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 13th August 2008
  #991
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electronique View Post
Isnt this post a week or two old??
Yup, UAD's customer service posted it on the forum only 12 hours after the cat was out.

They CAN be fast!
Old 13th August 2008
  #992
Lives for gear
 
iomegaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by author View Post
Nope, this is what official statements look like today.
Then give us a link please.
Old 13th August 2008
  #993
Gear Addict
 
Electronique's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iomegaman View Post
Then give us a link please.
The "official" post was made by a UAD member on the UAD "unofficial" forum... Im not sure what the address is. Im not a member.. I did see it - and the member did seem like he/she was from UAD.
Old 14th August 2008
  #995
Lives for gear
 

Um.... how about page two on this thread? (post #39)
Old 14th August 2008
  #996
Lives for gear
 
gregohb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PID View Post
Whenever it comes, it had better work with the 8-core Mac pros. I had the card stuck in my computer for months waiting for UA to come up with a fix.



I love the plugins, but I haven't been able to use them since I got the new computer. I upgraded to the UAD-1e to complement the Mac Pro and HD2Accel, but it rendered the system unusable.

I want an official announcement from UA before I hold my breath. I was thinking of selling the card, but now I guess I'll wait (as I have been...waiting...waiting..&..waiting).

However, that said, I hope for the best .
My original UAD caused problems with a particular chipset I had, and they blamed apple and had no option, other than to get a different mac. so don't expect much. also when they went from PC to PCe, there was no upgrade fee or discount - just a voucher for more plugs once you bought a 2nd card. So they are not terrible, but they are not going too far out of their way for you either.
Old 14th August 2008
  #997
Lives for gear
 
gregohb's Avatar
 

]I always find it strange and frankly very amusing when people bring up the power (or lack there of ) of the UAD-1 cards. Enlighten me here - three maybe four years ago it may have been an issue but with any modern computer we should have more than enough horsepower to run just about anything we choose. Now, I don't know about you but I don't know anyone in the last 2 years who has purchased a UAD-1 card looking for processing power. They buy them for the quality of the emulations as far as I can tell.[/QUOTE]

Ok i'll 'splain it to ya. UA plugs are not native. So if you run one Neve Buss Compressor it sucks up all the power on a card. So you can't run any Pultecs, Fairchilds, Precision stuff, 1176s, LA2a, etc. You are up a creek.

Quote:
Originally Posted by D K View Post
There are plenty of professional Engineers, Producers and Musicians getting a whole hell of a lot of mileage out of this "outdated" DSP technology -
Why aren't you?
Perhaps the professionals have four cards and magma chassis with another four cards, and unlimited budgets?
Old 14th August 2008
  #998
Lives for gear
 
gregohb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iomegaman View Post
And as far as 8 year old technology...pci-buss, PCM, TDM...to name a few...some technologies still work quite well and the UAD1 falls into that category as far as I'm concerned.
We are not talking about vintage analog gear, its digital computer technology, and 8 years in the computer business is a couple of life cycles. I put a UAD in a G4/400 mhz after they had been out a a year or two. Compare to modern computers, the processing is probably about 10 times faster. They do these comparisons in Macworld, although they usually don't compare with such old computers, so you would have to get several benchmark comparions to get a comparison. But its a lot. In fact, PCI has gone through a couple of revisions already and probably due for another one.

So its really strange that UA is using such old technology still. Actually not strange at all, if you notice that they really push to buy multiple cards. They have rebates for multiple cards, they work in the external chassis. So they actually make more money by selling more and more outdated cards, rather than retooling and putting better chips and busses in their cards.
Old 14th August 2008
  #999
Lives for gear
 
jeremy.c.'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregohb View Post
So its really strange that UA is using such old technology still. Actually not strange at all, if you notice that they really push to buy multiple cards. They have rebates for multiple cards, they work in the external chassis. So they actually make more money by selling more and more outdated cards, rather than retooling and putting better chips and busses in their cards.
I think Peeder may have already made this point 100x on gearslutz...
Old 14th August 2008
  #1000
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by olivia_nb View Post
I think Peeder may have already made this point 100x on gearslutz...
Well, the actually funny thing about this seems to be that his statements are as old and outdated as he says the UAD-1 technology is. (and there he is not that wrong).

he made his point but might have missed the point

if they made that much money by the cards they should not have lowered the prices several times.
Old 14th August 2008
  #1001
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Actually my point has been consistent: the cards are purely an enabling technology, and UA is really just selling plugins.

The cards have a couple side-effects: copy protection of course, as well as limiting instances, which allows UA to sell plugins by the instance which native vendors cannot (or at least don't). That means UA can scale its pricing to a degree, taking more profit from the bigger studios for the same product.

On this point, note how the UAD-2 is scalable as well, with solo, duo and quad versions. This is from the same motivation...a quad card might cost UA $20 more than a solo, or it might just be a software lock like the Duende Mini (where SSL sells you the same 32 channel processor as the maxi, but demands you pay more to use it fully ). But by scaling the power they can charge more to bigger studios while preserving a low cost of entry. They needed to scale within one card because Apple refuses to sell 6-slot machines like they used to, and so PCI slots are a market limiter (the expansion chassis are hideously expensive).

The jig is up and UA has to release a new card, but they don't want to have to do this more than every five years or so, because quite a lot of the cost factor is not only developing the cards and moving all that inventory (software digital distribution of course has no inventory problems), the cards are also a platform which the engine and plugins must be recoded for.

This is why if the UAD-2 is not remarkably powerful...say the quad version is at least 32x a UAD-1 (and ideally 100x)...UA will have really screwed the pooch. They should be able to achieve those sorts of processing rates over the ten years of chipset and bus development, but if they felt somehow that was too much, that they needed to leave something for themselves, or the market as a whole, whatever...then they will have sacrificed an incredible opportunity to both seize the gorilla share of the market and enjoy very comfortable margins for another 5-6 years.
Old 15th August 2008
  #1002
Gear Addict
 

Well, strange - I was not really refering to your post - did a wrong quote - was refering to that:
'So they actually make more money by selling more and more outdated cards, rather than retooling and putting better chips and busses in their cards.'

Sorry.

But anyways, I think to expect 100x the power of a UAD1 (or even 32x) is quite high. If we look at the how computer scaled - and besides GPUs computer CPUs had the best improvement rates I think (lots of sold units, lots of money, low production costs) - over these years we have a rate of maybe 40x (this is with 2x quad compared to a single processor at that time). Look at how Protools or PowerCore improved processing power - for powercore it is 50% for one DSP and double the dsp.

we will see one day or not ....

best
Old 15th August 2008
  #1003
Lives for gear
 

Sounds about right to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
Actually my point has been consistent: the cards are purely an enabling technology, and UA is really just selling plugins.

The cards have a couple side-effects: copy protection of course, as well as limiting instances, which allows UA to sell plugins by the instance which native vendors cannot (or at least don't). That means UA can scale its pricing to a degree, taking more profit from the bigger studios for the same product.

On this point, note how the UAD-2 is scalable as well, with solo, duo and quad versions. This is from the same motivation...a quad card might cost UA $20 more than a solo, or it might just be a software lock like the Duende Mini (where SSL sells you the same 32 channel processor as the maxi, but demands you pay more to use it fully ). But by scaling the power they can charge more to bigger studios while preserving a low cost of entry. They needed to scale within one card because Apple refuses to sell 6-slot machines like they used to, and so PCI slots are a market limiter (the expansion chassis are hideously expensive).

The jig is up and UA has to release a new card, but they don't want to have to do this more than every five years or so, because quite a lot of the cost factor is not only developing the cards and moving all that inventory (software digital distribution of course has no inventory problems), the cards are also a platform which the engine and plugins must be recoded for.

This is why if the UAD-2 is not remarkably powerful...say the quad version is at least 32x a UAD-1 (and ideally 100x)...UA will have really screwed the pooch. They should be able to achieve those sorts of processing rates over the ten years of chipset and bus development, but if they felt somehow that was too much, that they needed to leave something for themselves, or the market as a whole, whatever...then they will have sacrificed an incredible opportunity to both seize the gorilla share of the market and enjoy very comfortable margins for another 5-6 years.
Old 15th August 2008
  #1004
Lives for gear
 
laser's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
Actually my point has been consistent: the cards are purely an enabling technology, and UA is really just selling plugins.

The cards have a couple side-effects: copy protection of course, as well as limiting instances, which allows UA to sell plugins by the instance which native vendors cannot (or at least don't). That means UA can scale its pricing to a degree, taking more profit from the bigger studios for the same product.

On this point, note how the UAD-2 is scalable as well, with solo, duo and quad versions. This is from the same motivation...a quad card might cost UA $20 more than a solo, or it might just be a software lock like the Duende Mini (where SSL sells you the same 32 channel processor as the maxi, but demands you pay more to use it fully ). But by scaling the power they can charge more to bigger studios while preserving a low cost of entry. They needed to scale within one card because Apple refuses to sell 6-slot machines like they used to, and so PCI slots are a market limiter (the expansion chassis are hideously expensive).

The jig is up and UA has to release a new card, but they don't want to have to do this more than every five years or so, because quite a lot of the cost factor is not only developing the cards and moving all that inventory (software digital distribution of course has no inventory problems), the cards are also a platform which the engine and plugins must be recoded for.

This is why if the UAD-2 is not remarkably powerful...say the quad version is at least 32x a UAD-1 (and ideally 100x)...UA will have really screwed the pooch. They should be able to achieve those sorts of processing rates over the ten years of chipset and bus development, but if they felt somehow that was too much, that they needed to leave something for themselves, or the market as a whole, whatever...then they will have sacrificed an incredible opportunity to both seize the gorilla share of the market and enjoy very comfortable margins for another 5-6 years.
Excellent post.

The UAD formula will continue to work as long as their software is notably better than other offerings. When a competitor with comparable software enters the arena at a competitive price (if ever), the most powerful UAD card gets a drastic reduction in price and becomes their standard offering.

Laser
Old 15th August 2008
  #1005
Lives for gear
 
gregohb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by laser View Post
Excellent post.

The UAD formula will continue to work as long as their software is notably better than other offerings. When a competitor with comparable software enters the arena at a competitive price (if ever), the most powerful UAD card gets a drastic reduction in price and becomes their standard offering.

Laser
what about Powercore? They seem to have been a bit more progressive and open minded than UA. For example, the access virus that runs on the powercore and earlier expansion options. I think they opened their platform to outside developers too.
Old 15th August 2008
  #1006
Lives for gear
 
gregohb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steff3 View Post
Well, the actually funny thing about this seems to be that his statements are as old and outdated as he says the UAD-1 technology is. (and there he is not that wrong).

he made his point but might have missed the point

if they made that much money by the cards they should not have lowered the prices several times.
I don't understand the bizarre comments but its really quite simple. They look at the numbers and see that they can make more on plugs. When they were first sold, you got all the plugs and there were no options. The Cambridge EQ was the first one that came out for $85 or something, now they have about 30.

Those plugs cost them nothing to sell - you already have the software for all those in each release, and they are just selling an authorization which is downloaded. So its like a money machine going 24 hours a day. So they realized that its better to give away the card, or take a lower margin and get more additional plug sales. Its call "loss leader" and its the idea of McDonald's 99 cent menu (where drinks costing 10 cents are sold for $1.50 but a hamburger costing 89 cents is sold for 99 cents). In fact, its the whole idea of "sales" and "clearances" that are used by department stores, car lots, grocery stores, and guitar center. Once you come in to buy the cheap stuff, you are likely to buy something not on sale too.

Meanwhile, once they go to the UAD2 card, the UAD1 becomes quite undesirable. They also have to get the bugs out of the new board, it will cost more for the chips, and needs a new box, and they will need to do advertising and marketing. So better to keep turning out the low quality product as long as possible. Its just like the non-Asian family company on the east coast that is the main supplier of "soy sauce" packets used in Chinese take out restaraurants in the US - which contains no soy at all. Its like selling "all beef burgers" made out of dogmeat. Its crap, but it sells and makes money. So why mess with a winning formula?
Old 15th August 2008
  #1007
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregohb View Post
Meanwhile, once they go to the UAD2 card, the UAD1 becomes quite undesirable. They also have to get the bugs out of the new board, it will cost more for the chips, and needs a new box, and they will need to do advertising and marketing. So better to keep turning out the low quality product as long as possible. Its just like the non-Asian family company on the east coast that is the main supplier of "soy sauce" packets used in Chinese take out restaraurants in the US - which contains no soy at all. Its like selling "all beef burgers" made out of dogmeat. Its crap, but it sells and makes money. So why mess with a winning formula?
I dunno, I had a UAD-1 last night with some minced garlic and browned butter...it was actually quite satisfying.

Old 15th August 2008
  #1008
Lives for gear
 
jbuehler's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
Old 16th August 2008
  #1009
Lives for gear
 
slaves666's Avatar
Old 16th August 2008
  #1010
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbuehler View Post


I love how they chew in unison. heh
Old 16th August 2008
  #1011
Gear Maniac
 

Unofficial rumors say this:

Within weeks the new uad-2 will be releasedin 3 versions:
solo, duo and quattro

With 3 software packages:
basic, flexi and nevana

Pricing from 500$ to 1800$
Old 16th August 2008
  #1012
Lives for gear
 

Here. In case you missed out on the fun, you can chew on this...
Attached Thumbnails
UAD2 is a PCIE card-uad_2.jpg  
Old 16th August 2008
  #1013
Lives for gear
 
Henchman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vank View Post
Unofficial rumors say this:

Within weeks the new uad-2 will be releasedin 3 versions:
solo, duo and quattro

With 3 software packages:
basic, flexi and nevana

Pricing from 500$ to 1800$
Question is, will it be all new DSP or the same ones repackaged.
Old 16th August 2008
  #1014
Lives for gear
 
animix's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregohb View Post
what about Powercore? I think they opened their platform to outside developers too.
.........and the Sonnox plugins were cracked almost immediately.
Old 16th August 2008
  #1015
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vank View Post
Unofficial rumors say this:

Within weeks the new uad-2 will be releasedin 3 versions:
solo, duo and quattro

With 3 software packages:
basic, flexi and nevana

Pricing from 500$ to 1800$
Unofficial rumors ?

Since when rumors are official heh ?
Old 16th August 2008
  #1016
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henchman View Post
Question is, will it be all new DSP or the same ones repackaged.
Well, I would find it strange if they could still buy the MPact chip in bigger quantities - I mean, who really produces such a chip for more than 10 years?

best
Old 16th August 2008
  #1017
Lives for gear
 
macgee's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by animix View Post
.........and the Sonnox plugins were cracked almost immediately.
that's why macs are really good for developers since as to this day (as far as i know) there are no ilok protected plugins cracked
Old 16th August 2008
  #1018
Lives for gear
 
macgee's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregohb View Post
what about Powercore? They seem to have been a bit more progressive and open minded than UA. For example, the access virus that runs on the powercore and earlier expansion options. I think they opened their platform to outside developers too.
i love my powercore X8 - i did a mix using mainly this today and hardly any native plugins and there was still enough power in the unit. the plugins are really amazing, i love the stock plugs as well as CL1b, VSS3 & Virus

i have yet to buy the Virus & VSS3 so trying to decide which to get with my $500 voucher

it was incredibly stable on 10.5.4 & logic 8.0.2 but i spent hours with crashes and issues only to track the issue down to the process buffer setting which should be "Medium" and also i removed my firewire hard drive from the firewire 800 port since it's on the same bus and caused issues.

then again it's been suggested to have these things on it's own buss!
Old 16th August 2008
  #1019
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vank View Post
Unofficial rumors say this:

Within weeks the new uad-2 will be releasedin 3 versions:
solo, duo and quattro

With 3 software packages:
basic, flexi and nevana

Pricing from 500$ to 1800$
WOW!! Where did you find this info? Possibly from the previous 10 pages in this thread?? hahaa
Old 16th August 2008
  #1020
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by macleodgrant View Post
that's why macs are really good for developers since as to this day (as far as i know) there are no ilok protected plugins cracked
Yes there are. Waves I think and others...

As far as I know though no one ever cracked the Logic Pro dongle, not that that makes much difference now - and I guess Apple don't care.

They are too concerned about diminishing the impact if iPhone hacks.
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