chriskorff wrote:...BUT, can I just throw the name SADiE in there? Perhaps a closer comparison than (a) the polycopoly of native sequencers, the ones you mentioned, and (b) Pro Tools/Avid? ..., but from what I do know, wouldn't that be a fairer comparison?
interesting remark...
according to their website SADiE was aquired by Prism Sound - dunno if for economic or synergy reasons, but infact there's some 'similiarity'
Afaik both Creamware and SonicCore had (and/or still have) a foot in the professional audio market in broadcast and customer specific location installations.
Not very spectacular in public press, but probably what made them (at least CWA) to survive at all...
now switch back to SoniCore and their recent announcements - and what's the first response on boards like this ?
the XITE is called expensive

well, there are single channel preamps which costs more - so what ?
The XITE contains about everything people asked for over the last couple of years, even some mods only recently requested and it offers a
guaranteed 5 times increase of processing power.
So it is very affordable for what it does...
it could in fact be too expensive for one's personal wallet, but then... is that the fault of SC ? or even their concern ?
in the so-called 'professional' market it may even appear as a cheapo and not get the attention it deserves - while 'amateurs' might consider it out of reach as they just focus on the price alone, forgetting about the 'true' content of the package.
not exactly mindbreaking thoughts - but it shows how difficult it is to establish a product in it's market segment.
the very same applies to an (admittedly) costly developement of a recording application.
imho it's only reasonable in a stand-alone box - but then... who'd be willing to pay (reasonably) for it ?
if you have a contract to supply (say) the BBC with recording gear then there may be a chance for a true return of an investment.
In the PC/homercording domain you can simply forget about it - imho.
As mentioned by Greg and others, there are several not too bad applications that integrate Scope fairly well.
There seems to be a mysterious misinterpretion about the capabilities of Analog Devices' DSP processors.
Those are great tools, but don't make anything sound like magic just on their own - or did anyone hear about Behringer Digital mixers be an aural revelation ?
Whenever I read requests about dedicated midi processors within the Scope environement I can only shake my head in disbelief.
Midi is a sh*tty 8 bit protocol and in fact it seems to be handled best with 8 bit CPUs ...

It's a huge waste of resources on a DSP as it really doesn't fit the latter architecture
at all
A (somewhat) smartly coded midi application is probably less load on a current CPU than the process watching your network devices, read close to zero.
There is also no advantage - or rather not even a relation - between DSP processing and the writing of files.
This is plain native X86 code and deals with OS conventions if with anything at all.
Protools (and other early recording apps) has grown as a 'Box-in-the-Box' system only because harddisk performance via onboard devices wasn't exactly breathtaking in the early days of M68K Macs.
With high performance controllers on board noone would design it like that today.
People
had to integrate custom file handling because there simply was no other way... and if I may add... it was a (usually) fairly lean and straight forward developement environment in those pre .Net, OS9, OSX days
cheers, Tom