Mixdown (export Audio) question

[Spirit]

Some reasoned replies at last

I don't disagree with the points about the strengths of CW cards. Routing, quality, stability etc, all strong points. And anyone who's been around the Z for a while will know my feelings about CW synths and the cards generally.

The main point I've been (unsuccessfully) trying to make is that I think the platform is in danger of smugly isolating itself like the Chinese mandarins in the middle ages: so convined of their superiority and contemptuous of the opposition that they close the borders and ignore all other advances.

As for the "go native then" replies, the answer is I already have - without even really noticing. And that's one reason I write this thread, because the subtle forces that led me away from SFP may be more general factors. Or not...

But if the best CW can do is the occassional VA synth then that's a very bad sign.

As for samplers, it seems some people have already conceded that territory to native as if it doesn't really matter !

This is crazy ! CW samplers fall behind so somehow this whole segment now doesn't matter anymore and native is better anyway, so who cares !?

But why ? The STS range used to be quite advanced and CW have let it lapse.

That's not good enough.

The synths they release while good, aren't anything particularly special. Note how even the committed CW fans were not terribly thrilled by yet another VA synth. They're also very expensive compared with similar VSTi.

As for the reply "what has Steinberg done", have a look at X-Phrase and then show me a CW equivalent in terms of innovation.

The CW platform is known for synths, yet while Absynth goes to a very sweet-sounding version 2 what has CW done ? More VA.

Has anyone looked at the Z3ta+ and it's features ? Again, nothing even remotely as advanced on SFP.

So have we also conceded the "weird" synth category to native ? So now maybe this doesn't matter either ?

How many market segments are we going to be happy with conceding to native as if they don't matter ?

And while the "better CPUs will kill DSP" argument has been around for a long time, it doesn't invalidate the possibility that this statement may at last be coming true.

And even the much-hyped Modular & its Adern additions suffer from a dire preset bug which CW refuses to even acknowledge. Will it ever be fixed ? Who knows, because CW won't comment.

Not good enough.

Instead of defending this platform as if your mother's honour were at stake, maybe we should be asking some tougher questions, expecting more, and *demanding* answers to problems such as the preset bug.

Instead of flaming me maybe twenty emails sent on one day about the Modular bug might actually get CW off their hands and start working on a fix !

And while everything may be working brilliantly for you at the moment, the platform will need much more if it's to survive in the long term and not suffer another Chapter 11 scare.

Does CW recognise that this card is nearing the end of its life and that's why they diversified into Noah ?

Veterans will remember I once said Planet Z was a like "a dead old graveyard". I got badly flamed in that one, but it produced some very significant results.

[Shayne White]

Well, somehow whenever I work on any Sonar-only projects and use only native synths/plugs, it's always a relief to me later on when I switch to other projects that use Pulsar stuff. I don't know why, there's just something homey about Pulsar's interface. I don't see myself switching to a native-only setup anytime soon; I still use a lot of Pulsar synths (and samplers -- the STS samplers are still my favorite, contrary to what anyone else thinks).

Shayne

[garyb]

and of course,we DO want all bugs addressed!

[Mr Arkadin]

Some reasoned replies at last

and that was a reasoned post, compare this new post of yours to your first and i think you'll see that this would have been a better place to start - some valid points.

Although i actally like VAs and a lot of new-fangled new synths leave me cold (like the native one's you mention) i don't think i could be accussed of never being critical - look at my recent Prodyssey argument with the developer - i felt there was a certain arrogance in the initial answers (though it later cooled off and we made up) and it was nice of CW to consult on this product (ie. they didn't).

And yes i'm seriously thinking of getting Intakt - STS should have all those import formats and beat slicing etc. or CW should admit that there's not going to be any more STS development and we can get on with other sampler solutions.

Mr A.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-11-12 19:16 ]</font>

[Neil B]

Chthonian,
Does these replies answer your questions?
I bet you wonder what you've signed up to, but we're a friendly bunch really

[garyb]

[Spirit]

Ummm... can you repeat the question again ?

[spacef]

>>>> have a look at X-Phrase and then show me a CW equivalent in terms of innovation.
>>>

it's noah (i'm serious) well, almost, as noah doesn't have any drum sound....

[inDSP Frank]

Groundhog Day, again?

I guess CW should feel honoured to be seen as a serious "SFP vs. rest of the entire world" opponent. However, we never meant to enter such competition. I don't even think there IS such competition, even if some marketing departments try to tell you so.

Who said it is either/or? We designed SFP to integrate nicely into native setups and add functionality and sound to them. If SFP enhances your music, great, that's what it's meant to do. And no, we can not and we do not intend to substitute everything there is or may come in native. If there is something great in native, please use it. SFP is different, that's where its strengths lie - so why not use it both.

Some marketing forces induce you to believe you don't need it, maybe better decide for yourself whether you want it.

Peace, Frank

[ChrisWerner]

You spoke out my thoughts Frank.
I love my Cubase and SFP is a very good partner who helps me to route everything to Cubase and back. But SFP is more than a routing central for me, SFP doubles my resources for sounds, the modular, instruments, external thingies etc. I can experiment with all sources in SFP and connect together what I want.
It´s good to have both strengths combined together in a perfect way.
CW stay on your target and you will have success. In the last years I´ve learn something, products needs their time to be more perfect, like Kontakt with his DFD function, the first version was crap but I believed in NI and the actual DFD version works for me excellent. All things need their time but when you see the main idea in SFP you´ll notice that SFP or native things gets better and better.

cheers

[Billy goat gruff]

"....if you can keep your head while all around are losing theirs..."

Well said, CW Frank.

[Spirit]

Well, that's not telling us much except CW isn't aiming high. And what CW originally "meant" to do is nothing more than history.

Computers were originally invented to help calculate making the atomic bomb - their use has since widened. What if IBM still stuck to what computers were originally "meant" to do ?

The rest of the world is moving and improving faster than CW - but of course this is just my opinion ! In that context CW products will find themselves trying to exploit an ever-smaller niche alongside native.

And while SFP works well with SX & Logic, it is almost useless with Fl Studio, Orion, Project 5, Muzys and a host of other sequencing apps. Again, the point is that the market has evolved way past the old two-app dominance, and everyone must evolve with it.

But if CW doesn't care about the rest of the world and audio trends, then so be it.

But what about:

* innovative synth design
* a decent sampler
* fixing the Modular bug

This is not "taking on the world", it is merely "maintining our strengths".

In my opinion CW isn't even successfully defending what it's got. The first two points they've forfeited through neglect; and the third they won't even acknowledge.

So how about it Frank, let's just hear one tiny little nugget of news: When will the Modular bug be fixed ? That's no trade secret.

(Edit for my bad spelling )


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Spirit on 2003-11-12 09:13 ]</font>

[King of Snake]

Meanwhile the polyphony limits are hurting the platform - just search KvR for "creamware" and see what people think of CW polyphony. Horrified is the general impression.

You do realise of course that the people on KVR are just as biased towards VSTi's as we are towards Creamware.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-11-12 10:24 ]</font>

[Spirit]

Sure, but they represent potential customers. They should be feeling miserable at missing out on CW synths, not smug in the superiority of native polyphony.

[King of Snake]

But if the best CW can do is the occassional VA synth then that's a very bad sign.

As for samplers, it seems some people have already conceded that territory to native as if it doesn't really matter !

This is crazy ! CW samplers fall behind so somehow this whole segment now doesn't matter anymore and native is better anyway, so who cares !?

But why ? The STS range used to be quite advanced and CW have let it lapse.

That's not good enough.

You're not making sense. Obviously CW doesn't have enough resources or just don't think it's possible to make a sampler for their system that is of the same or superior quality and ease of use as the native samplers so why try? Most of us work with sequencers that support native sampling anyway so where's the big need for CW to try and overtake Halion, or Kontakt? They know their platform sells on quality synths/fx and flexible routing, and also that most people already have a native sampler. (also you usually only use one sampler, as opposed to synths which most people use more).

[King of Snake]

and the fact that you keep going on about the modular bug...well I'm sure it should be fixed but you know as well as everyone else that native systems have their fair share of unfixed bugs and bad support as well. (see Native Instruments and Steinberg as prime examples).
It's not as if this sets them apart from the Native world or anything.
_________________


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-11-12 12:01 ]</font>

[inDSP Frank]

Spirit, how can you expect a single smaller company like CW to directly compete with everything and everyone in the world plus be innovative on top? Frank

PS: I don't deny there is work to do on samplers and a few bugfixes.

[garyb]

although this kinda looks like a bashing,i'm sure it's not.thanks for wading in,frank.i agree with you,the cw card is for tying ALL the elements of the studio together AND it has great synths,mixers and effects.i really think that spirit just wants more(no real harm there) and is trying to stir the waters so they don't become stagnant.

[Spirit]

On 2003-11-12 11:55, CW Frank wrote:
Spirit, how can you expect a single smaller company like CW to directly compete with everything and everyone in the world plus be innovative on top? Frank

PS: I don't deny there is work to do on samplers and a few bugfixes.

OK, I expect a lot, but only because Creamware has already delivered a lot. There is never a time to relax.

CW synths are fantastic - no one argues on that point. I'm a big fan of them. But the VA thing has run its course - again just opinion - but a fairly common attitude now across many forums. Maybe another Modular contest (with Flexor ) similar to that which produced the Prisma, asking for something really different, would be a simple start point ?

Personally I'd like to produce audio loops from within the SFP environment, but that's just my own specialised fantasy

As for samplers, CW was near the front when the STS5000 came out. And the fact that they actually did sample was a plus too. But they have languished and now are far, far behind. How are sales going ?

Instead of (or as well as) just a sampler update how about something really unique: a recording-chopper-shifter-thingumy - so few so-called samplers these days actually record audio that maybe there is something in that aspect that could really be exploited.

Or maybe some sort of weird hybrid sampler-synth with bpm-grid multi-stage envelopes, who knows ? Absynth is a unique product for NI, but CW has nothing really unique.

Platform stability is hugely improved from version 2. Hardly any complaints that I see now. That must give some freedom to advance other areas ?

So with a stable platform, an established line of standard synths and effects, and Noah released, I think the time is right to innovate. Something to make the VSTi world decide that their systems are best supplemented by a CW card - after all combining DSP & native is your policy, yes ?

How about an XTC mode that works properly ? A way to really integrate CW synths into some of the many new hosts that use VSTi but do not directly record audio ? The world no longer revolves around SX.

A decent XTC mode would be a huge plus and give VSTi users the confidence to invest in CW knowing that workflows would not change, but a huge numbers of new synths and effects would eb opened to them.

But at the moment exactly what does CW think is enticing people to this platform ? What do your marketing people say ? The synth audio quality issue is repeatedly stated, but you never read about the native crowd maoning about their poor audio quality. And a 128K MP3 buried on the CW site is hardly going to change their minds.

So nowhere can I see the "big draw" to CW.

I know this is easy for me to just say, but it's only because I care that I argue here so strongly.

It's time for the best brains at Creamware to sit down and come up with something beyond a VA synth or STS6000 to give us all shake and make the VSTi world take notice.

This is not to compete with everythng - of course not - but in some category (that people actually care about!) CW must be acknowledged as the leader.

I don't think that's expecting too much.

[inDSP Frank]

Spirit, I know you care, thanks for that. You have many good points and I share several of them.

Please give us some more time - time will surely bring interesting new stuff. We also intend to intensify our work with third parties, so that more "new" stuff comes along. Please remember that "native" is not any great business either: very short lifecycles, huge piracy. Our business model is wider than MI, so MI will continue to profit from other activities.

As for a sales argument, yep sound design surely IS one of the highlights. I still think SFP is quite competitive, given that legal native stuff is not entirely free as well. We just can't compete with word of mouth which native piracy provides to the native world. We can't change it and I don't even think we want (piracy).

Frank