

There is only one senior coder as far as it has been hawked around. So it will be his genius and energy that defines the meaning of soon.

I wonder if he'll get laid off when the final release comes...........

[netguyjoel]

Yeah, I understand the situation, and all in all, I think S|C are being super nice to update the old Creamware systems, which also benefits me directly. It does take time to do things properly, but I am a patient man.

I feel there's a bit of a lack of communication, and sometimes that makes me a little nervous, but as far as they know, I could be an industrial spy with an infinite budget to gather info on the competition (I am not, BTW).

Let's give it a little time, hopefully by the end of the year most of the issues will be solved, at least on the Windows platform.

Icing on the cake would be to offer the EC card to early buyers Just kidding (but it would be great).


T

You are about to be surprised...

[siriusbliss]

mwahahahahahaahahahahha......ha



Greg

[netguyjoel]

OK COUNT!
u got me

[sandrob]

beside bugs. s/c must agrue people that scope do better summing than cubase (and similar) and they must create superior mastering tools.
i'll rather use scope mixer as summing box if i'll have more nice mastering tools like bx digital, timeworks limiter (or tc md3).

to me the best solution will be to use scope devices same as external hardware in the cubase, then route all chanels trough cubases buses to scope mixer (summing box) with superiror masterings plugins on the master channel.

now i use cubases master stereo out, instead scope, to mastering because i have better mastering tools in vst format.

in the youtube promo spots s/c must use song and slogan "what we need is a great big melting pot".
(with couple famous producers who will dance with xite in hands)

[siriusbliss]

I'd rather let SC focus on other things than developing mastering tools. bxDigital is already being used here with great results.

Summing through Scope is one of the main reasons I've been using it all these years.

Greg

[garyb]

i thouroughly disagree, but that's what talking is about sometimes.
i don't see a need for a sequencer to be the center of the world. that is ass-backwards, no matter how convienient. the tape machine should not be the universe. the current integration is the best way to join the inside and outside worlds.

as to more asio channels? there's nothing wrong with submixing, but for those ridiculous projects using more than 64 mono tracks(the phase issues in 32 stereo tracks are gargantuan) or for mixing down major motion picture sound tracks, ok, more asio i/o might be nice...

[pollux]

i thouroughly disagree, but that's what talking is about sometimes.
i don't see a need for a sequencer to be the center of the world. that is ass-backwards, no matter how convienient. the tape machine should not be the universe. the current integration is the best way to join the inside and outside worlds.

I thoroughly disagree for me the sequencer is way more than a tape machine, and I spend much more time in it than in the scope environment.. so it's way more conveinient for me to have everything in a single place (XTC)

as to more asio channels? there's nothing wrong with submixing, but for those ridiculous projects using more than 64 mono tracks(the phase issues in 32 stereo tracks are gargantuan) or for mixing down major motion picture sound tracks, ok, more asio i/o might be nice...

Classical music can use much more than 64 mono tracks, and I wouldn't call that ridiculous.
Modern productions with recorded instruments can easily hit 40 or more tracks and use *a lot* of busses.
Submixing is OK as long as you can easily continue to manipulate all the source tracks to make subtle changes all along the way. For that you still need to have all the tracks sent to scope, and then submix inside the SFP, or submix in the host and send the submixes to scope for the final mix, or load all the tracks in VDAT

[garyb]

classical music is recorded in stereo, unless it's artificial, like some film scores.

64 mono tracks are not necessarily ridiculous, but 64 stereo tracks might be, just because of the phase nightmares.

i understand the move to the sequencer as the center of the world, it IS convienient, but it disallows things that really make music great, like the real world. convienience is often a disguised slow death. electronic music is not the only reality, nor the only or best use of Scope. the best use(as far as using all of it's strengths! naturally, i'm not dissing Scope as an electronica tool or electronica, neither do i oppose electronica or dislike it!) is neither electronica, nor traditional recording, but all of the above. basing everything around the sequencer sacrifices traditional recording and other pure audio work. I'M NOT AGAINST THE OPTION, HOWEVER! i'm just sayin', there's more to life and music than your favorite sequencer, and if you utilize all of it, the current Scope interface is near perfect, considering the available technology. all that is left to make Scope the king of integration and usefullness in ALL audio applications at once is something like mackie control. jmho...

[pollux]

classical music is recorded in stereo, unless it's artificial, like some film scores.

64 mono tracks are not necessarily ridiculous, but 64 stereo tracks might be, just because of the phase nightmares.

i understand the move to the sequencer as the center of the world, it IS convienient, but it disallows things that really make music great, like the real world. convienience is often a disguised slow death. electronic music is not the only reality, nor the only or best use of Scope. the best use(as far as using all of it's strengths! naturally, i'm not dissing Scope as an electronica tool or electronica, neither do i oppose electronica or dislike it!) is neither electronica, nor traditional recording, but all of the above. basing everything around the sequencer sacrifices traditional recording and other pure audio work. I'M NOT AGAINST THE OPTION, HOWEVER! i'm just sayin', there's more to life and music than your favorite sequencer, and if you utilize all of it, the current Scope interface is near perfect, considering the available technology. all that is left to make Scope the king of integration and usefullness in ALL audio applications at once is something like mackie control. jmho...

I use the sequencer a lot and I don't do electronic music.. just as many other people out there
as I said, sequencers are much more than plain audio or midi tape machines, and for me, it's easier to have everything in a single place when mixing.

I do use a lot the Scope environment for tracking, but it's a totally different use

[garyb]

and for me, it's easier to have everything in a single place when mixing.

for me too! that's Scope.

don't think i don't get your point, i do. for me, the sequencer is like one of those hard disk recorders, it's all in one. if i had a nice Neve or Harrison to mix on, i surely would use the vs2480's mixer or effects, but that's me. as i said, i'm not against xtc-style inegration or seeing that integration improved, though. in fact, i think that it may have been improved and that it is about to see the real world.....

[pollux]

and for me, it's easier to have everything in a single place when mixing.

for me too! that's Scope.

don't think i don't get your point, i do. for me, the sequencer is like one of those hard disk recorders, it's all in one. if i had a nice Neve or Harrison to mix on, i surely would use the vs2480's mixer or effects, but that's me. as i said, i'm not against xtc-style inegration or seeing that integration improved, though. in fact, i think that it may have been improved and that it is about to see the real world.....

Try to split a clip, do some multi take comping, or using audio snap or beat inspector like tools inside VDAT, and you'll easily get my point

[garyb]

and for me, it's easier to have everything in a single place when mixing.

for me too! that's Scope.

don't think i don't get your point, i do. for me, the sequencer is like one of those hard disk recorders, it's all in one. if i had a nice Neve or Harrison to mix on, i surely would use the vs2480's mixer or effects, but that's me. as i said, i'm not against xtc-style inegration or seeing that integration improved, though. in fact, i think that it may have been improved and that it is about to see the real world.....

Try to split a clip, do some multi take comping, or using audio snap or beat inspector like tools inside VDAT, and you'll easily get my point

i DO get your point, those are operations that i use the sequencer for as well, but none of those operations have anything to do with MIXING.

why are we even arguing?

[pollux]

i DO get your point, those are operations that i use the sequencer for as well, but none of those operations have anything to do with MIXING.

I do them at the same time.. got spoiled by tracktion

why are we even arguing?

because it's fun and healthy?

[garyb]

[garyb]

no, it's really the crippling of the artist, but most have too little real experience with good gear to understand that. of course 99/999% of the "music" made is useless and pointless, so...

[siriusbliss]

Well, there ARE some studios still tracking directly to DAT or two-track

Greg

[Tau]

Sequencers have become instruments, more than just editors and recorders, Live is the perfect example of that.

Now the question if the human is playing the computer, or the computer is playing the human is also valid.

I have spent a lot of time sitting at my computer screen, "making music", and I also spent some time with some friends playing bass and "making music" alongside them. In terms of "product", I got more out of the computer time, but not in terms of enjoyment and learning. Playing an instrument involves your whole body and mind, and playing with others brings along music that one could never imagine on his own. It also helps one to get along with people in other aspects of life.

There was a time when you would write the music, play it, rehearse it, and then record it and mix it to perfection. Now, you get to do everything in one go, and you can do it all yourself, without having to find a guitar player, or a drummer, or a horn section - but it's still only you, and the machine. Things can get pretty boring and stale (but they don't have to).

15 years ago, we had dozens of bands in my town, all sorts. It wasn't hard to find a place to rehearse, there were many live concerts, a few "studios" to record demos and radio shows to send them off to. And everyone was always broke, but it didn't stop the music from happening. Now, it's impossible to find a good room to rehearse, there are no live bands, no studios, and a single music shop is left. We don't even have a proper record shop anymore. Everyone's a dj now... And everybody is into Ableton and techno and psy trance or whatever- thing is, most sound the same, copying each other, using the same plug-ins they see others use (as it's all "free"), etc. It's not all bad, many more are into music than before, and a few are doing great stuff, as before - only now, the noise has increased a thousand times...

Do you know how much is the standard fee for an all-night dj set in a bar here? Around 25 Euros. And you may have to bring along your equipment too That's how much people care for music...

[siriusbliss]

yup, it's the old economic scale and demand scale that has made the majority of what we hear now of the one-button push/loop, etc. - and it's made everything so homogenized and 'fast food' music, that the listener doesn't know the difference.

I can cut up a newspaper and glue stuff together and do a collage and call it 'art', but it's relative to actually being able to paint.

Now, I love sequencers, and the ability to do everything myself, and I also love playing with 20 other musicians as I did last week at Different Skies. Mostly improvised, but also pre-composed pieces by real players that also use many plugins, and a variety of hard/software tools.

But the whole show is recorded direct to stereo

There are amazing tools at our reach now - so much that I think we take them for granted.

Greg

[netguyjoel]

Well, there ARE some studios still tracking directly to DAT or two-track

Greg

+1