|
Considering getting a UAD-2 Solo/Laptop - Your 2 cents is appreciated (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Owsey2008 |
^ Same old , different day...
Stephen, I can't give you advice because I've never owned a UAD product. But based on people's opinions I think you'd be making a pretty good choice. The card seems very handy indeed. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
I've never owned one but theres a reason for that.
I don't like that teh hardware isn't very efficient, that the number of instances of things you can run are quite limited. That the interface it uses to connect to your computer can become obsolete VERY quickly and that it doesn't offload the most important processing are two other big issues.
The most CPU intensive processing you do in a DAW is your synths and strange effect chains. Not your EQ or compresion. If you look at how much CPU power those take up, its minimal. Reverb takes a bit, but not enough to justify a whole card for it IMO.
The only DSP solution I'd consider wouold be a kyma or an eventide. Having looked at your gear list, I'd say you'd be far better off looking into a new audio interface if your doing any recording, or if not, then refining what you really want from a DSP solution and getting a specialised unit. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
I mostly disagree with what you're saying about the UAD itself.
The new UAD cards are PCI-e so will be around for quite some time. The only real external card was the UAD Xpander I think.
Furthermore the new version has 2.5x the processing power of it's predecessor and a fair ammount of the plugins are of a quality you rarely come across in ordinary VST plugins.
http://www.uaudio.com/support/uad/charts.html
In the above chart you can see most plugins can be used a decent amount of times within one project, apart from a few. |
|
|
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
The most CPU intensive processing you do in a DAW is your synths and strange effect chains. Not your EQ or compresion. |
You've never used T-Racks then, or Elephant, or Vintage Warmer, or Ozone.
That comment is incorrect. |
|
|
| evo8 |
Just bear in mind that if you demo the FATSO you're probably gonna wish you got more than a Solo, dont think you can run too many instances but maybe someone here with a Solo knows more?
uad plugin counts |
|
|
| DjStephenWiley |
| FATSO will be the first plug-in I get. I have a friend with the dual distressors and the coloring he's able to add to a mix blows my mind. It's actually one of the reasons I want one. And you can only have around 3 or 4 instances of FATSO at a time, but it's more of a mastering tool although I'm sure it can be used as a send which is how I would likely use it. |
|
|
| hexadecimal |
Nobody does DSP "clones" like UAD. They are the best, hands down.
They work closely with the developers of the product they're creating a DSP approximation of, and only release them when the designers of the actual product are happy with it. This rarely happens when VST/AU clones are being created, and it shows.
I've owned most of the hardware that I currently have UAD plugins of, and I'd be lying if I said I could tell the difference.
The Fatso is a lot more than a mastering tool. It's great for mastering, but equally good when used as an effect on individual tracks, etc. It's one of the best tape saturation devices out there, and the UAD version (which includes the Fatso Sr., a device the designer never got to release in hardware) is dead accurate. |
|
|
| SoundMagus |
| I do all my mixing and mastering with UAD 1e and have never looked back, go for it :) |
|
|
| evo8 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DjStephenWiley
FATSO will be the first plug-in I get. I have a friend with the dual distressors and the coloring he's able to add to a mix blows my mind. It's actually one of the reasons I want one. And you can only have around 3 or 4 instances of FATSO at a time, but it's more of a mastering tool although I'm sure it can be used as a send which is how I would likely use it. |
3 or 4 yeah but you wont be running anything else
Rumours are that an EL Distressor plug is in the works also and i cant imagine that being easy on DSP either.... |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
I mostly disagree with what you're saying about the UAD itself.
The new UAD cards are PCI-e so will be around for quite some time. The only real external card was the UAD Xpander I think.
|
Thats what everyone thought a few years ago when they bought the PCI version.
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Furthermore the new version has 2.5x the processing power of it's predecessor and a fair ammount of the plugins are of a quality you rarely come across in ordinary VST plugins.
http://www.uaudio.com/support/uad/charts.html
In the above chart you can see most plugins can be used a decent amount of times within one project, apart from a few. |
Frankly, I haven't heard the plugins ABed against the real thing. So I can't really say. But I can't see how they would be THAT much better than something by Waves, like the SSL pack or Sonnox, or even sonalksis's stuff. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
You've never used T-Racks then, or Elephant, or Vintage Warmer, or Ozone.
That comment is incorrect. |
Actually, I've used both T-Racks and ozone. I didn't find them to be to my taste generally. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Thats what everyone thought a few years ago when they bought the PCI version.
|
Yes well, look at how long PCI was actually the standard... From that point of it is quite likely we still have a couple of years to go, I'd say 4-5 years minimum.
A few years ago I actually refrained from buying new PCI stuff because PCI-e was coming up. Having at least a bit of insight on technology is required in this discipline :). The ones that bought the uad pci quite recently either did not investigate on the matter or lacked knowledge of it. Or they just wanted it real bad, which I can imagine as well hehe. |
|
|
|
|
