can't believe it!

Jah Servant · Post by **Jah Servant** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:01 am

I'm a new scope user, just a few weeks. But I'm amazed at the difference in sound quality, even running a stereo mix into scope from cubase and mastering it there sounds so much better than what I was getting before. Things are more clear and defined and separated, it's great. Do you all find the same thing? I read some posts where people said there isn't much difference in the sound quality between scope and cubase, but there seems to be a big difference to me.

wayne · Post by **wayne** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:37 am

I believe you are correct

Welcome, and enjoy!

Post by **garyb** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:39 am

good ears.

8-Bit · Post by **8-Bit** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:27 am

A lot of people seem to be saying "mix in SFP, not in Cubase". I've been mixing in cubase since i got my new setup running. I have been considering to run all my tracks ASIO back into 2448 and mixing in SFP but I'm still so unsure about it. I'm buying a mackie control universal and its 'tuned' for cubase/logic mixing. I'd hate to fart around forever trying to get it to sync/vibe well with SFP mixing.

Maybe this question could help me: Is the volume/level mixing in SFP the only aspect of automation should be considered? I know there is a converter on planetz that converts the pitchshift data to midi CC so you can control it with Mackie control. But what about vice versa? The data sent back out needs to be PITCH because the mackie control has flying faders and reacts/moves with your track.

Post by **garyb** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:44 am

it doesn't have to be all or nothing. you can still use scoope for summing and bussing scope and external effects and 'verbs while automating mustes and volumes in cubase....

AltMR · Post by **AltMR** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:44 am

On 2005-03-18 06:44, garyb wrote:
... you can still use scoope for summing and bussing scope and external effects and 'verbs while automating mustes and volumes in cubase....

Yes.
In my opinion this is the best configuration.

Jah Servant · Post by **Jah Servant** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:15 am

that's what I'm going to do, use cubase for the mixing & automation but run it through scope still. Bus each track out, it's worth it to get the sound.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jah Servant on 2005-03-18 08:16 ]</font>

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:36 pm

Hi Jah, and welcome to the Z forums! I have been saying that for years already... I am glad you can also hear this. It realy is a nice sound, I find it quite warm too,

Jah Servant · Post by **Jah Servant** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:37 am

thanks Nestor, it really is a great sound & warm, like you said. I can hear things that I wasn't hearing before at all. It seems to be bringing out everything.

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:06 pm

I have had it for many years, and I still could repeat what you have just said in this last post...

It really drives me mad of joy

Music Manic · Post by **Music Manic** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:20 pm

On 2005-03-19 10:37, Jah Servant wrote:
thanks Nestor, it really is a great sound & warm, like you said. I can hear things that I wasn't hearing before at all. It seems to be bringing out everything.

MrV · Post by **MrV** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 1:26 am

Hello ,
Yes , have to agree .
I use SX or Nuendo as my "tape deck" bussed
into Scope then use elements of both SX and Scope for mixing .
Much better results with Scope than SX alone + very I'm happy with this setup.
I do a little level automation from SX but that's about it ....SX eq not great ...most mixing done in Scope.
Cheeers,
Michael

Jah Servant · Post by **Jah Servant** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:32 am

The difference between the SX eq and the Scope eq is huge.

firubbi · Post by **firubbi** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:13 am

Right choice Jah Servant. this forum is also great like creamware cards :lol

thanks