TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- My mate wants recommendations for mastering software
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Mad for Brad hard to tell. I think they enjoy the dongle aspect. But ya there is no reason why you would need those outdated video card chips from like 10 years ago. I mean lexicon released their reverb natively. Lets be honest, UAD is one of the few things EDM producers actually pay for.

Yeah I definately think exclusivity is a factor in its popularity.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips I think the fact that avid just conceded defeat with pro tools is a good reason to reject any DSP hardware at the moment. I think if you bought a UAD today, you'll find in a year that they're releasing a native version cheaper.

I seriously doubt they will ever go Native, not when the platform is bulletproof from a cracking point of view

But i think they will have to reduce the price of the cards, if it was today and i didnt already have a Quad i couldnt see myself forking out for one

they will go Native eventually as no one will settle for 515KB sample latency much longer. Just like SSL made the jump to Native. DSP power on those quad boards is only a fraction of what a modern PC has to offer, high latency because of the PCIe turnaround cycle.

Powercore is already nearly dead, SSL Duende DSP platform is dead, UAD will follow soon.

My mate Steve thanks you for the input guys and is at the moment inclined not to go his original UAD route as he favours that new slate dynamics software.

The best option, which most modern producers don't do because they are so lazy, is learn what each dynamics processing tool does to your mix and how to use it to your desired effect.

If you know how to do that, it would eliminate the need for having these marketing-manager's dream so called 'all in one' mastering suites that are actually no different than creating your own custom mastering chain.

It's completely pointless - STEVE - don't bother with it!

Instead, get yourself a good compressor (Waves R Comp or UAD is superb), a nice parametric eq - Sonnox Oxford is excellent, a good multiband compressor (again, waves C4 or L� Multimaximiser is perfect).

That is all you need if you know how to use them.

If you can't be bothered, well then there's no hope.

Trust me on this one.

There's no such thing as a quick fix by using an 'all in one, and getting a consistently excellent sound.

He is not looking for a quick fix magic box and he already knows EQ and dynamics very well. He will be mixing through a soundtracs desk and likely using dynamics and eq on each lane.

It does not hurt to have a decent transparant overall limiter such as Slate at the end though.

He is well aware that you can get everything right in the mix and all you really need at the end is a limiter if the mix is spot on.

quote:

Originally posted by Raphie they will go Native eventually as no one will settle for 515KB sample latency much longer. Just like SSL made the jump to Native. DSP power on those quad boards is only a fraction of what a modern PC has to offer, high latency because of the PCIe turnaround cycle. Powercore is already nearly dead, SSL Duende DSP platform is dead, UAD will follow soon.

You think the likes of Lexicon, AKG, Studer, Manley etc would sign up to a platform about to go native only to be cracked shortly afterwards??? Nope, cant see that happening

quote:

Originally posted by evo8 I seriously doubt they will ever go Native, not when the platform is bulletproof from a cracking point of view But i think they will have to reduce the price of the cards, if it was today and i didnt already have a Quad i couldnt see myself forking out for one

They said the same thing about digidesign never going native. In the end their product got cracked anyway and they were forced to, and they lost a lot of the good will of their customers too.

How long will it be before someone works out how to emulate powercore chips? Not long I think, at the end of the day they're just processors, and all processors are pretty much the same. And I'm sure they have documentation out their for those DSP chips, so it shouldn't be hard to do if someone could be bothered. I think no one has bothered doing it because they know that powercore/UAD don't really bring anything that special to the table above and beyond what waves, sonalksis, flux and other companies are already doing.

At the end of the day its better to have a good relationship with your customers that makes them WANT to buy your gear rather than forcing them to buy expensive, spave consuming, non portable DSP cards just so you can protect your product. Becausee then, you lose real customers as well as those who would have just cracked it.

It's not even as much the cracking, it's the performance restictions compared to Native (latency turnaround times and such)
They loose ground. And those hardware vendors have jack shit to do with UAD's plugs, it's only a marketing ensdorsement. (and it's associated fees)

quote:

Originally posted by Raphie It's not even as much the cracking, it's the performance restictions compared to Native (latency turnaround times and such) They loose ground. And those hardware vendors have jack shit to do with UAD's plugs, it's only a marketing ensdorsement. (and it's associated fees)

never understood the latency argument, never noticed any latency using UAD plugs, then again i dont do any tracking - what are the other performance restrictions?

And to say that the likes of Manley for example have "jack shit" to do with the Massive Passive, how else would they as EveAnna Manley put it "totally nailed it" ?

Anyways, we are all just speculating about UA's future, none of us really know what path they will take
What i do know is they sent a survey out some time ago asking various different questions so they obviously have some concerns

quote:

Originally posted by evo8 how else would they as EveAnna Manley put it "totally nailed it" ?

Now my friend: THAT's what they call a marketing endorsement......

Native nowadays is really quick, 32 samples or less, UAD and other DSP based solutions are left to 512 samples or more (depending on the host system) the capacity of the DSP is futile, i.e. one could easily run 20 massive passive instances if it would be released Native.

It's a nice scheme, hardware vendors to cover their plugin needs by signing up with UAD. Exclusivity guaranteed, still feels a bit like hardware because of the dongle/pcie card. Saves them investing in resources themselves to cater for ITB needs (everybody in pro audio land wants a piece of the ITB pie)It's a perfect Plug&play proposition for esotheric vendors, who can now touchbase with new customers who would never been able to afford the original HW boxes

ive recently tried to master my track in a way that i would be happy with the final product. im not sure how i did as i do not have high end monitors, so im a little reluctant however, i think its one the best mixes i have done in combination to it. just using my daw ofcourse, eq, slight compression, limiter. im also reluctant to say master, but the master channel was affected so i guess i did master it. anyways, the sound i feel came out the best ever for my own standards.

quote:

Originally posted by Raphie Now my friend: THAT's what they call a marketing endorsement...... Native nowadays is really quick, 32 samples or less, UAD and other DSP based solutions are left to 512 samples or more (depending on the host system) the capacity of the DSP is futile, i.e. one could easily run 20 massive passive instances if it would be released Native. It's a nice scheme, hardware vendors to cover their plugin needs by signing up with UAD. Exclusivity guaranteed, still feels a bit like hardware because of the dongle/pcie card. Saves them investing in resources themselves to cater for ITB needs (everybody in pro audio land wants a piece of the ITB pie)It's a perfect Plug&play proposition for esotheric vendors, who can now touchbase with new customers who would never been able to afford the original HW boxes

"if it would be released native" - theres my point it wont be, now im sure someone is already working hard trying to do a Native version of the Massive Passive, will it be as good? wouldnt have a clue since i didnt buy it

Saying you could run 20 instances is pure speculation, people seem to make out that an i7 can run an infinite number of plugs - i know for a fact i would be seriously struggling without my uad cards to keep Live from choking and spluttering

on the latency thing i dont really know what your on about, as i said i dont experience any noticeable latency at all - are you tracking with your UAD?

i know that the powercore plugins took less cpu when they were run natively than on the card. This was easy to test when the Sony Oxford plugins where made natively. I am pretty sure the same goes for UAD.

quote:

Originally posted by MSZ ive recently tried to master my track in a way that i would be happy with the final product. im not sure how i did as i do not have high end monitors, so im a little reluctant however, i think its one the best mixes i have done in combination to it. just using my daw ofcourse, eq, slight compression, limiter. im also reluctant to say master, but the master channel was affected so i guess i did master it. anyways, the sound i feel came out the best ever for my own standards.

Mastering isn't just throwing a compressor on the 2 bus. Just having something on your master doesn't mean that you've "mastered", lots of mix engineers do this all the time, its pretty common apparently.

quote:

Originally posted by evo8 "if it would be released native" - theres my point it wont be, now im sure someone is already working hard trying to do a Native version of the Massive Passive, will it be as good? wouldnt have a clue since i didnt buy it Saying you could run 20 instances is pure speculation, people seem to make out that an i7 can run an infinite number of plugs - i know for a fact i would be seriously struggling without my uad cards to keep Live from choking and spluttering on the latency thing i dont really know what your on about, as i said i dont experience any noticeable latency at all - are you tracking with your UAD?

It'l be released natively when someone cracks it so they don't have any choice.

I use a core2duo and live doesn't splutter. I think maybe you have computer problems. UAD cards don't relieve very much CPU load at all, since most of the plugins running on them are EQ and compression. The biggest CPU eater is synthesis adn sampling, neither of which UAD or powercore do. Thats why I'd never bother with them.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips It'l be released natively when someone cracks it so they don't have any choice. I use a core2duo and live doesn't splutter. I think maybe you have computer problems. UAD cards don't relieve very much CPU load at all, since most of the plugins running on them are EQ and compression. The biggest CPU eater is synthesis adn sampling, neither of which UAD or powercore do. Thats why I'd never bother with them.

When someone cracks what? the card? are you actually serious about that? are you working on cracking a UAD at the moment

And no, ive no problems with my PC at all thank you very much I can run some FATSOs, some EMT140s, 4K buss compressors etc etc with 0 cost to my quadcore, ill let ACE and Alchemy do their best to bring it to its knees, hasnt happened yet tho

poop

quote:

Originally posted by MSZ ive recently tried to master my track in a way that i would be happy with the final product. im not sure how i did as i do not have high end monitors, so im a little reluctant however, i think its one the best mixes i have done in combination to it.

I'm sorry but I can't fully justify this comment. High-end monitors are not going to give you a high-end master; your ears are far more important. So unless you're using something really low-end, try again. In saying that, you can always send me the mix and/or master and I'll be happy to give you my feedback. I don't have the most expensive monitors either but I do know a thing or two about engineering. At worst you're just going to get someone's outside opinion, which can be better than the most expensive monitors...

im only doing it to gel my own tracks with other professionally mastered tracks when i mix them to dj. do not essentially mean normalization as well.

here ill put up my progress, i still left some headroom, and i have some really good ideas to help maximize the peaks clearly by soloing each channel and monitoring to eliminate stray peaks so i dont get any clipping. doubt youll get a good gist of it since its 192kbps .

MSZ - A Shade Of Love [Cut] by msz


there is a reason why high end monitors cost that much, and its also the same reason i want them. im very keen on giving my best with what i have thats not the big problem.

quote:

Originally posted by MSZ here ill put up my progress, i still left some headroom, and i have some really good ideas to help maximize the peaks clearly by soloing each channel and monitoring to eliminate stray peaks so i dont get any clipping. doubt youll get a good gist of it since its 192kbps . MSZ - A Shade Of Love [Cut] by msz

I'm sorry but I don't need monitors to hear this sounds far too compressed. I could go on and on about what I think sounds bad, but that probably wouldn't help you improve the sound. Try to work more on your image though, particularly widening it... And stop compressing the dynamics so much!

like i said, it sounds wide, and fine too me(ive tried to spread this across frequency wise as best i could), ive heard way more compressed stuff on soundcloud, my monitors are shit, could be my ears or whatever, sounds fine to me except for some masking. i can usually tell if its way too compressed if my ears get tired simply by listening to it. if you would like to direct me to some of your self mastered mixdowns so i can see where youre coming from, would like to hear.

anyways im not too concerned, until i get some proper equipment. right now im happy with my mixing and my label says i can improve in that department, however its not bad im sure, especially given what i work with and the caliber of producers running the label, they wouldn't release something poorly mixed, unlike the countless amount of crap digital labels. ill definitely be disabling my master chain when i send it in(let them do it properly with great equipment), right now its just for fun so i can use the track in my mixes.

quote:

Originally posted by MSZ if you would like to direct me to some of your self mastered mixdowns so i can see where youre coming from, would like to hear.

Fair point, and I'm sorry to say I don't have any. I'm just someone who goes around giving feedback on mixing and mastering. Yes with credibility, but nothing worth showing.

Just listen to my Kyota track in the promotion section, i guess that's the kind of space / room you should look for in a track.

But it all starts in the mix, you should be 100% happy with your mix, before even using the word "mastering"

Think of mastering as in making your track "compatible" and not as a magic polish that makes it "shine" because that is definately the wrong perspective. If anyone is interested i am happy to share some knowledge on how to get there.

i listened to it, its clean and tidy, but meh im not impressed. im taking a look at your other work, and i cant even listen to it without my ears getting tired quick, such as your piledriver remix, its quite a nuisance. whatever though, atleast you're happy with it like you said.

not sure why im discussing this even, im terrible at mastering. ill leave now

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.