A from inside the music business

A place to talk about whatever Scope music/gear related stuff you want.

Moderators: valis, garyb

ernest@303.nu
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
Contact:

Post by ernest@303.nu »

Hmmmm, I must have mistyped the "7c5f35145cc"-part of that URL with "7cf535145cc" when I was looking for a recommended system on the CW-site..... or put in other words: where is the link to this obscure URL? :razz: :grin: I'm sure it's somewhere on the CW site, but apparently Creamware didn't take too much effort to make it apparent to potential CW-customers. It certainly isn't in their magazine adds or their full-colour brochures.

Thankfully the people who sold me my CW-products are extremely pro powerusers (I think they have about 100 DSPs in their 3 studios!!!) and so I've always gotten myself close-to-ideal systems through their advices. Very little trouble with CW, apart from the acknowledged bugs in the OS and devices. But without this knowledge I'd run into loads of troubles, I'm sure of that!

For those that can't get to http://www2.creamware.de/domino/webdbs/ ... enDocument :

-----------------------------------------
PowerSampler, Pulsar, Pulsar XTC, SCOPE /SP, SCOPE /DP, Luna, Elektra
FAQ

What does CreamWare recommend as a suitable Mac or PC platform?

Solution
Before reading our recommendations understand that you should use the highest quality computers and components you can get to form the foundation of a system based on our equipment. Audio professionals use carefully selected amplifiers, speakers and other audio components in their six-figure studios - not equipment found at their local super discount mart! So it should be with your computer system.

Even though our products are equipped with ultra-fast signal processors to handle audio processing, routing, mixing and so on, the host system nevertheless plays a vital role in many operations (it provides the sample RAM, for example). The host system's PCI bus is very important. If the system PCI bus is loaded down with inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary acitivity, erratic behavior of our software can result. Improperly tuned or poorly designed chipsets or drivers are a frequent cause of poor PCI performance. Trying to transmit massive amounts of data over the PCI bus can be compared to trying to put an elephant through the eye of a needle - it simply isn't possible.

By carefully selecting an appropriate computer and associated peripheral components your system will be a stable and reliable host for our products.


Recommended PC components:

Mainboard: Use a board with a BX chipset (e.g. ASUS CUBX) or an i815 chipset (ASUS CUSL-II)*, Athlon: boards with AMD 761 chip set, e.g. ASUS A7M/266 or Gigabyte GA7-DXR
For Pentium4 systems we recommend mainboards with an intel 845D or intel 850chipset, e.g. the ASUS P4B series.
*note that boards using the i815 chipset no longer have any ISA slots, and will therefore not be appropriate if you want to use tripleDAT or CUTmaster.

*We do not recommend dual CPU systems, since these lead to a higher PCI load and thus reduce the performance of our products.
Processor: Intel Pentium III with a speed of 600MHz or faster.
Our software is not written explicitly for multiprocessing, so multiprocessing systems bring no benefit.
In theory the AMD Athlon is also recommendable, but it is found on many mainboards (VIA Chipset) that currently exhibit problems regarding the efficient use of the PCI bus.
RAM: 256KMB or more. If you want to do extensive sampling, 512MB is better.
Drive controller: EIDE (UDMA) or SCSI (Adaptec 2940 U2W).
Unlike in the past, today's EIDE systems provide excellent performance. In boards using the i815 chipset the PCI bus is no longer burdened by the EIDE controller. These systems are equal or superior to SCSI in terms of performance.
Hard drive(s): In general, IBM produces a variety of very good, reliable drives.
For hard disk recording applications, choose a drive that operates at 7200 or 10000 RPM.
Graphics board: AGP with 32MB video RAM (e.g. Matrox G400 or G450 - or the DH models for dual-screen operation).
CD recorder: Teac CD-R 58 or equivalent (for use with tripleDAT or CUTmaster).
Monitor: 17" screen or larger.
Our DSP products require a resolution of 1024 X 768 pixels. Select a monitor with a suitable refresh rate for flicker-free operation at that resolution.


Recommended MacIntosh system:

Model: G4 400MHz or faster
Our software is not written explicitly for multiprocessing, so multiprocessing systems bring no benefit. Dual CPU systems even increase the danger of PCI performance problems, since they put more load on the PCI bus.
The Mac Cube and iMAC models contain no PCI slots so they cannot be used for our DSP products.
RAM: 256KMB or more. If you want to do extensive sampling, 512MB is better.

The above recommendations imply no guarantee of performance.
Sunshine
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Stuttgart

Post by Sunshine »

As for this TC "Finalizer" thing from post-1...

The Finalizer from TC is a nice unit when you want to gain loudness or do correctional things, but it is not the best compressor on the market. The Finalizer thing from TC is one of the most hyped tools out there... And it is questionable for me to use its compressor function. All other Finalizers on the market have better "compressors" IMO. I don´t want to start a diskussion on which one sounds best and so on. But the DBX unit sounds cleaner and more transparent. And I don´t want to critisize the Optimaster or PsyQ, since I have not even heard them, but TC´s real Finalizing product still is the M5000/6000... and transparency is the way to go...


Regards,
Sunshine
User avatar
krizrox
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Elgin, IL USA
Contact:

Post by krizrox »

Thanks ernest. I think the link is dead because most of Creamware's website is down at the moment. Which leads me to another observation:

Why does Creamware do this to themselves? What makes them think they can distribute MB's of software upgrades through their puny servers. Every time they do this their website crashes. Is there anyone in charge over there? What kind of a business model is this? Why am I asking myself these questions? Why is there air?
junklight
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 4:00 pm
Contact:

Post by junklight »

On 2002-05-30 06:37, krizrox wrote:

Why does Creamware do this to themselves? What makes them think they can distribute MB's of software upgrades through their puny servers. Every time they do this their website crashes. Is there anyone in charge over there? What kind of a business model is this? Why am I asking myself these questions? Why is there air?
The thing is - most of the time their pipe and capacity are just fine - its only when they do these releases and only then for a few days. Given that there are people kind enough to set up mirrors it makes perfect business sense.

Running servers and fat pipes costs <em>LOTS</em> of money - so they are actually following good business strategy - yes they will piss a few people off but I doubt they will lose any money from it and other people will step in and fill the gap for free.


cheers

mark
__________________________________________
junklight - dark experimental electronics
http://www.junklight.com
User avatar
krizrox
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Elgin, IL USA
Contact:

Post by krizrox »

Oh OK. So I guess the fact that their website crashes every time they do this is just a fluke or is an acceptable loss during software upgrades? Yeesh. I get the point though. I understand bandwidth costs money.

I don't mean to sound like I'm ragging on CW. I'm sure they're making the best decisions they can under the circumstances. I applaud them for making the upgrades available to those of us with hi-speed connections.

Which in turn leads to me to my final soapbox rant: why in heaven's name don't they simply charge a small fee (heck, even $10 seems reasonable) and use the income to pay for extra bandwidth? Even for just a short time frame? I mean, am I out of line to even propose something so outrageous?
User avatar
at0m
Posts: 4743
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bubble Metropolis
Contact:

Post by at0m »

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: at0mic on 2002-05-30 08:23 ]</font>
Sunshine
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Stuttgart

Post by Sunshine »

But there are some issues whith their website I guess...

First the link to those technical recommandations should be clearly visible on their front page.

And their forum software is so outdated!
I find it annoying that one has to "click" each and every message in order to read those posts.

And of course, we as users should demand what is demandable and annotate whatever doesn´t work properly.


Regards,
Sunshine
junklight
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 4:00 pm
Contact:

Post by junklight »

They should definitely get some new forumn software - have you seen the new phpBB? maybe they should try that.

Not having the bandwidth for very peak loads I can understand - there is no excuse for bad foumn software.

Mind you the forumns are full of so many whingers and people going - "Creamware are #@£%"$!!'s [because I didn't read the manual]" that I imagine that they avoid going anywhere near them unless someone forces them. They probably have to bully Ingo into reading them :smile:

mark
__________________________________________
junklight - dark experimental electronics
http://www.junklight.com
King of Snake
Posts: 1544
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Post by King of Snake »

btw. I think this whole recommended specs thing SHOULD be more prominent on the site, but I can wholly understand that they don't put it in their advertisements or brochures. I just don't think that would be the right place, also from a marketing point of view, to put lists of recommended systems. And also these are just RECOMMENDED systems, it might be perfectly possible to run Pulsar on different setups and there is no way CW can give any guarantees about system hardware performance. Computers are way too complex for that and you would be hard pressed to find any software or hardware company giving guarantees about such things.
King of Snake
Posts: 1544
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Post by King of Snake »

btw Coldmachine, I'm really interested to know which well-known musician you actually are! I'm guessing you go under a different artist name because I've never heard/seen the name Coldmachine and I listen to lots of "serious" dance music :smile:
Come on! You can tell us :grin:
Immanuel
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Post by Immanuel »

... and for that reason it makes perfect sence, they do not use a good message board like this. It would look very bad with all the pissed of people. With the current forum, their posts disapear. It will likely cause less ***posts, but it will in a way make the posts more demanding of attention. Now it is annoying, they show up so seldom. But in the other way, it will be all bull-shit. We have had it here. When people want to *** instead of listening, they will do so, and their current (crappy) forum is far more suited for that.

Immanuel
Information for new readers: A forum member named Braincell is known for spreading lies and malicious information without even knowing the basics of, what he is talking about. If noone responds to him, it is because he is ignored.
coc999
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Idonotknowanymore
Contact:

Post by coc999 »

hi all,this post makes me open my mac to
go to see how much dsp i've got.It was a long time i have not see them.only 4 he he:)I imagine Coldmachine that 30 and 45 dsp gives you a good and easy way to do the best of your system.And if in plus you've got this magic word "talent" with you i imagine that it is cool.I hope i will learn some cool things of your "knowledge" as i have learn of lot other people here.
Ps:hope i don't disturb too much with some of my 2 times stupid posts.:smile:bye guys
igge
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Kingdom of Sweden

Post by igge »

Just what I guessed all along. Anyway, synth guru/demigod Jean Michel Jarre have been using the Scope platform for years. Which means CW cards are the best you can get, right, lads? I'm also using mine in a multi purpose pc, even though I have enough hardware lying around to build a second PC.
King of Snake
Posts: 1544
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Post by King of Snake »

http://www.dagoose.nl

This great dutch techno producer also uses CW stuff (Powersampler & Luna I/O). (check the "studio" link)

Yet another pro to add to the list of CW users. :smile:
Tony B
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 4:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Tony B »

Let's get as much cards as we can and need. I have a feeling. :cry: :cry:
e-scape
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Denmark

Post by e-scape »

psychedelic trance producer HUJABOY

uses powersampler
BIT01
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Italy with love but living hell UK

Post by BIT01 »

to be honest the link of "suggested/tested system" was posted long time after all users went mad with Via chipset Amd combo... and in my opinion after their post and comments..
Regarding all comments posted before on this forum i'm puzzled.....
I mean, yes pulsar enviroment got wonderful routing options, and i run it happily in a small project studio too, but cant stand quality of much of what's available for it...
Aand much of that routing can be done in Logic Enviroments.
We got eq. with pulsar and reverbs and joke compressors, try the sonic timeworks and those are a shame but that's $399 on the bill... u like synth played "high quality" 96khz 24bit, huge dsp use, then u need more dsp thus add a scope board $somethouands..
More than number of dsp, what really counts is the quality of soft/synth for this platform and there is few...
I can agree on maximising the powers of existing stuff to a limit...
And i dont find interesting ppl that claims to be "pro" just because of 40 and more dsp without giving links to show their "awesome results"..
And furthermore if someone is saying that pulsar will run a threat with 40 and more dsp well u just discovered hot water in my views...
Why should pro user prefer this system to protools then ? Industry unfortunately accepted standard...
At least they got a soft that even in their beta/free version that is more reliable than TripleDat Full reatail belive me i own it, and huge array of top class plugins available..
And those system are free of pulsar first sin... deciding to use computer bus not a dedicated bus like tdm under digis products, this decision has definetely not paid off and pulsar is paying this initial project error, no matter fancy graphics interfaces...
U can claim poor Via design and so on but how someone noticed, why cream understood this after releasing prodcts...
We are obviously betatesting software/hardware for them so a little bit more of recognition will be appreciated...
And for the lots of ppl claiming that modular is the thing well more than saying, plz share some performance u did or even better some patch to make us "stupid users" understand all this powers...
I use my ears and see Reaktor much more open, powerful, better sounding, friendly and with 3rd party support like Dash synth devloping for it to name one...
I look at pulsar and see Wavelenght from which i almost own all soft because i love how his synth sounds, Celmo, Sonic Timeworks (in serious needs of updates) and no one other...

Is this a "Pro plattform" ?

Take a serious listen to Bombfactory plugins and Waves under Protools to realize how right i am... their Urei emulation is sweet..

Market says u have to decide....

Will pulsar go with synths or fx ? or both like i hope.. but there's none actually developing for it..
Why should some user invest in 40 dsp compared to native or other dsp platform, tc native will have a access virus, sony oxford eq, antares stuff.... plus their finalizer with faster dsp and architecture...

U say all good well about time to show.....
Words are easy.... as soon as my stuff is published i'll be glad to post links and so on..."most pros use" is so out of fashion nowdays......




P.s.

No mean to be unrespectful just real and honest....
User avatar
astroman
Posts: 8446
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by astroman »

On 2002-06-03 10:38, BIT01 wrote:

1.) Aand much of that routing can be done in Logic Enviroments.

2.) u like synth played "high quality" 96khz 24bit, huge dsp use, then u need more dsp

3.) Why should pro user prefer this system to protools then ? Industry unfortunately accepted standard...

4.)...poor Via design and so on ..., why cream understood this after releasing prodcts...

5.) I use my ears and see Reaktor much more open, powerful, better sounding, friendly

6.) ...and see Wavelenght from which i almost own all soft because i love how his synth sounds

7.) ...their Urei emulation is sweet..

8.) tc native will have a access virus, sony oxford eq, antares stuff.... plus their finalizer with faster dsp and architecture...

hi BIT,

I don't consider myself a pro from the financial part of the story but I demand professional performance from my system.
For me Pulsar delivers this as a core part of a recording setup.
But I'd never expect it to do all and everything on one single machine without external sound sources or processors.
There are directions like 'trance' where it might be possible, but I'm not into them.
Imho Creamware never advertised Scope as the ultimate Hollywood production solution, but for advanced budget studios.
Couldn't resist to comment some of your statements but of course I'm far from being personal or offensive, just some different opinions :

1.) maybe, but with a pita ui and a lot of time. My small Logic is my most hated piece of software and the same holds for the 'philosophy' of it's company.

2.) if I want THAT quality I'd buy me a real piece of analog equipment. Btw 95% of all consumers are unable to distinguish even CD quality from MP3 128 Kbit.

3.)...noone was ever fired for buying from the market leader... :evil:

4.) so who's responsible for the mobo design ? :lol:

5.) me too - and when I turn off ALL effects, I haven't found any native yet to compete with Pulsar sound in variaty and smoothness.
But of course that's a subjective item.
A very strange observation: :eek:
I own NI's B4 and I haven't been able to distinguish it's sound output on Pulsar's 20 bit devices from a crappy Ensoniq 1374.

6.) I bought one of them myself and found that Modular 2 was able to produce exactly that sound I liked most.
BUT: this would have been a lot of tweaking and routing. So I consider it a good buy.

7.) shurely, but why does everything has to sound exactly like Urei, Neve or whatever ?
I always get the feeling that those 'perfect' emulations are mostly a mental thing for their (potential) owners. Consider themselves smart because they can (or want to) afford a bunch of legends at a rock bottom price, maybe.
Don't get me wrong, I love analog productions from the pre-digital era a lot and they are still my personal measure against which that overproduced rubbish from the charts has to compete.

8.) yes, and all for free :grin:

cheers, Tom
Xantia
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2002 4:00 pm

Post by Xantia »

Um...BIT01 are you a KVR native or a
re-incarnation of DXL? :razz:

real and honest...
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23364
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Post by garyb »

dxl's mummy's ghost.........
Post Reply