Creamware vs CPU DAWs solutions
We're all waiting for the Scope Fusion 3.1
There are few bugs Creamware has to fix with the 3.1 release:
1. rm242 bug
2. cd(s) bug
3. sts3000 distortion bug
4. 24bit wmd
5. gsif
In the same time, in the technological race, we can see that CPUs based DAWs solutions can today rivalize or even outperform our DSPs based systems, and can do this with a much better price.
Seeing this, an idea has come in my mind: to stay attractive in this market, Creamware has to fix all the bugs exposed, but it's not the only thing they has to do.
To stay competitive, Creamware has to do a decisive offer. All Creamware's users must have more professional tools.
So why not giving at all users (for free, naturally) all the Scope and the Noah plugins?
In my opinion this has to be done soon or later. Perhaps soon is better for Creamware and users.
Please tell me if I'm wrong.
And if you think I'm right, couldn't we make a petition and send it to Creamware?
There are few bugs Creamware has to fix with the 3.1 release:
1. rm242 bug
2. cd(s) bug
3. sts3000 distortion bug
4. 24bit wmd
5. gsif
In the same time, in the technological race, we can see that CPUs based DAWs solutions can today rivalize or even outperform our DSPs based systems, and can do this with a much better price.
Seeing this, an idea has come in my mind: to stay attractive in this market, Creamware has to fix all the bugs exposed, but it's not the only thing they has to do.
To stay competitive, Creamware has to do a decisive offer. All Creamware's users must have more professional tools.
So why not giving at all users (for free, naturally) all the Scope and the Noah plugins?
In my opinion this has to be done soon or later. Perhaps soon is better for Creamware and users.
Please tell me if I'm wrong.
And if you think I'm right, couldn't we make a petition and send it to Creamware?
Why not ! And $500 cash would be nice too.
But seriously, in a slow way this is already happening. Over time you see plugins that were extras become standard. For example, new users get the STS3000 and ModV2 and PulsarMixer and effects, and and and.... all for free with their PulsarII.
It's a great deal.
But seriously, in a slow way this is already happening. Over time you see plugins that were extras become standard. For example, new users get the STS3000 and ModV2 and PulsarMixer and effects, and and and.... all for free with their PulsarII.
It's a great deal.
If you measure Creamware's comptetiveness solely on their effects, than you may be right about them falling behind to TC and some of the new players. However, no one has been able to beat Creamware's software synths without relying on host CPU (especially the Modular 2!) Beware though, TC Powercore is about to get Access Virus plug-in.
-
- Posts: 1544
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
- Contact:
Tell me again why Creamware MUST give away all their plugins for free, when people (me included) are perfectly happy to pay money for a good plugin?To stay competitive, Creamware has to do a decisive offer. All Creamware's users must have more professional tools.
So why not giving at all users (for free, naturally) all the Scope and the Noah plugins?
I thought the Pro-pack offer was already astounding value for money, and yes in time some of this stuff will come for free. The platform is evolving, so is the software.
Creamware still has no real direct competition when it comes to all-in-one integrated DSP platforms.
- John Cooper
- Moderator
- Posts: 1182
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Planet Z
- Contact:
the world is still evolving and so as we, other companies, even the universe,
On 2002-04-22 11:20, King of Snake wrote:Tell me again why Creamware MUST give away all their plugins for free, when people (me included) are perfectly happy to pay money for a good plugin?To stay competitive, Creamware has to do a decisive offer. All Creamware's users must have more professional tools.
So why not giving at all users (for free, naturally) all the Scope and the Noah plugins?
I thought the Pro-pack offer was already astounding value for money, and yes in time some of this stuff will come for free. The platform is evolving, so is the software.
Creamware still has no real direct competition when it comes to all-in-one integrated DSP platforms.
I'm still seeing new things in life.
<p><a href="http://mp3.com/dxl">www.mp3.com/dxl</a></p>
<p><a href="http://mp3.com/dxl">www.mp3.com/dxl</a></p>
But seriously, there's more and more quality softsynths based only on CPUs, and more mixing and mastering tools too, all this with crazy latencies ( 1,5 ms; 2ms rivalizing with ULLI latencies!!).
With the rising of WDM drivers supported by Microsoft, systems based on CPUs allows equals or better latencies than our DSP based systems!
The basic Creamware's packages don't include mastering tools as the scope package. Why? With this situation, users are going to compare the prices of CPU and DSP plugins, and who will win this race is not certain.
I'm not sure that today DSP based solutions are better than CPU + I/O DAWs. I think time works for CPUs.
That's why I think my idea is not totally stupid
With the rising of WDM drivers supported by Microsoft, systems based on CPUs allows equals or better latencies than our DSP based systems!
The basic Creamware's packages don't include mastering tools as the scope package. Why? With this situation, users are going to compare the prices of CPU and DSP plugins, and who will win this race is not certain.
I'm not sure that today DSP based solutions are better than CPU + I/O DAWs. I think time works for CPUs.
That's why I think my idea is not totally stupid

People where starting to feel the same way about Protools, then came Protools HD...
Once you try (like I did)running a session with 128 tracks and 640 plugin's, you KNOW that the imediate future still belongs to the DSP's !!!
I also think that you'll see Creamware's next generation hardware "overtaking" the native solutions.
For now, a couple of Creamware cards is WAY beyond what native only can do. And you can do all the native stuff at the same time as well...
Kim.
Once you try (like I did)running a session with 128 tracks and 640 plugin's, you KNOW that the imediate future still belongs to the DSP's !!!
I also think that you'll see Creamware's next generation hardware "overtaking" the native solutions.
For now, a couple of Creamware cards is WAY beyond what native only can do. And you can do all the native stuff at the same time as well...
Kim.
- EarlyFirst
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: The Future
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1544
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
- Contact:
Interestingly enough, I saw a couple of freeware VSTis the other day called Vivaldi and Ganymed.
They weren't that pretty to look at but they were both FM solutions. The difference seemed to be that the developer didn't want to compromise on the sound quality by economising for CPU cycles etc.
The result? A CPU hog and a half!!!
Now I can't verify that this guy was the worlds best VSTi developer, so I'm guessing this just from how he presented his product on his website, that if you really are serious about uncompromising quality with your oscillators, filters etc.., then you get one bitch of a synth to run even on a very pretty powerful CPU.
Perhaps VSTi synths like this should be compared to the Pulsar synths and then see which solution is better.
Sorry, I'm not really slagging the native solution but there does seem a difference in design philosophy between a Pulsar synth and a VSTi one that might make them uncomparable for performance - from this uneducated viewpoint anyway.
They weren't that pretty to look at but they were both FM solutions. The difference seemed to be that the developer didn't want to compromise on the sound quality by economising for CPU cycles etc.
The result? A CPU hog and a half!!!
Now I can't verify that this guy was the worlds best VSTi developer, so I'm guessing this just from how he presented his product on his website, that if you really are serious about uncompromising quality with your oscillators, filters etc.., then you get one bitch of a synth to run even on a very pretty powerful CPU.
Perhaps VSTi synths like this should be compared to the Pulsar synths and then see which solution is better.
Sorry, I'm not really slagging the native solution but there does seem a difference in design philosophy between a Pulsar synth and a VSTi one that might make them uncomparable for performance - from this uneducated viewpoint anyway.
Caleb
Happiness is the hidden behind the obvious.
Happiness is the hidden behind the obvious.