SCOPE versus Echo
Hi guys. I currently use an Echo Layla 24 as my soundcard, and am interested in possibly moving to a SCOPE Project. The main reasons being trying to take some processing load off the CPU by using the DSPs. My problem is that I don't know anyone that actually uses one, so I have no way of knowing what the sound is like. Can any of you comment on how the SCOPE cards sound compared to other professional cards. Thanks.
Hmmm, I was hoping you guys would jump up and tell me that a new SCOPE card was going to sound like golden honey compared to the Layla. Thats ok, I think the Layla is a pretty good card, but was curious because I've read 2 artist interviews now that were bragging on their SCOPE stuff.
So let me ask the question a little differently. What card did you have before you got your CW card and what did you notice sound-wise when you made the change? Anyone?
So let me ask the question a little differently. What card did you have before you got your CW card and what did you notice sound-wise when you made the change? Anyone?
-
hubird
well poidog, let me answer a little differently... 
the Pulsar One (and acompagning software) I aquired some years ago completely wiped that ware* idea from my mind within only a couple of months. You know... those CD Roms that occasionally show up on your table by a friend of a friend who knows someone...
The Pulsar worked better than expected, had in fact a pleasing sound, and every piece of (additional) software was reasonable priced.
I finally got a true delivery instead of spec sheet promises - and most surprisingly it was exactly the system I always dreamed of. I had read many reviews before, but none had made it as clear as the hands-on experience
One could brag with the sound, but that's not exactly my style.
Let's see it as it is:
there's a tremendous amount of processing cycles burnt on a Scope board - don't be irritated by clockrates - those Sharc DSPs do (almost) full parallel processing and execute highly optimized math assembly code.
That's why it sounds so good - and that's why I would strongly discourage the aquisition of a Scope Home in YOUR case.
Get at least one of the 6 DSP boards or you'll be disappointed. I have a couple of favourite fx that don't even fit with a single instance on 3 DSPs.
[edit]
that reminds me: I recently tried to load a demo of the Arturia Minimoog on my Celeron 1Gig - not possible at all, not even a single voice without crackles
The CWA equivalent Minimax (considered the best MM emu available) requires about 1 DSP per voice - to give you an idea of the processing power.
[/edit]
If you'd say: I want a straight IO-system to replace an Adat recorder (for example) then a Scope home would be perfect, but not if you're after top synths and fx
cheers - and welcome btw, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2004-10-21 20:05 ]</font>
the Pulsar One (and acompagning software) I aquired some years ago completely wiped that ware* idea from my mind within only a couple of months. You know... those CD Roms that occasionally show up on your table by a friend of a friend who knows someone...
The Pulsar worked better than expected, had in fact a pleasing sound, and every piece of (additional) software was reasonable priced.
I finally got a true delivery instead of spec sheet promises - and most surprisingly it was exactly the system I always dreamed of. I had read many reviews before, but none had made it as clear as the hands-on experience
One could brag with the sound, but that's not exactly my style.
Let's see it as it is:
there's a tremendous amount of processing cycles burnt on a Scope board - don't be irritated by clockrates - those Sharc DSPs do (almost) full parallel processing and execute highly optimized math assembly code.
That's why it sounds so good - and that's why I would strongly discourage the aquisition of a Scope Home in YOUR case.
Get at least one of the 6 DSP boards or you'll be disappointed. I have a couple of favourite fx that don't even fit with a single instance on 3 DSPs.
[edit]
that reminds me: I recently tried to load a demo of the Arturia Minimoog on my Celeron 1Gig - not possible at all, not even a single voice without crackles
The CWA equivalent Minimax (considered the best MM emu available) requires about 1 DSP per voice - to give you an idea of the processing power.
[/edit]
If you'd say: I want a straight IO-system to replace an Adat recorder (for example) then a Scope home would be perfect, but not if you're after top synths and fx
cheers - and welcome btw, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2004-10-21 20:05 ]</font>
-
Guest
Quote: I've read 2 artist interviews now that were bragging on their SCOPE stuff.
---------------------------------
.......and many more say the same.
you did not get the answer you are looking for because this type of questions has been asked many times here.
you can brownse and see. Better yet pick one of the creamware DSP card and you tell us what you think.
I guaratee that you will be a convert.
---------------------------------
.......and many more say the same.
you did not get the answer you are looking for because this type of questions has been asked many times here.
you can brownse and see. Better yet pick one of the creamware DSP card and you tell us what you think.
I guaratee that you will be a convert.
-
ScofieldKid
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Oregon
- Contact:
It's interesting to consider. I'm not sure what you are shooting for ultimately in your system, but I'll make some comments.
The killer things about the Scope stuff are #1 the routing flexibility and #2 the synths. For #1, everything can tie into everything else anywhere. It is a graphical routing interface for tieing in i/o's, synths, devices, effects, that is intuitive and easy to use. As for #2, I personally think that the Creamware synths sound incredible. A lot of them are "old school", but with modern clean sound.
Seems like you could do a DAW effects routing to DSP in a bunch of different ways. On the A/D side you could use 1) your Layla24, 2) RME stuff, 3) Creamware. On the DSP side you could use 1) UAD-1, 2) TC Powercore or 3) Creamware.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ScofieldKid on 2004-10-22 00:07 ]</font>
The killer things about the Scope stuff are #1 the routing flexibility and #2 the synths. For #1, everything can tie into everything else anywhere. It is a graphical routing interface for tieing in i/o's, synths, devices, effects, that is intuitive and easy to use. As for #2, I personally think that the Creamware synths sound incredible. A lot of them are "old school", but with modern clean sound.
Seems like you could do a DAW effects routing to DSP in a bunch of different ways. On the A/D side you could use 1) your Layla24, 2) RME stuff, 3) Creamware. On the DSP side you could use 1) UAD-1, 2) TC Powercore or 3) Creamware.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ScofieldKid on 2004-10-22 00:07 ]</font>
See, this is what I was hoping for 
And I do apologize for asking something that is a common question. But it was word of mouth that got me interested in Creamware, so I guess I was just looking for some reassurance from the true believers. Ordering a Project today.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: poidog on 2004-10-22 12:11 ]</font>
And I do apologize for asking something that is a common question. But it was word of mouth that got me interested in Creamware, so I guess I was just looking for some reassurance from the true believers. Ordering a Project today. <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: poidog on 2004-10-22 12:11 ]</font>
-
Basic Pitch
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 4:00 pm
Hi there,
Well I dont know if this makes any difference or not, but I have 2 Cards, a Scope Pro and also a Lynx2, not sure how familiar you are with the lynx line of cards but the consensus in most fields of audio and in mags finds its quality to be of the highest caliber competing with converters such as apogee while rating higher than most reviews of RME products aswell in terms of sound..
With that being said, I use my Scope card as my I/O instead of my lynx card...
the CW line of cards are done very well, the quality is good and the noise ratio is better than I had expected bepending on the I/O selection you go with.
Scope as was said is a larged undertaking than the Echo card and has a far greater learning curve, but the result is so much more powerfull, I mean seriously the Echo stuff is not even in the same league as the CW stuff in terms of usablity, then again I cant think of much thats out there than uses outing/fx/synths the CW has tied them all together.
Cheers!
Well I dont know if this makes any difference or not, but I have 2 Cards, a Scope Pro and also a Lynx2, not sure how familiar you are with the lynx line of cards but the consensus in most fields of audio and in mags finds its quality to be of the highest caliber competing with converters such as apogee while rating higher than most reviews of RME products aswell in terms of sound..
With that being said, I use my Scope card as my I/O instead of my lynx card...
the CW line of cards are done very well, the quality is good and the noise ratio is better than I had expected bepending on the I/O selection you go with.
Scope as was said is a larged undertaking than the Echo card and has a far greater learning curve, but the result is so much more powerfull, I mean seriously the Echo stuff is not even in the same league as the CW stuff in terms of usablity, then again I cant think of much thats out there than uses outing/fx/synths the CW has tied them all together.
Cheers!
-
hubird
hmmm...
i don't want to repeat TOO much of what has already been said here, but i must say after getting over the initial hurdle of implementation, and some less than perfect dealings with creamware support, using the system has been a pleasure.
using the A16 i can come out 24 bit and oh, what a difference that makes...
the sound is superb. i don't even use any of the soft synths; i run my analogues into the A16 (or most of them anyway) and use the creamware efx to go from there.
the STM 24/48 is a great mixer, and offers alot of flexibility in terms of eq and compression.
if i wanted to use softsynths i would be well sorted with the creamware offerings- fuck vsts when you have ones for SFP that shit all over them.
i still think that some of the support folks are cunts, but so am i, so i guess i can't complain too much...
honestly i am far more limited by (the lack of) personal creativity than my system. i can only hope that it will last many more years and that creamware will continue to grow, just as long as their marketing department doesn't come up with any more flops like the NOAH.
can you say Waldorf?????
eeeeek!!!
i don't want to repeat TOO much of what has already been said here, but i must say after getting over the initial hurdle of implementation, and some less than perfect dealings with creamware support, using the system has been a pleasure.
using the A16 i can come out 24 bit and oh, what a difference that makes...
the sound is superb. i don't even use any of the soft synths; i run my analogues into the A16 (or most of them anyway) and use the creamware efx to go from there.
the STM 24/48 is a great mixer, and offers alot of flexibility in terms of eq and compression.
if i wanted to use softsynths i would be well sorted with the creamware offerings- fuck vsts when you have ones for SFP that shit all over them.
i still think that some of the support folks are cunts, but so am i, so i guess i can't complain too much...
honestly i am far more limited by (the lack of) personal creativity than my system. i can only hope that it will last many more years and that creamware will continue to grow, just as long as their marketing department doesn't come up with any more flops like the NOAH.
can you say Waldorf?????
eeeeek!!!
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
I would like to repeat and summarize all the previous posts to this one. Sorry if I leave anything out.
The card I had before the Pulsar was a Midiman Delta 55, the sound quality was OK, I would say the Pulsar is crisper. But the astounding flexibility of the Pulsar card is what made me get rid of the other, I just don't need anything else (granted, you need lots of DSP chips to really make use of the platform). The quality synths, effects, routing, put this card in another league entirely. It really makes any recording or mixing task very easy - it brings alive the idea of a virtual studio that you can re-wire and rearrange, the interface is a snap to use. It's not often that I buy gear and two years later I'm still 100% satisfied with the investment.
The card I had before the Pulsar was a Midiman Delta 55, the sound quality was OK, I would say the Pulsar is crisper. But the astounding flexibility of the Pulsar card is what made me get rid of the other, I just don't need anything else (granted, you need lots of DSP chips to really make use of the platform). The quality synths, effects, routing, put this card in another league entirely. It really makes any recording or mixing task very easy - it brings alive the idea of a virtual studio that you can re-wire and rearrange, the interface is a snap to use. It's not often that I buy gear and two years later I'm still 100% satisfied with the investment.
-
hubird
.............. ' In fact, you're a thief of your own life if you don't have a Scope card '-
Guest
my Echo Darla (which i loved when i bought it) is in my closet with my other spare pc parts next to a SB Live Platinum. my CW Project card is in my working PC. Haven't had a functional problem with it yet & it sounds great. no more lockups, dropouts or driver sharing issues.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Stevil on 2004-10-26 03:08 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Stevil on 2004-10-26 03:08 ]</font>
Protools HD is no 1 and 2nd best soundcard is any Scope cardsOn 2004-10-21 12:50, poidog wrote:
Hi guys. I currently use an Echo Layla 24 as my soundcard, and am interested in possibly moving to a SCOPE Project. The main reasons being trying to take some processing load off the CPU by using the DSPs. My problem is that I don't know anyone that actually uses one, so I have no way of knowing what the sound is like. Can any of you comment on how the SCOPE cards sound compared to other professional cards. Thanks.
Thanks