Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!!

Page: << < ..6789 > Showing page 6 of 9
Author
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:24:14 (permalink)
I have checked out the M24, but I don't want 24 faders :) I just don't find em neccessary and I have far more interesting things I would rather use the deskspace for :)

I also found the documentation to be a little bit impentrable, but in all fairness the M24 was top of my list until I saw the V-Console :) its a great unit.

Now imagine that Cakewalk release a control surface only version of the V-Console and that is cheaper than the M24, sorry but then it becomes a no-brainer.

G

Duojet
Max Output Level: -62 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1413
  • Joined: 2003/12/06 22:02:31
  • Location: NJ, US
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:24:13 (permalink)
you could get an mcu and two extenders, 24 faders, for the price of this thing. i don't see the value of cake providing an audio interface. control surface, yes. and usb would have been fine if it were just a control surface.

Intel Core2Duo e8400
Abit IP35-E
4GB Ram
Windows 7 SP1 64 Bit
EMU 1820m

DFHS2, BFD2, Battery3, Amplitube2, GuitarRig3, Kontakt4, Ampeg SVX, Line6 PodXT
Timur
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 179
  • Joined: 2008/07/05 05:01:49
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:24:40 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: John T

ARRR HE COMES HERE WITH HIS "SCIENCE"... IT'S WITCHCRAFT I TELL YE!


We're all mad in here...
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:26:34 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: Duojet

you could get an mcu and two extenders, 24 faders, for the price of this thing. i don't see the value of cake providing an audio interface. control surface, yes. and usb would have been fine if it were just a control surface.

Dude, USB is fine anyway. All the USB nay-sayers simply don't know what they're talking about. Sorry and all that, but there you have it.
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:29:20 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: gordonrussell76

I have checked out the M24, but I don't want 24 faders :) I just don't find em neccessary and I have far more interesting things I would rather use the deskspace for :)


You know, if I could have 24 faders, I'd go for it. But lots of luck getting 24 faders in a device of this kind of spec at this price range.

Some of the complaints here might as well be "I was expecting a device that turned tapwater into a drink that tastes like lemonade and cures cancer".
post edited by John T - 2008/10/03 20:33:33
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:31:51 (permalink)
Yes but the MCU and 24 faders will not give you hte same level of control as the V-Console.

I own an MCU, and have a no point felt the need for the extenders, I have however flet the need for better integration. TO be honest, the only thing that sets an MCU apart from a Behringer is the Transport and touch sensitve faders, and if I knew what I do know, I would probably not buy one again.

This however I would buy, even though its considerably more expensive.

To be hoenst I am thinking of seeling my Interface/MCU and getting this, I will of course await feedback, and probably have to sit down and have a full paly/demonastration first.

I am not saying this thing is the holy grail, it oculd be buggy, and have all sorts of issues. However on paper at this point, knowing the same information as evecryone else, I am excited by teh possibilities of this.

For instance imagine if they brough out just the ACT?EQ section as a little stand alone box, that alongside my MCU would be incredible.

So I think in time there are going ot be cascade down benefits at all levels.

After Brandon demonstration teh Alderon T-bar will probably be avaliable on its own. Hell I would pay for it, if all it did was control the volume on my TV.

Cakwalk v_Console - $2000
cakewalk V Audio - $1800
Cakewalk Sonar 8 - $200
Feeling like you are on the Deathstar.....priceless....for everything else there Mastercard :)

G



G
Timur
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 179
  • Joined: 2008/07/05 05:01:49
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:32:42 (permalink)
Well, USB does have the disadvantage of being CPU polled, you can't deny that. If the CPU is too busy to fetch the data from an USB device then no data is transfered at all. Firewire and PCI(e) on the other hand push their data into RAM via Direct Memory Access (DMA) all by themselves.

But, it's not an awful lots of data for a CPU to shovel around. I mean 50 mb/s? My harddrive does that as a minimum on its slowest parts even. Question is how timely (latency) it is done, something which depends on your system (multicore CPUs should be well capable to deliver low latencies via USB) and the drivers (<-!!!! DPCs anyone?).

If Cakewalk/Roland got the drivers right and you're running a good system setup USB should deliver plenty enough.

We're all mad in here...
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:34:10 (permalink)
Some of the complaints here might as well be "I was expecting a device that turned tapwater into a drink that tastes like lemonade and cures cancer".


I invented that last week, thats why I can afford a V-Console :)
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:35:32 (permalink)
Yes becuase in the days of Quadcore's using up too much CPU is something that keeps me up at night:)

John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:37:08 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Timur

Well, USB does have the disadvantage of being CPU polled, you can't deny that. If the CPU is too busy to fetch the data from an USB device then no data is transfered at all. Firewire and PCI(e) on the other hand push their data into RAM via Direct Memory Access (DMA) all by themselves.
I wouldn't deny that at all, but you are the only person here discussing it on that level. And as you clearly know, this is not a problem that manifests itself in the field, as a rule.

I mean, if the CPU is that busy, USB transfers are the least of your worries.
post edited by John T - 2008/10/03 20:39:19
Timur
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 179
  • Joined: 2008/07/05 05:01:49
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:46:48 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: John T

I wouldn't deny that at all, but you are the only person here discussing it on that level. And as you clearly know, this is not a problem that manifests itself in the field, as a rule.

I mean, if the CPU is that busy, USB transfers are the least of your worries.

Practice has to tell how it works out. I own a Fireface 400 (FW), a NI Kore 1 (USB), a Audiophile 2496 (PCI) and a X-FI (PCI). The Fireface 400 performs on par with the Audiophile. The Kore 1 can perform better under some conditions than the X-FI.

It really depends alot on the drivers. I'm currently trying to help someone on the RME forum with his Fireface + Sonar + P4 Laptop performance problems. In order to find possible culprits I installed Vista on a P4 laptop myself and to my surprise among the two latency-affecting culprits (one being the ATI graphic when Aero is enabled) is the USB card-reader. Sometimes it's the really odd things that can affect performance.
post edited by Timur - 2008/10/03 20:49:10

We're all mad in here...
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:48:24 (permalink)
I just have to believe that the best inventions came from comments (nay-sayers). I wonder if Cakewalk just decided on it's own to upgrade the Sonar engine....or hmmmm....maybe it came from all of the comments about dropouts and lack of reliability conveyed on this forum.

Some say "Necessity is the mother of inventions"...I say "Forums (complaints) are the fathers of creations/updates"!!!
post edited by gtgarner - 2008/10/03 20:53:26
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 20:59:22 (permalink)
THere is a big difference from suggesting improvements to a product, when you have USED it, and ripping the wotsits out of something that has only been announced today.

G
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:03:17 (permalink)
Ripping the wotsits out of something that's only been a announced today must be PRO :)
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:08:33 (permalink)
There is nothing wrong with USB. USB's highest transfer rates are faster than Firewire.


FWIW, There has not been a single USB audio interface that offers the same low-latency performance as the best Firewire and PCI/e devices.

Run some benchmarks on external HDs to compare "realworld" transfer speed of USB vs. FW (use the same drive/enclosure to keep things consistant). The FW HD benchmarks will actually come out a few MB/Sec faster... with lower CPU use.

In this scenario, Roland/Cake went with the protocol that would work with nearly any PC.
No need to worry about having a TI chipset FW controller/etc...
But it'll likely be at the expense of low-latency performance.
I'd like to be completely wrong... (It would be the first/only USB audio interface to offer round-trip latency anywhere close to 5-6ms)

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
Timur
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 179
  • Joined: 2008/07/05 05:01:49
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:13:39 (permalink)
I didn't check with a loopback, but at its lowest latency settings the USB Kore 1 reports a roundtrip latency of 9ms. Given some better hardware and optimized drivers I can well imagine 5-6ms being at least "possible", depending on the load though.
post edited by Timur - 2008/10/03 21:15:27

We're all mad in here...
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:14:52 (permalink)
I'm glad I don't have any wotsits to rip out if it!!
post edited by gtgarner - 2008/10/03 21:16:39
Keith Albright [Cakewalk]
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1117
  • Joined: 2006/07/10 15:44:42
  • Location: Boston, MA
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:21:59 (permalink)
Timur,

Check out XPerf on Vista. That's a really nice tool for finding out what's sluggish.
It'll report dpc times, by driver name, etc.

You can find it here:

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/perftools.mspx

and you can read about using it here:

http://blogs.msdn.com/pigscanfly/archive/2008/02/09/xperf-a-new-tool-in-the-windows-sdk.aspx

Keith
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:30:27 (permalink)
USB Kore 1 reports a roundtrip latency of 9ms


FWIW, Reported latency... and round-trip latency are two *very* different things.
Run the Centrance test...

For playing soft-synths (Kore 1), you're dealing with "one-way" (playback) latency.
At 6ms (one way)... that's not bad. Equal to a good hardware synth.

Round-trip latency is the sum total of: ASIO input buffer, ASIO output buffer, the A/D and D/A converters, and any hidden safety buffer. FWIW, The Kore 1 isn't delivering anywhere close to 5-6ms round-trip.
BTW, Even if you find a USB audio interface that allows low buffer sizes and has an ultra small safety buffer... it needs to deliver "useable" (glitch-free) performance at those settings... or it's meaningless. As I mentioned before, no such unit currently exists. If Roland/Cake's device does it effectively, it'll be the first.

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:32:53 (permalink)
I am quietly hopeful about he interface.

My reason, well one as I mentioned before who better to write drivers for it than Cakewalk.

But also, to release an interface with such ambitiously high channel count as your first interface, they must be quietly confident.

Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:37:28 (permalink)
I am quietly hopeful about he interface.

My reason, well one as I mentioned before who better to write drivers for it than Cakewalk.

But also, to release an interface with such ambitiously high channel count as your first interface, they must be quietly confident.


I guess I'm sounding somewhat cynical... but I do hope it works great!
It looks pretty slick.
Just wish it said FW...

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:45:22 (permalink)
Hey who knows the V700FW might be just round the corner, with 2 ADAT's and 26 ins, one can but hope :)

G
keith
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3882
  • Joined: 2003/12/10 09:49:35
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:47:36 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: Jim Roseberry
Just wish it said FW...


Or... how 'bout dual interface... take your pick... just like the latest and geatest external drives and enclosures...
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 21:56:04 (permalink)
Or... how 'bout dual interface... take your pick... just like the latest and geatest external drives and enclosures...


YES!
Now that would be awesome.
Keith... you should patent that idea.
post edited by Jim Roseberry - 2008/10/03 21:58:08

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 10654
  • Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
  • Location: TeXaS
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 23:26:52 (permalink)
trock,

yea, the faders themselves are cheap, but most 8 moving fader units go for about $1000 - less as you add more. Of course, the behringer are cheaper.

https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/  
 
there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/03 23:34:43 (permalink)
Interesting sentence at the end of this NEW interview. "We listened to our users" hmmmmmm "Forum"?

http://www.sonicstate.com/news/shownews.cfm?newsid=7327

Lovely explanation of the I/O basically doing all of the engine work and the Control Surface doing the surface work.
Psychobillybob
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 882
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 20:52:44
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/04 00:06:20 (permalink)
After a little research the deal make or break will have to be the converters.
Consider that a Lynx Aurora with pci card to interface the unit will take you up to $3000.00 for 16 channels, if this thing is in the same leaque converter-wise then yes its actually a screaming deal.

My problem is I know what the high end converters cost, and any design implemented at this stage needs to be "future-proof" ie, needs to support future implementation of DSD and HD bit rate requirements.

So if its "old tech" meaning older than a year, its not ready for prime time and will be moderate quality...I guess it depends on Roland...

I'm using SOnar Platinium on a 6 core Lynx Audio machine and a ton of vintage pre-amps/eq's/comps I build for fun and sometimes money, REDD.47/API/Neve I also use the UAD stuff, and also use a Macbook Logic 9 through Apogee...
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/04 02:02:56 (permalink)
Hi everyone.

Well I tried to read the whole thread but it's late so I scanned what I could and thought I'd make a few comments regarding some of the things I've read.

SONAR 8 with V-Studio 700 performance is very good. I'm running it under Vista-64 and I'm getting 2.2 effective latency (in SONAR) for typical song creation. Some larger projects I have require me to move up to 4.4ms, but again it's really solid. This is all without any glitches, clicks or pops whatsoever.

What is so cool is that all the I/O, the MIDI ports, the Fantom VS and ARX synths, and all the control capabilities connect to your computer with one cable. It's very clean and very elegant.

Roland has long term history and experience with creating USB2 drivers (first product of kind was UA1000). Personally from what I've seen, I don't know if I'd worry about the connection format (USB2, FW, etc) as I can say that low latency is most certainly and solidly achievable - and due to wide compatibility it has worked consistently with a wide range of different machines with predictable results.

The fact that it is all one system ensures total compatibility with 64-bit Vista (w/o having to worry about varying support from differing manufacturers).

Also, I must say that I am extremely pleased with the integration with SONAR and it is still improving to this day. There are even little things that have been added since the current videos were produced that just keep expanding what you can do from the surface. Every week it gets more and more sophisticated and what is already there is arguably unprecedented, especially at this price-point.
post edited by Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk] - 2008/10/04 02:08:34

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/04 02:09:44 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: gordonrussell76

After Brandon demonstration teh Alderon T-bar will probably be avaliable on its own. Hell I would pay for it, if all it did was control the volume on my TV.

Cakwalk v_Console - $2000
cakewalk V Audio - $1800
Cakewalk Sonar 8 - $200
Feeling like you are on the Deathstar.....priceless....for everything else there Mastercard :)



LOL -

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
RE: Sonar / Roland Hardware BUT!!! 2008/10/04 02:14:53 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: TassieP

No one has noticed (not even Cakewalk ) that there is NO pause button. 8 iterations of Sonar to get a pause button - I suppose this console uses the T-Bar to shift into pause?


Actually you just hit the "Play" button on the VS-700C and it will blink, signifying that it is in pause mode.

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Page: << < ..6789 > Showing page 6 of 9
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1