Hi,
I'd like to know if anyone can tell me whether or not there are any differences between these two types of hardware, in that are the same DSP's used?
Also, do they both conform to the same PCI specification?
Thank you,
Regards
14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
yes, they are the same, functionally. the 15dsp board used 1 dsp for board functions, but it was eliminated, as it was redundant and money could be saved on production. actually, there is an older "type 1" board that is 15dsp that is different. usually, but not always, the type 1 boards(which are a little longer and taller than the Pulsar2 period and forward type 2 15 dsp boards) had 24 adat i/o.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Hey and thank you for replying.garyb wrote:there is an older "type 1" board that is 15dsp that is different. usually, but not always, the type 1 boards(which are a little longer and taller than the Pulsar2 period and forward type 2 15 dsp boards) had 24 adat i/o.
Sounds like you have all the background here so I will try to be as concise as possible with my questions.
Are you saying, that, "type 1" boards had the classic i/o already installed, or was it a part of the hardware itself at that time.
Also, if the 15th DSP is redundant as you say, can it still be used as just another processor?
I've got a powercore firewire and I'm thinking of integrating this into my system with cubase, and read somewhere there is a way to run cubase inside Scope, as well as the other way round.
At first I was interested in XTC, but now thinking of what Scope can really do, as well do you know if it supports ASIO 2.2, since my current hardware (Echo) does and I'd not want to sacrifice those functions.
Anything you could say here or anyone else would be most helpful to understand.
Thanks again
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
there were 2 type 1 boards, #1 was the pulsar 4dsp card, which came with integrated i/o on the card(classis20 or plus) and #2 was the Scope SP or DP card which came with a 24 adat and 2x midi i/o duaghter card, which is the same as type 2 cards. most classic 20 or plus and some 24adat 15dsp cards were type 2.
no, the 15th dsp makes little difference in performance.
in Scope mode, cubase is ALWAYS inside Scope.
yes, asio2 is supported. what 2.2 function can you not live without?
the Scope environment makes so much possible, i can't imagine choosing the echo, especially when sound quality is factored in, jmho...
no, the 15th dsp makes little difference in performance.
in Scope mode, cubase is ALWAYS inside Scope.
yes, asio2 is supported. what 2.2 function can you not live without?
the Scope environment makes so much possible, i can't imagine choosing the echo, especially when sound quality is factored in, jmho...Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
You are right technically but socioeconomically well I'm not that far up the pile so to speak.
Even looking at TC for all its' bugs and problems, that is very expensive as well but sonic core well it takes the cake but if I know enough I may just shell out.
Problem is of course no distributor where I am from.
I don't even know if paypal is available to get the software anyway. I can't download it to even see the versions of VST, and yes I want ASIO 2.2 because it's 64 bit compatible, just like I want VST 3 and I'm not here to argue for/against either since I know the score development wise.
All I want to know is why all these product iterations, can it be any more confusing?
Even looking at TC for all its' bugs and problems, that is very expensive as well but sonic core well it takes the cake but if I know enough I may just shell out.
Problem is of course no distributor where I am from.
I don't even know if paypal is available to get the software anyway. I can't download it to even see the versions of VST, and yes I want ASIO 2.2 because it's 64 bit compatible, just like I want VST 3 and I'm not here to argue for/against either since I know the score development wise.
All I want to know is why all these product iterations, can it be any more confusing?
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
well, it's not, really.
right now, there is the XITE, which is expensive, but not really. in fact it's dirt cheap for what it is.
just in the past few years, there were 3 choices, small(home), medium(project) and large(professional). up to 3 cards can be used at a time in any combination. the only software offered was the Scope Fusion Platform(SFP or just Scope). these were the exact same type 2 cards, but with a simplified package.
prior to that, there were 3 seperate product lines. entry(luna, power sampler or electra), Pulsar2(the 6dsp card with a 15dsp option called power pulsar which was a Scope card running the Pulsar software) and Scope(the developer's software and a non-developer version that was more deluxe than Pulsar). all these were type2
prior to that, there was Scope, which was the real product, and Pulsar(4 dsp) which was the entry product. all these were type1.
Scope's been around for quite some time, which is why there were a few different models and sodtware packages, but it's still the same cards.
it's true that Scope products are expensive compared to cracked programs, but Scope cards don't become obsolete just because they're not in a new computer, so the investment is actually a very good bargain in the long run, as real gear never stops sounding good. i guess it all depends on whether producing music or playing with the computer is the most important thing, as to what kind of a bargain Scope is, and whether or not it's worth scrimping up the money for, if you're not rich.
right now, there is the XITE, which is expensive, but not really. in fact it's dirt cheap for what it is.
just in the past few years, there were 3 choices, small(home), medium(project) and large(professional). up to 3 cards can be used at a time in any combination. the only software offered was the Scope Fusion Platform(SFP or just Scope). these were the exact same type 2 cards, but with a simplified package.
prior to that, there were 3 seperate product lines. entry(luna, power sampler or electra), Pulsar2(the 6dsp card with a 15dsp option called power pulsar which was a Scope card running the Pulsar software) and Scope(the developer's software and a non-developer version that was more deluxe than Pulsar). all these were type2
prior to that, there was Scope, which was the real product, and Pulsar(4 dsp) which was the entry product. all these were type1.
Scope's been around for quite some time, which is why there were a few different models and sodtware packages, but it's still the same cards.
it's true that Scope products are expensive compared to cracked programs, but Scope cards don't become obsolete just because they're not in a new computer, so the investment is actually a very good bargain in the long run, as real gear never stops sounding good. i guess it all depends on whether producing music or playing with the computer is the most important thing, as to what kind of a bargain Scope is, and whether or not it's worth scrimping up the money for, if you're not rich.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Maybe but not everyone can afford it. I think over the years Sonic Core have had such bad marketing that they've had to price things so high to re-coup losses. Of course the evidence is in the fact of the company going bust multiple times and "re-inventing itself" all over and again.garyb wrote:right now, there is the XITE, which is expensive, but not really. in fact it's dirt cheap for what it is.
prior to that, there were 3 seperate product lines. entry(luna, power sampler or electra), Pulsar2(the 6dsp card with a 15dsp option called power pulsar which was a Scope card running the Pulsar software) and Scope(the developer's software and a non-developer version that was more deluxe than Pulsar). all these were type2[/quote]garyb wrote:just in the past few years, there were 3 choices, small(home), medium(project) and large(professional). up to 3 cards can be used at a time in any combination. the only software offered was the Scope Fusion Platform(SFP or just Scope). these were the exact same type 2 cards, but with a simplified package.
Software version 4, no?
Version 3?garyb wrote:prior to that, there was Scope, which was the real product, and Pulsar(4 dsp) which was the entry product. all these were type1.
So it's a fact that the DSP's in use have not changed, only the amounts and i/o configurations, onboard, optional extra etcgaryb wrote:Scope's been around for quite some time, which is why there were a few different models and sodtware packages, but it's still the same cards.
No but coming from where I am, all I can get is second hand, so it's difficult enough trying to work out how to obtain the latest software, let alone what it all does.garyb wrote:it's true that Scope products are expensive compared to cracked programs, but Scope cards don't become obsolete just because they're not in a new computer, so the investment is actually a very good bargain in the long run, as real gear never stops sounding good. i guess it all depends on whether producing music or playing with the computer is the most important thing, as to what kind of a bargain Scope is, and whether or not it's worth scrimping up the money for, if you're not rich.
Anyway, no one said anything about cracked software, all I said was is I use PowerCore and am happy so you might see why I need XTC mode as an option since I compose music and rarely record.
One more thing...
...just because something sounds good doesn't mean it can work as well as it could, again TC powercore and all the bugs you got to put up with but it sounds great no denying that.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
ummm, Sonic/Core is COMPLETELY unrelated to Creamware EXCEPT for the owners of S/C are the original program/design team for Scope and the technology and records. S/C is a completely different company. XITE pricing has nothing to do with recouping losses and everything to do with how much it costs to make and develope. no, everyone can't afford it. some will need to work and save, if they find it useful, just like in real life. just like with a big television....
the cards all have the same dsps, but there have been 2 different card layouts. newer dsps only would add horsepower, not quality. the XITE has new dsps.
i never meant to suggest you were using cracked software, i was only saying that Scope is expensive compared to cracked software, but that it is inexpensive compared to other TOP QUALITY studio tools. for example, i own a $3500 microphone. XITE surely is dirt cheap, compared to that...
the pulsar 1 period was software v1 and 2. Pulsar2 v3, and SFP was v4 to present, or so.
personally, i find Scope mode to work just fine for composition. there's no reason for every synth to be in the sequencer. what if you wanted to use a hardware synth? it would be outside the sequencer just like Scope. what about real instruments? the things i can do with Scope mode are ALWAYS worth any extra mouse moves, but i like the freedom of traditional recording gear relationships...as i said however, whatever makes you happy is ok! obviously, you can use the gear any way you want, that it'll work in...
everything has limitations. we use stuff because we like it. it's only music...
the cards all have the same dsps, but there have been 2 different card layouts. newer dsps only would add horsepower, not quality. the XITE has new dsps.
i never meant to suggest you were using cracked software, i was only saying that Scope is expensive compared to cracked software, but that it is inexpensive compared to other TOP QUALITY studio tools. for example, i own a $3500 microphone. XITE surely is dirt cheap, compared to that...
the pulsar 1 period was software v1 and 2. Pulsar2 v3, and SFP was v4 to present, or so.
personally, i find Scope mode to work just fine for composition. there's no reason for every synth to be in the sequencer. what if you wanted to use a hardware synth? it would be outside the sequencer just like Scope. what about real instruments? the things i can do with Scope mode are ALWAYS worth any extra mouse moves, but i like the freedom of traditional recording gear relationships...as i said however, whatever makes you happy is ok! obviously, you can use the gear any way you want, that it'll work in...
everything has limitations. we use stuff because we like it. it's only music...
-
doktorfuture
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Not related to this thread so much, but:
I am happy that Sonic Core is entirely different from Creamware. I always thought Creamware was unstable financially, and I like what Sonic Core has done for the platform. When Modular IV came out, I figured this system would be worth it just for the modular environment (with Adern, etc...).
Still, Sonic Core could use better marketing. I was thinking something that would show the full 'scope' (hehe) and 'breadth' of the platform would be a web page that let you horizontally scroll across categorized columns of screenshot-thumbs of various devices from various manufacturers.
We'd see little thumbs of the EQ's, distortions, fuzzifiers, various synths, dynamics, vocoders, etc... The graphic impact would be something to behold and would give people a good sense of just how much is available.
I think it should be positioned against the UAD product, where UAD tries to be very emulative, the Sonic Core system should be positioned as being 'fresher'. I was considering the UAD 2 Quad to compliment the XITE-1 I have, but now that I've used the XITE-1 for a while, I'm thinking I probably won't.
I am happy that Sonic Core is entirely different from Creamware. I always thought Creamware was unstable financially, and I like what Sonic Core has done for the platform. When Modular IV came out, I figured this system would be worth it just for the modular environment (with Adern, etc...).
Still, Sonic Core could use better marketing. I was thinking something that would show the full 'scope' (hehe) and 'breadth' of the platform would be a web page that let you horizontally scroll across categorized columns of screenshot-thumbs of various devices from various manufacturers.
We'd see little thumbs of the EQ's, distortions, fuzzifiers, various synths, dynamics, vocoders, etc... The graphic impact would be something to behold and would give people a good sense of just how much is available.
I think it should be positioned against the UAD product, where UAD tries to be very emulative, the Sonic Core system should be positioned as being 'fresher'. I was considering the UAD 2 Quad to compliment the XITE-1 I have, but now that I've used the XITE-1 for a while, I'm thinking I probably won't.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
the only problem with doing better and more advertising is money.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Just reading some older posts and looking for info on my recently purchased card..
So a 15 DSP Scope SP card be Gen 2? Is this quite rare?
I have one which is NFR and came in a flight case, production date is 6/10/00. Yet seems to be gen 2 as ULLI can be set lower than 13ms
Any other ways to tell?
Anyone else have a card like this?
Also re: Sonic Core marketing, it is expensive and im sure companies like Native Instruments, Universal Audio or Arturia spend a fortune for the coverage they get.
Some things are free.. they seem to be trying at least http://www.youtube.com/user/SonicCoreGmbH
So a 15 DSP Scope SP card be Gen 2? Is this quite rare?
I have one which is NFR and came in a flight case, production date is 6/10/00. Yet seems to be gen 2 as ULLI can be set lower than 13ms
Any other ways to tell?
Anyone else have a card like this?
Also re: Sonic Core marketing, it is expensive and im sure companies like Native Instruments, Universal Audio or Arturia spend a fortune for the coverage they get.
Some things are free.. they seem to be trying at least http://www.youtube.com/user/SonicCoreGmbH
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
hey, Andy...
yeah, if you can do lower than 13ms it is DEFINITELY a type2 card. the older card was a little longer...
yeah, if you can do lower than 13ms it is DEFINITELY a type2 card. the older card was a little longer...
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
my Scope card also has 15 chips and does the ultra low latency values.
It's only 'flaw' (so to say) is that it fails at the 9 or 10th instance of masterverb because of a 'not enough DSP memory' error.
People have been able to load 14 to 18 such reverbs (as a test) on the mobo I have (ASUS TUSL) before getting a PCI bandwidth error.
Otherwise it's fine and I don't mind the above at all
cheers, Tom
It's only 'flaw' (so to say) is that it fails at the 9 or 10th instance of masterverb because of a 'not enough DSP memory' error.
People have been able to load 14 to 18 such reverbs (as a test) on the mobo I have (ASUS TUSL) before getting a PCI bandwidth error.
Otherwise it's fine and I don't mind the above at all
cheers, Tom
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Ive seen that masterverb test thread and i think i'll test + post how my system performs later..
So would you say the 2nd gen 15 DSP card failing on the 9th or 10th masterverb is bad? Much lower than one of those later 2nd gen 14 DSP cards?
So would you say the 2nd gen 15 DSP card failing on the 9th or 10th masterverb is bad? Much lower than one of those later 2nd gen 14 DSP cards?
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
no.
there are a lot of factors. 9 or 10 masterverbs are plenty of pci resources for most uses anyway.
there are a lot of factors. 9 or 10 masterverbs are plenty of pci resources for most uses anyway.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Gary, my card doesn't fail on PCI - it says: not enough DSP memory.
No matter which version of Scope, which mobo or OS...
cheers, Tom
No matter which version of Scope, which mobo or OS...
cheers, Tom
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
right, i've seen that before. the reason why some get 14-18 is unknown to me. i'm not really sure it's related to the board rev.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
well, then it's ok...
I don't mind it that much, as the card has been an exceptionally good purchase anyway
cheers, Tom
I don't mind it that much, as the card has been an exceptionally good purchase anyway
cheers, Tom
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
Hey Gary,
Thanks again for all of your past advice, i've been using Scope 5.1, modular and flexor happily for some time now on my Pulsar II..!!
I've just bought the Zarg bundle and a bunch of DAS plugs and i need more power. What is the best way to guarantee that i'm buying a 2nd gen 14/15 - ie to make sure that it is low latency capable?
Cheers,
Seth.
Thanks again for all of your past advice, i've been using Scope 5.1, modular and flexor happily for some time now on my Pulsar II..!!
I've just bought the Zarg bundle and a bunch of DAS plugs and i need more power. What is the best way to guarantee that i'm buying a 2nd gen 14/15 - ie to make sure that it is low latency capable?
Cheers,
Seth.
Re: 14 DSP -vs- 15 DSP system
you can look at manufacture dates, but if the card has a z-link, Plus or Classic20 i/o plate, it's almost certainly a 2nd gen card. if iut has a 24ADAT or was converted from a 24ADAT plate, then it's almost certainly a 1st gen card.