Re: Scott Systems automation?

[Chuckigo@att.net]

Steve opined on the Scott automation system:
>>(snip)but the DOS system is damn near 
bulletproof...imho Scott is the best around, and while 
it's expensive there are lesser systems that cost more.  
I'd have no reservations recommending Scott! <<

i've been working with the Scott system since the fall 
up here in Portland, and yeah, it takes a lickin' and 
keeps on tickin'.  the DOS version is very simple in 
nature, which probably adds to its ability to keep 
chugging along.  the station installed the newer, 
windows-based upgrade in our "tracking" studio, and it 
allows for a little more flexibility in voicing a shift; 
and for a music format, it lets one sound more "live" 
than on the DOS version.  
  the difference is that in the DOS version, which we 
still use to input commercials and programming elements, 
you record each file separately, without the benefit of 
hearing the completed sequence of events; the windows 
version allows you to hear the element before and after, 
be it song-voice track-spot or song-voice over-song.
 the one downside to Scott, at least the way its 
installed in our studios, it that you can only input 
information into the system from the production studio, 
and can not preview any upcoming elements in the on-air 
studio.  
  we have five other stations in the building that use 
ENCO, and that allows input of data in ANY room, as well 
as off-air previewing of material from the unit that is 
on the air.  but there are more "hoops" needed to jump 
through to make ENCO work smoothly.
 Scott is very very user friendly in its simplicity, 
though.

- -Chuck Igo