PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Clavia has released a free "demo" soft synth of the G2 modular - http://www.clavia.se/G2/demo/

Yes, and it's even functional with a single voice...

Hey did you notice the nomenclature of some new modules? Makes me think of something we're more familiar with :>

Is that what it really looks like ? Ugly as hell. Looks like a paintshop rough.

The editor is rather plain, but let me tell you, it is very, very functional. I find it more pleasant to work with than CW Mod, though not as pretty.

but does it have 32 steps in a stepsequencer?

point
saw a friend working with the editor, lookt really perfect to me, superfast and comprehensible!

On 2004-12-28 16:56, Michu wrote:
but does it have 32 steps in a stepsequencer?

.... and does it export perfect cut loops from the sequencer ?

On 2004-12-28 18:49, Spirit wrote:

On 2004-12-28 16:56, Michu wrote:
but does it have 32 steps in a stepsequencer?

.... and does it export perfect cut loops from the sequencer ?

ehem....


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: red_muze on 2004-12-30 13:06 ]</font>

On 2004-12-28 16:56, Michu wrote:
but does it have 32 steps in a stepsequencer?

The clavia standard sequencer is only max 16 steps, but you can chain a few modules together to get whatever length you require.

It looks terrible but i find it a lot more intuitive and workable than the creamware modular. I use them both, and use a nord mod g1 for 90% of my modular work as it's just so much easier to tweak, and just feels more like old analog gear.

I do love the creamware modular but nord just got it right in the user interface dept. The creamware mod has some very interesting stuff (like samples and wavetable oscs etc) and also sounds great, but i just keep going back to the nord.

I think Creamware has always considered style before ease of use. You need a lot of dexterity and good eyes. Try patching modules in Creamware and then patch modules in Reason....

Reason got it right.

I think Propellerheads considers style and ease of use over sound quality...

I was thinking that...lol

I was actually making a comment regarding weak points in the SFP. To say that Creamware has better sound quality is rather obvious.

Instead of arguing that the platform is ergonomic and easy to use which you can't, draw attention away from that argument and say the sound quality is better. Maybe people will forget about the tedious patching then.

Why can't they have great quality and be easy to use? and I don't care about how beautiful it is. Having 3D modules makes no difference to me. It probably slows it down anyway.

I recently got both the Nord and cw modulars. Picked up an expanded v3 Nord modular keyboard off ebay for 650 euros (absolute bargain). The interface does look a little bit dated (think win95) but it gets the job done.

Having bought a pulsar2 complete with Modular2 a couple of weeks ago, I definately think the Nord is more fluent when it comes to patching but the cw probably edges it in terms of sound. Reckon the cw sounds a bit more analogue, but I'm not sure that you could get the cw to sound as dirty (for lack of a better word) as the Nord. Come to think of it I'm not so sure about the sound ...they just sound different.

The way I see it, the Nord is hardware that you can take out and use live while the cw is like a real modular in that it's more expandable and generally restricted to the studio. On this note ...what the hell were cw thinking when they did the Noah? Mine's crying out for the modular. Surely they would have sold a lot more units if the Modular was available in some form. The Nord wouldn't really have stood a chance.

Oh well I suppose I can live with the fact that one modular's portable while the other one isn't. Now all I need to do is upgrade to the Modular3 with Flexor!! just out of interest does the Modular3 improve on the interface much? this v2 is a bit of a nightmare to patch.

the nightmare will continue, kind of... - but that's mostely due to getting familiar with the somewhat special mouse and graphic reaction.

It doesn't take too long, though
one thing to mention may be the 'cursor busy' hourglass. It's often a false indication, just click on an empty spot on the surface and the regular cursor is back.

Now the good news: Mod3 and Flexor wil not only move you one step beyond, but catapult you into a new universe of sound
I've rarely seen something that impressive with so few modules. It's a pity I often don't have enough time for Flexor...

cheers, Tom

On the face of it the Noah seems like a hardware version of the SFP but it is not. The software had to be redesigned and based on the limitations of the Noah hardware simply could not handle the modular. That is my understanding of it anyway.

On 2005-02-25 12:05, stardust wrote:
I am actually not so sure that M III is limited to studio by nature.
Certainly you'd need sth like the Magma, a notebook and a portable midi keyboard with presets for the controllers.

Speaking of the Magma. Does anyone have any experience using one of these with multiple scope boards (more than 3)? Are there any issues with PCI bandwidth?

You can't have more than 3 Scope cards in a system. I've used my 2-slot Magma with various combinations of Pulsar1s and Pulsar2s for the last few years with great results. You don't get the same amount of PCI bandwidth as a *good* desktop mobo, but it's more than adequate for normal use. I'm actually re-considering my decision to sell mine, it will be too useful as a Scope machine in my home studio with my laptop when I move my main gear into a dedicated studio.

I use a one slot full size Magma chassis with a 15DSP card - and it works great (using a Dell D600 laptop). I can imagine that with three cards you might run into some bandwidth issues though.