Sorry Hub... I'll go make some music now...On 2004-10-20 00:20, hubird wrote:
jeezzs!
CW future?
-
blazesboylan
- Posts: 777
- Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: The Great White North
- Contact:
-
Basic Pitch
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 4:00 pm
Hey now lol..
I am not trying to be negative, and by all means I love my Scope system as much as the next guy, but as technology advances at such a rapid pace, eventually CW will need to make a move, but those of us with PCI devices will still have our PCs that we use now to run our systems, the only negative I can find is that the seamless integration between 2 PCs one housing a scope card for its PCI abiltites loses a smidge of its power due to ADAT channel limitations I suppose.
I could be wrong entirely though aswell
Another idea might be for CW to follow suit with the other manufactors and put a card out that has less software bundled and sell the card its self at a lower price point and then make users purchase the software they need as additional sales, some what like a UAD Project pack, or the Powercore Element, these are the exact same cards as the normnal versions priced lower and shipping with less software, users then need to purchase the goods like the LA2A and 1176 and so forth.
Just an idea...
Cheers!
I am not trying to be negative, and by all means I love my Scope system as much as the next guy, but as technology advances at such a rapid pace, eventually CW will need to make a move, but those of us with PCI devices will still have our PCs that we use now to run our systems, the only negative I can find is that the seamless integration between 2 PCs one housing a scope card for its PCI abiltites loses a smidge of its power due to ADAT channel limitations I suppose.
I could be wrong entirely though aswell
Another idea might be for CW to follow suit with the other manufactors and put a card out that has less software bundled and sell the card its self at a lower price point and then make users purchase the software they need as additional sales, some what like a UAD Project pack, or the Powercore Element, these are the exact same cards as the normnal versions priced lower and shipping with less software, users then need to purchase the goods like the LA2A and 1176 and so forth.Just an idea...
Cheers!
blazesboylan: so you´re not controlling the setup with knobs but with a 2nd Copmuter and by software? Interesting... I doubt that if you would make the effort and build generic setups they would serve others needs that well, that one could spare building a setup on his own. Mind you persons requiring fader control often are so much into recording/music that they have strong personal likings. So I think I would have to build it by myself. And as you said that´s not for the fainthearted.
But still: does anybody know about SFP working together with motorfaders?
But still: does anybody know about SFP working together with motorfaders?
Basic Pitch: I think princing and software bundling politics of CW is o.k. If it would be like with e.g. the UAD SFP would compete against the UAD. And you shouldn´t (and you can´t) compare them directly.
SFP is the vision of the best handling possible. And it does a great job just by the routing window (together with superb sounding devices and all the rest). So Creamware: concentrate on that! Mind you others are catching up!
Motorfadersupport (I mean real support - look at Houston etc.) is a big theme for project studios as well as "minor" issues like autosave. I mean DOH - what software nowadays can´t do autosaves? It´s so crucial!
If you get SFP into Studios (for superb handling at low cost) other project studios /single producers would think "well I need a DAW - why not spending some more bucks if I can be compatible with the studio I´ll be producing in the end?"
That´s exacly what Protools succesfully does with the 001 and 002. And CW could directly compete with them for cost/perfomance ratio and diversity.
SFP is the vision of the best handling possible. And it does a great job just by the routing window (together with superb sounding devices and all the rest). So Creamware: concentrate on that! Mind you others are catching up!
Motorfadersupport (I mean real support - look at Houston etc.) is a big theme for project studios as well as "minor" issues like autosave. I mean DOH - what software nowadays can´t do autosaves? It´s so crucial!
If you get SFP into Studios (for superb handling at low cost) other project studios /single producers would think "well I need a DAW - why not spending some more bucks if I can be compatible with the studio I´ll be producing in the end?"
That´s exacly what Protools succesfully does with the 001 and 002. And CW could directly compete with them for cost/perfomance ratio and diversity.
that would be the sequel of CW's probably most negative business decision. When the original Scope was released it was positioned rather agressively in that direction - success known...
ProTools users are likely to develope the same (or similiar) relations to their gear than some of us Scopers
You'll finally hit the dude behind the faders and not the technical part of the studio.
Now that Digi is financially backed by names as big as M$, it would be a most ridiculuous enterprise, as would be the release of the next 'Blaster' by CWA.
It isn't bad to coop and have a niche occupied - look at Apple (for example) only 3% of the overall market, but 90% in their target group.
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2004-10-20 07:33 ]</font>
ProTools users are likely to develope the same (or similiar) relations to their gear than some of us Scopers
You'll finally hit the dude behind the faders and not the technical part of the studio.
Now that Digi is financially backed by names as big as M$, it would be a most ridiculuous enterprise, as would be the release of the next 'Blaster' by CWA.
It isn't bad to coop and have a niche occupied - look at Apple (for example) only 3% of the overall market, but 90% in their target group.
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2004-10-20 07:33 ]</font>
Interesting thread this.
Having bought a Luna second hand a few months ago I have just ordered a Scope Professional Classic card.
Why did I do this?
Well I suppose that I am different to a lot of people in that my most important criteria for the equipment I use is stability and quality. Scope has proved to be very stable for me and you all know about the quality.
If Scope does one thing better than anything else it's 'flexibility'.
I really can't see me needing to move to anything else.
Regards
Having bought a Luna second hand a few months ago I have just ordered a Scope Professional Classic card.
Why did I do this?
Well I suppose that I am different to a lot of people in that my most important criteria for the equipment I use is stability and quality. Scope has proved to be very stable for me and you all know about the quality.
If Scope does one thing better than anything else it's 'flexibility'.
I really can't see me needing to move to anything else.
Regards
@ basic pitch reg. ADAT:
what limitations do you mean ?
I have 40 I/O ADAT channels here connected (8 still free) and some S/P-Dif channels, using scope as main mixer (with a 600MHz computer around ). I never experienced any limitiations.
@ Rogurt
motorfader controls work nicely here. I have a Logic Control connected to the STM mixer via my Logic PC (which emitts 24 of the 40 adat channels, btw).
Everytime, I change a setting in the STM, the LC moves it's faders as well.
Since I din't change the basic setup of my studio since at least four years, I'm so used to it, that I feel more than home, when entering it. The whole update hystery and basic changes to my audio world would keep me away from beeing creative. That said, I never would stick my scope rig in a new comp beside the actual one blows up.
For shure I'll have a G5 here soon (not only for a short testing time, as I had), but again .. I just stick it on my scope rig, fire up logic and continue working after perhaps a quarter/half an hour connecting lightpipes/midi.
regarding creamware, imo they should concentrate on service and deliver high class preconfigured systems to studios. It doesn't matters, if it is pci/firewire or whatever, but it matters, what comes out of it and how productivity can be hold on a high level with no disruption.
In big studios they still remember the old days of pulsar v1.2 and keep away of it because of the bad experiences back then (which is no issue today, but getting this out of brains is a hard task). Most still use Mac OS9, an OS which is discontinued since at least 5 years, because they don't want to change their setup with the risk beeing out of biz for some time ..
just my two cent
best
Wolfgang
what limitations do you mean ?
I have 40 I/O ADAT channels here connected (8 still free) and some S/P-Dif channels, using scope as main mixer (with a 600MHz computer around
). I never experienced any limitiations.@ Rogurt
motorfader controls work nicely here. I have a Logic Control connected to the STM mixer via my Logic PC (which emitts 24 of the 40 adat channels, btw).
Everytime, I change a setting in the STM, the LC moves it's faders as well.
Since I din't change the basic setup of my studio since at least four years, I'm so used to it, that I feel more than home, when entering it. The whole update hystery and basic changes to my audio world would keep me away from beeing creative. That said, I never would stick my scope rig in a new comp beside the actual one blows up.
For shure I'll have a G5 here soon (not only for a short testing time, as I had), but again .. I just stick it on my scope rig, fire up logic and continue working after perhaps a quarter/half an hour connecting lightpipes/midi.
regarding creamware, imo they should concentrate on service and deliver high class preconfigured systems to studios. It doesn't matters, if it is pci/firewire or whatever, but it matters, what comes out of it and how productivity can be hold on a high level with no disruption.
In big studios they still remember the old days of pulsar v1.2 and keep away of it because of the bad experiences back then (which is no issue today, but getting this out of brains is a hard task). Most still use Mac OS9, an OS which is discontinued since at least 5 years, because they don't want to change their setup with the risk beeing out of biz for some time ..
just my two cent
best
Wolfgang
-
hubird
@ astroman: the announcement of the initial pricing was just for a very short period of time and as far as I remember just until Pulsar came into the shops. I bought my Pulsar 1.01 Hardware together with the A8 for 2.500 Deutschmarks back then.
I think you can´t really compare Apple and CW regarding positioning in niche markets. Apple is so successfull for it´s amazing products in the past (as is CW) but it´s not only a trademark but became the archetype of a "Lovemark" (people are carrying their I-Pods like jewelry). But still it competes with PCs in performance...
@ wolf:
a at last someone who really uses motorfaders! The STM is 2448 of SFP? I´m not firm to that shortcut "STM". It does sound like you have to use 2 PCs and Logic has to "convert" Logic Control Data to Pulsar? What does the reference to 24/40 ADAT channels mean? If you change fader/knob settings LC synchronizes ok. What if you klick a "STM" preset? Anything that doesn´t work well? What about initially opening an old project? Does everything synchronize too? What about 128 steps of midi - do you hear it? Can you control EQs? And last but not least: I suppose there´s no way having the LC Info-Panels refer to STM channel info whatsoever?
Wolf:
>> but it matters, what comes out of it and how productivity can be hold on a high level<<
I see you have only about 90 postsings. Less posting -> more creativity?
I think you can´t really compare Apple and CW regarding positioning in niche markets. Apple is so successfull for it´s amazing products in the past (as is CW) but it´s not only a trademark but became the archetype of a "Lovemark" (people are carrying their I-Pods like jewelry). But still it competes with PCs in performance...
@ wolf:
a at last someone who really uses motorfaders! The STM is 2448 of SFP? I´m not firm to that shortcut "STM". It does sound like you have to use 2 PCs and Logic has to "convert" Logic Control Data to Pulsar? What does the reference to 24/40 ADAT channels mean? If you change fader/knob settings LC synchronizes ok. What if you klick a "STM" preset? Anything that doesn´t work well? What about initially opening an old project? Does everything synchronize too? What about 128 steps of midi - do you hear it? Can you control EQs? And last but not least: I suppose there´s no way having the LC Info-Panels refer to STM channel info whatsoever?
Wolf:
>> but it matters, what comes out of it and how productivity can be hold on a high level<<
I see you have only about 90 postsings. Less posting -> more creativity?
-
marcuspocus
- Posts: 2310
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Canada/France
Hey Wolf, i use a tascam fw1884 in Mackie Control mode to drive the stm1632 completely with motors etc.
I made myself a small java program that transform mackie command in midi CC in realtime for doing this. It work like a charm, and i can save presets for instant recall at anymoment.
I'm actually finishing the implementation of complete automation (including the faders movements etc...) and record this directly to midi files. It's great for working in studio, or even live, when mixing many band in one night for example.
If anyone interested in this...
I made myself a small java program that transform mackie command in midi CC in realtime for doing this. It work like a charm, and i can save presets for instant recall at anymoment.
I'm actually finishing the implementation of complete automation (including the faders movements etc...) and record this directly to midi files. It's great for working in studio, or even live, when mixing many band in one night for example.
If anyone interested in this...
> The STM is 2448 of SFP?
yes
> It does sound like you have to use 2 PCs and Logic has to "convert" Logic Control Data to Pulsar?
yes, but I use 2 pcs anyway (long before I had the LC), as sfp is much smoother and more carefree used alone. On the other hand having four screens to look at instead of switching always between apps is very comfortable. Two screens with logic arrange, two with scope mixing tools. The adat thingie was just a reference to what I wrote to basic pitch's statement.
> What if you klick a "STM" preset?
mmh, I never use(d) presets for the stm, but what should happen ?
> What about initially opening an old project?
as said, the setup didn't change for a looong time and I use a standard project right from start away, where everything is set up to my liking, so no problem here. Sometimes I have to adjust a midi channel in Logic to get it to work again.
.. and opening a pre sfp3.x project is something I don't even want to think about
> Does everything synchronize too?
you mean, if all values are taken over to logic/lc and back ? yes, all values are taken over, regardless which one has been started first .. even much better, if I screwed up something on one pc, I have a security backup with the other one.
> What about 128 steps of midi - do you hear it?
no, neither by moving faders nor by doing automation.
> Can you control EQs?
I could, but in most cases I know, how I want to have eqs set up for each instrument. I adjust them and that's it.
Also, as scope is my mixing station, where my good speakers are, I'd have to turn around to adjust them via LC, where I have only some yamaha speakers for arranging/composing. So this wouldn't make sense for me.
If I want to control a synth, I can decide between a (preconfigured) doepfer control or, if I want to have it permanent use the LC, where I have also done some preconfigs.
> I suppose there´s no way having the LC Info-Panels refer to STM channel info whatsoever?
In the sense you perhaps mean not at moment, but might be possible for DP/SDK geeks, who have much time learning the LC reference and midi tools of DP/SDK
However you can name the tracks in Logic after the functions you have assigned in scope.
> I see you have only about 90 postsings. Less posting -> more creativity?
hehe, "postsings" .. yes, one might call it like that
.
best
Wolfgang
yes
> It does sound like you have to use 2 PCs and Logic has to "convert" Logic Control Data to Pulsar?
yes, but I use 2 pcs anyway (long before I had the LC), as sfp is much smoother and more carefree used alone. On the other hand having four screens to look at instead of switching always between apps is very comfortable. Two screens with logic arrange, two with scope mixing tools. The adat thingie was just a reference to what I wrote to basic pitch's statement.
> What if you klick a "STM" preset?
mmh, I never use(d) presets for the stm, but what should happen ?
> What about initially opening an old project?
as said, the setup didn't change for a looong time and I use a standard project right from start away, where everything is set up to my liking, so no problem here. Sometimes I have to adjust a midi channel in Logic to get it to work again.
.. and opening a pre sfp3.x project is something I don't even want to think about
> Does everything synchronize too?
you mean, if all values are taken over to logic/lc and back ? yes, all values are taken over, regardless which one has been started first .. even much better, if I screwed up something on one pc, I have a security backup with the other one.
> What about 128 steps of midi - do you hear it?
no, neither by moving faders nor by doing automation.
> Can you control EQs?
I could, but in most cases I know, how I want to have eqs set up for each instrument. I adjust them and that's it.
Also, as scope is my mixing station, where my good speakers are, I'd have to turn around to adjust them via LC, where I have only some yamaha speakers for arranging/composing. So this wouldn't make sense for me.
If I want to control a synth, I can decide between a (preconfigured) doepfer control or, if I want to have it permanent use the LC, where I have also done some preconfigs.
> I suppose there´s no way having the LC Info-Panels refer to STM channel info whatsoever?
In the sense you perhaps mean not at moment, but might be possible for DP/SDK geeks, who have much time learning the LC reference and midi tools of DP/SDK
However you can name the tracks in Logic after the functions you have assigned in scope.
> I see you have only about 90 postsings. Less posting -> more creativity?
hehe, "postsings" .. yes, one might call it like that
.
best
Wolfgang
I didn't compare them at all - I used the 'Apple example' as a proof for profitability of niche marketsOn 2004-10-21 04:40, Rogurt wrote:
... I think you can´t really compare Apple and CW regarding positioning in niche markets. ...
and yes, you're absolutely right on Apple's 'love me' product strategy: it was the same with the very first Macs - you simple had to have one... it was cute, it was cool, it was smart and it was different.
It had an identity in an anonymous market
btw I didn't refer to prices when I called CW's product intro aggressive. I once googled a statement of Frank Hund in that direction (ca. 2000), but I'm not shure if it were his own words or just the interpretion of the interviewer.
you possibly remember the 'comic style' ads from 1999 where a plane goes down with a 'PT, PT, oools' in the background.
The drawing shows a beach scene titled 'Do it with SHARCS' with hidden jokes about almost the complete PC audio scene.
cheers, Tom
Yes - that whas weird! 
Anyway - with the right politics (from the very beginnig though) they would have had a slight but real chance to compete with ProTools.
CWs credibility was enormous at that point (triple dat was a superb product back then).
I do find it sensible to have CW home, project, and professional line. But as I mentioned before "pro" would make sense if it meant that "pro" Hard/Software would be used by (not only few) Professionals thus making semi-pros think about having a compatible (and by the way superb sounding and reasonable priced) platform...
Nowadays it´s really hard for the superiority of PT in postpro/film market on account to the fusion with AVID.
Our studio did use CW and AVID Files though...
Anyway - with the right politics (from the very beginnig though) they would have had a slight but real chance to compete with ProTools.
CWs credibility was enormous at that point (triple dat was a superb product back then).
I do find it sensible to have CW home, project, and professional line. But as I mentioned before "pro" would make sense if it meant that "pro" Hard/Software would be used by (not only few) Professionals thus making semi-pros think about having a compatible (and by the way superb sounding and reasonable priced) platform...
Nowadays it´s really hard for the superiority of PT in postpro/film market on account to the fusion with AVID.
Our studio did use CW and AVID Files though...
-
Astral Fridge Magnet
- Posts: 347
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2001 4:00 pm
-
hubird
-
cannonball
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: italia
What can he say ? The future is "good". Well, he would say that wouldn't he ? If he says "bad" then that's a self-fulfilling prophesy and it really will be the end.
CWA has survived the nuclear winter. Hopefully a few things will start to sprout again soon.
Anyone remember when Noah was released there were a few threads here saying "this is a make or break" investment .....
CWA has survived the nuclear winter. Hopefully a few things will start to sprout again soon.
Anyone remember when Noah was released there were a few threads here saying "this is a make or break" investment .....
-
hubird
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... forum=10&1
(edit: I wrote that comment in the link before I passed this thread, I was just happy then }
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2004-11-04 23:20 ]</font>
(edit: I wrote that comment in the link before I passed this thread, I was just happy then
}<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2004-11-04 23:20 ]</font>