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 31st August 2008
  #1741
Lives for gear
 
Robert Randolph's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BorrelNote View Post
Yep...like I said, we know where you comming from... Knowing what your understanding of 'shame' is by now I even feel honored to get the ASS clown award from you fuuck..

Go ahead and keep promoting Waves and URS and keep dissing UA... Now THAT's mature.. Yeah, I piss on guys like you pretending to know **** but actually talk from their behindes. You know **** about UA plugins and their ability to run native. Give us some facts if you do..but you can't so stop your whining..

Go fuuck yourself... clear enough for you ?
Hey man, don't worry! Tony has plenty of assclown awards, and he just keeps trying to pawn them off on other people.

After all, if you had as many as he does, you'd be trying to give them away at every opportunity too.
Old 31st August 2008
  #1742
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arksun View Post
This thread concerns me a bit:

UAD Forums • View topic - EDIT: UAD-2 Quad Overloading my CPU

I hope that's just a software driver issue.
Wouldn't it be amazing if some of the UAD-2 plugin versions are actually not ported to the new chips, but are being shipped running native all the time?
Old 31st August 2008
  #1743
Lives for gear
 
Geert van den Berg's Avatar
 

ENOUGH BITCHING!

I'll clear up the mess tomorrow (I'm on iphone now), anyone that continuous with bickering will be temporarily banned from Music Computers! ANYONE!!!
Old 31st August 2008
  #1744
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
That's the typical response I hear from people.....

I would love to see a session that maxes out a current generation Mac Pro with a few gigs of RAM.

I mix with 140-150 tracks of audio... with a couple HUNDRED fairly CPU intensive plugins going (like Waves SSL channel as an example or URS Strip Pro)... no sweat.

).
I'll send you some of mine then... Okay, I'm "only" on a Quad core MacPro with 10 gigs of RAM, and I max it out almost daily just by running a combo of CPU hog plugins like Altiverb, MiniMonsta, Analog Factory, and Kontakt3, combined with a dozen tracks of live drums and then another dozen or so guitars, vocals and assorted noises.

I've got two UAD1 cards and they come in might handy for a) better sounding compression and EQ, and b) relieving the strain on my Mac (especially given Logic's sloppy handling of multiple cores).

I use the Waves SSL's, URS, and Sony Dynamics plugs as an alternative to the UAD, but I can't wait to get at least the Duo card so I can run more Neve EQ's!

Honestly, I'm surprised you aren't maxing out your MacPro. Maybe it's the 8-core difference. Mine is an awesome machine compared to my old Dual G4, but it's far from invincible.
Old 31st August 2008
  #1745
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeBasement View Post
I'll send you some of mine then... Okay, I'm "only" on a Quad core MacPro with 10 gigs of RAM, and I max it out almost daily just by running a combo of CPU hog plugins like Altiverb, MiniMonsta, Analog Factory, and Kontakt3, combined with a dozen tracks of live drums and then another dozen or so guitars, vocals and assorted noises.

I've got two UAD1 cards and they come in might handy for a) better sounding compression and EQ, and b) relieving the strain on my Mac (especially given Logic's sloppy handling of multiple cores).

I use the Waves
Really? I have all of those except for Analog Factory and don't have any problems running lots of them... Are you sure it's a CPU issue, or is your hard drive crapping out?

I wonder if it's because I'm running Symphony on my Mac Pro that it's so powerful at low buffers?
Old 1st September 2008
  #1746
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhang View Post
Hey guys. Where can I find the info on this moog filter. I'm very curious. I sit on the fence on this one. I like most here do not want any corners cut on ANYTHING for the uad-2. However, it does sound crazy for a single filter to eat this much juice. Just curious what this filter has that would make more of a system hog than the neve bus compressor. Is it me or does this sound backwards? As well, in regards to the comments about " I love when they use this much juice ... means they didn't cut corners". That or they have yet streamlined the code. I hear fantastic stuff about the neve plug ins, so I imagine no corners were cut there, yet they use less juice? Is this right? It just seems that it should be the other way around.
The distortion part of the filter is what uses so much DSP. The distortion-less SE version, which is supposed to be identical in every other way, uses 1/5 as much power. Search youtube and you'll find it, it sounds incredible and the distortion is the best digital distortion I've yet heard.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1747
Lives for gear
 

There's actually stuff on their site. It's in the webzine part:

Universal Audio Webzine | Plug-In Power

Take Care
Old 1st September 2008
  #1748
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProducerBoy View Post
Ok. So you are suggesting that the 1081 is UAD's finest EQ plug followed closely by the 1073 which tops the Helios? So then the 88rs doesn't come close to the UAD's other EQ plugs. Oh, and forget the Cambridge. That thing must be pretty ugly by comparison.
Yes, actually, it's pretty clear that most people would break them down somewhere along those line. As you said yourself, it's not possible to make an absolute 1:1 comparison due to different functionality and technology but I think we can all agree that the most DSP-intensive EQ's are definitely UA's finest.

Quote:
I suppose the 33609 must put all the other UAD comps to utter shame in terms of quality.
Again, yes, you're going to find that this is the general consensus. Many people say the 33609 is the most accurate digital emulation of analog hardware ever made.

Quote:
The Pultec and 1081 are both up and downsampled, yet the Pultec requires half the DSP.
Again, as you said in your first post, you can't make a 1:1 comparison between them because the 1081 does so much more than the Pultec does (about twice as much, so maybe there actually is some correlation there).

btw, do you realize you've contradicted yourself several times now? I thought I took a very fair stance, it's strange that you've become so rashly indignant against it.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1749
Lives for gear
 
duvalle's Avatar
 

mhh .. i think i will wait ... i really hate to be an "early bird" !!

beta testing seems to have started:
UAD Forums • View topic - UAD-2 and CPU Useage

UAD Forums • View topic - EDIT: UAD-2 Quad Overloading my CPU

Old 1st September 2008
  #1750
Gear Maniac
 
freshmints's Avatar
 

now uad2 has landed ,
how will i run it on my mbp P
hope they are coming up with something for
notebook users , was actually expecting they would target this group
from the beginning , lets see
Old 1st September 2008
  #1751
Lives for gear
 

FOX NEWS ALERT: The UAD 3 just came out and everyone can stop complaining. It's all things to all people.....
Old 1st September 2008
  #1752
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
Really? I have all of those except for Analog Factory and don't have any problems running lots of them... Are you sure it's a CPU issue, or is your hard drive crapping out?

I wonder if it's because I'm running Symphony on my Mac Pro that it's so powerful at low buffers?
Definitely CPU horse power, according to the meters, and my experience. Most of those plugs, except for Kontakt, don't hit your hard drive all that hard, and I've got 4 SATA drives chugging along just fine. It's enough power to get me through just fine, but I wouldn't call the UAD1 "overkill". On my system, I'm fairly certain that if the UAD plugs were native, I'd be using less of them, not more.

But nobody other than the programmers themselves - and possibly not even them - could tell you how much CPU power their plugs would take if they were native. So arguing about it is about as sensible as debating the color of God's underwear, or any other inherently unknowable fact.

(Though I have heard reliable rumors that the answer is: Blue Boxers)
Old 1st September 2008
  #1753
Lives for gear
 
Farshad's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zboy2854 View Post
There are also plenty of plugins and software that are cracked for Mac. Bottom line, if UAD went totally native, their stuff would be cracked one way or the other no doubt, and it would cannibalize the sales they've got going for them now.

Look, it's clear as day that UA sticks with the UAD card primarily for piracy reasons. In this day and age, NO DSP card can hang with the multi-core computers that are out there now. But so what? The way I see it, the fact that UAD cannot (or has not) been cracked is exactly the reason they were able to get partners to sign on board, such as Empirical Labs, SPL, Little Labs and Neve. Even those companies have said as much, since piracy was a huge fear for them getting into the plugin world, and rightly so.

So as far as I'm concerned, having the UAD be a glorified dongle is fine by me if it means that we can get more companies to license their products as plugins, who otherwise wouldn't because of piracy concerns.
So how come Waves have got SSL and API to approve their plugins WITHOUT any dongles involved? I think it is merely becuse that UA has a different business model.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1754
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeBasement View Post
Definitely CPU horse power, according to the meters, and my experience. Most of those plugs, except for Kontakt, don't hit your hard drive all that hard, and I've got 4 SATA drives chugging along just fine. It's enough power to get me through just fine, but I wouldn't call the UAD1 "overkill". On my system, I'm fairly certain that if the UAD plugs were native, I'd be using less of them, not more.
Hmmm... I have no idea then. My guess is the Analog Factory is not optimized for AU/ Intel yet.

Quote:
But nobody other than the programmers themselves - and possibly not even them - could tell you how much CPU power their plugs would take if they were native. So arguing about it is about as sensible as debating the color of God's underwear, or any other inherently unknowable fact.

(Though I have heard reliable rumors that the answer is: Blue Boxers)
I agree... the only point of reference we have is the TDM plugins that they made of their LA2A and 1176 (which I still have assets of on my iLok). We can gauge how potentially CPU intensive they would be by comparing similar TDM plugins and their native equivalents, but it is all speculation, and I don't like to speculate.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1755
Gear Addict
 
BlueSprocket's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeBasement View Post
So arguing about it is about as sensible as debating the color of God's underwear, or any other inherently unknowable fact.

(Though I have heard reliable rumors that the answer is: Blue Boxers)
You sir,

May be my new favorite person in the world. Certainly on Gearslutz right now. Might I have liberty to use that line at some future point in time?
Old 1st September 2008
  #1756
Lives for gear
 
kreeper_6's Avatar
 

Double
Old 1st September 2008
  #1757
Lives for gear
 
kreeper_6's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamzone View Post
So your songs are hits from the start now??

Would'nt have a PC anywhere near a studio....
I don't think you have a correct understanding as to what a PC is.

-The term PC has become more and more difficult to pin down. In general, though, it applies to any personal computer based on an Intel microprocessor, or on an Intel-compatible microprocessor. For nearly every other component, including the operating system, there are several options, all of which fall under the rubric of PC

-Microcomputer, including its own operating system (OS), application software, and other components necessary for its operation in service of a single user


Currently I have a NON-APPLE-MAC PC running the latest OSX Leopard build. They are called hackintoshes and it didn't cost me an arm and a leg and I CAN uprade the CPU at will. Apple has you guys by the balls, its so sad because the OS is much simpler than vista, but definatley not better. Talk about dongles, I think the MAC PRO is the most expensive dongle ever!
Old 1st September 2008
  #1758
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farshad View Post
So how come Waves have got SSL and API to approve their plugins WITHOUT any dongles involved?
It's true that it's not true across the board but I can tell you with authority that piracy was one reason UA got Neve and Waves didn't.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1759
Lives for gear
 
animix's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Talk about dongles, I think the MAC PRO is the most expensive dongle ever!
Old 1st September 2008
  #1760
Lives for gear
 
clonewar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Currently I have a NON-APPLE-MAC PC running the latest OSX Leopard build. They are called hackintoshes and it didn't cost me an arm and a leg and I CAN uprade the CPU at will. Apple has you guys by the balls, its so sad because the OS is much simpler than vista, but definatley not better. Talk about dongles, I think the MAC PRO is the most expensive dongle ever!
Man OS X must really suck for you to go out of your way to build a hackintosh to be able to run it..

BTW, there's a term for what you're doing: it's called pirating.. not looked at too favorably around here.
Old 1st September 2008
  #1761
Lives for gear
 
kreeper_6's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by clonewar View Post
Man OS X must really suck for you to go out of your way to build a hackintosh to be able to run it..

BTW, there's a term for what you're doing: it's called pirating.. not looked at too favorably around here.
Actually, I just wanted to see if I could do it with my latest PC build, and run Leopard before my friends with MACs did. Shoulda seen their faces! Why is it pirating when I bought OSX Leopard?
Old 1st September 2008
  #1762
Lives for gear
 
clonewar's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Actually, I just wanted to see if I could do it with my latest PC build, and run Leopard before my friends with MACs did. Shoulda seen their faces! Why is it pirating when I bought OSX Leopard?
Apple's EULA only allows for OS X to be installed on Apple hardware (go figure!), unless you have a special Developer's build.

Honestly, while I know a lot of people have them up and running, if you really wanted to rely on one full time as a music/studio machine I don't think the maintenance is worth it, you're better off running XP if you want the DIY flexibility (IMO).
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