The Best of the 2 worlds

[babaorum]

If you want to use analog external effect (for instance an 1176), you have to output from cubase ASIO , send the output to a physical output , input into the 1176 compressor and the outputs of the compressor send them to the input ASIO by a physical input from the scope ... ok
so the latence is increase a lot, is cubase compensate automatically like usually or are this plugs create a problem ?

[garyb]

Cubase should compensate for the latency.
it's not a good idea to mix as you create anyway. why not do the final mix in Scope? you can still use the Cubase automation...

[babaorum]

If you have very good hardware effects doesn't you want to use it ? I prefer mix 'in the box' but I woul dtry to work with very good external hardware to experiment. (I make a 2-1176 clone in DIY).

[garyb]

yes, of course i would use the hardware.
did i suggest not using the hardware?

[jksuperstar]

I think the scope mixer counts "very good hardware effects".

[garyb]

i mean, if it is sound that you are concerned about, you use hardware. period.
if you can't afford the hardware, there's Scope, which just happens to interface with hardware, because it's hardware.
Cubase is a recorder in a room.
everything makes sense and works as a studio is supposed to in the first place, after that.

[babaorum]

Yes sorry Gary, I wrong translated
My question is about hybrid studio that uses hardware and software , how they integrate the hardware into the software world.
Sometimes I mix in scope and record into vdat, sometimes (very often) I mix into cubase with external scope effects and internal plugins.
If there is a preamp you can insert it before input in scope. But if you want to affect a virtual drums like superior drummer with a stereo bus hardware 1176 you have to make the loop to i/o with extern. I suppose great studio do that every time but I would to know if with scope it's possible, I think yes. (In the mixing phase the latence is lesser important in fact)

[garyb]

actually, you'd be better off inserting the 1176 into the Scope environment, but that's my opinon. there's more than just latency going on, there's the REASON for the latency. i'd rather do as little with the audio as possible on the CPU side, unless it's all offline. again, it depends on whether sound quality is the purpose or if convienience is. in fact, there's nothing convienient about inserting into Cubase's mixer environment. it's the same amount of routing in Scope. but sure! you can do that and latency should be compensated.

[babaorum]

I'm not sure I understand, you mean it's preferable to insert into scope but not into cubase ? or to not insert nothing of external ?

[garyb]

i'm saying the Scope environment is a better place to use hardware than Cubase's.

you can use either that you wish to use, however.

it's not bad either way. feel free to use the external hardware!

[babaorum]

ho yes ok

[babaorum]

Gary, to be sure I had understood :

You prefer insert an external hardware only in scope environment (without insert in cubase) , so use the hardware like a scope plugin is it this way ?
scope output > ext-hardware > scope input
instead of
cubase ASIO output > scope output > ext_hardware > scope input > cubase ASIO input

[garyb]

yes, combine your sounds in the Scope mixer, even if you use the Cubase mixer's automation. it's not like you can't get enough outputs from Cubase.

[babaorum]

Ok Thanks Gary.