The PARIS Forums


Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Anyone used this?Liquid MIx
Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73236] Thu, 28 September 2006 19:05 Go to next message
Nappy is currently offline  Nappy
Messages: 198
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/

respect
Nappy
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73249 is a reply to message #73236] Thu, 28 September 2006 22:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
HI,
Sadly still MAC only so haven't been able to try it.
Hopefully sounds better than some of the horrible effects that come with
the Sapphire.
We got some in stock that Focusrite sent to early to us. Told them not
to bother till they had PC drivers. So we are sending them back till the
driver ship. Probably not till December now.


Chris



Nappy wrote:
> www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/
>
> respect
> Nappy

--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73259 is a reply to message #73249] Fri, 29 September 2006 06:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
neil[1] is currently offline  neil[1]
Messages: 164
Registered: October 2006
Senior Member
Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?

Neil


Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>HI,
>Sadly still MAC only so haven't been able to try it.
>Hopefully sounds better than some of the horrible effects that come with

>the Sapphire.
>We got some in stock that Focusrite sent to early to us. Told them not
>to bother till they had PC drivers. So we are sending them back till the

>driver ship. Probably not till December now.
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>Nappy wrote:
>> www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/
>>
>> respect
>> Nappy
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>ADK
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>(859) 635-5762
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73263 is a reply to message #73259] Fri, 29 September 2006 07:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
Hi Neil,
Haven't tried it out yet. Sold a few but they all went straight to the
customers. I haven't heard any negative responses yet from the customers
so I assuming is decent.
Sense we are not a retail store I can't just have a demo unit laying
around, especially at close to $3k.
The effects that come with the Sapphire have no reason to be on
hardware. They are very weak sounding. Much nicer plug ins are a
available for free out there. Plus the unit that has the effects is
$100.00 more than the one that doesn't and the cheaper one actually has
more analog I/O. Kinda Silly.


Chris



Neil wrote:

>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>
>Neil
>
>
>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>
>
>>HI,
>>Sadly still MAC only so haven't been able to try it.
>>Hopefully sounds better than some of the horrible effects that come with
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>the Sapphire.
>>We got some in stock that Focusrite sent to early to us. Told them not
>>to bother till they had PC drivers. So we are sending them back till the
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>driver ship. Probably not till December now.
>>
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>Nappy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/
>>>
>>>respect
>>>Nappy
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>Chris Ludwig
>>ADK
>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>(859) 635-5762
>>
>>
>
>
>

--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73264 is a reply to message #73263] Fri, 29 September 2006 07:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
animix is currently offline  animix   FRANCE
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
I have heard from folks who have used both, that the UAD-1 compressors have
a more realistic feel to them. The main complaint is that the attack/release
characteristics of compressors are not as realistic in convolution.

I have a video here that is about 175MB showing one of these processing a
trance track. I thought it was able to accomplish some pretty drastic
things, but it's hard to know from an MP4 whether or not these would be good
things or bad things.

I don't mean to slag this thing right out of the chute, and once they write
drivers for a *real* computer, I'm gonna probably give one a test drive. ;o)

Deej

"Chris Ludwig" <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote in message
news:451d25e7@linux...
> Hi Neil,
> Haven't tried it out yet. Sold a few but they all went straight to the
> customers. I haven't heard any negative responses yet from the customers
> so I assuming is decent.
> Sense we are not a retail store I can't just have a demo unit laying
> around, especially at close to $3k.
> The effects that come with the Sapphire have no reason to be on
> hardware. They are very weak sounding. Much nicer plug ins are a
> available for free out there. Plus the unit that has the effects is
> $100.00 more than the one that doesn't and the cheaper one actually has
> more analog I/O. Kinda Silly.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Neil wrote:
>
> >Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
> >ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
> >dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
> >you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
> >
> >Neil
> >
> >
> >Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>HI,
> >>Sadly still MAC only so haven't been able to try it.
> >>Hopefully sounds better than some of the horrible effects that come with
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >>the Sapphire.
> >>We got some in stock that Focusrite sent to early to us. Told them not
> >>to bother till they had PC drivers. So we are sending them back till the
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >>driver ship. Probably not till December now.
> >>
> >>
> >>Chris
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Nappy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/
> >>>
> >>>respect
> >>>Nappy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>--
> >>Chris Ludwig
> >>ADK
> >>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
> >>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
> >>(859) 635-5762
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Chris Ludwig
> ADK
> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
> (859) 635-5762
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73268 is a reply to message #73259] Fri, 29 September 2006 07:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gene lennon is currently offline  gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
Senior Member
"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>
>Neil
>

Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for the
eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
impulse responses.

I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound quality
is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but not
always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the original
units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of the
original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
if not “real”.

The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
sound.
The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.

My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably certain
that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never get
both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use more
extensively in my room.

Gene
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73271 is a reply to message #73268] Fri, 29 September 2006 07:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nappy is currently offline  Nappy
Messages: 198
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Thanks Gene,
Get back to us about the Liquid Mix,whats Duende?

respect
Nappy
"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>
>>Neil
>>
>
>Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for
the
>eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
>impulse responses.
>
>I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
quality
>is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but not
>always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
>does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the original
>units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
>all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
the
>original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
>if not “real”.
>
>The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
>to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
>sound.
>The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
>hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.
>
>My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
>is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably certain
>that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
get
>both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use more
>extensively in my room.
>
>Gene
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73275 is a reply to message #73271] Fri, 29 September 2006 07:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gene lennon is currently offline  gene lennon
Messages: 565
Registered: July 2006
Senior Member
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>Thanks Gene,
>Get back to us about the Liquid Mix,whats Duende?
>
>respect
>Nappy

The SSL C200 is an all-digital music production console that runs about $750,000,
and up.
http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/c200.html

SSL took the same DSP chips and the exact algorithms of the EQ plus the channel
and bus compressor from the C200 and built a box that uses Firewire to access
the programs. They added VST, AU and RTAS plugins as controllers and have
released the Mac version. It is about 1700.00 and sounds indistinguishable
from the C200 (other than the mix bus).

http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_home.html

It is still having a lot of bandwidth related issues, but sounds great!

Gene
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73277 is a reply to message #73236] Fri, 29 September 2006 08:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Don Nafe is currently offline  Don Nafe   UNITED STATES
Messages: 1206
Registered: July 2005
Senior Member
"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote in message news:451c7f6d$1@linux...
>
> www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LiquidMix/
>
> respect
> Nappy

word on the NG's who've commented...grossly overpriced!

YMMV

DOn
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73280 is a reply to message #73268] Fri, 29 September 2006 09:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Hello To all,
Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7 Comp
/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.

So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris & PT-Mpowered..
Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring as
soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)

These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD. Like
the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..


With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing will
take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
Zero latency native thru a DAW..

All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!! And
the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!




"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>
>>Neil
>>
>
>Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for
the
>eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
>impulse responses.
>
>I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
quality
>is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but not
>always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
>does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the original
>units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
>all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
the
>original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
>if not “real”.
>
>The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
>to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
>sound.
>The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
>hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.
>
>My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
>is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably certain
>that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
get
>both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use more
>extensively in my room.
>
>Gene
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73282 is a reply to message #73280] Fri, 29 September 2006 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
animix is currently offline  animix   FRANCE
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves SSL
pluygins with Paris?

Thanks,

Deej

"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>
> Hello To all,
> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
Comp
> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>
> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
PT-Mpowered..
> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
really
> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
heights.
> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring as
> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>
> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
Like
> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
sweet!!..
>
>
> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
will
> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>
> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
And
> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>
>
>
>
> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
> >>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
> >>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
> >>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
> >>
> >>Neil
> >>
> >
> >Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
algorithms
> >are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container" for
> the
> >eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
> >impulse responses.
> >
> >I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
> quality
> >is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
not
> >always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
disconcerting
> >to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
container
> >does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
original
> >units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
result,
> >all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
> the
> >original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
varied,
> >if not "real".
> >
> >The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
comparison
> >to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
TriTone
> >sound.
> >The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
> >hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
disappointment.
> >
> >My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
reason
> >is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
certain
> >that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
> get
> >both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
more
> >extensively in my room.
> >
> >Gene
> >
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73284 is a reply to message #73280] Fri, 29 September 2006 10:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neil is currently offline  Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
Senior Member
I have some native plugs that I like a lot, and I'm sure the ones
you mentioned sound great, but what I need is MORE POWER,
SCOTTY!!! - or more precisely, less CPU load (rememeber, I'm
running at 24-bit/88.sk, and a LOT of tracks!), so the LiquidMix
or Duende are looking interesting to me.

Like the quikquak demo that I tested last night... takes up 20%
of my CPU power all by itself - sounds great, but I can't use
that kind of resource hog!

Neil


"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Hello To all,
>Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
Comp
>/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>
>So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris & PT-Mpowered..
>Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
>needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
as
>soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>
>These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD. Like
>the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..
>
>
>With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
will
>take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>
>All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
And
>the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>
>
>
>
>"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>
>>>Neil
>>>
>>
>>Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>>are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for
>the
>>eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
>>impulse responses.
>>
>>I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>quality
>>is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
not
>>always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>>to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
>>does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the original
>>units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
>>all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
>the
>>original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
>>if not “real”.
>>
>>The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
>>to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
>>sound.
>>The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
>>hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.
>>
>>My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
>>is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably certain
>>that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>get
>>both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
more
>>extensively in my room.
>>
>>Gene
>>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73285 is a reply to message #73282] Fri, 29 September 2006 10:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.

Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your DAW
run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.

Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall performance
you'll get with using the SSL plugs.

This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to me,
The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.

Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better performance
of these new plugins..

"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves SSL
>pluygins with Paris?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Deej
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>
>> Hello To all,
>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
7
>Comp
>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>
>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
>PT-Mpowered..
>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>really
>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>heights.
>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
as
>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>
>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>Like
>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>sweet!!..
>>
>>
>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>will
>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>
>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>And
>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>> >>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>> >>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>> >>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>> >>
>> >>Neil
>> >>
>> >
>> >Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>algorithms
>> >are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container" for
>> the
>> >eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
the
>> >impulse responses.
>> >
>> >I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>> quality
>> >is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
>not
>> >always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>disconcerting
>> >to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>container
>> >does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>original
>> >units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>result,
>> >all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
of
>> the
>> >original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>varied,
>> >if not "real".
>> >
>> >The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>comparison
>> >to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>TriTone
>> >sound.
>> >The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
the
>> >hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>disappointment.
>> >
>> >My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>reason
>> >is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>certain
>> >that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>> get
>> >both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
>more
>> >extensively in my room.
>> >
>> >Gene
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx [message #73287 is a reply to message #73275] Fri, 29 September 2006 11:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nappy is currently offline  Nappy
Messages: 198
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Thanks Gene,
Looks like a great value!

respect
Nappy


"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>"Nappy" <mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>Thanks Gene,
>>Get back to us about the Liquid Mix,whats Duende?
>>
>>respect
>>Nappy
>
>The SSL C200 is an all-digital music production console that runs about
$750,000,
>and up.
>http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/c200.html
>
>SSL took the same DSP chips and the exact algorithms of the EQ plus the
channel
>and bus compressor from the C200 and built a box that uses Firewire to access
>the programs. They added VST, AU and RTAS plugins as controllers and have
>released the Mac version. It is about 1700.00 and sounds indistinguishable
>from the C200 (other than the mix bus).
>
>http://www.solid-state-logic.com/music/duende_home.html
>
>It is still having a lot of bandwidth related issues, but sounds great!
>
>Gene
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73288 is a reply to message #73284] Fri, 29 September 2006 11:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Neil ,
Remember when TC brought out their Powercore? To this day, both the PCI or
Firewire version will tax your PCI buss performance. This is why folks are
using Magma Chasis for runing multiple UAD's and using DUAL processor with
Dual PCI buss Channels.

If all you have in your DAW is a Single channel PCI buss setup, you are actually
degrading the overall peformance by imlementing these so-called Powered plugins.
You ever see some of those Super Daw boxes over there on Nuendo.com user
forum??
Lead by our very own Brain Tanksersly. They found out by massive research
that to run those Powered Plugins optimally, at a decent latency, your'e
need have a Dual channeled,high end Dual -core Opteron, Now Conroe Intels,
with at least 8 gigs RAM..% gigs per channel. Withthe UADs and Powercore
on their on PCI buss.. :)

I said all that to say, that TC has never really had great Asio drivers,
so their performance is not that stellar. Same with Duende, the Firewire
and Asio drivers need a lot of work. From what I'm told, writing good firewire
drivers is easy.

So, Neil you do have choices in how you want to implement your Native solution.

Take care LaMont

"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>I have some native plugs that I like a lot, and I'm sure the ones
>you mentioned sound great, but what I need is MORE POWER,
>SCOTTY!!! - or more precisely, less CPU load (rememeber, I'm
>running at 24-bit/88.sk, and a LOT of tracks!), so the LiquidMix
>or Duende are looking interesting to me.
>
>Like the quikquak demo that I tested last night... takes up 20%
>of my CPU power all by itself - sounds great, but I can't use
>that kind of resource hog!
>
>Neil
>
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hello To all,
>>Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
>Comp
>>/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>
>>So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
PT-Mpowered..
>>Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
>>needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>>In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>as
>>soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>
>>These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
Like
>>the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..
>>
>>
>>With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>will
>>take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>>Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>
>>All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>And
>>the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>
>>>>Neil
>>>>
>>>
>>>Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>>>are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for
>>the
>>>eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
>>>impulse responses.
>>>
>>>I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>quality
>>>is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
>not
>>>always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>>>to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
>>>does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
original
>>>units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
>>>all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
>>the
>>>original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
>>>if not “real”.
>>>
>>>The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
>>>to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
>>>sound.
>>>The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
>>>hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.
>>>
>>>My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
>>>is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
certain
>>>that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>get
>>>both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
>more
>>>extensively in my room.
>>>
>>>Gene
>>>
>>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73291 is a reply to message #73285] Fri, 29 September 2006 11:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
Hi Lamont,
Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not
have Open GL support at all.


Chris


LaMont wrote:
> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>
> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your DAW
> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>
> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall performance
> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>
> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to me,
> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>
> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better performance
> of these new plugins..
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves SSL
>> pluygins with Paris?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Deej
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>> Hello To all,
>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
> 7
>> Comp
>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>
>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
>> PT-Mpowered..
>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>> really
>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>> heights.
>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
> as
>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>
>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>> Like
>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>> sweet!!..
>>>
>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>> will
>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>
>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>> And
>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil
>>>>>
>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>> algorithms
>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container" for
>>> the
>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
> the
>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>
>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>> quality
>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
>> not
>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>> disconcerting
>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>> container
>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>> original
>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>> result,
>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
> of
>>> the
>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>> varied,
>>>> if not "real".
>>>>
>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>> comparison
>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>> TriTone
>>>> sound.
>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
> the
>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>> disappointment.
>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>> reason
>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>> certain
>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>> get
>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
>> more
>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>
>>>> Gene
>>>>
>>
>

--
Chris Ludwig

ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73292 is a reply to message #73291] Fri, 29 September 2006 12:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jamie K is currently offline  Jamie K   UNITED STATES
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
Senior Member
What's your source on that Chris?

Apple seems very solidly behind OpenGL and supports it in core graphics.

Microsoft is more reluctant, they prefer proprietary DirectX.

On both of these platforms, a host of 3D animation software depends on
OpenGL.

Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com


Chris Ludwig wrote:
> Hi Lamont,
> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not
> have Open GL support at all.
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> LaMont wrote:
>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>
>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that
>> your DAW
>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your
>> system.
>>
>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall
>> performance
>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to
>> me,
>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp
>> excellerators
>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better
>> performance
>> of these new plugins..
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the
>>> Waves SSL
>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message
>>> news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>> Hello To all,
>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL
>>>> bundle,
>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
>> 7
>>> Comp
>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>
>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>> really
>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>> heights.
>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>> as
>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>
>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>>> Like
>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>> sweet!!..
>>>>
>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>> will
>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
>>>> with
>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>
>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>> And
>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>> algorithms
>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
>>>>> for
>>>> the
>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
>> the
>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The
>>>>> sound
>>>> quality
>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
>>> not
>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>> disconcerting
>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>> container
>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>>> original
>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>>> result,
>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>> of
>>>> the
>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>>> varied,
>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>
>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>> comparison
>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>>> TriTone
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>> the
>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>>> disappointment.
>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>> reason
>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>>> certain
>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could
>>>>> never
>>>> get
>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
>>> more
>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gene
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73293 is a reply to message #73280] Fri, 29 September 2006 11:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gene Lennon[3] is currently offline  gene Lennon[3]
Messages: 40
Registered: June 2006
Member
"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Hello To all,
>Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
Comp
>/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>
>So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris & PT-Mpowered..
>Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
>needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
as
>soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>
>These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD. Like
>the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..
>
>
>With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
will
>take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>
>All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
And
>the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>
>

I have the Waves SSL plugins and I agree with everything you say about it.
Nice package, although I haven’t tried it inside Paris yet.

As to the future of low latency native systems: Symphony can do 1.8MS at
64 samples right now.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=80936&hi ghlight=Symphony

I think Brian and others are getting similar results on PC systems with new
RME Beta drivers. No need to wait for 80 core computers.

As to efficiency, I can run about 80 channels of the Waves SSL plugins on
my MacBook Pro. Sony is promising the Oxford plugs for Intel-Mac (RTAS) will
be out within a few weeks; I hope the efficiency is close.
Gene
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73294 is a reply to message #73291] Fri, 29 September 2006 12:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
TCB is currently offline  TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
Senior Member
If this is true, and I suspect it is if you say so, it's amazingly stupid.

TCB

Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Hi Lamont,
>Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
>sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not

>have Open GL support at all.
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>LaMont wrote:
>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>
>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
DAW
>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>>
>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall performance
>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>
>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to
me,
>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>
>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better performance
>> of these new plugins..
>>
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
SSL
>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>> Hello To all,
>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
>> 7
>>> Comp
>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>
>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
&
>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>> really
>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>> heights.
>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>> as
>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>
>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>>> Like
>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>> sweet!!..
>>>>
>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>> will
>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
with
>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>
>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>> And
>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>> algorithms
>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
for
>>>> the
>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
>> the
>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>>> quality
>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
but
>>> not
>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>> disconcerting
>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>> container
>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>>> original
>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>>> result,
>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>> of
>>>> the
>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>>> varied,
>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>
>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>> comparison
>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>>> TriTone
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>> the
>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>>> disappointment.
>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>> reason
>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>>> certain
>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>>> get
>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
use
>>> more
>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gene
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>
>ADK Pro Audio
>(859) 635-5762
>www.adkproaudio.com
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73295 is a reply to message #73288] Fri, 29 September 2006 12:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
Hi,


LaMont wrote:
> Neil ,
> Remember when TC brought out their Powercore? To this day, both the PCI or
> Firewire version will tax your PCI buss performance. This is why folks are
> using Magma Chasis for runing multiple UAD's and using DUAL processor with
> Dual PCI buss Channels.


The funny part is that the TC and UAD have tons of compatibility and
performance issues on dual buss/ dual cpu systems like the Opteron.
especially if they are running Dual core CPUs. Mainly due the AMD 8131
chip set. Only way around it is to buy a Magma and put it on the 32 bit
slot which shares with almost all the motherboards on board components.
The only dual buss Opteron board thats works fully with the UAD and TC
power core on all the PCI-X, PCI slots are ones that use the AMD 8132
chip sets. UADS and Powercore work best on single socket, Intel and ATI
(AMD) and dual socket AMD-8132 and Xeon wood crest based chip sets. You
can easily run 4 in any combo of PCI/PCI-E on any of these boards with
out an abnormal CPU load.

>
> If all you have in your DAW is a Single channel PCI buss setup, you are actually
> degrading the overall peformance by imlementing these so-called Powered plugins.
> You ever see some of those Super Daw boxes over there on Nuendo.com user
> forum??
> Lead by our very own Brain Tanksersly. They found out by massive research
> that to run those Powered Plugins optimally, at a decent latency, your'e
> need have a Dual channeled,high end Dual -core Opteron, Now Conroe Intels,
> with at least 8 gigs RAM..% gigs per channel. Withthe UADs and Powercore
> on their on PCI buss.. :)


On the majority of all the Conroe based Motherboards same as on single
socket AMD boards there are only 2 buses, PCI-E and PCI. Virtually
everything except video share the PCI buss. Running a combo of PCI-e and
PCI versions of the UAD/TC cards will be the only way o run them on
separate buses. The are a couple of high end workstation boards that
just came out with 3 buses, PCI-X, PCI and PCI-E but are very expensive.

Personally I think companies are doing it wrong by using firewire for
doing DSP this way. Firewire like USB is a very limited bandwidth
general purpose connection. Everybody is going put drives, sound cards
and who knows what else on the same firewire buss. If you have to put in
separate firewire card for each device hen whats the point of firewire.:)

It would make more sense for them have a PCI-e host card and an external
box that you can add DSP cards too to upgrade the processing power. Huge
amount s of bandwidth is available on even a 1x PCI-e slot. Far more
than 5 PCI slots worth of DSP could be run from one card.


>
> I said all that to say, that TC has never really had great Asio drivers,
> so their performance is not that stellar. Same with Duende, the Firewire
> and Asio drivers need a lot of work. From what I'm told, writing good firewire
> drivers is easy.

Neither the TC nor UAD use ASIO drivers. They use VST and special
hardware driver that the VST plug ins communicate with.




Chris

>
> So, Neil you do have choices in how you want to implement your Native solution.
>
> Take care LaMont
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>> I have some native plugs that I like a lot, and I'm sure the ones
>> you mentioned sound great, but what I need is MORE POWER,
>> SCOTTY!!! - or more precisely, less CPU load (rememeber, I'm
>> running at 24-bit/88.sk, and a LOT of tracks!), so the LiquidMix
>> or Duende are looking interesting to me.
>>
>> Like the quikquak demo that I tested last night... takes up 20%
>> of my CPU power all by itself - sounds great, but I can't use
>> that kind of resource hog!
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>> Hello To all,
>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
>> Comp
>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>
>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
> PT-Mpowered..
>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>> as
>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>
>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
> Like
>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..
>>>
>>>
>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>> will
>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>
>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>> And
>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil
>>>>>
>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container” for
>>> the
>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of the
>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>
>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>> quality
>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
>> not
>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the container
>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
> original
>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a result,
>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound of
>>> the
>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and varied,
>>>> if not “real”.
>>>>
>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct comparison
>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the TriTone
>>>> sound.
>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish the
>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big disappointment.
>>>>
>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One reason
>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
> certain
>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>> get
>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
>> more
>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>
>>>> Gene
>>>>
>

--
Chris Ludwig

ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73296 is a reply to message #73295] Fri, 29 September 2006 12:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Neil is currently offline  Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
Senior Member
Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Personally I think companies are doing it wrong by using firewire for
>doing DSP this way. Firewire like USB is a very limited bandwidth
>general purpose connection.

Chris, as I understand it, USB 2.0 has better "one-way" speed
than Firewire, but Firewire has better "both-way" speed
than does USB 2.0 (which makes a difference if you're sending
signals out, then back in via either protocol), and that's why
they all choose Firewire. Is that actually the case?

Neil
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73297 is a reply to message #73291] Fri, 29 September 2006 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.

I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That being
the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support being
that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.


Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Hi Lamont,
>Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
>sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not

>have Open GL support at all.
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>LaMont wrote:
>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>
>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
DAW
>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>>
>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall performance
>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>
>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to
me,
>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>
>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better performance
>> of these new plugins..
>>
>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
SSL
>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>> Hello To all,
>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
>> 7
>>> Comp
>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>
>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
&
>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>> really
>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>> heights.
>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>> as
>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>
>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>>> Like
>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>> sweet!!..
>>>>
>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>> will
>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
with
>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>
>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>> And
>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>> algorithms
>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
for
>>>> the
>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
>> the
>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>>> quality
>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
but
>>> not
>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>> disconcerting
>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>> container
>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>>> original
>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>>> result,
>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>> of
>>>> the
>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>>> varied,
>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>
>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>> comparison
>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>>> TriTone
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>> the
>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>>> disappointment.
>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>> reason
>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>>> certain
>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>>> get
>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
use
>>> more
>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gene
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>
>ADK Pro Audio
>(859) 635-5762
>www.adkproaudio.com
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73298 is a reply to message #73295] Fri, 29 September 2006 13:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Agreed!!

Personally I think companies are doing it wrong by using firewire for doing
DSP this way. Firewire like USB is a very limited bandwidth general purpose
connection. Everybody is going put drives, sound cards and who knows what
else on the same firewire buss. If you have to put in separate firewire card
for each device hen whats the point of firewire.:)
It would make more sense for them have a PCI-e host card and an external
box that you can add DSP cards too to upgrade the processing power. Huge
amount s of bandwidth is available on even a 1x PCI-e slot. Far more than
5 PCI slots worth of DSP could be run from one card.



Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>LaMont wrote:
>> Neil ,
>> Remember when TC brought out their Powercore? To this day, both the PCI
or
>> Firewire version will tax your PCI buss performance. This is why folks
are
>> using Magma Chasis for runing multiple UAD's and using DUAL processor
with
>> Dual PCI buss Channels.
>
>
>The funny part is that the TC and UAD have tons of compatibility and
>performance issues on dual buss/ dual cpu systems like the Opteron.
>especially if they are running Dual core CPUs. Mainly due the AMD 8131
>chip set. Only way around it is to buy a Magma and put it on the 32 bit

>slot which shares with almost all the motherboards on board components.

>The only dual buss Opteron board thats works fully with the UAD and TC
>power core on all the PCI-X, PCI slots are ones that use the AMD 8132
>chip sets. UADS and Powercore work best on single socket, Intel and ATI

>(AMD) and dual socket AMD-8132 and Xeon wood crest based chip sets. You

>can easily run 4 in any combo of PCI/PCI-E on any of these boards with
>out an abnormal CPU load.
>
>>
>> If all you have in your DAW is a Single channel PCI buss setup, you are
actually
>> degrading the overall peformance by imlementing these so-called Powered
plugins.
>> You ever see some of those Super Daw boxes over there on Nuendo.com user
>> forum??
>> Lead by our very own Brain Tanksersly. They found out by massive research
>> that to run those Powered Plugins optimally, at a decent latency, your'e
>> need have a Dual channeled,high end Dual -core Opteron, Now Conroe Intels,
>> with at least 8 gigs RAM..% gigs per channel. Withthe UADs and Powercore
>> on their on PCI buss.. :)
>
>
>On the majority of all the Conroe based Motherboards same as on single
>socket AMD boards there are only 2 buses, PCI-E and PCI. Virtually
>everything except video share the PCI buss. Running a combo of PCI-e and

>PCI versions of the UAD/TC cards will be the only way o run them on
>separate buses. The are a couple of high end workstation boards that
>just came out with 3 buses, PCI-X, PCI and PCI-E but are very expensive.
>
>Personally I think companies are doing it wrong by using firewire for
>doing DSP this way. Firewire like USB is a very limited bandwidth
>general purpose connection. Everybody is going put drives, sound cards
>and who knows what else on the same firewire buss. If you have to put in

>separate firewire card for each device hen whats the point of firewire.:)
>
>It would make more sense for them have a PCI-e host card and an external

>box that you can add DSP cards too to upgrade the processing power. Huge

>amount s of bandwidth is available on even a 1x PCI-e slot. Far more
>than 5 PCI slots worth of DSP could be run from one card.
>
>
>>
>> I said all that to say, that TC has never really had great Asio drivers,
>> so their performance is not that stellar. Same with Duende, the Firewire
>> and Asio drivers need a lot of work. From what I'm told, writing good
firewire
>> drivers is easy.
>
>Neither the TC nor UAD use ASIO drivers. They use VST and special
>hardware driver that the VST plug ins communicate with.
>
>
>
>
>Chris
>
>>
>> So, Neil you do have choices in how you want to implement your Native
solution.
>>
>> Take care LaMont
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>> I have some native plugs that I like a lot, and I'm sure the ones
>>> you mentioned sound great, but what I need is MORE POWER,
>>> SCOTTY!!! - or more precisely, less CPU load (rememeber, I'm
>>> running at 24-bit/88.sk, and a LOT of tracks!), so the LiquidMix
>>> or Duende are looking interesting to me.
>>>
>>> Like the quikquak demo that I tested last night... takes up 20%
>>> of my CPU power all by itself - sounds great, but I can't use
>>> that kind of resource hog!
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>> Hello To all,
>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
7
>>> Comp
>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>
>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
&
>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
really
>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>>> as
>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>
>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>> Like
>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
sweet!!..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>> will
>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
with
>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>
>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>> And
>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only algorithms
>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the “container”
for
>>>> the
>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
the
>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>>> quality
>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
but
>>> not
>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little disconcerting
>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
container
>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>> original
>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
result,
>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
of
>>>> the
>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that’s clear). They do sound good, and
varied,
>>>>> if not “real”.
>>>>>
>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
comparison
>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
TriTone
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
the
>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
disappointment.
>>>>>
>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
reason
>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>> certain
>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>>> get
>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
use
>>> more
>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gene
>>>>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>
>ADK Pro Audio
>(859) 635-5762
>www.adkproaudio.com
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73299 is a reply to message #73293] Fri, 29 September 2006 13:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
On my Dual-Core Opteron, I have yet to max out the SSL plugs. These are really
some special plugins, as are the URS's..

"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSP.com> wrote:
>
>"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>Hello To all,
>>Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
>Comp
>>/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>
>>So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
PT-Mpowered..
>>Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris really
>>needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer heights.
>>In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>as
>>soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>
>>These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
Like
>>the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are sweet!!..
>>
>>
>>With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>will
>>take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>>Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>
>>All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>And
>>the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>
>>
>
>I have the Waves SSL plugins and I agree with everything you say about it.
>Nice package, although I haven’t tried it inside Paris yet.
>
>As to the future of low latency native systems: Symphony can do 1.8MS at
>64 samples right now.
>
> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=80936&hi ghlight=Symphony
>
>I think Brian and others are getting similar results on PC systems with
new
>RME Beta drivers. No need to wait for 80 core computers.
>
>As to efficiency, I can run about 80 channels of the Waves SSL plugins on
>my MacBook Pro. Sony is promising the Oxford plugs for Intel-Mac (RTAS)
will
>be out within a few weeks; I hope the efficiency is close.
>Gene
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73303 is a reply to message #73297] Fri, 29 September 2006 14:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
Hi Lamont,
All the of the software manufacturers are going to be using Direct show
many already are. It is just as powerful and from what I've seen easier
to code force and maintain.

Chris
Lamont wrote:
> Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
> Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.
>
> I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That being
> the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support being
> that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.
>
>
> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>> Hi Lamont,
>> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
>> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not
>
>> have Open GL support at all.
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> LaMont wrote:
>>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
>>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>>
>>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
> DAW
>>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
>>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>>>
>>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall performance
>>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>>
>>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to
> me,
>>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
>>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
>>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>>
>>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better performance
>>> of these new plugins..
>>>
>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
> SSL
>>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Deej
>>>>
>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>>> Hello To all,
>>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
>>> 7
>>>> Comp
>>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
> &
>>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>>> really
>>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>>> heights.
>>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>>> as
>>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>>
>>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>>>> Like
>>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>>> sweet!!..
>>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>>> will
>>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
> with
>>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>>
>>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>>> And
>>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>>> algorithms
>>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
> for
>>>>> the
>>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
>>> the
>>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The sound
>>>>> quality
>>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
> but
>>>> not
>>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>>> disconcerting
>>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>>> container
>>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
>>>> original
>>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>>>> result,
>>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>>> of
>>>>> the
>>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>>>> varied,
>>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>>> comparison
>>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>>>> TriTone
>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>>> the
>>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>>>> disappointment.
>>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>>> reason
>>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>>>> certain
>>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could never
>>>>> get
>>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
> use
>>>> more
>>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>
>> --
>> Chris Ludwig
>>
>> ADK Pro Audio
>> (859) 635-5762
>> www.adkproaudio.com
>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com
>

--
Chris Ludwig

ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73304 is a reply to message #73296] Fri, 29 September 2006 14:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris Ludwig is currently offline  Chris Ludwig   UNITED STATES
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
Senior Member
HI Neil,
Yes thats pretty much one of the main reasons. I think the cross
platform part also comes into play in this.

Chris


Neil wrote:
> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>> Personally I think companies are doing it wrong by using firewire for
>> doing DSP this way. Firewire like USB is a very limited bandwidth
>> general purpose connection.
>
> Chris, as I understand it, USB 2.0 has better "one-way" speed
> than Firewire, but Firewire has better "both-way" speed
> than does USB 2.0 (which makes a difference if you're sending
> signals out, then back in via either protocol), and that's why
> they all choose Firewire. Is that actually the case?
>
> Neil

--
Chris Ludwig

ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73309 is a reply to message #73303] Fri, 29 September 2006 16:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jamie K is currently offline  Jamie K   UNITED STATES
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
Senior Member
Of course no one is going to use direct show on OSX.

Direct show/Direct X is proprietary Microsoft stuff.

OpenGL is a multi-platform open system.

Last I heard Microsoft was finding ways to make it hard for software
companies to continue to use OpenGL on MSWindows but at least some
software companies were fighting that. Dunno how that's been working out
but it seemed pretty fishy.

Here's the OpenGL info page:

http://www.opengl.org/about/

OpenGL on the Mac: http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/

Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com


Chris Ludwig wrote:
> Hi Lamont,
> All the of the software manufacturers are going to be using Direct show
> many already are. It is just as powerful and from what I've seen easier
> to code force and maintain.
>
> Chris
> Lamont wrote:
>> Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
>> Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.
>>
>> I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That
>> being
>> the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support
>> being
>> that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.
>>
>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Lamont,
>>> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
>>> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will not
>>
>>> have Open GL support at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves
>>>> sugggest
>>>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>>>
>>>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
>> DAW
>>>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed
>>>> running
>>>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your
>>>> system.
>>>>
>>>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall
>>>> performance
>>>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to
>> me,
>>>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that
>>>> waves
>>>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp
>>>> excellerators
>>>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better
>>>> performance
>>>> of these new plugins..
>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
>> SSL
>>>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Deej
>>>>>
>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>>>> Hello To all,
>>>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL
>>>>>> bundle,
>>>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
>>>> 7
>>>>> Comp
>>>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
>> &
>>>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>>>> really
>>>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>>>> heights.
>>>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the
>>>>>> coloring
>>>> as
>>>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with
>>>>>> UAD.
>>>>> Like
>>>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>>>> sweet!!..
>>>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native
>>>>>> processing
>>>>> will
>>>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
>> with
>>>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a
>>>>>> beauty!!
>>>>> And
>>>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>>>> algorithms
>>>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
>> for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
>>>> the
>>>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The
>>>>>>> sound
>>>>>> quality
>>>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
>> but
>>>>> not
>>>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>>>> disconcerting
>>>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>>>> container
>>>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>> original
>>>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
>>>>> result,
>>>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>>>> of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
>>>>> varied,
>>>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
>>>>> TriTone
>>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>>>> the
>>>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
>>>>> disappointment.
>>>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>>>> reason
>>>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am
>>>>>>> reasonably
>>>>> certain
>>>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could
>>>>>>> never
>>>>>> get
>>>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
>> use
>>>>> more
>>>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>
>>> ADK Pro Audio
>>> (859) 635-5762
>>> www.adkproaudio.com
>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com
>>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73318 is a reply to message #73309] Fri, 29 September 2006 19:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMOnt[4] is currently offline  LaMOnt[4]
Messages: 1
Registered: September 2006
Junior Member
For sure, Uad is not going directx. The Pro Video market would not stand for
this. The Pixar's, SGI's workstations..Not to mention, Final Cut Pro, Avid..Nahh.
I don't buy it..
Again, the waves SSL plugs are wonderful..Matters not what platform it was
coded in, just as long as it performs..

Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Of course no one is going to use direct show on OSX.
>
>Direct show/Direct X is proprietary Microsoft stuff.
>
>OpenGL is a multi-platform open system.
>
>Last I heard Microsoft was finding ways to make it hard for software
>companies to continue to use OpenGL on MSWindows but at least some
>software companies were fighting that. Dunno how that's been working out

>but it seemed pretty fishy.
>
>Here's the OpenGL info page:
>
>http://www.opengl.org/about/
>
>OpenGL on the Mac: http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>Chris Ludwig wrote:
>> Hi Lamont,
>> All the of the software manufacturers are going to be using Direct show

>> many already are. It is just as powerful and from what I've seen easier

>> to code force and maintain.
>>
>> Chris
>> Lamont wrote:
>>> Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
>>> Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.
>>>
>>> I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That

>>> being
>>> the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support

>>> being
>>> that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.
>>>
>>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Lamont,
>>>> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not

>>>> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will
not
>>>
>>>> have Open GL support at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves
>>>>> sugggest
>>>>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>>>>
>>>>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that
your
>>> DAW
>>>>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed
>>>>> running
>>>>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your

>>>>> system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall

>>>>> performance
>>>>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>>>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined
to
>>> me,
>>>>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that

>>>>> waves
>>>>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp
>>>>> excellerators
>>>>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>>>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better

>>>>> performance
>>>>> of these new plugins..
>>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
>>> SSL
>>>>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deej
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>>>>> Hello To all,
>>>>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL

>>>>>>> bundle,
>>>>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series
EQ
>>>>> 7
>>>>>> Comp
>>>>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
>>> &
>>>>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>>>>> heights.
>>>>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the
>>>>>>> coloring
>>>>> as
>>>>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with

>>>>>>> UAD.
>>>>>> Like
>>>>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations
are
>>>>>> sweet!!..
>>>>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native
>>>>>>> processing
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
>>> with
>>>>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a
>>>>>>> beauty!!
>>>>>> And
>>>>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>>>>> algorithms
>>>>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
>>> for
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most
of
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The

>>>>>>>> sound
>>>>>>> quality
>>>>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
>>> but
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>>>>> disconcerting
>>>>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>>>>> container
>>>>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of

>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>> original
>>>>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As
a
>>>>>> result,
>>>>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good,
and
>>>>>> varied,
>>>>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for
the
>>>>>> TriTone
>>>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do
wish
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a
big
>>>>>> disappointment.
>>>>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided.
One
>>>>>> reason
>>>>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am
>>>>>>>> reasonably
>>>>>> certain
>>>>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could

>>>>>>>> never
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix
to
>>> use
>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>>
>>>> ADK Pro Audio
>>>> (859) 635-5762
>>>> www.adkproaudio.com
>>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com
>>>
>>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73321 is a reply to message #73293] Fri, 29 September 2006 19:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
animix is currently offline  animix   FRANCE
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
I've got a friend here with both the Waves SSL bundle and the URS "All EQ"
and a couple of their other compressors. I'm gonna test drive them over the
weekend. If I could find something that I could use in Paris that would
allow me the sonic mojo that I get with Cubase SX and UAD-1 plugins, I'd
sell 3 out fo 4 of my UAD cards, and a couple of my RME cards, put the money
toward these plugins and go back to mixing 100% in Paris with the Cubase rig
as a sequencer only and for the occasional Hi Rez project. I'm just plain
sick and tired of mixing on two DAWs. though the flexibility is beyond
belief, it's such a PITA.

Deej


"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSP.com> wrote in message news:451d6ce3$1@linux...
>
> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >
> >Hello To all,
> >Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
> >and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ 7
> Comp
> >/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
> >
> >So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
PT-Mpowered..
> >Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
really
> >needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
heights.
> >In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
> as
> >soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
> >
> >These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
Like
> >the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
sweet!!..
> >
> >
> >With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
> will
> >take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
> >Zero latency native thru a DAW..
> >
> >All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
> And
> >the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
> >
> >
>
> I have the Waves SSL plugins and I agree with everything you say about it.
> Nice package, although I haven't tried it inside Paris yet.
>
> As to the future of low latency native systems: Symphony can do 1.8MS at
> 64 samples right now.
>
> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=80936&hi ghlight=Symphony
>
> I think Brian and others are getting similar results on PC systems with
new
> RME Beta drivers. No need to wait for 80 core computers.
>
> As to efficiency, I can run about 80 channels of the Waves SSL plugins on
> my MacBook Pro. Sony is promising the Oxford plugs for Intel-Mac (RTAS)
will
> be out within a few weeks; I hope the efficiency is close.
> Gene
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73324 is a reply to message #73285] Fri, 29 September 2006 20:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
animix is currently offline  animix   FRANCE
Messages: 356
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
That's very interesting. Yesterday I bought two NVidia FX5500 dual head
viideo cards (AGP and PCI) with 256MB of VRAM on each card. I'm getting
ready to put my Matrox G450's (32MB per card-16MB per video head ) out to
pasture. I've been very happy with the one I've got here in my Cubase
machine. It will be interesting to see how these work with my Paris rig on
Win ME. If I like the Waves SSL and the URS plugins, I'll probably build
muyself a new Paris rig using my Gigabyte NForce 3 chipset based mobo, see
if I can get Paris working on a dual core CPU and start running Paris on Win
XP again. I've got a dual core 4200 sitiing here and I'm going to do some
experimentation with getting it happening with Paris. Otherwise I'll see if
going with an XP 3500+ CPU will give me enough horsepower. If these work,
I'll likely sell 4 x of my ADAT cards, 3 UAD-1 cards and 2 HDSP 9652's and
retool my situation completely. As I said in my other post to this thread.
I'm getting tired of mixing on two DAWs and I'm not ready to get rid of
Paris. I just want that *reality* that I get with the UAD-1 plugins in Paris
without the latency.

Thanks for the heads up.

Deej

"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d5c64$1@linux...
>
> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>
> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
DAW
> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>
> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall
performance
> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>
> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined to me,
> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp
excellerators
> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>
> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better
performance
> of these new plugins..
>
> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
> >LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
SSL
> >pluygins with Paris?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >"LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Hello To all,
> >> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL
bundle,
> >> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
> 7
> >Comp
> >> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
> >>
> >> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris &
> >PT-Mpowered..
> >> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
> >really
> >> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
> >heights.
> >> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
> as
> >> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
> >>
> >> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
> >Like
> >> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
> >sweet!!..
> >>
> >>
> >> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
> >will
> >> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
with
> >> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
> >>
> >> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
> >And
> >> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
> >> >>ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
> >> >>dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
> >> >>you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
> >> >>
> >> >>Neil
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
> >algorithms
> >> >are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
for
> >> the
> >> >eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most of
> the
> >> >impulse responses.
> >> >
> >> >I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The
sound
> >> quality
> >> >is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good but
> >not
> >> >always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
> >disconcerting
> >> >to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
> >container
> >> >does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of the
> >original
> >> >units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As a
> >result,
> >> >all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
> of
> >> the
> >> >original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good, and
> >varied,
> >> >if not "real".
> >> >
> >> >The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
> >comparison
> >> >to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for the
> >TriTone
> >> >sound.
> >> >The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
> the
> >> >hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a big
> >disappointment.
> >> >
> >> >My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
> >reason
> >> >is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
> >certain
> >> >that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could
never
> >> get
> >> >both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to use
> >more
> >> >extensively in my room.
> >> >
> >> >Gene
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73336 is a reply to message #73321] Fri, 29 September 2006 22:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Hey DJ,
I feel your pain..As I and others have been witness to your quest for 2 system
perfection.

For me, in my personal studio, I conceeded that onmy Dual-core Opteron(PT-M(48
stereo), & Nuendo) and I have A Paris machine with Acid. With a KVR switch,I
choose the DAW that fits the song..One DAW at time:)

One thing that I can vouch for is the use of a analog mixer to sum , even
with Paris. Just by using an old Mackie 1604vlz, you can hear the difference
with just a stereo (2track) sub into the anolog mixer. Having a analog mixer
will definitely smooth out Cubase /Nuendo's summing. Thus, letting the mixer
push the app for a more aggresive sound.

I'm anolog summing believer. Even with these great new Plugins, Analog summing
can make the difference.
P.S. Those Makie Onyx mixers are awsome for summing..Then you get those nice
Pres..


"DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>I've got a friend here with both the Waves SSL bundle and the URS "All EQ"
>and a couple of their other compressors. I'm gonna test drive them over
the
>weekend. If I could find something that I could use in Paris that would
>allow me the sonic mojo that I get with Cubase SX and UAD-1 plugins, I'd
>sell 3 out fo 4 of my UAD cards, and a couple of my RME cards, put the money
>toward these plugins and go back to mixing 100% in Paris with the Cubase
rig
>as a sequencer only and for the occasional Hi Rez project. I'm just plain
>sick and tired of mixing on two DAWs. though the flexibility is beyond
>belief, it's such a PITA.
>
>Deej
>
>
>"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSP.com> wrote in message news:451d6ce3$1@linux...
>>
>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hello To all,
>> >Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>> >and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series EQ
7
>> Comp
>> >/56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>> >
>> >So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
&
>PT-Mpowered..
>> >Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>really
>> >needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>heights.
>> >In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>> as
>> >soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>> >
>> >These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with UAD.
>Like
>> >the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>sweet!!..
>> >
>> >
>> >With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>> will
>> >take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability with
>> >Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>> >
>> >All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>> And
>> >the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I have the Waves SSL plugins and I agree with everything you say about
it.
>> Nice package, although I haven't tried it inside Paris yet.
>>
>> As to the future of low latency native systems: Symphony can do 1.8MS
at
>> 64 samples right now.
>>
>> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=80936&hi ghlight=Symphony
>>
>> I think Brian and others are getting similar results on PC systems with
>new
>> RME Beta drivers. No need to wait for 80 core computers.
>>
>> As to efficiency, I can run about 80 channels of the Waves SSL plugins
on
>> my MacBook Pro. Sony is promising the Oxford plugs for Intel-Mac (RTAS)
>will
>> be out within a few weeks; I hope the efficiency is close.
>> Gene
>>
>
>
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73340 is a reply to message #73303] Fri, 29 September 2006 22:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
LaMont is currently offline  LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
Senior Member
Did you know that Cubase 4 does not support Directx?

Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Hi Lamont,
>All the of the software manufacturers are going to be using Direct show

>many already are. It is just as powerful and from what I've seen easier

>to code force and maintain.
>
>Chris
>Lamont wrote:
>> Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
>> Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.
>>
>> I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That
being
>> the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support being
>> that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.
>>
>>
>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Lamont,
>>> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not

>>> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will
not
>>
>>> have Open GL support at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves sugggest
>>>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>>>
>>>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that your
>> DAW
>>>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed running
>>>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your system.
>>>>
>>>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall
performance
>>>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>>>
>>>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined
to
>> me,
>>>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that waves
>>>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp excellerators
>>>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>>>
>>>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better
performance
>>>> of these new plugins..
>>>>
>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
>> SSL
>>>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Deej
>>>>>
>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>>>> Hello To all,
>>>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL bundle,
>>>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series
EQ
>>>> 7
>>>>> Comp
>>>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
>> &
>>>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>>>> really
>>>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>>>> heights.
>>>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the coloring
>>>> as
>>>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with
UAD.
>>>>> Like
>>>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations are
>>>>> sweet!!..
>>>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native processing
>>>>> will
>>>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
>> with
>>>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a beauty!!
>>>>> And
>>>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>>>> algorithms
>>>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
>> for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most
of
>>>> the
>>>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The
sound
>>>>>> quality
>>>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
>> but
>>>>> not
>>>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>>>> disconcerting
>>>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>>>> container
>>>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of
the
>>>>> original
>>>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As
a
>>>>> result,
>>>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>>>> of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good,
and
>>>>> varied,
>>>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for
the
>>>>> TriTone
>>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do wish
>>>> the
>>>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a
big
>>>>> disappointment.
>>>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided. One
>>>>> reason
>>>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am reasonably
>>>>> certain
>>>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could
never
>>>>>> get
>>>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix to
>> use
>>>>> more
>>>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>
>>> ADK Pro Audio
>>> (859) 635-5762
>>> www.adkproaudio.com
>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>
>ADK Pro Audio
>(859) 635-5762
>www.adkproaudio.com
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com
Re: Anyone used this?Liquid MIx..No Waves SSL..WOW [message #73349 is a reply to message #73318] Sat, 30 September 2006 08:53 Go to previous message
Dedric Terry is currently offline  Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
Senior Member
A bit of a sidenote, but interestingly Cubase 4 and Nuendo 4 apparently
won't support DirectX plugins anymore (don't know about video or driver
support - I'll have SX4 Monday to find out I hope).

I don't know if that implies anything in particular, at least in terms of
the longterm plans for DirectX, and Directshow vs. OpenGL, etc; could just
be Steinberg's attempt to push VST3, or just get rid of DirectX headaches
once and for all (since it is a more limited plugin format than VST).

The reviews of Liquid Mix I've read haven't been stellar. I'm holding out
for a Duende at some point.

Dedric

On 9/29/06 8:16 PM, in article 451dd381$1@linux, "LaMOnt"
<jjdpro@ameeriech.net> wrote:

>
> For sure, Uad is not going directx. The Pro Video market would not stand for
> this. The Pixar's, SGI's workstations..Not to mention, Final Cut Pro,
> Avid..Nahh.
> I don't buy it..
> Again, the waves SSL plugs are wonderful..Matters not what platform it was
> coded in, just as long as it performs..
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>> Of course no one is going to use direct show on OSX.
>>
>> Direct show/Direct X is proprietary Microsoft stuff.
>>
>> OpenGL is a multi-platform open system.
>>
>> Last I heard Microsoft was finding ways to make it hard for software
>> companies to continue to use OpenGL on MSWindows but at least some
>> software companies were fighting that. Dunno how that's been working out
>
>> but it seemed pretty fishy.
>>
>> Here's the OpenGL info page:
>>
>> http://www.opengl.org/about/
>>
>> OpenGL on the Mac: http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>> Chris Ludwig wrote:
>>> Hi Lamont,
>>> All the of the software manufacturers are going to be using Direct show
>
>>> many already are. It is just as powerful and from what I've seen easier
>
>>> to code force and maintain.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>> Lamont wrote:
>>>> Hey Chris, not sure why as well. Maybe they no something???
>>>> Or, they already have a easy port over version waiting.
>>>>
>>>> I do know (And You) that Open GL is used for high level graphics. That
>
>>>> being
>>>> the case, I really can't see both Microsoft & Apple dropping support
>
>>>> being
>>>> that the entire Video post pro market works on that standard.
>>>>
>>>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Lamont,
>>>>> Too bad Waves wasted time on using Open GL for the SSL plug ins. Not
>
>>>>> sure why they did it sense future versions of Windows and Apple will
> not
>>>>
>>>>> have Open GL support at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LaMont wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Guys. None. These plugs are very efficent. Here is what waves
>>>>>> sugggest
>>>>>> and really as shededsome light to the Native plugin delima.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Waves says in the SSL docuemntation that these plugin require that
> your
>>>> DAW
>>>>>> run in 32 bit Video mode. If not,(And I have personally witnessed
>>>>>> running
>>>>>> in 16 bot mode) these plugins are sluggish and will bore down your
>
>>>>>> system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plain and simple: The bettter your Video card is, the better overall
>
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>> you'll get with using the SSL plugs.
>>>>>> This is a revelaion of sorts because, as Chuck Duffy once expalined
> to
>>>> me,
>>>>>> The UAD PCI card is no more than a nice Video card. It seems that
>
>>>>>> waves
>>>>>> have tapped into this technology of using the video card's dsp
>>>>>> excellerators
>>>>>> to enhance the performance of their new SSL Plugins.
>>>>>> Suffice it to say that, the better the video performance,the better
>
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>> of these new plugins..
>>>>>> "DJ" <notachance@net.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> LaMont. Is there a big latency issue with the URS plugins or the Waves
>>>> SSL
>>>>>>> pluygins with Paris?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:451d4bf1$1@linux...
>>>>>>>> Hello To all,
>>>>>>>> Not to rain on the Liquid Channel, but we just got the Waves SSL
>
>>>>>>>> bundle,
>>>>>>>> and all I can say is WOW!! DEAD On. We have a SSL 4000G/W E Series
> EQ
>>>>>> 7
>>>>>>> Comp
>>>>>>>> /56 channels and those plugins sound just like the real things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, I went to load up the VST /RTAS version demo to try out in Paris
>>>> &
>>>>>>> PT-Mpowered..
>>>>>>>> Needless to say, the SSL plugs sounds Wonderful in Paris.. Like Paris
>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> needed the help :)..But, it takes our beloved Paris sound to newer
>>>>>>> heights.
>>>>>>>> In Nuendo & PT, same results.. In those apps, you can hear the
>>>>>>>> coloring
>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> soon as you insert them on a channel!! :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These days there are some great Native Plugins that can hang with
>
>>>>>>>> UAD.
>>>>>>> Like
>>>>>>>> the URS line.. Their Neve, API, Pultec, fairchild,etc emulations
> are
>>>>>>> sweet!!..
>>>>>>>> With Intel announcing 80 cores on a chip in 5 years.. Native
>>>>>>>> processing
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> take over and we will soon reach BrianT coveted 64 sample stability
>>>> with
>>>>>>>> Zero latency native thru a DAW..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All in all, we are seeing the fruits with Sonar 6..Wow wahat a
>>>>>>>> beauty!!
>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>> the new featuers coming from Cubase4. Again WOW!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Neil" <IOUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Chris, from what I've read about it, it's supposed to be algo's
>>>>>>>>>> ported from the LiquidChannel, right? If you're a Mucusrite
>>>>>>>>>> dealer, you must have tried that unit out, yes? If so, what do
>>>>>>>>>> you think of that one? Sounds good? Not so good?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Liquid Mix is not Algo based. It is convolution based. The only
>>>>>>> algorithms
>>>>>>>>> are containers that hold the various impulses. Both the "container"
>>>> for
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> eq models and the one for compressor impulses are new as are most
> of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> impulse responses.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I only have a few hours playing with a friends unit in Logic. The
>
>>>>>>>>> sound
>>>>>>>> quality
>>>>>>>>> is approximately equivalent to a UAD-1 (IMHO). Which is quite good
>>>> but
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> always the same as the original. The compressors are a little
>>>>>>> disconcerting
>>>>>>>>> to me. Many of the impulses are right-on but the algorithm for the
>>>>>>> container
>>>>>>>>> does not model the real attack, release, and timing attributes of
>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> original
>>>>>>>>> units, and this is a big part of the sound of any compressor. As
> a
>>>>>>> result,
>>>>>>>>> all the compressors have a similar feel, but with the harmonic sound
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> original sampled unit (I hope that's clear). They do sound good,
> and
>>>>>>> varied,
>>>>>>>>> if not "real".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The EQ options were a little more disappointing for me. In a direct
>>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>>>> to HydraTone and AngleTone (beta), I had a strong preference for
> the
>>>>>>> TriTone
>>>>>>>>> sound.
>>>>>>>>> The hardware interface and DSP relief are indeed benefits. I do
> wish
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> hardware unit chased the selected channel in the DAW. That was a
> big
>>>>>>> disappointment.
>>>>>>>>> My friend is happy with his purchase, but I am still undecided.
> One
>>>>>>> reason
>>>>>>>>> is that I am still contemplating getting a Duende and I am
>>>>>>>>> reasonably
>>>>>>> certain
>>>>>>>>> that even with a dedicated Firewire card added to my Mac, I could
>
>>>>>>>>> never
>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>> both units to work together. I am hoping to borrow a Liquid Mix
> to
>>>> use
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> extensively in my room.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Chris Ludwig
>>>>>
>>>>> ADK Pro Audio
>>>>> (859) 635-5762
>>>>> www.adkproaudio.com
>>>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com
>>>>
>>>
>
Previous Topic: Christmas at what his names house.
Next Topic: OT: Kim W isn't me... ;o)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Sep 28 02:42:52 PDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04007 seconds