Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » UAD 4.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87002 is a reply to message #86992] |
Thu, 21 June 2007 21:49   |
Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So Deej, what's the LA3A give you that's different from the LA2A? I read
the stuff about faster response and all, but in terms of application and
gut response, what's the difference? From the blurb about it, I would guess
it's more like an 1176 if you put it on the highest ratio and a fast attack.
I've never worked with a real one myself.
Rod
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>A 13 Space Magma can be had for around $450.00 - $500.00. If you're
>interfacing PCI, a 7 space Magma won't work for 4 UAD-1 cards without some
>mighty risky IRQ sharing. I wouldn't even go there. I'm speaking from some
>pretty extensive experience.
>
>I went ahead and bought the LA-3A because I had a voucher and they can
>always deauthorize me if I decide I don't want it....but I'll tell you
>what.....of all of the "vintage" UA processors, the LA-3A is the one I have
>the mos experience with and this plugin nails it. Forward and cleanly "in
>your face", just like the real deal. I'm very impressed.
>
>Deej
>
>
>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>news:467b10e9$1@linux...
>> Maybe they expect you to buy it right away? ;)
>>
>> I'm sort of stuck between buying 3 more UAD-1s and a Magma chassis, or
>> going for the WAVES SSL + V Series. I hate having to buy an ilok to try
>> them out, but if they're as good as some folks say, it would be nice to
>> have that many instances and be more portable for working in different
>> rooms.
>>
>> How much does a 7 or 13 space PCI Magma go for these days?
>>
>> Graham
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> yes, i know. I'm trying to get the deom to work. It automatically
>>> expired. Nice
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87005 is a reply to message #87002] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 05:00 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Cleanliness instead of godliness. It's a lot punchier sounding tio. It
really brngs something to the table on low end sources and is very *forward*
sounding. I like it much better than the UA LA-2A. (but with me, that was
the case with the hardware units too).
DJ
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:467b54c2$1@linux...
>
> So Deej, what's the LA3A give you that's different from the LA2A? I read
> the stuff about faster response and all, but in terms of application and
> gut response, what's the difference? From the blurb about it, I would
> guess
> it's more like an 1176 if you put it on the highest ratio and a fast
> attack.
> I've never worked with a real one myself.
> Rod
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>A 13 Space Magma can be had for around $450.00 - $500.00. If you're
>>interfacing PCI, a 7 space Magma won't work for 4 UAD-1 cards without some
>
>>mighty risky IRQ sharing. I wouldn't even go there. I'm speaking from
>>some
>
>>pretty extensive experience.
>>
>>I went ahead and bought the LA-3A because I had a voucher and they can
>>always deauthorize me if I decide I don't want it....but I'll tell you
>>what.....of all of the "vintage" UA processors, the LA-3A is the one I
>>have
>
>>the mos experience with and this plugin nails it. Forward and cleanly "in
>
>>your face", just like the real deal. I'm very impressed.
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>
>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>news:467b10e9$1@linux...
>>> Maybe they expect you to buy it right away? ;)
>>>
>>> I'm sort of stuck between buying 3 more UAD-1s and a Magma chassis, or
>
>>> going for the WAVES SSL + V Series. I hate having to buy an ilok to try
>
>>> them out, but if they're as good as some folks say, it would be nice to
>
>>> have that many instances and be more portable for working in different
>
>>> rooms.
>>>
>>> How much does a 7 or 13 space PCI Magma go for these days?
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>> DJ wrote:
>>>> yes, i know. I'm trying to get the deom to work. It automatically
>>>> expired. Nice
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87009 is a reply to message #87005] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 07:07 |
Rod Lincoln
Messages: 883
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK thanks.
Rod
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Cleanliness instead of godliness. It's a lot punchier sounding tio. It
>really brngs something to the table on low end sources and is very *forward*
>sounding. I like it much better than the UA LA-2A. (but with me, that was
>the case with the hardware units too).
>
>DJ
>
>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:467b54c2$1@linux...
>>
>> So Deej, what's the LA3A give you that's different from the LA2A? I read
>> the stuff about faster response and all, but in terms of application and
>> gut response, what's the difference? From the blurb about it, I would
>> guess
>> it's more like an 1176 if you put it on the highest ratio and a fast
>> attack.
>> I've never worked with a real one myself.
>> Rod
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>A 13 Space Magma can be had for around $450.00 - $500.00. If you're
>>>interfacing PCI, a 7 space Magma won't work for 4 UAD-1 cards without
some
>>
>>>mighty risky IRQ sharing. I wouldn't even go there. I'm speaking from
>>>some
>>
>>>pretty extensive experience.
>>>
>>>I went ahead and bought the LA-3A because I had a voucher and they can
>>>always deauthorize me if I decide I don't want it....but I'll tell you
>>>what.....of all of the "vintage" UA processors, the LA-3A is the one I
>>>have
>>
>>>the mos experience with and this plugin nails it. Forward and cleanly
"in
>>
>>>your face", just like the real deal. I'm very impressed.
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>
>>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>>news:467b10e9$1@linux...
>>>> Maybe they expect you to buy it right away? ;)
>>>>
>>>> I'm sort of stuck between buying 3 more UAD-1s and a Magma chassis,
or
>>
>>>> going for the WAVES SSL + V Series. I hate having to buy an ilok to
try
>>
>>>> them out, but if they're as good as some folks say, it would be nice
to
>>
>>>> have that many instances and be more portable for working in different
>>
>>>> rooms.
>>>>
>>>> How much does a 7 or 13 space PCI Magma go for these days?
>>>>
>>>> Graham
>>>>
>>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>> yes, i know. I'm trying to get the deom to work. It automatically
>>>>> expired. Nice
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87010 is a reply to message #87001] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 07:35 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The UAD-1 cards must be more than a dongle. Based on UA's charts, the number
of plugins you can run is based on the card not the speed of your CPU. IE,
a slow machine can run the same number of plugins.
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>That's my point all along. I've been able to get that vinatge plugin sound
>with native plugins. The Sonalkis really does impart color and mimics vicage
>gear really well.. The waves SSL are very sweet and the word on the Waves
>V series is that they a Killer!!..
>
>I was never sold on the whole power PCI card thing ..even with superior
plugings
>such as the UADs.
>
>Plus, UAD has not imprived their card DSP power which begs the question
of
>: Does the card really speed up the plugins or is it just a dongle?
>
>UAD has been using the same DSP card for 5 years now!! What gives? The one
>article I read inwhich the interviewer asked why there has not been a more
>powerful DSP card, they (UAD) responded with the Lame(est) answer to amounted
>to really no answer at all. Saying things like we researching it, it a
detailed
>process..LAME...Even worst, the PCI-e cards offers no real improvement over
>the current dsp card..
>
>
>
>
>Graham Duncan <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote:
>>Maybe they expect you to buy it right away? ;)
>>
>>I'm sort of stuck between buying 3 more UAD-1s and a Magma chassis, or
>>going for the WAVES SSL + V Series. I hate having to buy an ilok to try
>
>>them out, but if they're as good as some folks say, it would be nice to
>
>>have that many instances and be more portable for working in different
>>rooms.
>>
>>How much does a 7 or 13 space PCI Magma go for these days?
>>
>>Graham
>>
>>DJ wrote:
>>> yes, i know. I'm trying to get the deom to work. It automatically expired.
>
>>> Nice
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87046 is a reply to message #87043] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 13:37 |
|
|
I played around with the demos.. Nice. the interface needs some work
"wireline" <kennospam@wirelinestudio.com> wrote:
>
>These:
>
>http://www.samplitude.com/eng/vst/uebersicht.html
>
>The AM track is very VERY cool, as it by istelf is a very clear and powerful
>SW compressor, but add to the flavor the tape emulator (which is as accurate
>a tape emulation design as I've encounter yet...smokes anything offered
for
>digi or others...)
>
>Note these were just recently made available as VST - for years they were
>proprietary Samplitude...all written by the same genius who wrote the Digital
>Fish Phones set (my second favorite SW comps and all time favorite noise
>gates...)
>
>Graham Duncan <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote:
>>Which comps in Samplitude?
>>
>>Graham
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87063 is a reply to message #87053] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 09:29 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think Sasha's Samp stuff is good too and I enjoyed the filets as well
as dominion, but on critical trax I usually prefer the UAD comps. I
think there is a limitation to what can be done without external
processing muscle.
Curious, why are you planning to move from Sam and where to? I am up to
Sam 8, but switched back to Cubase because I need MIDI often and Sam let
me down once too often in sessions with MIDI. I'll still use it for
dialog and CDs, but I am fed up w/ it on music.
wireline wrote:
> Graham, have you opened up the advanced tab for AM track? I found the presets
> a bit much when I first started working with them, but the blend knob in
> the advanced window is an absolute miracle IMO...parallel compression in
> one track...that, plus the ability to fine tune the tonal responses...woof!
>
> When I dump Samp at some point in the not too distant future, I'm definately
> buying the VST package...
>
> Graham Duncan <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote:
>> wireline wrote:
>>
>>> The AM track is very VERY cool, as it by istelf is a very clear and powerful
>>> SW compressor, but add to the flavor the tape emulator (which is as accurate
>>> a tape emulation design as I've encounter yet...smokes anything offered
> for
>>> digi or others...)
>> Thanks. I use Samplitude v9 so I was curious. I often find am-track to
>
>> be a little heavy handed or hard to control, so I go to the UAD-1 as a
>> first choice. Or maybe it just seems to run out of headroom really
>> fast? I should spend more time with it.
>>
>> What I can't figure out is how the old SPITFISH works much better than
>> the new one in Samplitude!
>>
>> Graham
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87065 is a reply to message #87063] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 10:03 |
wireline[31]
Messages: 1
Registered: June 2007
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Don't know yet, really...I have demo'd several different DAWs as of late,
and what I'm finding is they all really fall short...I don't like some of
the limitations imposed by DAW A, the lack of sample accurate editing in
DAW B, the sound of DAW PT, etc...
Money aside, I'd be all over a RADAR, my SOundtracs bonsole, and a buttload
of hardware in a heartbeat...I really don't need any more MIDI than a simple
clock to align the occassional drum machine...too complicated (!)
All in all, the reason I'm so displeased with Samp is the holier than thou
attitude taken lately by developers...its like they are jamming certain questionable
things down the userbase's throat, and totally ignoring essentially crippling
bugs...
I'm using 9-11 (appropriate, huh?)... maybe the roaylty Gods will be kind
and send me the cash for a 48K RADAR, but until they do I'm pretty well stuck
where I am, DAW wise...I can migrate to and from 7.23, 8.31, and 9.11...
Mainly I miss the ability to write (either directly or via the message board)
to the developers and get an intellegent and reasonably sane response - those
days are looooong gone.
Curious, why are you planning to move from Sam and where to? I am up to
Sam 8, but switched back to Cubase because I need MIDI often and Sam let
me down once too often in sessions with MIDI. I'll still use it for dialog
and CDs, but I am fed up w/ it on music.
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87066 is a reply to message #87010] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 09:58 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Probably the reasons they have not updated it are, 1) it still works and
is cheap; 2) perhaps they can't enlarge it because it is based on some
chips from a mass produced video card that they were able to buy
cheaply. I read somewhere they could not have made it so inexpensively
if they had to make their own design or chips - something like that.
What I know for sure is, I had an 1176LN which I loved and once I
compared it to the UAD1 I was sold. In my typical usage settings I could
not hear a quality difference. No other s/w plugs sound as good to me
except the PLParEQ, which always bring a smile, but it is a CPU hog. I
love SIR too.
James McCloskey wrote:
> The UAD-1 cards must be more than a dongle. Based on UA's charts, the number
> of plugins you can run is based on the card not the speed of your CPU. IE,
> a slow machine can run the same number of plugins.
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> That's my point all along. I've been able to get that vinatge plugin sound
>> with native plugins. The Sonalkis really does impart color and mimics vicage
>> gear really well.. The waves SSL are very sweet and the word on the Waves
>> V series is that they a Killer!!..
>>
>> I was never sold on the whole power PCI card thing ..even with superior
> plugings
>> such as the UADs.
>>
>> Plus, UAD has not imprived their card DSP power which begs the question
> of
>> : Does the card really speed up the plugins or is it just a dongle?
>>
>> UAD has been using the same DSP card for 5 years now!! What gives? The one
>> article I read inwhich the interviewer asked why there has not been a more
>> powerful DSP card, they (UAD) responded with the Lame(est) answer to amounted
>> to really no answer at all. Saying things like we researching it, it a
> detailed
>> process..LAME...Even worst, the PCI-e cards offers no real improvement over
>> the current dsp card..
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Graham Duncan <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote:
>>> Maybe they expect you to buy it right away? ;)
>>>
>>> I'm sort of stuck between buying 3 more UAD-1s and a Magma chassis, or
>
>>> going for the WAVES SSL + V Series. I hate having to buy an ilok to try
>>> them out, but if they're as good as some folks say, it would be nice to
>>> have that many instances and be more portable for working in different
>
>>> rooms.
>>>
>>> How much does a 7 or 13 space PCI Magma go for these days?
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>> DJ wrote:
>>>> yes, i know. I'm trying to get the deom to work. It automatically expired.
>>>> Nice
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: UAD 4.7 [message #87069 is a reply to message #87065] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 10:22 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
For me Cubase was a no-brainer. I have used it since the '80s for midi.
It is not perfect, but I'm afraid nothing is. I used Logic for a time at
a place I worked but it kind of bugged me too.
I guess we should be thankful we have so many choices, compared to the
way Adobe has a virtual monopoly in the graphics area.
wireline wrote:
> Don't know yet, really...I have demo'd several different DAWs as of late,
> and what I'm finding is they all really fall short...I don't like some of
> the limitations imposed by DAW A, the lack of sample accurate editing in
> DAW B, the sound of DAW PT, etc...
>
> Money aside, I'd be all over a RADAR, my SOundtracs bonsole, and a buttload
> of hardware in a heartbeat...I really don't need any more MIDI than a simple
> clock to align the occassional drum machine...too complicated (!)
>
> All in all, the reason I'm so displeased with Samp is the holier than thou
> attitude taken lately by developers...its like they are jamming certain questionable
> things down the userbase's throat, and totally ignoring essentially crippling
> bugs...
>
> I'm using 9-11 (appropriate, huh?)... maybe the roaylty Gods will be kind
> and send me the cash for a 48K RADAR, but until they do I'm pretty well stuck
> where I am, DAW wise...I can migrate to and from 7.23, 8.31, and 9.11...
>
> Mainly I miss the ability to write (either directly or via the message board)
> to the developers and get an intellegent and reasonably sane response - those
> days are looooong gone.
>
> Curious, why are you planning to move from Sam and where to? I am up to
> Sam 8, but switched back to Cubase because I need MIDI often and Sam let
> me down once too often in sessions with MIDI. I'll still use it for dialog
> and CDs, but I am fed up w/ it on music.
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 88VR strip=Paris sound!!!! [message #87091 is a reply to message #87080] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 19:17 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil, that's an interesting point. I usually run everything in the -10
range, I guess, but I wonder if there is a best way to do it. Should the
master be at 0 and the individuals much lower, or the individuals high
and the master down or what? Or does it make any difference at all as
long as they don't clip? I've never seen any data on that.
Neil wrote:
> Lamont, those DiMakina tunes you heard recently (and you said
> you liked - thank you again, BTW) were all in the low-20's to
> low 30's in track count. No weirdness there.
>
> It's all about gain staging, dEwD - like I said, you wouldn't
> run an analog console with every channel at +15 & the master
> there as well, so why would you run a digital "virtual" console
> at "0", giving yourself no headroom?
>
> Neil
>
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritec.net> wrote:
>> Very cool.. But, be careful..Adding too many tracks to Cubase..Equals weirdness..
>>
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>> OMG!!!!! Just opening this up as a track insert on default settings on
> a
>> 14
>>> track mix here is some major Parisness!!!. My DAW no longer sounds like
>>> Cubase and I don't have the Neve 5042 on the mix bus. I'm going to have
>> to
>>> set this up on a something like 24 tracks and see what the cumulative result
>>> is.
>>>
>>> Yikes!!!!
>>>
>>> ;o)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>> news:467aeb33@linux...
>>>> http://www.uaudio.com/
>>>>
>>>> LA-3A and a Neve 88RS Channel Strip. Interesting...
>>>>
>>>> Graham
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 88VR strip=Paris sound!!!! [message #87102 is a reply to message #87100] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 21:41 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
Bill, I don't know what kind of JavascriptingHTMLSQL weirdness
you're posting in, but the first try of my reply didn't work
becasue fo some weird formatting thing... anyway: Yeah, the -10
that you're using on individual channels could be good too, I
think it all depends on the tracks themselves & the genre...
I usually leave the masterfader at dead-on zero & stick some
kind of brickwall across the 2-buss (usually Izotope Ozone -
that way you can use their MBIT+ or Psych5 dither at the same
time), and in my case -6 seems to be a good place to start all
tracks. I have a template set up for that, and often the vocals
end up higher & sometimes the kick & snare, too; but most
everything else ends up lower... IOW, -6 for what I'm doing
seems to be a good starting point for individual channels;
maybe -10 for you as a starting point is the way to go.
It matters not too much, I think, as long as you're not
overstuffing the mix buss with too many overhot levels going
into it or wasting bitstream resolution potential by having too
many low levels going in either.
Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 88VR strip=Paris sound!!!! [message #87111 is a reply to message #87080] |
Sun, 24 June 2007 00:41 |
|
|
Hey Neil..I haer ya and you are right about proper digital mixing..
I really don't like mixing that way, so I sum thru an analog mixer and let
it do he job..Slamming into a Alesis Masterlink..
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Lamont, those DiMakina tunes you heard recently (and you said
>you liked - thank you again, BTW) were all in the low-20's to
>low 30's in track count. No weirdness there.
>
>It's all about gain staging, dEwD - like I said, you wouldn't
>run an analog console with every channel at +15 & the master
>there as well, so why would you run a digital "virtual" console
>at "0", giving yourself no headroom?
>
>Neil
>
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritec.net> wrote:
>>
>>Very cool.. But, be careful..Adding too many tracks to Cubase..Equals weirdness..
>>
>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>OMG!!!!! Just opening this up as a track insert on default settings on
>a
>>14
>>>track mix here is some major Parisness!!!. My DAW no longer sounds like
>>
>>>Cubase and I don't have the Neve 5042 on the mix bus. I'm going to have
>>to
>>>set this up on a something like 24 tracks and see what the cumulative
result
>>
>>>is.
>>>
>>>Yikes!!!!
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>>news:467aeb33@linux...
>>>> http://www.uaudio.com/
>>>>
>>>> LA-3A and a Neve 88RS Channel Strip. Interesting...
>>>>
>>>> Graham
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 23 22:33:18 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07105 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
