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
UAD-2 : facts and figures Audio Interfaces
Old 3rd September 2008
  #61
adl
Gear Addict
 
adl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhang View Post
Do you know the sample rate he's using? I always work in 24/96 but specs for DSP cards are usually slated for 48. At least thats what most cards seem to quote. I'm curious how this thing behaves at 96. If I can get the thing buzzing along at 256 samples with a generous track count I will be pretty damn happy. I use a lot of stuff and I constantly get pushed back to 1024 by the end of a track and it really suX.

The Card seems to work pretty well with 256 Samples. The other question (24/96 behavior) has not been answered so far (or I overlooked it)
Maybe you have a look at the thread yourselfe to be sure:
UAD Forums • View topic - EDIT: UAD-2 Quad Overloading my CPU

Thomas
Old 3rd September 2008
  #62
Lives for gear
 
Bhang's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by adl View Post
The Card seems to work pretty well with 256 Samples. The other question (24/96 behavior) has not been answered so far (or I overlooked it)
Maybe you have a look at the thread yourselfe to be sure:
UAD Forums • View topic - EDIT: UAD-2 Quad Overloading my CPU

Thomas
Thanks for the link ... well, a bit down he includes photos and they say ... 44.1 ... hhmmm ...
Old 3rd September 2008
  #63
adl
Gear Addict
 
adl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhang View Post
Thanks for the link ... well, a bit down he includes photos and they say ... 44.1 ... hhmmm ...

Hm, sorry for you. I record 44.1 and with 256 Samples so,
hopefully everything works fine

Will post a short message as soon as i worked with the card (hopefully Monday).
Old 3rd September 2008
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Bhang's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by adl View Post
Hm, sorry for you. I record 44.1 and with 256 Samples so,
hopefully everything works fine

Will post a short message as soon as i worked with the card (hopefully Monday).
I have been considering 48, but it depends on how the quad card with the neve plugz performs at 96. If its pretty lame than I'll have to switch to 48. I have been doing projects in both resolutions and I'm not entirely convinced that 96 makes all that much difference. Especially for the music i do.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #65
Gear Addict
 
Spookym15's Avatar
 

Anyone know how the load with pro tools is? I heard there were some issues with it.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #66
Lives for gear
 
T_R_S's Avatar
No Protools support = No sale

The statement I read about RTAS support on the UA website did not leave me with the impression I would want to buy one yet
Old 3rd September 2008
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by duckoff View Post
I've also tested out the 'Live Track' feature & have to say I'm impressed - it really appears to work well - it puts a fair amount of stress on the CPU tho ( is it running native I wonder ....... the more DSP intensive plugs seem to give the computer ( CPU ) a bigger hit..... very interesting )
Wow! So you mean Live Track mode is simply let the UAD card act as dongle?

Did you check the exact latency it introduce, and mind sharing the details on how much CPU it use?
Old 3rd September 2008
  #68
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pigcat View Post
Wow! So you mean Live Track mode is simply let the UAD card act as dongle?

Did you check the exact latency it introduce, and mind sharing the details on how much CPU it use?
What he said!!!
Old 3rd September 2008
  #69
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProducerBoy View Post
First, that claim doesn't apply to a lot of the plugs. Second, UAD-1 almost matches and actually out performs the UAD-2 with Cambridge?
Given the current CPU munching issue, it seems wisest to hang on to UAD-1's for now and save the UAD-2 for the most DSP-hungry plug-ins.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deuc647 View Post
Someone please report back about the live track mode.
It uses a ton of CPU but should work fine during the early stages of tracking. Running 24 88RS's, my CPU usage jumped from 22% to 80% when I switched to LiveTrack Mode. I only have a dual core, though, and it's not hard to imagine that a quad core might handle things much better given that this is the kind of multitasking they're meant to deal with.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Necola View Post
wait for the WEISS powerhouse..

haha.. 4 sharc DSPs.. THINK 10!

Weiss :: POWERHOUSE
Am I correct that Soniccore's new Xcite-1 also uses 10 of these new Sharcs?
Old 3rd September 2008
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

[quote=fooman;3356645]What I've very worried about is if nobody is really jazzed about instance counts now, what will happen when the newer plugs start coming and they take up more DSP than the current plugs? Then the card will seem under powered prematurely, right?

UA did a great job of providing uncompromising quality while still allowing us the option of using less DSP-hungry plug-ins. The VCA VU and LA3 sound incredible for how little DSP they use and for bass I actually prefer the 1073SE over the full 1073.

Quote:
And I'm also a bit cheesed that nobody is talking about mixing in 96k yet. I've been told that doing so would be a decent idea and help quality of the audio. However, without more of a power leap it's not possible.
As I brought up in the other UAD2 thread, the best UAD plug-ins do not use much more power at 96K than they do at 44.1K because less (if any) upsampling is involved.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #73
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_m View Post
Did i miss something or will the old plugins just be rewrites for the new DSP with no further improvements? I was hoping UAD2 to be a clear step up in emulation quality.
The plug-ins have not changed. Most people would prefer to have UA develop new ones than work on the ones they already have, though I agree that it would be cool to see some revamped "Pro" (a la the Pultec Pro) versions of the UAD classics (1176LN, LA2A). I also agree with another poster that the included plug-in suite could stand to be better, it'd be great to see UA eventually include the 1176LN and LA2A, then charge to upgrade to the Pro versions (again, a la the Pultec Pro).
Old 3rd September 2008
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhang View Post
Does anyone have both a UAD-2 and Duende? It would be very interesting to hear some comments comparing the two.
They're equals in terms of quality. The UAD-2 provides you with more options but the Duende gives you that frighteningly accurate emulation of the SSL Buss Compressor. Many people get Duende's for the Buss Compressor alone, I'm hoping SSL will eventually include it with the Duende Mini.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #75
Lives for gear
 
Eric Dahlberg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by T_R_S View Post
No Protools support = No sale

The statement I read about RTAS support on the UA website did not leave me with the impression I would want to buy one yet
It seems pretty clear that UA's drive for lower latency is mainly for the LE crowd. I honestly believe the UAD-2 will eventually provide much better performance with Pro Tools than the UAD-1 ever did.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #76
Lives for gear
 
barryjohns's Avatar
 

I don't know which long awaited release was more of a disaster, Digi's 003 or UA's UAD-2?
Old 3rd September 2008
  #77
Yeah, I tried a mix at 96k once, never again!! it was a joke CPU wise. It was sooo power hungry it was unusable.

Personally I would like to see UAD upgrade some of the older plugs, rather than keep bringing out new plugs.

UAD Cambridge. It's a great plug already, but with more power available to it, it could be even better.

The LA2A simulation i just dont think is good enough, it just adds mud, there's no sparkle, so I never use it. So UAD could bring out a LA2A XL version that rocks.

A couple of free upgrades would be great PR, but also am happy to pay a token $25-50 for a good upgrade for some items.

What's the consensus on this? j
Old 3rd September 2008
  #78
Lives for gear
 
duckoff's Avatar
 

Here's some pictures - ( this is from a pretty complex mix )

1st pic -

Here's 3 stereo files, ( logic buffer @ 128 samples )
The pulse on the left side ( top ) is dry,
The pulse on the right ( bott ) is processed ( with no delay compensation )

Red file = UAD normal mode
Green = UAD in live track
Blue = Native plugin

So live track is *almost* up there with native, but not quite, see other pix for CPU hit - 1st one 2 plugs in normal mode, 2nd = 'live track'
Old 3rd September 2008
  #79
Lives for gear
 
duckoff's Avatar
 

ok - having trouble posting - will try L8r
Old 3rd September 2008
  #80
Gear Addict
 

UAD-2 hit Germany today. (thomann.de, to be more precise).
Solo 469 Euro
Duo 839 Euro
Quad 1399 Euro (not on stock at Thomann)
Nevana 128: 1869 Euro.

At the moment I tend to stick with my 2 UAD-1s and wait until prices drop a bit ...
Old 3rd September 2008
  #81
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Dahlberg View Post
Am I correct that Soniccore's new Xcite-1 also uses 10 of these new Sharcs?
The XITE-1 will probably use 12 ADSP-21362 and 6 ADSP-21065L:

333MHz - Peak : 1.8 GFLOPS
3Mbit on chip Ram
25 DMA channels

Total Peak : 21.6 GFLOPS + 1.1 GFLOPS = 22,7 GFLOPS

They will put 6 old ones in to make 100% sure all the older stuff will run.Safety reasons i suppose.
This is pre info,i am not sure if they really do it that excact way.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #82
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by waltermusik View Post
At the moment I tend to stick with my 2 UAD-1s and wait until prices drop a bit ...
Don't hold your breath...
Old 3rd September 2008
  #83
Lives for gear
 
Pschelfh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by waltermusik View Post
UAD-2 hit Germany today. (thomann.de, to be more precise).
Solo 469 Euro
Duo 839 Euro
Quad 1399 Euro (not on stock at Thomann)
Nevana 128: 1869 Euro.

At the moment I tend to stick with my 2 UAD-1s and wait until prices drop a bit ...
Thanks for the info, just ordered mine at Thomann. I hope they have enough cards in stock! heh

Peter.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #84
Lives for gear
 
True North's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasprouch View Post
3.6Ghz E6850, Hyperx8500 2gb, Asus P5Q-E, 1x UAD-1e, 1x UAD2 Quad, Cubase 4, RME Fireface 400 running through that Agere Chip...

Setup real easy, and the new format installs the authorizations on the card itself, so you can switch to another rig with your card and its ready to go..

Opened up a project where I was at 95% running two UAD-1's (mix of Cambridge, 1073SE's, and 1176LN & SE), and it showed 25% on the Quad. That for me happily demonstrated the rated 8 to 10 times a UAD-1 power of the card...

So I started ramming the card full of plugs and saw that above 90% full my Asio driver spiked, with CPU usage of around 20-30% (just plugs, no audio) at a latency of 256. If I stayed at 90%, no spikes and everything fine...

Moved the latency to 512, and absolutely no issues whatsoever with spiking or whatever, with Quad at 99% and CPU usage lower.

Overall extremely pleased with the power (went completely nuts on my last mix, and barely hit 35% of the Quad), and wondering whether the spiking I saw at 256 is due to the Agere Chip.. Waiting on my TI chipped firewire card to try again.
Thanks for the post - did you try using the low latency mode on the plugs when you brought it down to 256 Samples ?
Old 3rd September 2008
  #85
Lives for gear
 
animix's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Dahlberg View Post
Am I correct that Soniccore's new Xcite-1 also uses 10 of these new Sharcs?
Sonic8 - SCOPE XITE-1

It's an audio interface and depending on the current exchange rate would sell for a bit more than what two UAD-2 quads and a duo would street. The Creamware plugins are nice, but I'm not as partial to them as I am the UAD-1 plugins. I had a big CW system a while back. The reverb was great......the rest of the stuff was good, but not great as I consider the UA plugs to be.......plus, if it's anything like previous CW systems, the DSP plugins don't work worth a **** when used as inserts in a native system like Nuendo.....they have to be integrated with the CW system so you are running an extra shell mixer (sorta like Totalmix with DSP processing) as well as your actual DAW software interface.....which I think is a PITA, personally. For the price they're asking for the X-CITE, you could buy three of the new Steiny audio interfaces, have 24 AD/DA's, 24 decent preamps, ADAT ports for third party converters and integrate it's onboard DSP into Nuendo or Cubase on input channels at zero latency. I'd wager the Yamaha DSP is every bit as good as the X-CITE. It would be interesting to experiment with it to see. For those who want zero latency DSP while tracking, the new Steiny stuff (if using Cubase or Nuendo) is probably going to be a better ticket then either X-Cite or UAD-2 because it is built specifically for this purpose.

err.........sorry for the sidetrack.....


This is why I sold my CW system and went with RME MADI plus 4 x UAD-1's.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #86
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by True North View Post
Thanks for the post - did you try using the low latency mode on the plugs when you brought it down to 256 Samples ?
No, unfortunately not. If you want, score me an outline of a test to run with stuff that interests you guys, and I'll post the results for everybodys use...
Old 3rd September 2008
  #87
Lives for gear
 
infiniteposse's Avatar
 

Here's a FYI re: the 5.0 software and my rig:

Quad 2.66, 4 gigs RAM, latest OS and latest Logic version, 3 x UAD1e.

v5.0 has fixed, thus far, almost all performance issues I've had with my UAD-1e's in my system. Prior to the update I rarely got more than a total of 50% usage out of the 3 cards and now they seem to be rock solid on mixes that used to seriously choke. I'm very pleased.

I've ordered a Quad to replace one of the cards and will be using the other 2 to cover unsupported plugs for now and overflow. I'm really excited to just keep an instance of the Space Echo on a buss when I mix now, all of the time. Their plugs really do sound amazing.

I'll update again once I get the Quad integrated and we'll see how everything gets along.
Old 3rd September 2008
  #88
Lives for gear
anyone in NYC pick one up yet?
Old 3rd September 2008
  #89
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macaroni View Post
No sooner does UAD-2 come out and already it's not good enough for some people.

Certainly there will continue to be amazing advances in processing power, which will no doubt raise the various processing bars, but if you can't make it happen in your mixes with a couple of UAD-2 Quad cards, then the problem isn't the SHARC chips.
You beat me to it, man! Nail on the head...

Now, children; quit da f#¤%in whining about what should have been donetutt
Old 3rd September 2008
  #90
Lives for gear
 
True North's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasprouch View Post
No, unfortunately not. If you want, score me an outline of a test to run with stuff that interests you guys, and I'll post the results for everybodys use...
Wow, that is a kind offer

I think what a lot of people might be interested in is exactly how the low latency mode (LLM) works

We know that LLM works by offloading ALL of the processing power to your CPU. I am just curious about two things

1) Does it work

2) How much CPU power do these plugs take up - this is a little more difficult to figure out unless you use Reaper (free download BTW) which outlines how CPU each plugs in uses.

A simple test would be to put a couple of plugs in a session
Put some of the plugs on a pre-recorded track
Put some UAD plugs on a track that is record armed
Put your latency down to 128 samples
Record yourself on the record armed track with the UAD plugs on it
Use software monitoring (I don't know if you do this, if you monitor through a board this test wont work)

Does everything work as it should - i.e. Were you able to use record monitoring through your DAW without any noticeable latency delays or UAD plugs forcing other tracks out of time ?

Thanks for offering to do this, cheers
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
Poopants / So much gear, so little time
3
celebritymusic / So much gear, so little time
1
Jonkan / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
4
Jonkan / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump