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
UAD2 is a PCIE card Dynamics Plugins
Old 23rd July 2008
  #571
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
The UAD-2, I suspect, could run perhaps 800 of the current plugins if it had the bandwidth access...
. . . . all at 192kz, stereo . . . . . . . .
Old 23rd July 2008
  #572
Lives for gear
 
SoundEng1's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocktober View Post
. . . . all at 192kz, stereo . . . . . . . .
Nononono! 384Khz & Stereo heh
Old 23rd July 2008
  #573
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
Maybe in another 8 years.
we will use PCIe 3 within the next two years
so if we get UAD2 working on our actual systems this will let us use two
systems or a stronger unit
Old 25th July 2008
  #574
Lives for gear
 
Flying_Dutchman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by astronmr20 View Post
I dunno...

Despite it's limitations, I love my UAD-1, and I have now decided that the longer we have to wait for the 2, the longer I can keep my $.
i love my uad-1, too. Pure love, it´s the holy onion. Please UA free us from this sitaution. I would pay a lot to use the plugs native or whatever way you go, but do it!!!
Running 4 cards at 96.1 is a mess ,really. This plugs are superior in most situations, exept some goodies around, but only some.
I love the UAD, but i hate the limitations, i´m getting schizo lol
Old 25th July 2008
  #575
Lives for gear
 
Gemylon's Avatar
Been following this thread for some time now.
And what I understand is that It might be a new card soon, or maybe in 6 months,
or maybe in a year, or whatever.
Actually nothing to hold on to...



So, this could be a good time to buy, as any time ?

If they come out with a new card in a month I guess there will be some sort of
exchange-program coming up for 'old' customers.


And 2 cards, would that be the minimum to start with ?


Cheers
G
Old 25th July 2008
  #576
Lives for gear
 
solidstate's Avatar
 

wait AES in October at least
Old 26th July 2008
  #577
Lives for gear
 
manthe's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by solidstate View Post
On my duende system i can run 32 mono(or 16 stereo) channel @ 88.2 of ANY plug in, not just the channel strip.And it costed me about 2,500$(duende classic+mini+dsp upgrade). Try to run one stereo instance of the neve buss compressor at 88.2 on the UAD1..How many strips you can run after that?

Don't get me wrong here. I love the UAD plug ins. But their card processing power is not comparable to sharks dsps.
Took a while to get around to it, but I finally did a test.

On a song at 88.2, I loaded a 33609 on the 2Bus, then proceeded to #! INSTANTIATIONS OF THE 88RS....YES, 31!!

If I take the 33609 out, I can get 36, easy! This is at 88.2. Turns out most of the UAD-1 plugs upsample and the instance counts stay the same across all of the supported sample rates.

It may be old, but there is no question that the UAD-1 'SYSTEM' can hang with (and outdo at times) a full Duende Classic. Hell, with certain plugins, the UAD-1 can load as many as 2 Duende Classics.

Aside from that, both systems work in harmony on my machine.

I just want to be the 'other' voice in these threads that tells people that the cards, while older, can still hang with the best of whats out there and that waiting for vaporware hardware updates is robbing you of embracing some of the best plugins available.

I'm not a 'fanboy' just because I am satisfied with UAD-1 or because I'm not bitching for a new card. I'm just an engineer tat has been able to squeeze (and often save) many, MANY mixes out these 'useless' (unusable?) UAD-1 cards!
Old 26th July 2008
  #578
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

One advantge of the UAD architecture is the chips are unpartitioned, so you only use what you need from each plugin. On Duende, Poco, LM they are partitioned so you are unable to recover unused cycles, and they are unable to build plugins like the 33609 which require tons of crunch.
Old 26th July 2008
  #579
Lives for gear
 
ProducerBoy's Avatar
 

Okay, we get the picture. All right, so why didn't you add more DSPs to the UAD-1?
Patience, Grasshopper. Technology is rarely the limiting factor in any practical product design. We sent men to the moon almost 40 years ago, and yet there's still no Disney Moon theme park where you can take mum and the kiddies on holiday.

Adding DSP chips to make a multi-card UAD-1 card might be an option if that were all we had planned for the future of the product line, but we're not stopping quite yet. We're actively developing new products based on new technology, but, sorry, no specific announcements just yet. We can assure you that your current investment in our platform will continue to provide value. We designed the UAD-1 quite a while ago, and although it has been on the market for many years, it continues to sell well and provide value to customers. The real value in our system, however, is the quality of our software-the way our plug-ins make your music sound better-and this will continue to be the case as bigger, faster and louder hardware DSP systems are developed and released.


(Taken from UAUDIO.COM, July 2006 article. Universal Audio)

Just fueling the fire! : )
Old 26th July 2008
  #580
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by manthe View Post
Took a while to get around to it, but I finally did a test.

On a song at 88.2, I loaded a 33609 on the 2Bus, then proceeded to #! INSTANTIATIONS OF THE 88RS....YES, 31!!

If I take the 33609 out, I can get 36, easy! This is at 88.2. Turns out most of the UAD-1 plugs upsample and the instance counts stay the same across all of the supported sample rates.

It may be old, but there is no question that the UAD-1 'SYSTEM' can hang with (and outdo at times) a full Duende Classic. Hell, with certain plugins, the UAD-1 can load as many as 2 Duende Classics.

Aside from that, both systems work in harmony on my machine.

I just want to be the 'other' voice in these threads that tells people that the cards, while older, can still hang with the best of whats out there and that waiting for vaporware hardware updates is robbing you of embracing some of the best plugins available.

I'm not a 'fanboy' just because I am satisfied with UAD-1 or because I'm not bitching for a new card. I'm just an engineer tat has been able to squeeze (and often save) many, MANY mixes out these 'useless' (unusable?) UAD-1 cards!

YEah you can load up what you did in your test. But try and practically work a project like that when reopening and you will run into the load balancing issue.
Old 26th July 2008
  #581
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
YEah you can load up what you did in your test. But try and practically work a project like that when reopening and you will run into the load balancing issue.
So you just de-activate the plugins, and load them back up in order from largest to smallest DSP usage.
Old 26th July 2008
  #582
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
FW has been stated - categorically - as unsuitable for the UA platform - by UA!
They also explained why their plugins couldn't be ported over to TDM systems early on...then they ported them over and made them available for TDM.

Then, of course, they discontinued them...
Old 26th July 2008
  #583
Lives for gear
 
manthe's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
YEah you can load up what you did in your test. But try and practically work a project like that when reopening and you will run into the load balancing issue.
That isn't necessarily true in this scenario and most certainly not true in many, many other scenarios. For instance, if I weren't using the 33609, and just using 36 or 38 88RSs, it would load fine. BUT, the REAL point is (and 1 that has been 'conveniently ignored tutt) is that this 'UNDERPOWERED' and 'DEFUNT' DSP system has just been proven to be able to handle an EXTRAORDINARY load and plugin instance count that rivals and can even surpass the newest, most modern DSP systems...and they still hold up with the absolute tip-top in sound quality, vibe and character.

So, for people on the fence, balance out the 'UAD-1 power bitchers/moaners' arguments with these. The bottom line is, the UAD-1 system is PLENTY powerful and more than capable of handling even large, complex mixes..
Old 26th July 2008
  #584
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
So you just de-activate the plugins, and load them back up in order from largest to smallest DSP usage.

Yeah, that becomes a big hassle though. Look, I am a huge UAD fan and have been using them since they came out. I am not knocking the quality etc. But this is a dated card and will very soon become incompatible with modern systems, as Solid Sate already mentioned has happened with the newest MacPros. In the meantime I am using the UAD1's but it would be crazy if they didn't come out with a new solution soon. That would just be not good busniess sense.
Old 26th July 2008
  #585
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
So you just de-activate the plugins, and load them back up in order from largest to smallest DSP usage.
-1 (to UA, not Peeder)

That workaround is a piss-poor excuse for UA selling plugs their card can't properly handle.
Old 27th July 2008
  #586
Lives for gear
 
Henchman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6strings View Post
-1 (to UA, not Peeder)

That workaround is a piss-poor excuse for UA selling plugs their card can't properly handle.
It's no different with a Pro-Tools system that's maxed to the gills with plug-ins.
And how much does THAT cost?
Old 27th July 2008
  #587
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6strings View Post
-1 (to UA, not Peeder)

That workaround is a piss-poor excuse for UA selling plugs their card can't properly handle.
I used to bounce tracks back and forth on a 4-track to get more tracks so...


Who cares?


It's worth the trouble for me. I'm quite happy with my mixes. I haven't upgraded my rig in over 4 years, when I bought my MH interface (except for the odd plugin or software instrument here or there).

The UAD-1, before I bought the G5 (Old PPC, still the center of my rig), helped me get amazing results with a 10 year-old G4 sawtooth single-400.

For what I have gotten out of the UA for the cost, I don't see how I can complain, and it still does wonderfully.

Yes, some of the Neve plugs will only give you one or two instances, but have you ever tried to bounce? it works fine for me in Logic.

Again, cost to benefits ratio hitting on all cylinders for me.

I happen to know their team of developers is top notch and they won't release something until it's right.

UA users seem on average FAR less frustrated than Duende users in general.

It will eventually come out, and people will flock to their retailers to buy it. End of story.
Old 28th July 2008
  #588
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by astronmr20 View Post
Yes, some of the Neve plugs will only give you one or two instances, but have you ever tried to bounce? it works fine for me in Logic.
+1

I almost automatically freeze a track when I'm done with EQing, compressing etc. Then I just load the plugs on other tracks, works fine.
Old 28th July 2008
  #589
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
BUT, the REAL point is (and 1 that has been 'conveniently ignored ) is that this 'UNDERPOWERED' and 'DEFUNT' DSP system has just been proven to be able to handle an EXTRAORDINARY load and plugin instance count that rivals and can even surpass the newest, most modern DSP systems...and they still hold up with the absolute tip-top in sound quality, vibe and character.
The fact that you've been able to load up so many instances of one particular plugin doesn't mean that the complaints that other have regarding available horsepower...especially compared to native processing engines...aren't valid.
Old 28th July 2008
  #590
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
This thread is officially going in circles ... again ...

JSL


Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
If you want to run 150 instances of a CPU-heavy plug-in, then you're not making music, you're masturbating. Hey, why stop at 150? Why not 1500? Why not 15,000?

You can never have too much, but you can have enough to do good work. The real talent is doing great work right now, with whatever you've got right now.

In this day and age, if you're really aching for more CPU power for native plug-ins, then you're just no good at this.

JSL
Old 28th July 2008
  #591
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
This thread is officially going in circles ... again ...

JSL
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin
If you want to run 150 instances of a CPU-heavy plug-in, then you're not making music, you're masturbating. Hey, why stop at 150? Why not 1500? Why not 15,000?

You can never have too much, but you can have enough to do good work. The real talent is doing great work right now, with whatever you've got right now.

In this day and age, if you're really aching for more CPU power for native plug-ins, then you're just no good at this.

JSL
Well in that case why use any plugins at all? you should just sell all your cards, otherwise you are just masterbating with plugins. Get your sound with mics and the room. You don't need the UAD or any hardware at all. You don't need high quality expensive hardware/software. Use Behringer.
Old 28th July 2008
  #592
Lives for gear
 
manthe's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duardo View Post
The fact that you've been able to load up so many instances of one particular plugin doesn't mean that the complaints that other have regarding available horsepower...especially compared to native processing engines...aren't valid.
Just as their complaints of lack of power don't mean that those of us that are happy with the amount of power aren't valid either. The only reason I participate in these arguments is because of how 'absolute' some people would have others believe the UAD-1 cards are rubbish. The truth is, it is purely a matter of opinion, not a fact. For every plugin that I can only run 6 to 12 of, there are twice as many (or more) that I can get 35 to 80 of....even more for some.
Old 29th July 2008
  #593
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by manthe View Post
Just as their complaints of lack of power don't mean that those of us that are happy with the amount of power aren't valid either. The only reason I participate in these arguments is because of how 'absolute' some people would have others believe the UAD-1 cards are rubbish. The truth is, it is purely a matter of opinion, not a fact. For every plugin that I can only run 6 to 12 of, there are twice as many (or more) that I can get 35 to 80 of....even more for some.

I don't think the UAD is rubbish at all by petitioning for a UAD2. I am concerned about future support and compatibility. And I can't live without my UA plugs! ;-) THe current card system is broke. I have 4 cards but can only really get 3 cards of power out of them, due to load balancing issues and inefficiencies.
Old 29th July 2008
  #594
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
I don't think the UAD is rubbish at all by petitioning for a UAD2. I am concerned about future support and compatibility. And I can't live without my UA plugs! ;-) THe current card system is broke. I have 4 cards but can only really get 3 cards of power out of them, due to load balancing issues and inefficiencies.
Well said. My sentiments exactly (minus the fact that I will not buy 4 cards).

If $1500 delivered me a card or a box with a minimum of 6 times the current power of a UAD1, and had no load balancing issues, I would buy it on the spot.

The other requirement besides power would be that it would work with a laptop with either firewire or an express card, plus be compatible with the new Mac Pros.

So it's not about the money, it's about investing my money in something that is not a legacy product - underpowered with compatibility issues.

BTW: Why is this so difficult for the UAD apologist's to understand?

They act as if the load balancing issue does not exist, keep avoiding the fact that the card is seriously underpowered compared to modern CPUs/GPUs, and never address that Yes, there are problems with the card vis a vis the new Mac Pros.

The more people that boycott buying the outdated cards, the more pressure is on UAD to step up and address the issues.
Old 29th July 2008
  #595
Lives for gear
 
Tube World's Avatar
With Quad computers do we really need DSP cards anymore which become underpowered in several years? Look how often Pro Tools came out with new DSP cards. There is no doubt that UAD makes great plug ins, but I could get buy without them with plug ins for other company's that don't rely on DSP cards.
Old 29th July 2008
  #596
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tube World View Post
With Quad computers do we really need DSP cards anymore which become underpowered in several years? Look how often Pro Tools came out with new DSP cards. There is no doubt that UAD makes great plug ins, but I could get buy without them with plug ins for other company's that don't rely on DSP cards.


As has been speculated, the new UAD-2 may be an Ilok.

People still like the idea of xtra horsepower, though. Native systems are powerful now, but the UA plugs eat a LOT of HP.

Lots and lots of PPC G5's and G4's still churnin'. Mine included.
Old 29th July 2008
  #597
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by astronmr20 View Post
As has been speculated, the new UAD-2 may be an Ilok.

People still like the idea of xtra horsepower, though. Native systems are powerful now, but the UA plugs eat a LOT of HP.

Lots and lots of PPC G5's and G4's still churnin'. Mine included.
That's fine. Let users of older machine's buy UAD1's, and the rest of us can use iLok's.

I'm down with that. Everyone can be happy!
Old 29th July 2008
  #598
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by siddhu View Post
Well said. My sentiments exactly (minus the fact that I will not buy 4 cards).

If $1500 delivered me a card or a box with a minimum of 6 times the current power of a UAD1, and had no load balancing issues, I would buy it on the spot.

The other requirement besides power would be that it would work with a laptop with either firewire or an express card, plus be compatible with the new Mac Pros.

So it's not about the money, it's about investing my money in something that is not a legacy product - underpowered with compatibility issues.

BTW: Why is this so difficult for the UAD apologist's to understand?

They act as if the load balancing issue does not exist, keep avoiding the fact that the card is seriously underpowered compared to modern CPUs/GPUs, and never address that Yes, there are problems with the card vis a vis the new Mac Pros.

The more people that boycott buying the outdated cards, the more pressure is on UAD to step up and address the issues.

Yup. I want one seriously powered dsp card or something totally native (albeit with dongle). I have said this for awhile but why not go native and use the existing UAD1 as a sort of dongle? I have to imagine this would be just as hard to crack. But everyone wins. UA can keep on selling there limitless stock of ancient graphic cards and users can stay current with Intel/AMD cpus.
Old 29th July 2008
  #599
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

It won't be ilok. ilok has been cracked wide open. Syncrosoft seems to be the only safe dongle systems nowadays.
Old 29th July 2008
  #600
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Survey of my informers says....

Quote:
Not Native!
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
sevendaysoff / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
kingneeraj / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
3
rackdude / Low End Theory
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump