PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

braincell wrote: The speed of light is not quick enough for music.

not when Im Shredding



heheheh

So is anyone here using Reaper a lot? i can't get it to buss to the correct outputs in Scope - whatever i select in the "add outputs" (say output 10) will randomly be on Scope Source 5. Is there a different way to buss things in Reaper that i'm having trouble seeing? i know RTFM but it's huge and i can usually get most simple things like MIDI and audio assigns done without manuals.

Mr Arkadin wrote:So is anyone here using Reaper a lot?

Yup. Not at the moment, but I speak Reaperese.

I'm not quite sure what your problem is, Mr A.

1. Set up your ASIO ins/outs in Options/Preferences/Audio/Device - choosing range "first">"last". You can rename the ins/outs to anything you fancy, if desired, in Options/Preferences/Audio - "channel naming" / "edit names". Note that they only persist for each specific ASIO module in Scope. If you change to another ASIO module in Scope you'll have to rename them again. But the names persist for each module once you've done it once for a particular ASIO module. The aliased names are saved in reaper.ini.

2. Once you've done that the channel ins/out can be assigned in the "routing matrix". Right click on the routing matrix to get the various matrix options. Bear in mind it is possible to have the Reaper master outs running into Scope as well as individual Reaper channel outs to separate Scope channels. You just disable the Reaper master outs if necessary.

A bit cat sat on the mat. Get back to me if you still have problems.

ns

I don't use Reaper at all.

Greg

siriusbliss wrote:I don't use Reaper at all.

Greg

If Samplitude were available for Mac i would have it in a snap, but i need cross-platform software. Don't know why Samp has never made it as it is considered 'pro'.

To nightscope - cheers, i think i have figured it out now - it's a bit different to my old VST and initially the Reaper routing seems a bit over-complex compared to VST for what i need (i like my complexity in Scope - i suppose for the native users it's handy though).

Mr Arkadin wrote:

siriusbliss wrote:I don't use Reaper at all.

Greg

If Samplitude were available for Mac i would have it in a snap, but i need cross-platform software. Don't know why Samp has never made it as it is considered 'pro'.

Samplitude runs on bootcamp on Mac, no problem. Plenty of people doing this.
Magix isn't going to spread their development across multiple platforms (thins out resources) like 'those other guys'.

Greg

So tell us, what is so great about Samplitude? It looks nice.

http://www.samplitude.com/eng/seq/news.html

I'm very attached to some of the obscure Cubase midi functions such as the ability to restrict polyphony. I can make sure that my oboe is 100% monophonic for instance. How is the score feature? Do you know? I have never heard of Samplitude before.

braincell wrote:So tell us, what is so great about Samplitude? It looks nice.

There's nothing great about Samp in my not so humble estimation. It's only a production environment, But it suits my purposes very well having a multitude of essential features that Reaper has not yet incorporated. It's midi inplementation is nowhere near as good as Cubase's so I'd hazard a guess that you wouldn't gain anything in that sphere. Samp midi is more than good enough for me, however, being only an occasional midi dweller.

Also it has worked out quite cheap. I purchased the download version which is limited to 64 tracks, 8 mix busses & 6 aux busses. More than I ever use. Of course many more auxs & busses in Scopeland. It doesn't have the am-suite plugs but I had those anyway. I didn't need am-unition as I use outboard for the master comp. The only thing I was a little short of with the download version was with sidechain busses as Samplitude includes those as an aux buss. But I recently got the db audioware gate and comps which use their own sidechain system, Universal Sidechains, which negates the need to use the Samp aux sidechain method. These db audioware gates & comps are really excellent if a lot of sidechaining is on the cards. http://www.db-audioware.com/sidechaincompressor.htm

Samp's main strengths for me is in it's audio, audio editing, object management & comprehensive project integration and management. Automation is good and external contoller support is comprehensive. It's just so quick to work with. The latest version, 10.2, is very, very stable with my system, having not fallen over once.

However, not for everyone as needs differ.

As you say, looks nice.



ns

braincell wrote:So tell us, what is so great about Samplitude? It looks nice.

http://www.samplitude.com/eng/seq/news.html

I'm very attached to some of the obscure Cubase midi functions such as the ability to restrict polyphony. I can make sure that my oboe is 100% monophonic for instance. How is the score feature? Do you know? I have never heard of Samplitude before.

Samplitude's MIDI IMO is at about 90% of all the extra doo-daddy features in MIDI-heavy Cubase. Samplitude's history has always been audio, including an effective 80-bit audio engine. You can mix MIDI and audio on one track and edit that way, and can already plug in chords in the editor manually, and can edit all active MIDI tracks of your choice at one time. Freeze function is fast, and includes freezing VST synths and effects.

I've been pushing the Score a lot lately to checkout how it responds to all the deeper MIDI manipulations, and it's been performing like a champ. You can export out to Sybillius if desired.

Reaper's been coming on strong, but I'm not entirely satisfied with what it will soon come up against as the program grows. At least it's keeping the industry humble

Greg

Reaper has a long way to go and sometimes software gets orphaned.

Here's the Score and MIDI editor in Samplitude (unfinished, raw capture).

By the way, as you know, with Scope it's possible to mix through Samplitude into a second instance of Samplitude to effectively capture/mix 'outside the box', while working 'inside the box'.
I'm getting very good results this way.

Hi nightscope,

thanks for your comments about samplitude and there possiblities about midi.
I tested samplitude 10.1 to prove thats samplitude is able to automate XTC plugins. Unfortunately i have to say there is no support. I work with BCF2000 in Mackie Control Mode and Samplitude.

The results are as follows:

No support of INTR-Function of MC: It is not possible to assign automatically the knobs of scope synths to my BCF2000. Manually assignment is not possible as well: it doesn't works.
Additionaly the plugins are assigned automatically to BCF, but after recording they don't feedback to BCF: no changes of knobs on BCF.

Afterwards i changed to Cubase SX 3.1, and what can i say?
Fully support of automation to hardware controller:
INSTR function of MC fully supported: all the knobs of synths and effects are automatically assigned with full feedback before and after recording. Even positioning of my play cursor in cubase is answered by feedback to my BCF: the knobs are changed to the actual position of my cubase cursor.
Additional i am able to select new synths only by using my BCF2000, without mouse click.

For me this is actual hardware controller support.

Don't understand it wrong, i actual want to use Samplitude because of there excellent audio engine. But at the moment for me the effort of working without fully hardware controller support is to high for me in Samplitude or not possible, because i have to automate my scope effects and synths. In GOA and Trance music this is absolutely necessary.

I hope Samplitude will close this gap. I sent an email to Samplitude support without getting an answer. To bad for them.
Do you have some connections to Samplitude Gurrus?

goaFromLivingRoom wrote:Hi nightscope,

thanks for your comments about samplitude and there possiblities about midi.
I tested samplitude 10.1 to prove thats samplitude is able to automate XTC plugins. Unfortunately i have to say there is no support. I work with BCF2000 in Mackie Control Mode and Samplitude.

The results are as follows:

No support of INTR-Function of MC: It is not possible to assign automatically the knobs of scope synths to my BCF2000. Manually assignment is not possible as well: it doesn't works.
Additionaly the plugins are assigned automatically to BCF, but after recording they don't feedback to BCF: no changes of knobs on BCF.

Afterwards i changed to Cubase SX 3.1, and what can i say?
Fully support of automation to hardware controller:
INSTR function of MC fully supported: all the knobs of synths and effects are automatically assigned with full feedback before and after recording. Even positioning of my play cursor in cubase is answered by feedback to my BCF: the knobs are changed to the actual position of my cubase cursor.
Additional i am able to select new synths only by using my BCF2000, without mouse click.

For me this is actual hardware controller support.

Don't understand it wrong, i actual want to use Samplitude because of there excellent audio engine. But at the moment for me the effort of working without fully hardware controller support is to high for me in Samplitude or not possible, because i have to automate my scope effects and synths. In GOA and Trance music this is absolutely necessary.

I hope Samplitude will close this gap. I sent an email to Samplitude support without getting an answer. To bad for them.
Do you have some connections to Samplitude Gurrus?

I'm in contact with Magix re: this, and even spoke directly with them for quite a while at NAMM. (nice people).
They are a small team, so just because they don't respond to emails doesn't mean they are not reading and/or investigating or acting on people's issues. The developers also actively participate in the Samplitude forums.

The word is that they are working on enhancing, improving hardware controller integration - especially with your type of approach - in upcoming V11.
To what DEGREE they update this, I can only assume it will be very good anyways.

In the meantime I'll say that I DO have full integration with my Yamaha 01V96V2 mixer, with full automation response, etc.
It's some of the other external controllers for effect manipulation where there are issues that the Cubase guys have obviously spent more time on.

Greg

goaFromLivingRoom wrote:Hi nightscope,

thanks for your comments about samplitude and there possiblities about midi.
I tested samplitude 10.1 to prove thats samplitude is able to automate XTC plugins. Unfortunately i have to say there is no support. I work with BCF2000 in Mackie Control Mode and Samplitude.

The results are as follows:

No support of INTR-Function of MC: It is not possible to assign automatically the knobs of scope synths to my BCF2000. Manually assignment is not possible as well: it doesn't works.
Additionaly the plugins are assigned automatically to BCF, but after recording they don't feedback to BCF: no changes of knobs on BCF.

Afterwards i changed to Cubase SX 3.1, and what can i say?
Fully support of automation to hardware controller:
INSTR function of MC fully supported: all the knobs of synths and effects are automatically assigned with full feedback before and after recording. Even positioning of my play cursor in cubase is answered by feedback to my BCF: the knobs are changed to the actual position of my cubase cursor.
Additional i am able to select new synths only by using my BCF2000, without mouse click.

For me this is actual hardware controller support.

Don't understand it wrong, i actual want to use Samplitude because of there excellent audio engine. But at the moment for me the effort of working without fully hardware controller support is to high for me in Samplitude or not possible, because i have to automate my scope effects and synths. In GOA and Trance music this is absolutely necessary.

I hope Samplitude will close this gap. I sent an email to Samplitude support without getting an answer. To bad for them.
Do you have some connections to Samplitude Gurrus?

Well, as I said needs differ. I don't use and will never use XTC which I consider to be the Devil's Spawn to be hunted down and eradicated from the face of the earth by a pack of rabid hell hounds. I totally agree Cubase is the best solution for those who manipulate MIDI a lot when producing music. Mind you, alot of folks get by with Samp's MIDI just fine.

These little Novation Nocturns are the dog's borax for controlling VST's and VSTi's. Much, much better than the old BCF2000, which I use for track control in the host. Just plug 'em in and everything is automatically mapped for any VST or VSTi. They support most Cubase track functions as well tho I haven't seen it in action. Samplitude is not supported. They are so cheap and work perfectly. The new Automap 3 software allows for multiple Nocturns to be chained together. Totally amazing for the price and functionality.
http://www.novationmusic.com/products/m ... l/nocturn/

Bob Katz' comments on differing DAW's from Samplitude forum

"There are certain areas of Sequoiatude that don't work well for me, but day in and day out, it is my go-to program for preparation and processing of masters for replication. You have to decide if the same areas of the program are necessary for you, and besides, if you encounter the same problems in there as I do. There are many happy users of Sequoiatude that do not encounter problems in the same areas of the program as I do. Not that that makes me any happier, but I think that it's come to the point where EVERY DAW has some area that doesn't work as well as others. If you look at it one way, you're ALWAYS going to be trading off one set of problems for another----but I prefer to look at it the other way: You're ALWAYS going to be trading off one set of advantages for another!

And remember, there are things that Sequoiatude does (like powerful object-based processing) which are not available in every other program.

I have a client who uses Sonar who is very happy with the program. Maybe he doesn't exercise the areas where you see problems, or those problems don't concern him. The point being that DAWs are a personal fit and I feel you should seriously consider Sequoiatude."

But then he ain't doing Goa or trance just messing around with mastering. Easy life.

ns

Ok, then my consumption is to work with cubase until the new version 11 of samplitude will be announced.

With cubase i can controll the mixer, controll all effects and synths in one sequencer without special configurations. I hope that samplitude will extend there sequencers for this subject.

At the moment my experiences in XTC mode are good. The only thing is that i am not able to sidechain scope compressors because they don't save the sidechain channels in the xtc project. I think i have to make my end mix in scope system without xtc by using the sidechainings. It is not the best solution but possible. But with this concept i have to most intuitive way to create my tracks without thinking in technical problems. Then the end mix can be done in the scope routing system.

Any other solutions?

goaFromLivingRoom wrote:Any other solutions?

http://www.db-audioware.com/sidechaincompressor.htm

http://www.db-audioware.com/sidechaingate.htm

Definitely worth demoing. They use their own sidechain system - Universal Sidechain. I love 'em. And working with them with a Nocturn is really cool.

ns

el doublo

goaFromLivingRoom wrote:Ok, then my consumption is to work with cubase until the new version 11 of samplitude will be announced.

With cubase i can controll the mixer, controll all effects and synths in one sequencer without special configurations. I hope that samplitude will extend there sequencers for this subject.

At the moment my experiences in XTC mode are good. The only thing is that i am not able to sidechain scope compressors because they don't save the sidechain channels in the xtc project. I think i have to make my end mix in scope system without xtc by using the sidechainings. It is not the best solution but possible. But with this concept i have to most intuitive way to create my tracks without thinking in technical problems. Then the end mix can be done in the scope routing system.

Any other solutions?

this is how big studios work. get the tracks ready and then mix on the best system. i think you'll tend to do better work preparing first and then doing final mixes in Scope. an added benefit is the ability to use selected hardware in the Scope environment without latency....

goaFromLivingRoom wrote:Ok, then my consumption is to work with cubase until the new version 11 of samplitude will be announced.

With cubase i can controll the mixer, controll all effects and synths in one sequencer without special configurations. I hope that samplitude will extend there sequencers for this subject.

At the moment my experiences in XTC mode are good. The only thing is that i am not able to sidechain scope compressors because they don't save the sidechain channels in the xtc project. I think i have to make my end mix in scope system without xtc by using the sidechainings. It is not the best solution but possible. But with this concept i have to most intuitive way to create my tracks without thinking in technical problems. Then the end mix can be done in the scope routing system.

Any other solutions?

If you're a heavy MIDI user, and the controller companies only spend time on setting up configurations for Cubase, Sonar, Logic, etc., then it's obvious that it won't automatically be a plug-n-play configuration for Samplitude, since it's more often than not ignored by the developers IMO. Believe me, I've been there. At least Samplitude has the MUI and other baseline controller configurations built in, so you can start from there - but it won't necessarily work 'out of the shute'.

And, as well, Bob Katz is a relatively new Sampliquoia user, and has some very good feedback from a new users' perspective, but is often helped out by the veteran users and developers as well, so there is a good balance there for the folks that are so used to (brainwashed by ) the other programs' way of doing things, and the long-time users that can usually make Samplitude do just about anything.

I advise not to have expectations of Samplitude 11 being immediately XTC friendly, but I could be mistaken. It also may not be EXACTLY plug-n-play configured for YOUR preferential controller-of-choice, since Magix is not focused on (nor do they have the programming resources) spending development time to setup for all the multitude of controllers out there, as well as the relative minority XTC paradigm. I just don't really see it on their radar.

However, Samplitude 11's developments will hopefully offer up more 'external' hardware usability, which immediately opens up the possibility of easier XTC integration. I think Magix' focus is now on deeper MIDI implementation, as well as more video-post type applications, but at the same time, I think they're about to have a breakthrough in the program that offers up some unique features, rather than basically mimicking what the other guys are doing in the industry.

Personally, I never use XTC with Samplitude, since I use several different Scope environments, and often use TWO instances of Samplitude inside Scope during mixdown/mastering phase. XTC just gets in the way (in my experience).

In the meantime, you can work in Cubase, and mix/master/burn in Samplitude.

Greg