UAD-2 - Manley Massive Passive in the queue

[jamwerks]

Originally Posted by Mr.HOLMES

I paid pretty much money in my store for three cards two UAD-1 and one UAD-2 Quad cards all over all....
3.100,00 Euros = 4441,00 US $ + near 500 US $ for plug ins at thier store.
.

Ouch !
For that money, buy 3 great hardware comps and then bounce the tracks. You can then sell them 15 years later without loosing a penny.

[csiking]

Originally Posted by steff3

What will we see in native processing this year? 12core or 16 core with additional processing on grapic cards ...

Of course we won't see it for a while but Intel developed a 48 DUAL core (96 independent processors) which takes up the space of a postage stamp! Speed goes up = quality of plugs go up. And for those of you whining....think back 5 - 8 years ago and what native plugs were like then. It's an evolution and it won't happen over night.

[kreeper_6]

Oh, here come the dongle boys....Most of them who use the biggest, most expensive dongle in history daily.

I'm currently running 90 UAD plugs with near ZERO CPU resources @ 24Bit/192Khz, can Native do that?

[Animus]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

Oh, here come the dongle boys....Most of them who use the biggest, most expensive dongle in history daily.

I'm currently running 90 UAD plugs with near ZERO CPU resources @ 24Bit/192Khz, can Native do that?

At what latency though?

I wonder how many Waves CL compressors you could run on a modern cpu.

[danger]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

People's ideas of "insanely expensive" blow my mind.

The sense of entitlement is unbridled!

- c

ok, sorry, maybe a bit overreacted, but look at the price difference between the solo, duo and quad, do you really think it's fair? why not cut the cardprices to the half and make the plugs around 3-400 bucks? (vouchers should stay :D )

[danger]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

I'm currently running 90 UAD plugs with near ZERO CPU resources @ 24Bit/192Khz, can Native do that?

cambridges?
and what about fatso, neve 33609?

[audiomichael]

Quite honestly, the FATSO alone is worth the price of admission.

[depulse]

Buy a Liquid Mix for 400 dollars and you can run 64 plugins in parallel and it's shipped with 40 compressors and 20 EQs without having to pay a cent more. It makes UAD2 look very expensive. The price difference between the solo, dual and quad doesn't make sense, except for UA. Each extra sharc chip costs peanuts, UA could have made just a quad version and sold it for 499 and sold way more plugins instead.

[hugol]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

People's ideas of "insanely expensive" blow my mind.

The sense of entitlement is unbridled!

- c

That's a bit unfair. UAD are marketing this to a wide audience after all so you will get differing opinions. If they wanted to market this to pros and commercial studios only fair enough - it's dirt cheap, but they aren't.

Let's face it, this isn't boutique studio hardware, it's software with an artificial constraint imposed by UAD. The DSP is beneficial to some, not so much to others and let's face it you could buy a whole new PC for the price of a UAD-2 card and people are very aware of this.

An upfront cost on DSP is a big ask when there are many awesome native offerings at the moment - and the premium for the Quad card is significant no one can argue that surely.

[bmanic]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

Oh, here come the dongle boys....Most of them who use the biggest, most expensive dongle in history daily.

I'm currently running 90 UAD plugs with near ZERO CPU resources @ 24Bit/192Khz, can Native do that?

No, but I got tired after 30 instances of Softube FET compressor.. seeing how our CPU was showing around 20% usage in Reaper. Oh, and it sounds better than the UA 1176 as well, in my opinion.

Again, you are comparing OLD relatively "low-tech" plugin counts to their native much more advanced counterparts. Of course the Waves and others will use up a bit of juice (but not much) as they model everything more carefully. How many Waves RenComps do you think one can insert on a modern DAW? I'm pretty sure nobody needs more than 100 of them.. and that'd probably be without even maxing a single core.. of which many of us have 8. Or something like the Oxford EQ? Heck, I can easily run more than 50 instances of FabFilter Pro-Q with 6 bands on this crappy laptop I have.. and that one is superior to the Oxford, at least in my opinion (charts would prove that as well because the Oxford has warping at Nyquist and suffers from some nasty aliasing.. check it out in Christian Budde's analyzer and prepare to cry).

Wanna compare apples to apples? Try the Fatso Jr. and compare that to something like the IK Fairchild (both have complex modeling of harmonic distortion and program dependencies) or Urs Saturation 2.0. Ouch.. game over. Buy another card.

- bManic

[jamwerks]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

I'm currently running 90 UAD plugs with near ZERO CPU resources @ 24Bit/192Khz, can Native do that?

You work at 192? And have 90 instances open? That's the same as 360 instances at 48!

[electricsound]

Originally Posted by jamwerks

You work at 192? And have 90 instances open? That's the same as 360 instances at 48!

Keep in mind that upsampled plugs have the same number of instances on 44 as higher sample rates.

[SPUMD]

The onley reason I have an UAD is the Precision EQ.
It's the most natural sounding plugin EQ I have ever heard.

If someone can tell me a native one, that sounds that good i sell my UAD.
I compared a lot of EQs and I can tell that Ozone has a very nice sounding EQ too.
But no EQ can threat the highs so soft like the Precision.

So lets hear what you got to say...

[kreeper_6]

Originally Posted by bmanic

No, but I got tired after 30 instances of Softube FET compressor.. seeing how our CPU was showing around 20% usage in Reaper. Oh, and it sounds better than the UA 1176 as well, in my opinion.

Again, you are comparing OLD relatively "low-tech" plugin counts to their native much more advanced counterparts. Of course the Waves and others will use up a bit of juice (but not much) as they model everything more carefully. How many Waves RenComps do you think one can insert on a modern DAW? I'm pretty sure nobody needs more than 100 of them.. and that'd probably be without even maxing a single core.. of which many of us have 8. Or something like the Oxford EQ? Heck, I can easily run more than 50 instances of FabFilter Pro-Q with 6 bands on this crappy laptop I have.. and that one is superior to the Oxford, at least in my opinion (charts would prove that as well because the Oxford has warping at Nyquist and suffers from some nasty aliasing.. check it out in Christian Budde's analyzer and prepare to cry).

Wanna compare apples to apples? Try the Fatso Jr. and compare that to something like the IK Fairchild (both have complex modeling of harmonic distortion and program dependencies) or Urs Saturation 2.0. Ouch.. game over. Buy another card.

- bManic

Says who?

Universal Audio | UAD Charts

Nobody asked me how many UAD-2's I have...But why would they when they can just slam me? With your theory of plugin usage many should be fine with a UAD-2 Quad, but yet they still bitch. If somebody can't mix effectively with a single Quad, there is an underlying problem.

If I could compare Apples to Apples I would, but NOBODY has a FATSO SR., 33609, EMT 250, Trident, MOOG Filter, Dimension D, RE-201, Plate 140, Cooper Time Cube Mk II to compare it too!

How bout that WaveArts Saturator...Talk about low on CPU cycles. dfegad

Originally Posted by jamwerks

You work at 192? And have 90 instances open? That's the same as 360 instances at 48!

I like to do Benchmark Testing.

[feck]

And the inevitable argument about everything but the topic of the thread ensues. Come on!

[electricsound]

Originally Posted by feck

And the inevitable argument about everything but the topic of the thread ensues. Come on!

Indeed. I'd rather UAD updates/news were banned here than have to read the same twaddle every time.

[arimaka]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

If I could compare Apples to Apples I would, but NOBODY has a FATSO SR., 33609, EMT 250, Trident, MOOG Filter, Dimension D, RE-201, Plate 140, Cooper Time Cube Mk II to compare it too!

AMEN!!!

[Farshad]

Originally Posted by gundam

... Clever marketing, I must say.

+1

[Farshad]

Originally Posted by SPUMD

The onley reason I have an UAD is the Precision EQ.
It's the most natural sounding plugin EQ I have ever heard.

If someone can tell me a native one, that sounds that good i sell my UAD.
I compared a lot of EQs and I can tell that Ozone has a very nice sounding EQ too.
But no EQ can threat the highs so soft like the Precision.

So lets hear what you got to say...

Try Sonnox or Flux Epure if you have not already. I have found the Sonnox to be great at surgical tasks.

[Farshad]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

Says who? ... If I could compare Apples to Apples I would, but NOBODY has a FATSO SR., 33609, EMT 250, Trident, MOOG Filter, Dimension D, RE-201, Plate 140, Cooper Time Cube Mk II to compare it too!
...

May be not with the same pretty gui or name but they are plenty native options now available that SOUND equally good or better and you do not have to pay royalty fees for the Neve logos used on them either

[NuSkoolTone]

FWIW, I LOVE my UAD hardware. (4 UAD1, 1 UAD2 Quad). That said I've been having a problem with the value of the platform lately and have been voicing it on UA's forum.

It's just not the same deal it was, even on it's own nevermind if you look around and compare to what's available now. UAD to me has always been a "Bang for buck" proposition because I couldn't afford the real gear. NEVER because I wanted it OVER slutty gear. IME the better your tracks are recorded, the LESS you need these DSP "solutions".

From a software perspective, nearly ALL the plug-ins are now a solid $100 more than they used to be and I'm not talking about the licensed stuff. Those are DOUBLE what used to be the "Norm" prices.

From a hardware perspective, the only one that makes sense to get IMO is the Quad and it's expense makes it compete with many OTHER worthy studio upgrades. (Towards Monitors, Slutty Outboard, etc...)

So that brings us to:

Promos and Incentives. It used to be that if you bought the hardware you got some nice vouchers and coupons that let you subsidize the cost of the plug-ins. With what many of us consider UA's new pricing model, this is no longer true! So it makes the platform more expensive.

There are also more restrictions on the promotions than ever. NO discounts on new plug-ins is nothing new and expected. Though they stay "new" for a lot longer. The KILLER for me was this: They had a GREAT promo on a Quad that threw in some nice desirable plug-ins, but it was ONLY available to people that didn't already OWN a UAD2! So since I did, I wasn't eligible. THAT turned me off. Is my money not as good? Otherwise I would have bought a second UAD2 Quad on the spot!

I think the quality of the new stuff is better than ever and they've priced it as such. The problem is UA is no longer the only game in town for good DSP/Plug-ins, and computing power is no longer in short supply. In fact it's a commodity at this point IMO. The sooner UA realizes this, the better.

[Mr.HOLMES]

I have said everything I had to say for that it is DSP stuff the native stuff I named above sounds better today... a long time it was the other way round but now times have changed.

I just did a test again with files of the Softube FET.
It sounds more 3 D more open and breathes more with the sound.

The Blackface on the UAD Card does pretty strange things in the time domain.

Anyway I was a long time happy with it.
If things does not change one day I will sell the Quad Card and only use the plugs I realy need often on a single card and sell all the other plugs I do not use often.

I did today a DEMO of the URS 1975 and that plug in even if it is older as well did some very nice things on the drum bus as well....

So there are a lot of native plugs out there which do the trick for me in a better more likable way ....
Its subjective but since the Softube and Waves TACK my opinion on UAD CHANGED!!!

I wrote them an e-mail about this issue yesterday I hope they have standpoint to it.
We will se but I cant wait one year.... the native stuff sounds too damm good.

[Synergy Media]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

You people are fackin' spoiled!

Thats what I'm getting at... The whole ' I deserve a better version because I paid $X. You knew what you were buying, you have gotten use out of it during the years you've owned it which if you're doing this professionally in anyways ( hope you are putting out that kind of money ) then you have made a profit from your tools.

UA deserves a decent fee for an upgraded MKII of their plugins, knowing them, they'll probably give you a better deal then you deserve and you'll probably still bitch about it. They made plugins that worked within the cards of the day... and now they will do the same with the UAD2.

[NuSkoolTone]

Originally Posted by Synergy Media

Thats what I'm getting at... The whole ' I deserve a better version because I paid $X. You knew what you were buying, you have gotten use out of it during the years you've owned it which if you're doing this professionally in anyways ( hope you are putting out that kind of money ) then you have made a profit from your tools.

UA deserves a decent fee for an upgraded MKII of their plugins, knowing them, they'll probably give you a better deal then you deserve and you'll probably still bitch about it. They made plugins that worked within the cards of the day... and now they will do the same with the UAD2.

How about you get off your high horse and get some experience with the platform? Are you a UAD user? For how long? When I grabbed the UAD2, I assumed things would be the same as with the UAD1 in regards to development, promos, and pricing. Had I known they were moving to a new business model I would have NEVER signed on. Some of us have a good amount invested in the platform and have a right to bitch. YMMV.

[danger]

Originally Posted by kreeper_6

If I could compare Apples to Apples I would, but NOBODY has a FATSO SR., 33609, EMT 250, Trident, MOOG Filter, Dimension D, RE-201, Plate 140, Cooper Time Cube Mk II to compare it too!

nobody said they aren't excellent plugs, the cards are overpriced, that's it. if quad would have the power of a Bricasti M7 i would say ok.

[Macaroni]

Had I known they were moving to a new business model I would have NEVER signed on.

What's the new business model?

For all the bitchers and moaners...

I had 3 original UAD-1 cards and many of the then available plugins. Loved it.

Then I got an PCIe Mac and sold the UAD-1s for 80% of what I paid, got 3 new UAD-1e cards, plus thousands of dollars worth of new plugins with all the vouchers and promotions that came with it. Love it.

Then I sold the 3 UAD-1e cards for around 75% of what I paid and got a UAD-2 Quad - again, more vouchers and promo $ = more plugins.

I now have 80% of all UAD plugins, but probably only paid for 1/4 of them out of pocket.

I got tremendous value out of 'using' each card set I had, and then got back most of the money I paid for them to ease the upgrade costs. And all along things have improved/increased.

And I still have over $300 in voucher money that I got free.


What other company has a model that let's you do all that?

[Bob Yordan]

UAD-2 & Manley rocks.

Looking forward to the emulations.

[hugol]

Originally Posted by Synergy Media

Thats what I'm getting at... The whole ' I deserve a better version because I paid $X. You knew what you were buying, you have gotten use out of it during the years you've owned it which if you're doing this professionally in anyways ( hope you are putting out that kind of money ) then you have made a profit from your tools.

UA deserves a decent fee for an upgraded MKII of their plugins, knowing them, they'll probably give you a better deal then you deserve and you'll probably still bitch about it. They made plugins that worked within the cards of the day... and now they will do the same with the UAD2.

Have I missed something, who's arguing they should get upgraded versions for free?

Changing the topic slightly, what evidence have we got that UAD have got the DSP capacity to model non-linear behaviour properly? There are very few UAD plugins that exhibit this - those that do - e.g. Moog Filter, Fatso, 33609 take up a fair amount of DSP.

The UAD-1 held them back, the low-end UAD-2 cards equally. Whilst people want superb emulations they don't like it when they can only run a handful of instances on the cards - and the low-end UAD-2's aren't much more than a dongle.

It's going to be interesting to see how heavy the Manly emulation is and more importantly how realistic it is.


By the way this isn't moaning, it's pro-UAD, just want them to rise to the challenge and up their game a bit.

[hugol]

Originally Posted by Macaroni

What other company has a model that let's you do all that?

Yes true, previously there were definitely some good opportunities if you played your cards right (pun intended).

However I agree with the other poster in that it does look like the nature of the deals and charging has changed - the recent UAD-2 promotions have been targeted at first time UAD-2 buyers only for example.

[lllubi]

remember times when there was only bitching against Protools LE in UAD threads
not so much left from the glory days