Hello!
I will order a soundcard system very soon (in 24 hours) for our studio, but want some recommendations first. What we want is a stable 16-24 channels high quality platform for Cubase SX2 with WinXP. We will use it both for regular studio recoring, as well as for real time rehearsal with reverb, compression and EQ-s for different sessions with different mixers (not at the same time). But our main requirement is that the product are 100% stable, and what I've heard RME (DIGI96/36) is that with Cubase. Now I wonder if Creamware Scope Project is that stable. What are your recommendations?
Please answer quickly, I need answers in 24 ours.
Best regards
/Magnus
Creamware or RME with Cubase SX2
It can come very close here tho 
If you are new to SFP and want it to run 100% stable tomorrow, it won't work. It takes some experience, many problems can be avoided by tricks and habits of handling the system. Long term, SP offers some nifty options that are unique in digital audio processing.
If you want instant stability and a more limited setup, get the RME.
My 2 cents.
If you are new to SFP and want it to run 100% stable tomorrow, it won't work. It takes some experience, many problems can be avoided by tricks and habits of handling the system. Long term, SP offers some nifty options that are unique in digital audio processing.
If you want instant stability and a more limited setup, get the RME.
My 2 cents.
more has been done with less
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
-
Guest
Nothing is 100% sure out of the box.
You have to consider OS stability. is your XP tweeked right? is SX 100 % ? I don't think even steinberg will say yes to this.
to get 100% stability. stay away from Computers.
Scope system can be as stable as your PC can be. However Scope System are only one factor. how about your SX and winXP and your System as a whole. each part in that PC will determin what you can and can't do.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: antar on 2004-05-04 16:20 ]</font>
You have to consider OS stability. is your XP tweeked right? is SX 100 % ? I don't think even steinberg will say yes to this.
to get 100% stability. stay away from Computers.
Scope system can be as stable as your PC can be. However Scope System are only one factor. how about your SX and winXP and your System as a whole. each part in that PC will determin what you can and can't do.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: antar on 2004-05-04 16:20 ]</font>
I recently made the same decision myself. I was originally planning to get a RME HDSP 96/32 but realised for not a lot more (well within my budget) I could have equal performance in terms of sound quality but also get my hands on a hell of a lot of synths and effects (especially the Modular which as a Reaktor user I'd been looking at enviously) - and when I saw what was on offer in the Scope 4 upgrade package it clinched it for me. I suppose if I'd just wanted a good quality audio interface without those extra synths though I would still have gone for the RME but you get a lot more with the Pulsar 2 than you do with the RME, the question is, do you want or need those extra's yourself?
If all you want is I/O then go with the RME. If you want real time effects on headphone sends whilst recording then Scope would be ideal because it has 0 latency for that sought of thing and keeps it away from the OS and sequencer software.
With regards to system stability, I've never had problems during tracking sessions here using scope. It has always been stable for me which is why I still use it. However, I have a solid technical background in computers and audio/electronic engineering which always helps.
The RME stuff is basic i/o but the scope stuff is very complex which is the trade off for being so versatile.
With regards to system stability, I've never had problems during tracking sessions here using scope. It has always been stable for me which is why I still use it. However, I have a solid technical background in computers and audio/electronic engineering which always helps.
The RME stuff is basic i/o but the scope stuff is very complex which is the trade off for being so versatile.
for the live sound effects?yes!
scope is a better buy than rme,hands down and will be as reliable as computer as others have posted.
you will have to do some work to get optimal performance as with any computer system.a poorly realized computer will be loads of trouble,but a good system will be almost turnkey.
scope is a better buy than rme,hands down and will be as reliable as computer as others have posted.
you will have to do some work to get optimal performance as with any computer system.a poorly realized computer will be loads of trouble,but a good system will be almost turnkey.
-
hubird
absolutely problemless on my Mac G4/733.
Never one crash caused by Pulsar2, yet by Cubase (5.0) or ASIO, not a big deal.
I'd always choose for Scope, you get all the possibilities for the future, whatever direction you plan to go, is it a classic studio situation for life recording or is it a typical software studio.
You'll never regret Scope!
_________________
Let There Be Music!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2004-05-04 21:04 ]</font>
Never one crash caused by Pulsar2, yet by Cubase (5.0) or ASIO, not a big deal.
I'd always choose for Scope, you get all the possibilities for the future, whatever direction you plan to go, is it a classic studio situation for life recording or is it a typical software studio.
You'll never regret Scope!
_________________
Let There Be Music!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2004-05-04 21:04 ]</font>