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 29th August 2008
  #1531
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHOOKS View Post
ok so where are the new plugins???? fatso????? i guess they are going to announce that soonish.....
The Moog filter is coming later this year. The Fatso should show up around Winter NAMM, perhaps a bit earlier.
Old 29th August 2008
  #1532
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

I have gone to great lengths to avoid being ripped off by Digi's HD hegemony, and I have sold a Duende at a bitter loss. UAD-1 (and to a lesser extent, Liquid Mix) were the products that I found to offer value for money over native. Even though the added latency in PTLE is a pain regardless of how many workarounds I've helped create. I have a system now that is uncompromised sonically, without compromising me financially.

If I were not a long-suffering UAD-1 owner (for years now) with an established workflow in Pro Tools and nearly all the plugins, I would view these prices as quite fair.

I do not view the upgrade offers as fair. The plugins have nil unit cost...truly nil, as this is digital distribution direct from the manufacturer's servers. Plugin vouchers are the way they've kept us happy during the long bitter suffering waiting for them to find their arse in the dark. They've given me plugin vouchers for virtually no reason over the years...the UAD-1 cards have been effectively free for years, that has won my absolute acclaim and evangelism.

Then they ship something that I can't even use and say, ching-a-ling chump, we're now charging over $1000 just for the top card, and we'll give you no more than we were already offering with the "free" old cards for the hassle of finding our bugs.

It's a culture shock, it says to me the deals before were more of pure embarassment than customer friendliness, and it leaves me out in the cold regardless.

UAD -2.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1533
Lives for gear
 
Marogru's Avatar
DAMN!!!! I boutgh a nest uad1 card just a week ago!!
DAMN DAMN DAMN DAMN!!!

But anyway, nore uads plz!
Old 30th August 2008
  #1534
Gear Maniac
 
King Of Spain's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emdub123 View Post
Looks like the street price on the UAD2 Solo is going to be $499. $799 with a $500 voucher. Not to far from what the UAD1e is currently at, no?

For me personally, I find it to be both predatory and unethical to target your install base in June for a $399 crossgrade promotion to UAD1e when you are planning on releasing a card with 2.5x the processing power w/transfer of plugs for free in August for $100 more without disclosing that information to them. It's complete BS and they clearly don't give a fvck about the people they suckered into that deal while trying to deplete their inventory.

Last edited by King Of Spain; 30th August 2008 at 01:30 AM.. Reason: dsp power
Old 30th August 2008
  #1535
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
the very idea that they would charge long-suffering UAD-1 users to transfer their plugins to a modern chip (I don't care if they will never actually charge that fee, the very thought of it is a total insult)....

REAL BAD.
You have the conch.

But you are very wrong.

It's EXTREMELY BAD.

ns
Old 30th August 2008
  #1536
Lives for gear
 

I bought the UAD-1 and I like it alright, but I wouldn't buy it again unless I had money to burn.

I'm not going to buy the UAD2.

I think plugins in general are somewhat of a con game.

I'm not sure anyone really needs much beyond what comes with your average DAW.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1537
Lives for gear
 
ProducerBoy's Avatar
 

Looks like the 10, 5, and 2.5x performance rating is pretty misleading. Doesn't apply to a lot of the plugs. UAD-1 actually OUTPERFORMS UAD-2 in EX-1 stereo plug counts and Cambridge mono counts. Not so much a complaint as an observation.

For instance:

plug count | Mono | Stereo
LA-2A - UAD1 19 17
LA-2A - UAD2 27 23
LA-3A - UAD1 15 13
LA-3A - UAD2 22 20
Plate 140 - UAD1 4 4
Plate 140 - UAD2 6 6
RealVerb Pro - UAD1 9 8
RealVerb Pro - UAD2 9 9
CS-1 - UAD1 10 10
CS-1 - UAD2 16 14
EX-1 - UAD1 49 40
EX-1 - UAD2 50 38

Cambridge - UAD1 44 23
Cambridge - UAD2 39 27
Fairchild - UAD1 12 6
Fairchild - UAD2 21 18
DreamVerb - UAD1 6 5
DreamVerb - UAD2 8 7
RS-1 - UAD1 20 20
RS-1 - UAD2 24 21
Cambridge - UAD1 44 23
Cambridge - UAD2 39 27

PMBand - UAD1 5 2
PMBand - UAD2 8 5
Old 30th August 2008
  #1538
Gear Head
 

1. Wait until the new plugins are released and we'll see if you keep saying that (instruments, etc)

2. Yes for the love of god put a DAMN SHIRT ON!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmcallister View Post
I've bitched about lack of power as much as anyone, but I think ONE quad will do me for the time heh
Old 30th August 2008
  #1539
Lives for gear
 
Silver Sonya's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by barryjohns View Post
I run a business that does much more revenue annually than Universal Audio could dream of, I think I am in a position to know what's a good business decision or not.
Come on, man.

- c
Old 30th August 2008
  #1540
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by barryjohns View Post
Go back in this thread and read my posts in this thread. Had you done that you would not ask that question or make that comment.

It kills me when people quote someone without seeing everything they have to say so that they understand the context of the points being made within the entire conversation. Don't just pick and choose from one comment amongst many on the subject.
I did read the posts but was just making a goof hence the emoticon.

Let me start over. The UAD-2 is a great bargain. Discuss.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1541
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Starting to paw through the manual...

Unfortunately, you have to choose PER PLUGIN MODEL what gets run on UAD-1 vs. UAD-2. i.e. ALL 1081's will have to run on UAD-2s, or UAD-1's. They couldn't figure out how to do that automatically per instance! heh

Here's a goodie:

Quote:
When LiveTrack is active, host CPU loading increases. The host load is directly
proportional to the DSP load of the UAD plug-in(s) in LiveTrack mode,
however host CPU is never used for Powered Plug-in processing.
Makey no sensey. All the host CPU cares about is moving an audio stream around if it's not doing the processing. Any audio stream is the same as any other.

My conclusion is this is an outright lie, and the CPU is, indeed, doing the processing in low-latency mode, they just can't bring themselves to admit the plugins do run native because that would mean everyone would see the cards as just the dongles they are.

Someone with a low-level debugging skill please confirm this...
Old 30th August 2008
  #1542
Lives for gear
 
chrispick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randall View Post
The time to dump UAD-1 cards on ebay is now before the word about this release gets all over the planet.... they can still fetch a 2 or 3 hundred each... Mine are going up over the weekend. We pay attention to things around here that a lot of cats won't know for a while.. I'm taking advantage
Just make sure you're good with those plugs not yet ported (they're promised soon).

Here's the full load-down from UA:

Universal Audio | Current Promotion

Hey, sorry it's such a bad deal for some of you. For me, it's perfectly fine given the free transfer window, purchase voucher and crossover voucher. I'm placing my order right now.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1543
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Dahlberg View Post
The Moog filter is coming later this year. The Fatso should show up around Winter NAMM, perhaps a bit earlier.

god i cant wait!!!! thanks!!!
Old 30th August 2008
  #1544
Lives for gear
 
Chris's Avatar
Seems like a pretty standard price to me. Plus you get a bunch of bonuses.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1545
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
 

I agree peeder, i know HD can run almost latency free because the mix engine is on the card, if UA broke some code and allowed us to track or monitor through plugs like HD does, they will sell by the ton, well im sure they already are, and ill buy 4 lol
Old 30th August 2008
  #1546
Lives for gear
 
barryjohns's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Sonya View Post
Come on, man.

- c
I just sent you a PM to give me a call at work next week.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1547
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Here's the performance chart:

Universal Audio | UAD Charts

I hope that the cases mentioned above where the 2.5x/10x multiplier does not apply is actually because the code has been greatly improved on the UAD-2 version.

That would explain the need to assign which plugin model got run on which card.

However, it is a ham-handed way to do business if that is the case, as it is not per-session.

Quote:
Note: The Run On menu should not be used dynamically; it is designed to be
“set and forget” because the value is not stored within sessions. (UAD 5.0 manual p.64)
The proper approach would have been what I suggested, new "XE" versions of the plugins instead. Then when you instantiate an XE, it runs on UAD-2, and when you don't, it still runs on UAD-1, unless there is no UAD-1 available (in which case it warns you when you open an old session that your sonics will change).

Of course this could just be an optimization problem...they didn't optimize those plugin implementations (yet? ever?) and the sonics are actually the same. The 5.0 manual says nothing about this though.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1548
Lives for gear
 
slaves666's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProducerBoy View Post
Looks like the 10, 5, and 2.5x performance rating is pretty misleading. Doesn't apply to a lot of the plugs. UAD-1 actually OUTPERFORMS UAD-2 in EX-1 stereo plug counts and Cambridge mono counts. Not so much a complaint as an observation.

For instance:

plug count | Mono | Stereo
LA-2A - UAD1 19 17
LA-2A - UAD2 27 23
LA-3A - UAD1 15 13
LA-3A - UAD2 22 20
Plate 140 - UAD1 4 4
Plate 140 - UAD2 6 6
RealVerb Pro - UAD1 9 8
RealVerb Pro - UAD2 9 9
CS-1 - UAD1 10 10
CS-1 - UAD2 16 14
EX-1 - UAD1 49 40
EX-1 - UAD2 50 38

Cambridge - UAD1 44 23
Cambridge - UAD2 39 27
Fairchild - UAD1 12 6
Fairchild - UAD2 21 18
DreamVerb - UAD1 6 5
DreamVerb - UAD2 8 7
RS-1 - UAD1 20 20
RS-1 - UAD2 24 21
Cambridge - UAD1 44 23
Cambridge - UAD2 39 27

PMBand - UAD1 5 2
PMBand - UAD2 8 5
Probably has to do with the initial stages of coding.....now the plugins are better coded and optimized.

I honestly don't think they'll sell as many solo's as they will Quads. If you wanted a Solo, you could probably but a few used UAD-1's for less.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1549
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
I think most of us have space for 2 PCIe cards. Therefore if you had 2 Quad cards you should never really run out of power. At least not if you work in a normal manner.

I'm a bit disappointed that there's no new plug included in the version 5. However I do believe that the moog filter isn't far from beeing released now. Especially as we can see it fully functional in the webzine already. That thing looks (and sounds) sweet!!!

I'm more than happy with the UAD-2, eventhough it'll cost me some money to get 1 or 2 Quads but hey, Quality comes at a price.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1550
F5D
Lives for gear
 
F5D's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
Starting to paw through the manual...
Makey no sensey. All the host CPU cares about is moving an audio stream around if it's not doing the processing. Any audio stream is the same as any other.

My conclusion is this is an outright lie, and the CPU is, indeed, doing the processing in low-latency mode, they just can't bring themselves to admit the plugins do run native because that would mean everyone would see the cards as just the dongles they are.

Someone with a low-level debugging skill please confirm this...
Some powercore plugins also have the "no latency-mode". It does not mean that the plugins run on the host cpu. The high cpu load comes from the way the data is transferred between the dsp card and the host cpu. If I remember correctly, normally a certain DMA mode (asynchronous I guess) is used for the data transfer that does not require much of cpu but causes the typical latency of dsp cards. The "no latency" or "low latency" mode just bypasses the basic data transfer mode and the cpu must work much harder to handle the data transfer in almost realtime (synchronous, I guess). At least that is how I understand this and it has also been explained in some older TC Electronic Powercore manuals. The plugins do not run natively.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1551
Lives for gear
 

to the people who own uad-1... the upgrade policy does seem unfair, but if they continue to update there plugins so that the product you purchased continues to work through the future I don't think there is to much to complain about. The product that you bought still works fine. They do seem to be shooting themselves in the foot a bit here as it makes the incentive to upgrade not as big...

to the people who don't own uad... if you think its overpriced, don't buy it! If it is overpriced then most people probably won't buy it and it will tank. If most people think its overpriced and continue to purchase it...well its value is therefore raised to that over priced level.

Either way, I don't get pissed off cause Mercedes releases a new car that costs 80 grand that I think is overpriced... Cause guess what... there are other options out there!
Old 30th August 2008
  #1552
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by F5D View Post
Some powercore plugins also have the "no latency-mode". It does not mean that the plugins run on the host cpu. The high cpu load comes from the way the data is transferred between the dsp card and the host cpu. Normally, the DMA mode is used for the data transfer (if I remember correctly) and causes the typical latency of dsp cards. The "no latency" or "low latency" mode just bypasses the basic data transfer mode and the cpu must work much harder to handle the data transfer in almost realtime. At least that is how I understand this and it has also been explained in some older TC Electronic Powercore manuals. The plugins do not run natively.
OK but that does not explain the key aspect of the claim:

Quote:
The host load is directly proportional to the DSP load of the UAD plug-in(s) in LiveTrack mode
As I stated, the host CPU would not be more burdened by a Precision Multiband running on a distant coprocessor than it would be by a 1176SE running on the same coprocessor, if the coprocessor was doing all the DSP. The host CPU would just care about moving audio around, any audio stream the equal of any other. (They could have said "proportional to instance count" but they didn't...)

What this smells to me like is, development on the cards was going really, really bad a few years ago...we know they had to burn and rebuild at least once...and the management decided they needed a fallback strategy and had all the plugins coded as native (which they may have already been for development purposes). When the cards finally came together, the management decided to make use of the native implementations by offering them as a low-latency mode.

That's what it sniffs like, but someone with a real sniffer could tell for sure.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1553
Lives for gear
 
chrispick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by n8tron View Post
They do seem to be shooting themselves in the foot a bit here as it makes the incentive to upgrade not as big...
The power upgrade is some incentive.

I do agree that had they included a tasty new plugin with the UAD-2 -- say, the Fatso emulation -- they'd have a more enticing carrot to dangle.

Nevertheless, it's a buy for me. I ordered a Duo which I'll tag-team with my UAD-1. Seriously considered a Quad, but figured it was more than need anytime soon. I've more slots available, should I need the step up.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1554
Lives for gear
 

so did they improve any of their old plugs (la2a, 1176 etc)?
Old 30th August 2008
  #1555
Lives for gear
 
hugol's Avatar
 

Well I think they're taking the piss a bit with the prices. £720 odd quid for the basic duo version!?!? That's more than a Duende PCI.... and you don't get any decent plug-ins. On the other hand, maybe it's on purpose so as not to devalue the second hand UAD-1 market too much?

Also the idea of (in the future) having to pay $25 a plug-in to transfer to UAD-2 is very unexpected. Sure they're trying to recoup the development costs, but even so. Seems like they've taken a leaf out of Wave's book all of a sudden.

Also anyone if any of the new plug-ins (Fatso etc) are going to be UAD-2 only?
Old 30th August 2008
  #1556
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wuss88 View Post
OK OK its just everything seems to cost about twice as much for Mac and for ProTools and there are often compatibility issues, thats what make these companies suspicious for me. I work in the music retail industry, can't say where, been looking at prices and policies for years and these two stick out big time. But thats just my opinion. Sorry man, didnt want to hurt your feelings.

Now lets get back to discussing the UAD2.
lemme guess, you work for Guitar Center
Old 30th August 2008
  #1557
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by salomonander View Post
so did they improve any of their old plugs (la2a, 1176 etc)?
I doubt it, otherwise they would have announced it cause it would kinda be a big deal.
Old 30th August 2008
  #1558
Gear Maniac
 
King Of Spain's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrispick View Post
I ordered a Duo which I'll tag-team with my UAD-1. Seriously considered a Quad, but figured it was more than need anytime soon.
since it looks like the quad is the same card minus two sharc chips I wonder if any tech heads will be offering duo to quad mods for a price point somewhere under the 6 hundy UA wants for the extra processors...
Old 30th August 2008
  #1559
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Dahlberg View Post
. . . . I don't think UA wants to be doing transfers after 2008.

yeah, right . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Old 30th August 2008
  #1560
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder View Post
OK but that does not explain the key aspect of the claim: "The host load is directly proportional to the DSP load of the UAD plug-in(s) in LiveTrack mode"
Maybe they want to say : if you use 3 plugins in LTM, it will use three times the cpu of one using the LTM...
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