ua neve 1073 eq is here!

[IMS]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I might be wrong, but I don't think it works with PT HD.

Actually, the UAD does work with HD--I use it with my HD1 system. UA has a VST to RTAS wrapper (free for UAD owners) for the plugs. The downside is that the wrapper doesn't work very efficiently with PT7--they are working on a rewrite (or Fxpansion is) that will improve the efficiency. For someone with a newer G5, the UAD PCIe card is coming but not out yet, I believe.

Irwin

[van Overhalen]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I might be wrong, but I don't think it works with PT HD.

This thread has been amusing to me. It's a fine-sounding eq --- and I'm all for technological progress --- but reports of its magic healing properties are a bit exaggerated. It's a terrific musical tool like the rest of the UA plug-ins. The future is indeed bright for native DAW audio, which grows in power exponentially every year.

The thing about the 1073 plug-in that everyone should beware: it has a lot of torque. Making good EQ decisions requires good hearing and good logical thinking (i.e. "Which frequencies of this instrument would I like to emphasize with respect to its surrounding musical landscape? Which frequencies of this instrument would I like to de-emphasize with respect to its surrounding musical landscape?") In my opinion, most people do not have a good ear for this sort of thing. The fact that the 1073 plug-in is more powerful than many other digital EQs (i.e. turning a knob yields a strong, identifiable shift in sound), making the right decision becomes more important!

I say this as a mastering engineer who works on lots of records by both professionals and hobbyists alike. It's remarkable to me how easy it is to make a bad decision with EQ... I almost feel like people should have to pass a test before they start using a 1073! I would say that, for the vast majority of people, getting their hands on a 1073 is not necessarily a good thing. I'm expecting a rash of home-made records with very bizarre frequency anomalies because hobbyists now have access to a tool that makes them feel powerful. They've heard of this mystical 1073 thing but could never afford to use one... and now they feel like they can! And so they will. A lot. All over the place.

I realize the above paragraph sounds snobby and for that, I apologize. I'm at odds with that sentiment, because I am fundamentally a populist and I believe in the democratization of technology. I don't want to put anyone down and I certainly don't feel that only the rich or the established should have access to good sonic tools. I'm someone whose life has benefitted greatly from the advancement of technology and its increasing affordability. So I ain't no elitist.

Hooray for the UA1073 plug-in, but I guess I'm just concerned that people understand that skill is still the best EQ in the world. Y'know?

--- Chad

Great post !
Yes EQ is DANGEROUUUUUUUUS !
There's no better way of ruining your audio but applying eq when you haven't got a clue.

I really like the plug-in and yes you can overdo it easy.
It is kind of drastic and really grabs hard.
Very satisfying

[BrianT]

Originally Posted by AnalogBob

If there are only 3 instances of the plug on a DSP card thats a step back in time not foreward. I would expect at least 24 instances at the very least. 3 instances of a plugin takes me back to the days of working with my old old G4 where I would have to be choosy as to which plug I used on what. On my g5 I can have as many instances as I like and If I'm gonna pay for DSP which is supposed to be more power I expect to be able to add plugs till I'm blue in the face and it to do way more than my nativer proccesor not less.

Cool. I hear they will soon be making a "Sux" version that sounds like crap but will provide as many instances of crap as your heart desires. So you're all set there.

[BrianT]

Guys, what really needs to happen is that we listen to this stuff without looking at the names or the graphic faceplates.

The EQ either sounds good, or it doesn't. IMO, the UA plugs, and especially the high end ones, are mostly in a class of their own. Pultec, LA2, and 1073 are simply superior to the competition IMO, and I've spent many years making records with the originals.

My point is, I seriously think that if you changed the name and faceplate on most software EQs that are supposedly emulations, you wouldn't think twice about them being anything special. We are being manipulated in some Pavlovian fashion to hear what we want to hear when we see something that's got a rep. The fact that it's just some pixels seems to not matter. I think if there was an properly done blind test, many popular plugins (including some of the URS stuff) would not fare so well once stripped of the graphics.

To be clear, I'm not talking about the UAD plugs here. To my ears, they would hold up just as well in a blind test as they do with their names and graphics. They are not just good because they have vintage graphics. They are good because of the way they sound. I wish the same could be said for all "vintage" plugins.

[van Overhalen]

Originally Posted by BrianT

We are being manipulated in some Pavlovian fashion to hear what we want to hear when we see something that's got a rep.

Same goes the other way round and for hardware, too.
Pack an original 1073 into an ugly "modern" looking chassis with lots of LEDs plus fancy tube for marketing, name it something with "pro" and "ultra" in the name like "ultrapro" or "proultra" and sell it for $299,-

And then ask about it in the hi - end forum !

Now, that would be fun !!!

I can already hear them:

Hey, this is the HI END, man !!!

[narco]

does "4 instances" = 2 instances @ 96k? (or 1 @ 192 k !?)

narco

[mBlaze]

http://www.uaudio.com/products/softw...073/specs.html

Instances @ 44.1kHz

1073: 5 Mono, 3 Stereo (upsampled to 192k)
1073SE : 16 Mono, 15 Stereo

Because of the upsampling, the instance count I guess remains the same @192k-haven't tried it though. I've also heard reports of some people getting more instances of the SE on some systems but can't verify personally.

The SE is extremely close to the 1073 but without the upsampling and is really not the poor man's version. The SE is still agreat-sounding musical EQ in its own right.

[Flying_Dutchman]

Awesome digital EQ, great on rock guitars, i havent heard sth better for this in the digital domain. Don´t know the original Neve, but the UAD Version is just great. I own a hardware Pultec EQ in the Voxbox, great EQ, but the UAD Version is quite close , much closer than the URS thing i tested. I suggest that it might be same same thing with the Neve EQ.
Well done Universal Audio! I got 2 UADs an i will get 2 more + the Neve EQ.

[Billy Buck]

Originally Posted by BrianT

Cool. I hear they will soon be making a "Sux" version that sounds like crap but will provide as many instances of crap as your heart desires. So you're all set there.

Yeah, that is what I am talking about, a down-sampled version. For those that are only concerned with how many instances they can get, they should be happy as clams. Who cares what it sounds like, I can get 72 instances, on one card and it looks fabulous, after all, it's a Neve.

[raydo]

played with it for a hour and bought it
hey if i only got 1 instance out of it
i still would have bought it
its that good




r

[bsteeve@ozemail]

Just bought the UA1073, probably the best EQ plugin I've heard! You can even distort the input without it sounding absolute crap. (easy to over do though!)
BUT!!!!!Compatibility issue! Just contact UA about that and waiting for a response:
I've got a PT HD2 system, 1 UAD card, PT 6.9.1 and OX 10.3.9, VST2RTAS 1.0.7ua
The 1073 only works when it is the only plug loaded on the UAD, as soon as you open another UA plug an error message appear saying that their is a buffer size mismatch! Delay comp. doesn't work on that plug either for a strange reason. and yes PT and VST2RTAS have been set to the same buffer size, so hopefully it shoud not be my fault if this thing doesn't work. So far, I can only use that plug for submixing, which really sucks!
Does anyone have the same problem?

[IMS]

I know I can only run a few plugs (no more than 5) on my UAD with an HD1 system on Mac. Doesn't matter if it's 1176, LA-2A, Dimension D, etc. More than that causes the PCI usage meter in PT to redline on spikes. So given that the Neve plug is so much more intensive it doesn't surprise me that trying to load two might cause that to happen.

UAD says there are problems with the wrapper that will be addressed in an update at some point in the next couple of months.

Irwin

[TinderArts]

Can UA make a new card with at least 4x the dsp? I'll pay the price.

[bsteeve@ozemail]

Originally Posted by IMS

I know I can only run a few plugs (no more than 5) on my UAD with an HD1 system on Mac. Doesn't matter if it's 1176, LA-2A, Dimension D, etc. More than that causes the PCI usage meter in PT to redline on spikes. So given that the Neve plug is so much more intensive it doesn't surprise me that trying to load two might cause that to happen.

UAD says there are problems with the wrapper that will be addressed in an update at some point in the next couple of months.

Irwin

The thing is that if I open 1 x 1073 and then try to open an 1176 on my HD system, the error occur! It doesn't overload the card at all, it just doesn't work in conjunction with any other UA plug on the card. 4x 1073 no worries, 1 x 1073 and 1 x 1176 not at all! Does it do the same thing with you or it's just me?

[norman_nomad]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I might be wrong, but I don't think it works with PT HD.

This thread has been amusing to me. It's a fine-sounding eq --- and I'm all for technological progress --- but reports of its magic healing properties are a bit exaggerated. It's a terrific musical tool like the rest of the UA plug-ins. The future is indeed bright for native DAW audio, which grows in power exponentially every year.

The thing about the 1073 plug-in that everyone should beware: it has a lot of torque. Making good EQ decisions requires good hearing and good logical thinking (i.e. "Which frequencies of this instrument would I like to emphasize with respect to its surrounding musical landscape? Which frequencies of this instrument would I like to de-emphasize with respect to its surrounding musical landscape?") In my opinion, most people do not have a good ear for this sort of thing. The fact that the 1073 plug-in is more powerful than many other digital EQs (i.e. turning a knob yields a strong, identifiable shift in sound), making the right decision becomes more important!

I say this as a mastering engineer who works on lots of records by both professionals and hobbyists alike. It's remarkable to me how easy it is to make a bad decision with EQ... I almost feel like people should have to pass a test before they start using a 1073! I would say that, for the vast majority of people, getting their hands on a 1073 is not necessarily a good thing. I'm expecting a rash of home-made records with very bizarre frequency anomalies because hobbyists now have access to a tool that makes them feel powerful. They've heard of this mystical 1073 thing but could never afford to use one... and now they feel like they can! And so they will. A lot. All over the place.

I realize the above paragraph sounds snobby and for that, I apologize. I'm at odds with that sentiment, because I am fundamentally a populist and I believe in the democratization of technology. I don't want to put anyone down and I certainly don't feel that only the rich or the established should have access to good sonic tools. I'm someone whose life has benefitted greatly from the advancement of technology and its increasing affordability. So I ain't no elitist.

Hooray for the UA1073 plug-in, but I guess I'm just concerned that people understand that skill is still the best EQ in the world. Y'know?

--- Chad

I %100 agree. Get ready for a lot of songs with massive 12k boost!

The new UAD Neve plugs sound really good, but I think people are getting a bit overzelous... I don't think it blows the URS out of the water.... The URS N12 (the graphic EQ, not the 1084 look-a-like) is still a favorite "color" eq plug and IMO holds its own in some ways against the new UAD stuff.

[Empty Planet]

Hmmm. An awful lot of over-the-top accolades.

Anyone care to put their engineering where their mouth is?

How about posting a clip or two against the URS? I realize it's not the same unit, but I believe a couple of the controls match.

Illuminate us.

If the difference is indeed so profound, I'll jump on the bandwagon too. Why not?


Cheers.

[Kyle Ashley]

Just playing with the 1073 plug today. Very "chewy" and deep sounding. A little goes a long way.

[slaves666]

So after shelling out for the URS plugins, how does it compare? Do I really need a UAD one? I'm more concerned about the le version, not the full one. I'll run it on everything ;)

[0t0b0t]

Originally Posted by Empty Planet

How about posting a clip or two against the URS? I realize it's not the same unit, but I believe a couple of the controls match.

Illuminate us.

If the difference is indeed so profound, I'll jump on the bandwagon too. Why not?

The difference is indeed profound

I've just made a clip on a whole drum group (not a live rock drum kit though.. but minimalistically programmed).

Urs N Series vs UAD Neve 1073

Made the same settins in each plugin, which are:
+5 dB on the highshelf (URS N Series @ 12 kHz),
-3 dB on the mid band @ 360 Hz (URS N Series @ 350 Hz),
+4 dB on the lowshelf @ 110 Hz.

I switched the GUI of the UAD plugin to the detailed GUI-less view of Nuendo to make fine adjustments to the gain values.

The following clip starts off with the dry signal for two bars, then the URS N Series for two bars and finally the UAD Neve 1073 for two bars length:

1. dry
2. URS N Series
3. UAD Neve 1073

It's uncompressed 44100kHZ/16bit PCM Wave

[norman_nomad]

Originally Posted by slaves666

So after shelling out for the URS plugins, how does it compare? Do I really need a UAD one? I'm more concerned about the le version, not the full one. I'll run it on everything ;)

The UAD sounds more like an outboard piece to my ears...

I'll post some URS vs UAD sound samples when I get home next Friday if someone else doesn't beat me to it...

URS makes good stuff IMO... you should be able to make good mixes with them. Don't let plug lust creep in too deep!

On a side note, DIY is the best cure for plug lust. I'm forcing myself to build up a few Neve style Eq's as an alternative to buying the software.

[Empty Planet]

Hey 0t0b0t, cool Thanks for going to the trouble. I'll definitely be giving this a listen.

Cheers.

[norman_nomad]

0t0b0t beat me to it!

Nice example.... it sounds about right ... the UAD has a smoother top and a little more meat in the low and low mids..

Now 0t0b0t let me ask you something: When I went into the GUI -less view for the UAD I was not able to type in whole numbers... did the UAD allow for +5, -3, and +4 respectively?

[Empty Planet]

Well, I have to say "hmm" again. For whatever reason -- plugin output disparity or whatever -- the level on the last two sets of two bars is not matched and the UAD clip is louder. Take some scissors to them so that you have the two bars of the URS and the two bars of the UAD in separate pieces, normalize both of them, and all of a sudden I'm not finding a profound difference.

I'm not going to form an opinion yet. I'm not running through my best system at the moment, and other source material and settings might perhaps reveal the glory.

At any rate, thanks for going to the effort.

Cheers.

[0t0b0t]

You're welcome, Empty Planet!
It's unmatched because I purposely haven't matched them.. You are right, the last one (UAD) has higher amplitude. However I matched the eq gain values on both plugins so each of them could show what they're doing to the signal with the same settings.. not the overall gain. For a minute I considered matching their output, but the purpose of this test was to show how different they sound.
If you like you can match their amplitude and still they'd sound very different.
It seems to me the URS is much harscher and not that sweet sounding.. there's that brittle sound in the high end. In the low end the two plugins are comparable.. maybe the UAD has a little more meat.

norman_nomad,
I tried to type in whole numbers too.. wouldn't work. So I used the slider to come as close as possible to +5,03, -3,01 and +4,0. I think that was still in academic regions



cheers

[IMS]

Originally Posted by bsteeve@ozemail

The thing is that if I open 1 x 1073 and then try to open an 1176 on my HD system, the error occur! It doesn't overload the card at all, it just doesn't work in conjunction with any other UA plug on the card. 4x 1073 no worries, 1 x 1073 and 1 x 1176 not at all! Does it do the same thing with you or it's just me?

Sorry, but I haven't bought the 1073 so I can't duplicate your test exactly. However, I certainly have had different plugs open in the same sessions (1176, LA-2A, Dimension D) without any issue. I just can't go above 5 or so instances (which is no more than 50% or so on the UAD meter) without getting PCI spikes. Sounds like you may have a different problem...

Irwin

[kats]

I almost feel like people should have to pass a test before they start using a 1073! I would say that, for the vast majority of people, getting their hands on a 1073 is not necessarily a good thing

Yes, it could be the beginning of the end

Man, there's three bleeding dials on the sucker - wank em and listen. If you can't tell what sounds good and what doesn't - you've got bigger problems, and it's not the eq.

[Ruudman]

Multiply the simplicity of the eq with the number of channels you want to use it on, and the simplicity has almost vanished..
like magic!


ruudman

[severe]

Originally Posted by 0t0b0t

...It seems to me the URS is much harscher and not that sweet sounding.. there's that brittle sound in the high end. In the low end the two plugins are comparable.. maybe the UAD has a little more meat.

It's funny to me that the URS can now be described as "brittle" after all the lengthy threads/posts about its smoooth sound just months ago.

Please take no offense, 0t0b0t, and thanks for the sample.