CW future?

dodge77 · Post by **dodge77** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:52 am

I asked Magma tech support if the Creamware PCI cards were compatible with their expansion chassis:

"Thank you for using our E-Support for submitting your technical inquiry to us. In response, I would like to inform you that we have tested the 6 DSP Creamware Pulsar II 5v PCI card and the 15 DSP Scope SRB and unfortunately both cards it did not pass our tests."

[ This Message was edited by: dodge77 on 2004-11-23 02:53 ]

Post by **garyb** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:07 am

that's interesting considering how many are using cw cards with those chassis..

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2004-11-23 03:08 ]

dodge77 · Post by **dodge77** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:40 am

Who is actually using CW 5v PCI cards in a Magma expansion chassis in a production enviroment? I would like to know their experience with using this setup.

Are the CW cards the only cards in an expansion chassis or are there other cards in the chassis as well? Maybe that could make a difference.

Leon

[ This Message was edited by: dodge77 on 2004-11-23 06:42 ]

[ This Message was edited by: dodge77 on 2004-11-23 06:43 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 9:52 am

the point is probably the signal level, i.e. a card is compatible if it draws 5V from the PCI slot only to supply a converter or and amp stage, but it doesn't work if the level of the data signals is 5V.

I'm not totally sure, but I once digged for the specs of the interface array on the Pulsar One and those were available in both voltage versions.
If CWA choose the 5V type then it's (obviously) not compatible.
Imho it's a pretty demanding task to reliably buffer different signal levels and Magma probably didn't consider this worth the effort (or increased costs).

my 2 cents, Tom

dodge77 · Post by **dodge77** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:31 pm

In any case it's my opinion that Creamware should focus on creating platform independent devices that can be connected to a computer using different types of interfaces. That way, I think it's easier to keep up with the changes in hardware. For high bandwidth requirements, a PCI-X card with some type of Ultra3 SCSI like interface could be used to connect such a device to a computer. In other situations, FireWire or USB may be more than enough. Let's not forget there's also another high bandwidth interface type: fiberchannel. And there are also developments in mLan which is also FireWire based.

As far as the software is concerned, I still think the complete Scope package is something unique and the main reason I chose this option a long time ago. For instance, I like the fact that I can control the complete routing of my studio independent of any recording or sequencing software.

decimator · Post by **decimator** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:40 pm

Well, I see those benchmarks : http://www.analog.com/processors/proces ... marks.html

The 21364 should be in production very soon, the 21368 in summer 2005 ...

They have some differences in specs so I don't know which one is the most appropriate to succeed.However roughly 10 times more power meaning a hypothetical Scope Professional would have a 150 DSPs of today meter !

Meaning, even at 192 Khz ( which will be supported ) you'll have to build a monster project to meet the limit and if you do so you could always buy a SRB.

Meaning also there may be close to no need for a third generation of Creamware hardware after that, then it would be better to have a sturdy chassis solution that will defy time.

Otherwise I have a feeling ( to be proven ) that they are pushing into their primary more reliable income business that is not music so I would rely more on various third parties ( free or not free ) to provide excitment.

If a deep device comes out of free SDK, Creamware will enhance it and sell it and from time to time they will release a plug.

At least I hope that they will show real bite when this new hardware will be out and that they continue developping the SDK and things like convolution ( see Focusrite's Liquid Channel on SHARCs )

symbiote · Post by **symbiote** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:02 am

The only problem right now is that Firewire and USB are both kinda slower than PCI, bandwidth wise. I vote for multichromatic fiber

80Gbps should be enough for everyone!!

Also, by the time PCI-X/PCI-E is stable and widely available, something else 10x faster is going to loom on the horizon, and the discussion that is going on right now will happen again!

I think the problem is a bit more with hardware vendors and operating systems company (*cough*) forcing everyone to upgrade often and fighting petty standard games. I don't think it would be impossible for people to sit down and design a nice scalable protocol for that kind of stuff, and operating systems a bit more optimized for/dedicated to realtime audio applications and similar things.

Seriously tho, with a nice network audio protocol, you could just put a pair of Gigabit Ethernet cores on the board, and use Firewire connections for control/interface stuff. All your geat neatly networked talking to each other, fun!

powerpulsarian · Post by **powerpulsarian** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:47 am

On 2004-11-23 02:52, dodge77 wrote:
I asked Magma tech support if the Creamware PCI cards were compatible with their expansion chassis:

"Thank you for using our E-Support for submitting your technical inquiry to us. In response, I would like to inform you that we have tested the 6 DSP Creamware Pulsar II 5v PCI card and the 15 DSP Scope SRB and unfortunately both cards it did not pass our tests."

I use a Magma 1-slot Cardbus chassis with a laptop all the time without issues. There are a few limitations compared to being installed directly in a PCI slot because of limitations with the Cardbus, but nothing dramatic (e.g., problems occur if you load a bunch of reverbs into a project at the same time - buy why would you ever want to do that?)

Rogurt · Post by **Rogurt** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:00 pm

>>problems occur if you load a bunch of reverbs into a project at the same time - buy why would you ever want to do that?

Because I need them? I need 4verbs and a delay as "room effects" in a HQ Project. And I want to use the Timeworks P100 & A100. But that wont work... (on any CW configuration)
Therefore I hope CW will catch up the "Bus".

Post by **garyb** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:41 pm

do they ALL have to be scope reverbs? if so, the magma chassis is not cool for you....

blazesboylan · Post by **blazesboylan** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:06 am

What's an HQ project?

Rogurt · Post by **Rogurt** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:39 am

Well, I was just too lazy to write "...when having pop/rock projects that involve demanding ambient placement of the different groups...".
I usually have it like that: 2 Verbs on percussive material (one for the space or openess and one for the ambience). The same for non-percussive material. And one delay to get some extra air into the vocs (or a key-instrument) without smearing the rest.
With this setting you can adjust depth ordering and air for every instrument seperately and individually (and that does the trick!).

That´s the way I learned it. It´s more complicated than having just two or three verbs for all tracks but it gives you more option and control.

[ This Message was edited by: Rogurt on 2004-11-25 04:43 ]

blazesboylan · Post by **blazesboylan** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:47 pm

Buy some outboard gear. Or another Pulsar II card.

Rogurt · Post by **Rogurt** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:08 am

It´s absurd: no matter how many scope boards I stack I´ll never get 4 Timeworks Verbs to work. I do not lack the dsp power but there are allways PCI overflows. I have done a lot of research on the pci topic and since I can easily have 9 Masterverbs in one project I assume that it´s just not possible to improve the situation regarding the timeworks (warp69) plugs.
Hmmm I though about having outboard stuff. But that´s what I abandonned happily some time ago for the sake of total integration.
But maybe things get better the more pci-x gets to a standard (and CW would finally move their behinds - remember the harware concept is basically 8 years old)

Besides: has someone a CW board running on an overclocked bus? Could it be that pci performance improves a little (even with the DSPs running on the same freq. for they most likely have an internal clock)

[ This Message was edited by: Rogurt on 2004-11-26 05:10 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:51 am

I do not even think that it's the bus performance itself - the use of 'scratch' mobo Ram is also depending on certain timing schedule restrictions.
It is also avoided as far as possible by programmers of native stuff - the more that fits into the CPU's cache, the better performance.

As soon as access to mobo Ram is required the performance breaks down tremendously.
Btw all those CPU specs assume the data is present immediately - which is of course nonsense in a real-world app...
and the reason why people hardly experience a difference between a 3 gig P4 and a 1 gig P3

The PCI bottleneck IS a design flaw from current perspective, but if you would have told someone around 1998 that you're gonna buy a gigabyte of memory for 200 bucks, they'd probably doubt your mental health...

cheers, Tom

Rogurt · Post by **Rogurt** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:06 am

So I´d go for clearing up the pci bus by ACPI disabling and futher twaeking (eg. mark knudson´s "dbldawg")?
Then I´d go for RAM tweaking (timings or rather memory freq.)?

I know that´s not the topic of this thread but maybe you could give me an opinion, astroman?

[ This Message was edited by: Rogurt on 2004-11-26 06:06 ]

dodge77 · Post by **dodge77** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:00 am

I can load 12 masterverbs in one project without any errors on a 21 DSP (6 + 15) configuration, PowerMac 933 MHz G4.

doodyrh · Post by **doodyrh** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:34 pm

On 2004-11-26 05:08, Rogurt wrote:
It´s absurd: no matter how many scope boards I stack I´ll never get 4 Timeworks Verbs to work.

Don't know if Timeworks works in XTC. If so would it be possible to put a couple of Scopes in a second PC and use the verbs over something like System Link?

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 7:37 pm

On 2004-11-26 05:08, Rogurt wrote:
... Hmmm I though about having outboard stuff. But that´s what I abandonned happily some time ago for the sake of total integration...

that's the point that prevented me from my usual 'buy a couple of outdated P3 servers...'

you know how to route that stuff via adat, so I'd still consider this a solution if the verbs and delays by Warp69 and Mehdi play an important role in the setup.

A passively cooled P3 is more than enough to run SFP in a way that a perfectly tuned autostart project boots that doesn't require much GUI interaction. 2 6-DSP cards for that purpose and one for the sequencer in your recording machine.
The latter exchangable of course by an RME or alike if you'd prefer OSX and the Mac way. I've successfully remote controlled my Pulsar by the Farallon Timbuktu software (even from a 10 year old Nubus PowerMac) - imho Timbuktu is more reliable and less resource intense than the Windows stuff.

The tweaking of Ram and bus access really isn't worth the effort, let alone more expensive memory. You'll never get even close to the performance range required for the STW plugs - it's a fundamental (or conceptual) problem.
Yet I must admit that PD100 and CD100 are among the most impressive devices I ever used - I cannot comment in comparison to high end studio (outboard) gear due to the lack of access, but it's probably in the same performance range, isn't it ?

and back to the topic - CWA's future will indeed not look too bright if they continue those marketing campaigns, where they offer you a device you already bought a couple of months back...

Thomann does a better job... they wrote a nice mail that they noticed I haven't been shopping for a while - and suggested a 10 Euro bonus on next buy might change my mind, possibly... ?

well, 10 Euros isn't a big deal, but it was the style that made this a nice 'hey, we recognize (and appreciate) you as a customer'...

cheers, Tom

darkrezin · Post by **darkrezin** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:20 am

Rogurt - you should probably look into AMD64-based boards - the chipset design is very good and much less prone to PCI overloads.

I use a Magma 2-slot chassis with 2 CW cards and it works fine. However, if you want 4 or 5 reverbs on top of a heavy project, it's just not going to happen. You can't have everything in this world, unfortunately :/