Page 1 of 9
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:17 am
by hifiboom
What do you think about it....?
I`ve done a small comparison between DAS N1084 and the URS Neve 1084
http://www.ursplugins.com/ursN.html
and I have to say that I like the DAS version more.
It sounds more like analog gear and more heavy.
But I have never heard the original outboard gear.
So is the Scope system becoming also a replacement of an U-Audio card.
Now I have the two Scope cards for only about 4 days and I am totally convinced about my investment....
The synths are the best I have heard, and the FX too....
The standard Creamware FX sounds like the best VSTfx and the extras(like SPL, DAS, ....) are just one class better I think...
The only fx I miss in my Scope environment is the CSR from IK-M. (I won`t buy that again, because I have CSR)
And there are tools you cannot replace with anything in VST world.
For example there is nothing that sounds like a SPL attacker in the VST world. And this is heavenly good plug-in.
These 2 cards are sooo sweet. I can`t believe it....
Hopefully Creamware gets much money with their ASBs and are able to bring out new synths and fx-plug-ins...
I love the whole environment and the classic way of routing your gear.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 08:22 ]</font>
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:59 am
by ernest@303.nu
welcome to the world of Scope-addicts

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:48 am
by hifiboom
jeah !!!
there is only one cause for selling you scope board: to get a bigger one with even more DSP. (I think I need 3x Scope Pro)

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:56 am
by katano
On 2006-08-11 09:48, hifiboom wrote:
jeah !!!
there is only one cause for selling you scope board: to get a bigger one with even more DSP. (I think I need 3x Scope Pro)
these are exactly my words!!! unfortunately, i only have two pci slots in my cheapo dell

now you could suggest which cards sit in these slots...
i began with one LunaII (scope home now) and finally ended up with 2 powerpulsar2, 15dsp each.
this is what i call music, damn!!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: katano on 2006-08-11 10:56 ]</font>
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:59 am
by Eric Dahlberg
I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?
Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:00 am
by hifiboom
Yes I also do only have 2 pci slots on my nForce4 board...
so I cannot pull a further Scope board inside.
But if you consider the price of the cards, its not much more money to spend for a new board with more pci slots...
hahah

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:05 am
by hifiboom
On 2006-08-11 10:59, Eric Dahlberg wrote:
I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?
never touched the XTC mode since now...
But the EQs are really good I think...
Of course the Creamware EQs are also very nice, but I had the feeling that the DAS EQs can achieve more clarity with the higher frequencies and smoother at bass.
And if you boost mid-range the sound gets that "heavy" quality. Really nice...
It has some analog character.
I did try it on classical orchestra and you can really boost the indivual instruments without affecting the other too much.
It has its own character....
Generally it sounds more like the URS EQ than the Creamware standard. But from my tests I like it more than the VST URS
Be careful if you compare, the knobs don`t seem to show the exact setting...
You never know, which level they are...
Maximum should be 18dB, I think.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 11:12 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 11:13 ]</font>
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:58 am
by digitalaudiosoft
hi,
thanks to compare das to urs !
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-08-12 11:14 ]</font>
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:14 am
by hifiboom
at least there is some problem with the neve plug.
The clipping light is not working correctly at all.
Sometimes it clips and light is of....
(And its right the reverb RMX160 has some crackles instead of the reverb sometimes...)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-12 13:35 ]</font>
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:14 pm
by bassdude
On 2006-08-11 10:59, Eric Dahlberg wrote:
I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?
Thanks, I would be very interested in what you have to say.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: bassdude on 2006-08-13 17:15 ]</font>
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 11:34 pm
by bill3107
As sl9000 and Poltec sound different, it is obvious that both plugins are not scope effects with new gui !!!!! I definitly agree these are good EQs. SSL technics and dynamic EQs on scope is perfect for those - like me - who mix under scope...
I know that the vintage bundle is a success as many have already purchased it (i have a good spy

). The strength of the SL9000 is that it runs the algo like the ssl (!), it is very intersting.
For those looking for a very sharp sound under 60 hz, polteq or n1084 are amazing !!! Of course, you should have very good monitoring to feel the difference (with scope EQs) on high frequencies for those 2 plugins.
Real cool plugins...
Jo
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:08 am
by voidar
As they are being sold in the CWA-shop - and as they denied them selling their mastering-processor due to the BX-resemblance - I am pretty sure they are not regular Creamware EQ's with a new interface.
It is after all possible to construct new devices by using low-lever atoms. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.
Eric Dahlberg:
Have you been able to compare yet?
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:26 am
by steffensen
Yes, would be interesting to see what u've come up with Dahlberg.

Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:59 am
by MCCY
The context of this discussion has been changed several times, so I drop this discussion.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 4:37 am
by voidar
I have not bought them yet, but I am considering, and asap as I would like the free SL9000 Mastering Comp too.
Did you try this you say? What where the results?
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:28 am
by digitalaudiosoft
MCCYRANO wrote:Did really nobody else (than me) do the test to kill poltec with a normal phaseinverted CW EQ? Why discussing and argumenting, when something can be proved.
Martin
that's true....here is the official test
http://www.planetz.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... 02&start=0
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:30 am
by digitalaudiosoft
On 2006-09-23 01:08, voidar wrote:
As they are being sold in the CWA-shop - and as they denied them selling their mastering-processor due to the BX-resemblance - I am pretty sure they are not regular Creamware EQ's with a new interface.
It is after all possible to construct new devices by using low-lever atoms. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.
Eric Dahlberg:
Have you been able to compare yet?
hi voidar,
we have develloped a new m/s eq and we will sell it soon.
eric
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:32 am
by digitalaudiosoft
On 2006-08-17 00:34, bill3107 wrote:
As sl9000 and Poltec sound different, it is obvious that both plugins are not scope effects with new gui !!!!! I definitly agree these are good EQs. SSL technics and dynamic EQs on scope is perfect for those - like me - who mix under scope...
I know that the vintage bundle is a success as many have already purchased it (i have a good spy

). The strength of the SL9000 is that it runs the algo like the ssl (!), it is very intersting.
For those looking for a very sharp sound under 60 hz, polteq or n1084 are amazing !!! Of course, you should have very good monitoring to feel the difference (with scope EQs) on high frequencies for those 2 plugins.
Real cool plugins...
Jo
On 2006-09-23 04:59, MCCYRANO wrote:
Did really nobody else (than me) do the test to kill poltec with a normal phaseinverted CW EQ? Why discussing and argumenting, when something can be proved.
Martin
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MCCYRANO on 2006-09-23 05:00 ]</font>
hi bill,
of course ,you are right

but it seems that there is a newbie in sound and with sdk here

his name is martin or mccyrano...
@ martin,
don't be so ridiculous with your phase test...if you are not able to hear the difference on polteq or sl9000 ,go the see a doctor or let people hear by themselves.
why are you so jalous when other devellopers do better plugs than yours ?
eric
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-09-23 09:07 ]</font>
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:32 am
by MCCY
??? The context of this discussion has been changed several times, so I drop this dischssion. What I said only make sense in its old context.
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:33 am
by digitalaudiosoft
martin,
i have never seen a man like you !
go playing with your sdk...
bye
eric
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-09-23 06:39 ]</font>