Page 5 of 5

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:31 pm
by at0m
Found here, a post from 1998:
>SCOPE was not build on Extended Csound and is not at all compatible with existing Csound apps
although...
One could add full Csound support to the SCOPE environment or just start with a kind of compiler, that transforms Csound apps into SCOPE structures, using compatible atom modules
Quite interesting read IMO :)

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2009 9:42 pm
by valis
Nice find at0m, had forgotten about the bath maillist for csound (there's also leeds/columbia archives and those related to the book.)

A 10+ year history isn't that shabby either :D

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:37 pm
by Sounddesigner
I guess the title of this thread should now be 'It appears Universal Audio has done it'.

Rumour has it there is a Uad-2 Satellite comming that is Firewire for their bigger cards (duo and quad). I'm sure UA knew they had to figure out a way to make their bigger cards portable since so many musicians prefer portability. The laptop is the area where dedicated dsp's are needed the most since they have no dual processor versions and generally are much weaker then desktops.

I find it strange UA chose firewire since they spoke so badly about Firewire when they released their uad-1e card in 2007. Maybe they had no choice but to try it since expresscard did not work for them and they probably figured it never would. I guess since they make all the money they could afford to pay a expert to design the firewire interface for them to a good enough standard. Here's a quote and a link with UA comments on Firewire and Expresscard from 2007;

UA QUOTE: "The PCIe bus and ExpressCard system interfaces are vastly superior to other high-speed interconnects, and allow us to run many more channels (up to 254 channels per card), operate reliably at higher sample rates, and offer much more powerful DSP expansion than alternatives using FireWire or EtherNet. Put simply, PCIe is the professional solution." END QUOTE

Link- http://www.uaudio.com/press/releases/20 ... AD-1E.html

This Satellite is a big move by UA and does mean Sonic Core are not alone with large dsp power for Laptop studios anymore. I still prefer expresscard since several dsp companies have had problems with firewire (SSL, TC). Firewire to my knowledge tends to have a little extra added latency aswell.
The Uad-2 Quads for desktops are very expensive and i'm sure the Satellite Laptop version will cost even more, so the market that loves uad and want this new device will likely get taxed heavily with no mercy. The Satellite Firewire device still is not as portable as XITE-1 since it has no mic pre's, converters, i/o's but none-the-less a big move from UA. Here's a link to the Gearslutz thread talking about the new Uad Satellite (wich is just a rumour ATM).

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-prod ... llite.html


EDITED

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:38 pm
by siriusbliss
Hehe....firewire....suckers :lol:

Yeah, IMO a big SIDEWAYS move for them.
We'll see what the buzz is at NAMM starting tomorrow. (They're booth is right next to Magix)

I'm sure they'll have some success with it though.

Greg

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:43 pm
by garyb
firewire because it's easy for them.

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:59 am
by dante
Not rumour anymore apparantly. The firewire fizzer is officially 'pending release' :

http://www.musicradar.com/news/tech/nam ... ors-358443

'.....with prices starting at $899 MAPP USD'. Thats not much more than the PCIe duo isnt it ?

Re: It appears Universal Audio could not do it.

Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:48 pm
by Sounddesigner
siriusbliss wrote:


I'm sure they'll have some success with it though.

That may be true but i would not want to be the guinea pig to find out if it's of a good quality standard or not :lol: . If i where interested in the Satellite i'd wait atleast 6 months to a year and see what others who've used it have to say. I could not help but to keep UA's own critisism of Firewire in mind if i considered buying such a product. It's only available for Mac since PC is alot more difficult to achieve Firewire compatibility from what i've read. But a PC solution is rumoured to be in development. It is a sideways move by UA in my opinion aswell and probably one out of desparation since they know they'd miss out on ALOT of money without a sufficient portable solution (Wich they pretty much acknowledged in the press release).


@Dante, the price of the Satellite units are the same as their pcie cards counterparts. This is surprising to me especially since the older Solo-Laptop cost more then the Solo-desktop and to my knowledge UA's Laptop solutions have always costed more then desktop. But the desktop Quads and Duos are so expensive anyways that starting the Satellite versions at $899 for duo and $1499 for Quad still does'nt look appealing to me. But the prices for the Satellite do look better then the desktop versions due to portability and greater need for dsp power with laptops, so i'm sure many others will see it as a good price.


EDITED