The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
From Massive Passive to ITB Equalizer Plugins
Old 25th November 2009
  #31
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Those are integer coordinates. Even IF this was handled by the FP unit, that would be what... 10 kHz to 16.7 kHz * 1 word = < 0.00001593 GIPS. It is actually less than a quarter of that due to how the mouse protocol works but anyway...



Sure you do but not 140 times more as you imply. Oh did I mention that Modern CPUs not only have higher speeds but also wider bandwidth than those MPACT2 and TigerSHARC DSP chips? So it is closer to 500 times more. (128 bit vs 32/40 bit instructions/operations).



Things have moved on quite a bit since then. Actually, SGI could not keep up with Intel and AMD (Or Sun or IBM etc) and went bankrupt. Don't wave around your credentials. You are not the only one here with a background outside of music. Please present some solid arguments that support UAD's marketing.

Alistair
Maybe but your reasoning doesn't explain why native plugs in general sound inferior to UAs...Which at the end of the day the most important thing for most users.heh
Old 25th November 2009
  #32
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by baikonour View Post
Maybe but your reasoning doesn't explain why native plugs in general sound inferior to UAs...Which at the end of the day the most important thing for most users.heh
Actually I'm not sure many people share that view now - have you tried softtube, stillwell, cytomic, soundtoys etc? Things are changing rapidly
Old 25th November 2009
  #33
Lives for gear
 
macc's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I think a lot of those comparisons are still valid - UA is still selling those plugins after all - but it is also worth bearing in mind that a lot of the comparisons are being done between new plugins and those UA made a number of years ago.

Say, IK's pultec plugin and UAD pultec. There's 5 years (? roughly) between them, and we'd probably all agree that plugins have come a long, long way in that time. One could possibly argue that they have come so far because of UA's setting the bar so high 5 years ago. And to some extent their new plugs are still ahead of the game, Fatso being a prime example.

I think some people are a little too keen to state that some plugins sound as good as the UA ones when in my experience and opinion, they do not. It's human nature I suppose. Equally some new plugs rule over UAD, for various reasons, including that outlined above.

FWIW I voted in the UAD poll/survey thing for them to update the old models, in light of it being 5 years later. That would be a good thing for them to do IMHO.
Old 25th November 2009
  #34
Lives for gear
I agree - the point is it is a constantly changing situation.
Softtubes FET is a killer and UAD could certainly do with updating theirs to get back to the top of the pack.
Competition can only be a good thing!
Old 25th November 2009
  #35
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kundevelop View Post
What I love about this unit is of course the sound but also I appreciate user interface with selective frequencies, etc etc. lovely and easy, a pleasure to play with. Anyway I'm searching for some VST plugs that have similar interface philosophy so I'm using waves API and SSL collection. Anyones knows any good VST that could be similar to massive passive interface ( if not sound )?
Download the Abbey Road Mastering Pack (in fact demo the whole suite!), it has a very similar workflow and coupled with the SPL TwinTube makes for a tip top EQ chain. The processor hit is low also so it's easy to create a device chain in your host of choice that enables you to process left/right mid/side channels separately, mind you the TwinTube isn't so easy on your Intel (but it sound so good!).

JM

Leftside Wobble
Old 25th November 2009
  #36
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Those are integer coordinates. Even IF this was handled by the FP unit, that would be what... 10 kHz to 16.7 kHz * 1 word = < 0.00001593 GIPS. It is actually less than a quarter of that due to how the mouse protocol works but anyway...



Sure you do but not 140 times more as you imply. Oh did I mention that Modern CPUs not only have higher speeds but also wider bandwidth than those MPACT2 and TigerSHARC DSP chips? So it is closer to 500 times more. (128 bit vs 32/40 bit instructions/operations).



Things have moved on quite a bit since then. Actually, SGI could not keep up with Intel and AMD (Or Sun or IBM etc) and went bankrupt. Don't wave around your credentials. You are not the only one here with a background outside of music. Please present some solid arguments that support UAD's marketing.

Alistair
you're missing the point!! Bottle necking , bussing etc etc.....
Old 25th November 2009
  #37
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
you're missing the point!! Bottle necking , bussing etc etc.....
Yet again another GS thread gets hijacked by an argument irrelevant to the original posters request. I'm not suggesting that valid points aren't being raised but they've nothing to do with helping someone find plugins that may be able to emulate the workflow and ultimately sound of the Massive Passive.

I'll go back to minding my own business now!

JM

Leftside Wobble
Old 25th November 2009
  #38
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
you're missing the point!! Bottle necking , bussing etc etc.....
A strange comment considering UAD cards live on the PCI bus of computers thus suffering from all of the above even more than any native plugin. You get the DAW's own buffers but unlike native plugins, the data stream leaves the CPU and RAM where the DAW process runs. That explains the extra buffers and latency needed to run UAD plugins.

In other solutions like the Fairlight CC-1, Pro Tools HD, Soundscape (now SSL), Pyramix etc, you do benefit from the DSP/FPGA based solutions with very low latency. In a native DAW, any additional DSP or FPGA based processing only increases buffering and latency.

There were times when this increased buffering and latency were compensated and wholly warranted by the overall gain in processing power. These days that is not the case. Such DSP based systems do not significantly increase the processing power of modern computers.

There are of course exceptions. For instance DSP based mixers and processing as part of the I/O interfacing of your DAW can make sense. This allows low latency monitoring and other such things. Creamware go even further than this but UAD? It's a dongle.

Alistair
Old 25th November 2009
  #39
13036
Guest
There is a Massive Passive impulse for the Focusrite Liquid Mix HD plugin. Not quite what you need, probably, but close.


Ben
Old 26th November 2009
  #40
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
A strange comment considering UAD cards live on the PCI bus of computers thus suffering from all of the above even more than any native plugin. You get the DAW's own buffers but unlike native plugins, the data stream leaves the CPU and RAM where the DAW process runs. That explains the extra buffers and latency needed to run UAD plugins.

In other solutions like the Fairlight CC-1, Pro Tools HD, Soundscape (now SSL), Pyramix etc, you do benefit from the DSP/FPGA based solutions with very low latency. In a native DAW, any additional DSP or FPGA based processing only increases buffering and latency.

There were times when this increased buffering and latency were compensated and wholly warranted by the overall gain in processing power. These days that is not the case. Such DSP based systems do not significantly increase the processing power of modern computers.

There are of course exceptions. For instance DSP based mixers and processing as part of the I/O interfacing of your DAW can make sense. This allows low latency monitoring and other such things. Creamware go even further than this but UAD? It's a dongle.

Alistair
when i comment about these things i'm generally in the PT / Fairlight zone. But I also see the benefit of DSP cards where you send all the gumpf to the card and it gets on with it without hitting the proc - that's always an advantage surely !!
Old 26th November 2009
  #41
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmoore View Post
I'll go back to minding my own business now!
very good.
Old 26th November 2009
  #42
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
when i comment about these things i'm generally in the PT / Fairlight zone. But I also see the benefit of DSP cards where you send all the gumpf to the card and it gets on with it without hitting the proc - that's always an advantage surely !!
In theory yes but the UAD cards are so underpowered that they are just a burden. Now if Fairlight were to release a version of the CC-1 that was a compliment to a native DAW and that could host 3rd party plugins (a bit like Sydec did), we would be talking about an entirely different kind of situation.

Alistair
Old 26th November 2009
  #43
Lives for gear
 
macc's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I see what you're saying, and more power/less burden would be better... but being pragmatic, if I turn on loads of UAD plugins my CPU doesn't really change. I can run loads of em, it's great.
Old 27th November 2009
  #44
Lives for gear
 
OurDarkness's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
yeah - and the graphics position calculations and mouse pointer are all handled by the FP processor. Rendering obviously isn't....

You DO get more out of less with a DSP card.... not just a musician here.... was a research mathematician with a funded PhD from Silicon Graphics many years ago!! UAD card are not just dongles... and FP chips dont sit doing nothing in any modern OS. You've got a whole load of shenianigans with allocation bottle necks. A DSP card with a tenth of the power of a CPU and math co processor will still out perform a general purpose system. I've seen this time and time again and it's one of the very reasons DSPs systems are oft pursued - although I'll grant you the "dongle" too...
Graphics calculations in DSP are handled much more differently than audio. In graphic calculations, a feed-forward algorithm is almost necessary whereas in audio it's a feed-back algorithm. Different DSP handle these differently. In other words, it's not safe to assume that because a certain CPU performs better (spec-wise) than some other one, it is the holy grail of DSP.
Old 27th November 2009
  #45
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by OurDarkness View Post
Graphics calculations in DSP are handled much more differently than audio. In graphic calculations, a feed-forward algorithm is almost necessary whereas in audio it's a feed-back algorithm. Different DSP handle these differently. In other words, it's not safe to assume that because a certain CPU performs better (spec-wise) than some other one, it is the holy grail of DSP.
that cuts both ways no? Perhaps a supporting reason for DSP cards?thumbsup
Old 27th November 2009
  #46
Lives for gear
 
OurDarkness's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
that cuts both ways no? Perhaps a supporting reason for DSP cards?thumbsup
My point exactly.
Old 27th November 2009
  #47
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by OurDarkness View Post
My point exactly.
thumbsup
Old 28th November 2009
  #48
Lives for gear
 
XAXAU's Avatar
 

There will probably be some UAD Manley plugins on the market within the next six months.

The UAD Precision EQ is great too.

Plug-in Folder

http://uad2-www.uaudio.com/products/...e_peq_plim.pdf
Old 28th November 2009
  #49
Lives for gear
 
Jesse Graffam's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by OurDarkness View Post
Graphics calculations in DSP are handled much more differently than audio. In graphic calculations, a feed-forward algorithm is almost necessary whereas in audio it's a feed-back algorithm. Different DSP handle these differently. In other words, it's not safe to assume that because a certain CPU performs better (spec-wise) than some other one, it is the holy grail of DSP.
Unless I'm missing the point, the only thing that feed forward/backward the GUI would effect is latency. And only by a maximum of 1 buffer block. Which is already the bare minimum delay. And only assuming that the graphics are trying to be that accurate, or are somehow even tied that directly to the audio itself.

If that's ever not the case, then it's a problem for the person who designed the plugin. Not the architecture. Name me one case that's relevant with today's main plugin SDKs where I'm wrong.
Old 29th November 2009
  #50
Lives for gear
 
Farshad's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
It's the same reason why a Bricasti M7 cannot be put ITB native. Single pass power.
I heard the same thing before the Lexicon PCM plugs came out ... dunno
Old 29th November 2009
  #51
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farshad View Post
I heard the same thing before the Lexicon PCM plugs came out ... dunno
well - we'll see. I haven't heard the Lexicon plugins myself yet - however what I've heard on the demo videos leads me to no conclusion - either way.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
guru007 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2
electric / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
3
garydb64 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
SiliconAudioLab / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump