ULN-8 for classical work on Mac

[JonesH]

Hi!
I'm starting to consider a Metric Halo ULN-8 for it's portability and amazing array of features paired with all this talk of sounding very very good. However...

I like the idea of using it to record with the enclosed Record Panel which is supposedly very stable (a must). But what to do then? Ideally I'd run Sequoia for editing but the ULN only works with OS X - as do I. My other option would be Pro Tools (I don't like Logic, have limited experience with DP) but the ULN doesn't interface with it. Soundblade seems expensive and limited trackwise. So.
I guess I could just import the recorded files into pro tools or sequoia but then I can't use the supposedly amazing plugins from the ULN.

How do people on OS X work with the ULN-8?

[Allen Rowand]

The Record Panel outputs to AIFF, WAV, BWAV, CAF and SDII formats. You should be able to import your files into just about any DAW (once you find what work for you).

A friend just gave me a copy of a Shostakovich string trio recorded with the ULN-8 in B format at 192k in a church in Great Britain. He imported the files to Nuendo and decoded them to 5.1- stunning.

If you use a ProTools 192 interface you can send/receive 8 channels between ProTools and the ULN-8 via AES.
Allen

[Chao]

I use it with DP. It works great and is very reliable!

[jglamar]

I also use the ULN-8 with DP and am happy with the results, even though DP is not perhaps the ideal DAW for editing classical. (It works well if you work it, though.) One great thing about the ULN-8 is that you can mix itb, which bypasses a lot of the sonic limitations of DP's mixing engine. Seven of my recordings from this summer have been aired on Performance Today in the last month or so.

[Larry Elliott]

In my view Nuendo is the current best app on the mac for multi track classical editing. Sonic needs a bit more work.

I edit all my ULN8 RP tracks in Pyramix on PC.

Larry

[jglamar]

Interesting Larry.. why Nuendo? Pyramix is great, but like the OP I am allergic enough to PCs that I will not consider using it myself.

[saovi]

You could look at Samplitude 11 and run it under OS X Bootcamp. Nuendo would be another good option in OS X. Digital Performer and Logic are also very good choices but you've ruled those out.

edit: yeah perhaps Samplitude won't work since running that under bootcamp would make your Mac a PC which ULN-8 is allergic to.

[Larry Elliott]

Originally Posted by jglamar

Interesting Larry.. why Nuendo? Pyramix is great, but like the OP I am allergic enough to PCs that I will not consider using it myself.

Nuendo runs under OSX. I use Pyramix on a dedicated PC - used only for editing and mixing. but prefer to use laptop for location recording. Had a lot of problems trying to use bootcamp firewire devices on MacBookPro. Best option for me was to use ULN8 as recorder - and transfer to Pyramix for editing.

Hope this clarifies

Larry

[jglamar]

Thanks Larry. But no, it doesn't clarify why you like Nuendo for classical editing above other Mac DAWs (this was what I asked in my previous post). I'm just curious because I'm always looking for a better solution for my classical editing.
Do you find Nuendo has the more powerful crossfade editor? Great mixer? Fast workflow? Intuitive interface? Excellent SRC? Flexible routing? Efficient use of plugs? etc.?

[Larry Elliott]

Originally Posted by jglamar

Thanks Larry. But no, it doesn't clarify why you like Nuendo for classical editing above other Mac DAWs (this was what I asked in my previous post). I'm just curious because I'm always looking for a better solution for my classical editing.
Do you find Nuendo has the more powerful crossfade editor? Great mixer? Fast workflow? Intuitive interface? Excellent SRC? Flexible routing? Efficient use of plugs? etc.?

Sorry - its the crossfade editor that I found the bonus.

Larry

[JonesH]

It seems as I figured before; using the ULN-8 would also include buying a secondary good DA to use with Sequoia or Pro Tools (though in the latter case I probably would use HD in the future and so could connect via AES.). It's just, it would be nice to be able to use the +DSP when mixing.

Guess I'll record in record panel, edit in sequoia and mix it in some native app that can communicate with the ULN-8. Oh well, thanks for the replies.

[tsvisser]

I have PT LE and an 003 which has wordclock and ADAT I/O. As long as I'm doing 24/44.1 or 24/48, its not an issue as I can get 8 channels of digital audio in and out. In order to interface with AES/EBU, I have an Alesis AI4. Such a setup would be a good way to use the ULN for recording via Record Panel and also to use it for DSP processing in real time.

[Allen Rowand]

Originally Posted by JonesH

It seems as I figured before; using the ULN-8 would also include buying a secondary good DA to use with Sequoia or Pro Tools (though in the latter case I probably would use HD in the future and so could connect via AES.). It's just, it would be nice to be able to use the +DSP when mixing.

Guess I'll record in record panel, edit in sequoia and mix it in some native app that can communicate with the ULN-8. Oh well, thanks for the replies.

Don't forget that the ULN-8 can be used as a standalone D/A- complete with front panel monitor control if desired.

If you only need 2 channels of output from your Windows DAW running in BootCamp, it might be possible to have the DAW output via the digital output of the Mac and then convert that to AES.

Allen

[JonesH]

Hey, Allen, that's not a bad idea. I already have a M-Audio Transit so I guess I'll just buy a converter (which costs more than the Transit itself...figures). Good Idea. Will checkout NUendo as well.

[rumleymusic]

Don't forget that the ULN-8 can be used as a standalone D/A- complete with front panel monitor control if desired.

If you only need 2 channels of output from your Windows DAW running in BootCamp, it might be possible to have the DAW output via the digital output of the Mac and then convert that to AES.

mumlbe mumble...some Windows drivers would be nice...mumble mumble

Ahh the futility of it all...

[JonesH]

So the plan now would be
M-Audio ProFire Lightbridge (though I've heard reports of instability..?)
RME ADI-4 DD converter 4xAES->2xADAT i/o

Use the ProFire when one relaly needs to work in Pro Tools or Windows and convert it to AES in order to use the ULN-8 converters even when doing 96k.

Of course, for two-channel work only the M-Audio Transit would be required for Pro Tools, or the built-in output for windows. The ADI-4 does both ADAT and SPDIF.

[JonesH]

I recently installed a borrowed sequoia under Windows XP running virtualized. Seeing as it actually runs audio through CoreAudio, it could maybe be possible to output audio through the ULN-8 via CoreAudio, no?

[mh_bj]

Yes - this works for two channel audio (the limit that both Parallels and Fusion provide at this time).

[JonesH]

Well, at least that's something. That means that at least one can use the ULN-8 DAC for monitoring of not the DSP for mixing...

[saf34]

Hi Johannes, Allen,

Given the above experience, I was wondering if there have been any developments on this front?

The ULN-8 looks like it 'should' be the perfect box for me hardware-wise, and I'm eager to test one. But there are so many obstacles to entry for me. Doing classical here in the UK I am somewhat bound to use Sequoia and Pyramix and it so happens my favourite digital EQ is windows based. If the ULN-8 is as good as I hope I'm even willing to buy a mac laptop to use it to record on location, but the firewire interface means I can't even choose the one I'd want (the MacBook Air) or the cheapest option (the MacBook). As far as I can see,the only way to use the +DSP while mixing/mastering in Sequoia would be to buy another digital interface and process digital sends. Altogether we're starting to approach the DAD price ranges here and have already overtaken Prism.

Is there any other way around this or any developments in the pipeline? It's quite clear Windows drivers are out of the question, but anything else that means I could contemplate buying this item?

[JonesH]

As of now I'm still using record panel for tracking, making careful notes on time for each take in RP plus TextEdit. I later run sequoia under parallels which can communicate with the ULN-8 in order to use the headphone amp and DA.
My macbook's too slow to run sequoia smoothly so I'm getting a new dedicated audio MacBook Pro.
I'm placing my long-term hopes with Magix to deliver Sequoia for Mac. Good god that'd be nice.

[sonare]

As a long-time Sequoia user I would say you are day-dreaming. MAGIX has their plate quite full with tending to the Windows crowd.

All the angst described herein is why I sold my 3 ULN-8s and went with Prism Orpheus and Broadhurst Gardens (to fill in the line-only channels). Better sound, and I can actually talk to a human when I rarely need to talk to Prism.

Being able to record into a multi-track DAW that can do source/destination and unlimited curve crossfade editing seems to me to define what one needs for serious work. The ASIO driver for Prism (after an initial shakedown issue with SP2) has been solid for almost 2 years. My 2.33 MBP is getting a little long in the tooth, so when the painfully expensive moment arrives I will get a new MBP, install Win7 (currently have XP) and continue on. And while there isn't anything to complain about with the sound of the ULN-8, the Prism does slightly exceed it in smoothness-- and the micpres are at least as good.

A little searching will answer all questions on all the topics you raise. For me the answer was to retreat to Bootcamp (100% stable) and leave the track import stuff behind.

Rich

[saf34]

Thanks for the responses guys. Yes, I read - dare I say it - all of the discussions here on the ULN-8 but was more wondering how things had got on in this particular case after a year of usage.

I don't want to start a Orpheus vs ULN-8 thread; I understand why someone might go for the Prism but unfortunately when I tried it the pres didn't do it for me. I'm yet to try the ULN-8 so I might well feel the same. But, if I do happen to like it them I just wanted to know the current state of affairs before buying both the ULN *and* a MacBook pro.

You're right though: recording straight into Sequoia is great for workflow.

[sonare]

Don't forget that there are only DB25 connectors o the back of the uln8 so it is time and expense there.

[saf34]

Yeah, luckily (or rather, painfully) I've soldered enough of those DB25 breakouts for my Lynx to avoid experiencing that particular PITA! But point well made.

[JonesH]

Originally Posted by sonare

As a long-time Sequoia user I would say you are day-dreaming. MAGIX has their plate quite full with tending to the Windows crowd.
/.../
Being able to record into a multi-track DAW that can do source/destination and unlimited curve crossfade editing seems to me to define what one needs for serious work.

Yeah I'm probably dreaming. I keep hearing rumors though. Dreaming and hoping
I would really like to record into sequoia though. So far I can stand having to import files from reaper or pro tools, though.

[Dave Davis]

Originally Posted by sonare

Don't forget that there are only DB25 connectors o the back of the uln8 so it is time and expense there.

...and some benefits and savings (of time and money) as well. Whether it costs more or less depends on your current rig, and needs. In many cases, for instance when starting from scratch (esp in a PTHD facility), DB25s will be cheaper to buy and faster to hook up. I have multiple sets of cables in different length and termination options for my ULN8, and they've saved my bacon many times. Very handy, since the device has multiple paths - BOTH line and mic level inputs on seperate jacks, BOTH analog sends and post-converter line outs again on separate jacks. When I go on location it's great to carry only the cable and connectors I need, rather than lugging around pounds of XLRs and miles of cable I don't.

At my old job we used our ULN8s (we had at least one/room in a 3 room facility) not only as interfaces and upgrades for PTHD, but also as installed routers, making it easy to access devices in analog or digital domain, depending on need. Much time was saved in installation, not to mention when we had to move things around or go out on location. So in terms of time, your point is frequently not true.

This brings us back to expense: In those installations we found it actually SAVED us a ton of money while improving sound quality by enabling us to eliminate dozens of patchpoints and one of the 2 bays in each room. The patchbays we kept were DB25-based, which means the interconnects between them and the units were MUCH cheaper than similar length XLR or TRS or TT terminated cables, and configuring the bays was faster/easier than conventional bays of similar price. For PTHD users, interconnection couldn't possibly be easier or more affordable: HD192s et al use the same connectors in the same format - at $3/ea x 2 ends, an 8 channel XLR snake is going to cost $48+labor/time vs <$10 for a pair of DB25s.

Ultimately we saved money over the gear they were replacing, and not just a little (our A room had a large frame MCI console and 2" machines, all requiring absurdly expensive Tuchels, alongside ADAT Elco as well - not cheap). Even where you do lots of point-point change overs, as in a busy studio or touring situation, the simplicity = savings (fewer people can do more in less time, time=money). So unless you're just DIY your point's variable at best, a truism. In many cases DB25 is cheaper, better or both. YMMV.

-d-

[JonesH]

I jotted down my workflow in a conversation with Sonare and it might be useful for someone else.

When recording in Record Panel, I've been using A Better Finder Rename afterwards to rename the files from "Take_001/01-4006.L.wav" to "01/4006-01.L.wav" so that I can import the entire folder for take 01 unto separate tracks and have them auto-grouped in Sequoia.

This works quite well but I usually have to leave RP running and just note down the times for each take, leaving it up to me to separate and rename them i Sequoia later. That takes ages... I think I'm gonna start recording in reaper or Pro Tools instead to get separate files for each take easily.
Or I might stop and start RP between each take, but it's a bit slow...

[mh_bj]

You know that you can click the record button while you are in record and it will start the next take (with no loss of samples). Don't know if that helps you....

[JonesH]

Originally Posted by mh_bj

You know that you can click the record button while you are in record and it will start the next take (with no loss of samples). Don't know if that helps you....

That will help me lots actually. Thanks bj!