Hey Phil! Welcome to RO!!!

Well, I am not experienced enough with SAW or Scope to comment specificially about either one, but one quick comment re: Host vs. Non-Host systems:

Go to the Computing section of this Forum (DAW), and read some of the new posts by the moderator, Opus 2000, about the new computing technology that is about to break. Host computers are reaching the point where even most "non-host" pundants are beginning to step back and say "wow"! The power of even the current systems is just mind-boggling, and as we look ahead about 6 months into the crystal ball, things are about to take a drastic leap forward (again!).

Host-based systems are obviously cheaper and more flexible than their non-host based counterparts since the need for proprietary hardware and software plugs goes away. A lot of the high-end host-based systems (Nuendo, for example) also support the use of *optional* DSP cards that can help even more. In this way, you really get a blend of host-based processing, along with a bit of DSP help...the best of both worlds!

And speaking of "new and and up-and-coming", keep your eyes on the Stenberg camp for the release of Nuendo 2.0 (hopefully before the end of the year)...it is going to re-define what a host-based system is capable of!

Hopefully someone else will chime in here that has some specific SAW or Scope experience, but in the mean time, read some of those Computer Forum posts. Such as:

(Dead Link Removed)

(Dead Link Removed)

Good luck, and once again, welcome to RO!!!

DH:
Thanks for your reply.
Generally, how long does it take to recieve replies? I've posted this question (about a week)in a few different areas in RO, but no replies as of yet.
Could it be that the majority of members here don't like/use non host based systems, or that Scope and or SAW are in little use with this forum's members?
I believe I saw only one post in the "Which DAW?" post of the DAW Digital Cafe mentioning SAW and haven't seen anything (but I'm not positive that I've made a complete read through here at RO) about Scope.
Please don't mistake the writting style here as a complaint. It's sometimes easy to misjudge tone in letters. Just seems curious that these two products which are distinguished get little mention.
Sincerely,
Phil Magnotta

Phil
With the many products out there it's hard to say why certain people choose one product over the other. I myself have not tried the Scope platform and have had no time to check out the demo of SAW myself. I've heard good things about them tho.
I think most people tend to go with what everyone else is using...it's sort of like radio play...you go and buy what you constantly here on the radio..the mass public tends to follow each other in this regard. So if more people say they use Cubase vs. the other platforms you tend to see more people jumping aboard that bandwagon. I'm sure there are quite a number of SAW users out there but not enough to make it seem like it's making headway so to speak.
Again, I myself haven't fully checked it out only because I'm happy with what I use at the present moment which is Neundo, Cubase SX, Reason, Wavelab, UAD card and smattering of VSTi's.
Now, Native Vs. DSP...
James is correct in that native based systems are very powerful nowadays with the advance of computer technology. In the next 6-12 months you will see amazing advances that will make PC systems sooooo much faster and more responsive that it won't matter what you put into it. It will be able to handle everything..literally.
Propietary hardware is a thing of the past now and it's not needed to have the DSP on the audio card anymore..the CPU can take the load.
As far as why I haven't responded or anyone else...it's because this issue has been discussed before...it's an old topic so to speak.
To me this sounds like an attempt to advertise Scope and SAW and to try and get more users to try it out and switch over...I could be wrong about this but I've been here long enough to see this happen. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but that this is merely a survey for you..
Check out the Which Daw and OS are you using survey/thread and you'll see the same discussion within.
Opus

Dear Opus:
I will swear that "Im not involved in any way or manner, or in any other description of said activity and that I'm not even doing, said activity, for myself".
Now I do not accept your statement of hardware devices, used in computer DAW, as becomming obsolete. I do agree, after reading the Intel documentation, that the new system will be a great step forward in many areas - not just audio. I do suspect that the new system will offer other problems and at the very least cause the need for the consumer, both user and pro audio professionals to have to spend more money on what seems to be a never ending garantee for the creators to pose yet another "well you have to have this now", and "Now that you have bought this, you will have to buy this as well", etc.
Please don't misunderstand. Ofcourse, it is the nature of man, but having formaly worked in a high profile music/audio manufacturing company, I have seen the methodologies planned and implemented which are all too often deliberately undertaken with the objective to corner, cause dependancy, create the "neccessary" (unneccessary) system, protocol, digital protection "for our own good",etc.
Regarding my question about MIDI...what MIDI packages, either included in the DAW software, or as a seperate package designed to work with DAWs can you recommend as being very good and why?
I would like to remind you that although the tone of this reply may seem aggressive, it isn't meant to be.
I Thank you for your time and hope that you will reply further.
Sincerely,
Phil Magnotta

Phil
Of course I'll always reply!
First, I never said hardware becomes obsolete...just stated that it's not as popular as others!
Second, Midi....hmmm..that depends on how detailed you want to go on that area...Logic is still the undisputed king of MIDI implementation...it's environment is very complex and very detailed oriented. There's nothing like it out there! It takes a serious MIDI geek to understand it too! lol
Besides that Cubase SX now has a decent MIDI implimentation..Nuendo isn't geared towards that really but supposedly the 2.0 version will....Digital Performer is a MIDI oriented software but to be honest I do not like the functionality overall of that program..it's klunky and does not conform to modern terminology. Other than that..I am not a MIDI person so my judgement on how MIDI may be implemented may be off...
Opus

Opus:
Yes I understand that Logic is what most are compared to. I am very midi oriented, but at present, I do it all from a hardware unit and sometimes MasterTracks Pro on the Mac, anyone remember that? Is logic STRICTLY dependant on the computer setup, as far as stability is concerned, or are their things about it that also, to date, are unstable?
I know that there is much about a program like that which can lead to problems because of the setup, but overall, is it considered (besides its features/editing), to be the best on the market regarding stability?
I wrote Mr. Lentini, owner/developer of SAW about midi usage within SAW and he said that at present it is desighned to sync to midi with MTC/SMPTE. Of interest, Mr Lentini will release a new midi platform called MIDI Workshop, which will work within SAW (I guess like logic has DAW and MIDI, MIDI/SEQ in the same package) and says that there will be nothing like it in the market place, as far as timming/accuracy, but he didn't go into features.
Oops, I just realized that this may look like, again, that I'm up to something with SAW, but I just wanted to let our midi friends know about it.
Phil M.