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
UA Plugins , possibly native ? Reverb & Delay Plugins
Old 18th November 2009
  #181
Gear Nut
 
tyronehowe's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Expansion slots.. well the slots are inside the computer so it's still native isn't it!
How many slots do you need though?!
I've never been able to fill all the pci slots, even when I had to use firewire pci cards and network cards and all that jazz.
But laptops don’t have PCI slots. Out of Apple’s current range of laptops, only one has an expansion port (the most expensive one!) and who knows if that will stay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
As someone said before, the reason they can afford to keep developing and stay ahead of the game, as well as attracting juicy partners is because there are no uad cracks …
Sorry but I don’t think that is true. There is a lot of unprotected software that’s still being developed (such as Sonar, Logic, Ableton Live) and lots of software that has been cracked but is also still being developed (such as Cubase, Waves, Native Instruments).
Old 18th November 2009
  #182
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Jeez guys , you sure know how to nip an idea in the bud!

But all valid points, although to be fair to myself, I don't have any sympathy for mac users that let apple drop them in the **** as far as dropping computer hardware support such as pci goes.
If you want to pay far too much money for a system that provides little to no upgrade possibilities, then thatøs your call and you can suffer the consequences.
Ok, next group that loses out - PTHD users. All PTHD users that want to use uad plugs are no doubt using them all ready with the current dsp card system.
And they would benefit as they would only have to have one uad card in their system but can now use countless more instances with their native cpu power.
You have to remember, with this idea, you only need ONE slot and you can use all the native uad versions you want, it's up to you whether or not you choose the cheaper non-dsp option or the full 'dsp bonus' option.

Finally, laptop users. Laptop users are always going to have to make sacrifices for portability, they always have and they always will.
If you want the hardcore daw you go for a desktop, that has always been the case, and also always will, purely because of heat.
Besides, I already mentioned that there wouldn't be any change for laptop users, you just keep the laptop/solo concept but then you can still run all the uad native plugs you want once you max out the solo.

Why on earth am I talking like I'm actually marketing the thing??!!
I need to get out more

You fazed me for second, but I'm still sure it's a good solution thumbsup

I don't have anything against ilok though, and maybe it's less hassle for UA to go that route? But as a current uad user I really don't want to have to pay the charges for that ilok which would be incorporated into every uad plug I purchased from that point on, I'd rather UA keep it all in-house and pass on the savings to us.
Old 18th November 2009
  #183
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steff3 View Post
A German magazine wrote LN 1176 60% of a 800 MHz P3 .... that was when they first tested the release version and referred back to a trade show ... somewhen around Sept. 2001 (as I went UAD recently I looked for those old tests and read through them again ... so I still remember that )


best
Besides the common benchmark results available for current processors, I don't know very much about how the computing performance of two processors can be determined. So if anyone can add to this, I would appreciate it. That being said, I found some specs on a Pentium 3 processor (admittedly a 500 MHz and not the 800 MHz chip used in the test mentioned above) compared to an Intel Core i7 Extreme 965EE. The spec is listed in MIPS (million instructions per second). The result for the two chip sets were 1,354 & 76,383, respectively.
Old 18th November 2009
  #184
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Thats an increase of 75 Billion instructions per second. Wow.

These humans are crazy
Old 18th November 2009
  #185
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Jeez guys , you sure know how to nip an idea in the bud!
That's because it's a f-ing stupid idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post

But all valid points, although to be fair to myself, I don't have any sympathy for mac users that let apple drop them in the **** as far as dropping computer hardware support such as pci goes.
If you want to pay far too much money for a system that provides little to no upgrade possibilities, then that's your call and you can suffer the consequences.
It's got nothing to do with mac users - does your wonderful PC have ISA slots? would have been screwed if you'd bought a UAD ISA dummy card, wouldn't you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Ok, next group that loses out - PTHD users. All PTHD users that want to use uad plugs are no doubt using them all ready with the current dsp card system.
And they would benefit as they would only have to have one uad card in their system but can now use countless more instances with their native cpu power.
You have to remember, with this idea, you only need ONE slot and you can use all the native uad versions you want, it's up to you whether or not you choose the cheaper non-dsp option or the full 'dsp bonus' option.
what about the HD user who would buy the plugins if they were ilok-able, but doesn't have a free slot for his dummy card? Sale lost because wrong choice of copy protection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Finally, laptop users. Laptop users are always going to have to make sacrifices for portability, they always have and they always will.
If you want the hardcore daw you go for a desktop, that has always been the case, and also always will, purely because of heat.
Besides, I already mentioned that there wouldn't be any change for laptop users, you just keep the laptop/solo concept but then you can still run all the uad native plugs you want once you max out the solo.
So your argument for penalising laptop users further is that they're used to it?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
You fazed me for second, but I'm still sure it's a good solution thumbsup
Don't ever go on Dragon's Den will you? you'll get torn to shreds!

About the only intelligent point in your plan is the comment about native plugins running if you have a DSP card. THAT would make sense - no pointless dummy card getting in the way, and no need to buy native versions of plugins you already own DSP versions of - like using RTAS under HD systems.
Old 18th November 2009
  #186
Lives for gear
The solution is simple - release a FEW UAD plugins that run Native. If they get cracked, don't release any more. Start with the old ones that almost all card users already have.
Old 18th November 2009
  #187
Gear Addict
 
rydan's Avatar
 

Yes please. The 1176LN, Plate 140 and DimD, and I'm happy... =)
Old 18th November 2009
  #188
Gear Nut
 
tyronehowe's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rydan View Post
Yes please. The 1176LN, Plate 140 and DimD, and I'm happy... =)
Ha! you sure know which ones to pick! Those would be my first 3 choices as well! thumbsup
Old 18th November 2009
  #189
Lives for gear
 

Thumbs down

People are awfully mean spirited in internet land.
Old 18th November 2009
  #190
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LQM View Post
Whether UA go native or not, their plugins are really good. They don't seem to be flopping just on DSP cards, so I don't think they have a dire need to change things.

As for pro studios, it's not likely that your really big name studios which charge top dollar and have worldwide reputation, such as Ocean Way or AIR etc, would ever use non legitimate software, but there have been instances of medium sized provincial studios, who often specialize in hip hop, rnb or electronic music (but not just this type of studio before anyone accuses me of bias) who have been busted by the Waves undercover team and while most settled and paid up the $7500 to stay out of court, others didn't, 2 or 3 even stopped trading.

It's sad - any studio charging clients money to record should be running legit software - most groups/artists don't have too much of a clue and don't need you to pirate Waves Mercury to be impressed.
thumbsup
Old 18th November 2009
  #191
Lives for gear
 
hugol's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco View Post
P.S. Later today, I'm mixing a PT session with my 4 UAD-1s and 2 UAD-2 Duos, I got most of the effects and it feels f-ing GREAT to know some of you cats waiting for these to go Native are hating right about now, hahaha! fuuck
So what you're saying is UAD has fuelled your superiority complex. Well done you.

DSP cards - the penis extension that certainly won't get you laid.
Old 19th November 2009
  #192
Gear Addict
 
Barbary Ape's Avatar
 

How about the Duende method still use the card but as a dongle and have the option to instantiate a plugin as powered or native. I doubt that it will get cracked that way, it doesn't completely solve it for iMac or some laptop users but it's a compromise.
Old 19th November 2009
  #193
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoL View Post
So what you're saying is UAD has fuelled your superiority complex. Well done you.

DSP cards - the penis extension that certainly won't get you laid.
It really says something about the year we're in when people think that software emulations of legendary hardware is something worthy of acting like a pompous ****** about, haha.

"LOOK AT ME! I HAVE A 1073 ON MY SCREEN! I RULE! YOU SUCK!"

In all seriousness though, I'm sure they sound good, it's just very funny to me.
Old 19th November 2009
  #194
Lives for gear
 

There is no god reason for UA not to go native now. I'd love to use some of their plugins but I don't like dsp cards and the latency issues that come with them.

bring on native thumbsup
Old 19th November 2009
  #195
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoL View Post
So what you're saying is UAD has fuelled your superiority complex. Well done you.

DSP cards - the penis extension that certainly won't get you laid.
lol. True that
Old 19th November 2009
  #196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broken View Post
There is no god reason for UA not to go native now. I'd love to use some of their plugins but I don't like dsp cards and the latency issues that come with them.

bring on native thumbsup
IT's funny how the people slating PT and the DSP aspect being obsolete, are the same people arguing for UAD to stay on DSP cards.
Old 19th November 2009
  #197
Lives for gear
 
XAXAU's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayRadioPlay View Post
Hi Peter. I don't disagree with you. I'm not saying what you think I'm saying. I'm simply stating that someone that calls them self a professional wouldn't pirate plugins just because they can, as XAXAU suggested the 'pros' he knows do. I feel like any 'pros' in our industry should understand what hard work is, and why things cost money.

I've worked with several big producers that are somewhat stingy about the money they spend. They don't spend 10k on a TDM Mercury Bundle because even for them, that's just too much money for that software. Does that mean they pirate the software instead? No. It means they do without it, and spend money on the things that they think are worth it.

That's what I'm discussing here: mainly XAXAU's pretty incredible and pathetic attempts to justify his ridiculous positions on this issue. I definitely know that making money doesn't equate to professionality.

There is a lot of software that I don't have that I choose not to pirate. Perhaps XAXAU would call me old fashioned, but I consider myself to be a reasonable person that values other people's work. Besides, I don't need Waves Mercury bundle to do what I do. It would be nice, but I have some restraint and respect.
I hear you and I feel you.

I hardly use any plugins at all besides my beloved UAD ones. I like a select few which I trust and can make pretty much anything with.

If I find a plugin I like, I would pay for it. BUT, only if I´m making money of it. That´s technically still stealing, I know, but I don´t care. I don´t draw the line where the does.

But whatever, that´s not the subject here.

You´re right, making money doesn't equate to professionality. In this case "pro" was referred as professional producer, as in they´ve got mad production skills.

I think that going native would hurt UA, but believe that they´re not doing as well as they were hoping for, so doing a Duende is on their agenda of possible solutions.

We´ll see what happens in the future...

Cheers...
Old 19th November 2009
  #198
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by XAXAU View Post
I hear you and I feel you.

I hardly use any plugins at all besides my beloved UAD ones. I like a select few which I trust and can make pretty much anything with.

If I find a plugin I like, I would pay for it. BUT, only if I´m making money of it. That´s technically still stealing, I know, but I don´t care. I don´t draw the line where the does.

But whatever, that´s not the subject here.

You´re right, making money doesn't equate to professionality. In this case "pro" was referred as professional producer, as in they´ve got mad production skills.

I think that going native would hurt UA, but believe that they´re not doing as well as they were hoping for, so doing a Duende is on their agenda of possible solutions.

We´ll see what happens in the future...

Cheers...
Understandable
Old 19th November 2009
  #199
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
Whats with the iLok hate? It never ever caused me any trouble.
Old 19th November 2009
  #200
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorg View Post
Whats with the iLok hate? It never ever caused me any trouble.
Agreed. I have mine plugged into the back of my Apple monitor, and I forget that it's even there.
Old 19th November 2009
  #201
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slapswan View Post
Besides the common benchmark results available for current processors, I don't know very much about how the computing performance of two processors can be determined. So if anyone can add to this, I would appreciate it. That being said, I found some specs on a Pentium 3 processor (admittedly a 500 MHz and not the 800 MHz chip used in the test mentioned above) compared to an Intel Core i7 Extreme 965EE. The spec is listed in MIPS (million instructions per second). The result for the two chip sets were 1,354 & 76,383, respectively.
Each sharc processor in the uad-2 will do up to 2.4GFlops, compared to the various flavours of Intel i7 which will do from 40 -50 GFlops apiece.
Old 19th November 2009
  #202
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulls hit View Post
Each sharc processor in the uad-2 will do up to 2.4GFlops, compared to the various flavours of Intel i7 which will do from 40 -50 GFlops apiece.
There's no way you can compare a dedicated DSP with a computer proc' , they really really don't work the same way.
Old 19th November 2009
  #203
Lives for gear
 
DaveC's Avatar
 

Quote:
There's no way you can compare a dedicated DSP with a computer proc' , they really really don't work the same way.
True, a dedicated DSP is a hundred times slower.
Go native UAD!
Old 19th November 2009
  #204
Gear Addict
 

yeah go ahead be native ... be cracked and piss of your actual and so loyal customers (you know the serious and solid customer base you have since the beginning) for moaning kids

kids want high end free cracked native plugins go native and you will bring them that,

yeah UA lose all the value you create slowly years after years on your so great plugins system in 3 weeks.

yeah UA break the trust with your partnership and deliver crackable plugins.

yeah UA bring us native version of yours plugins at 2-3 x the actual price just to survive to the warez

yeah UA becomes natives and kill yourself just because kids are jealous.

sorry guy all native plugins (even with any usb dongle) can be cracked and are cracked if you want them (even the last waves, the fact you didn't find them on google doesnt mean they didn't exist, cubase 5 is cracked too for instance),

the method to crack ilok or syncrosoft exist and can be use for any ilok/ syncrosoft protected plugin (even the most recent plugins)

the only plugins that are not cracked are on DSP (yeah i heard about sonnox on Poco but you still need a poco to run them and it was the only case) and that fact give DSP hosted plugin a real value. because they only run on the DSP (hybrid dsp/native version certainly open the door for craked version too)

all i read here from people who want native version of UAD plugins are kids jealousy, people with laptop or imac toy. Use real tools and stop moaning about the fact life isn't like you want.

mixing isn't a funny game for funny people on funny laptops, it's a serious work that need serious tools.

the world goes crazy each time we are obliged to satisfy all the silly marketted behaviors (no need mobility for mixing, you need working tools with serious monitoring in a good room, kids lost their time mixing on their bicycles, serious ingeeners don't do the 2 things at the same time ).
Old 19th November 2009
  #205
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
That's because it's a f-ing stupid idea.
Hmm. No, not really. You're contradicting yourself further down the page, read on!

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
It's got nothing to do with mac users - does your wonderful PC have ISA slots? would have been screwed if you'd bought a UAD ISA dummy card, wouldn't you?
I bought my first computer in 2003. ISA slots were all ready a thing of the past then, and pci 2.2 slots are still present in modern motherboards, so that's a good decade at least of use.
Now pci-e is the new standard, and that too will be supported for at least a decade too I'm sure. Is 10 years not long enough for you to get your money's worth out of a product?
It is for me, and unlike you, I'm not even making money off of it!
I didn't hear cries of woe that the uad-2 cards are pci-e only, did you?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
what about the HD user who would buy the plugins if they were ilok-able, but doesn't have a free slot for his dummy card? Sale lost because wrong choice of copy protection.
Are you seriously telling me that there are HD users out there right now, in numbers, that are not using uad plugs solely because they run on a dsp card that takes up a slot?
What about all the pro users that bought a magma chassis so they could run the full complement of uad-1 cards? Or the people that continue to use more than one uad-2 card?

Anyone that really wants to use the plugs whether for pro or amateur work has all ready splashed the cash on a card and is using them, and really isn't complaining about the fact that they have the card in their system.
What they are complaining about is the fact that they have all this raw native power that they would love to run more uad instances on, and how do they know they would like to run more instances?
Because they all ready have a card in their system.

What I'm suggesting is that a card reamins in the system, but that you would never need to add a second, unless you really wanted more dsp power, one card gives you the right to use the dsp and run all your authorised plugs on native power as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
So your argument for penalising laptop users further is that they're used to it?!
How are laptop users being penalised? They're being given an advantage. It just means they still have to have a laptop/solo card, as they do now, but they also can run native versions, so it's actually a gain for them.

If I tell you you can buy a car or a house, not both, are you going to tell me then that if you choose the car, you feel penalised because you can't have a house?
That's a ridiculous viewpoint.
There are always trade-offs for portablilty, that's just physics I'm afraid, it's not anyone's fault. You know that when you choose to take a laptop as a workstation. It's no big secret or conspiracy against laptop users.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Don't ever go on Dragon's Den will you? you'll get torn to shreds!
Likewise!

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
About the only intelligent point in your plan is the comment about native plugins running if you have a DSP card. THAT would make sense - no pointless dummy card getting in the way, and no need to buy native versions of plugins you already own DSP versions of - like using RTAS under HD systems.
But this is the whole premise!
What do you care if that card is actually running dsp or not, if it effectively cost you nothing to obtain due to the purchase price being offset by plug vouchers?
You don't need to buy native versions of the plugs if you have a dsp card. If you own uad dsp hardware that automatically gives you the right to unlock the native versions, no extra charge, or at worst, a nominal charge, $5 per plug with a $100 cap to unlock all native versions of your current authorised plugs, something like that.

I've all ready said though that I don't have anything against ilok, so long as it is truly secure, I've never used one, only synchrosoft and I'm obviously not impressed with that.
I also think that if uad went ilok, then the momentum behind cracking the ilok would increase exponentially though.

Think about if this question appeared on the questionnaire, and what your answer would be to it:

Q. If you could run your authorised uad plugs using both dsp and native cpu power in your current system, would you be happy to pay $100 in order to achieve this?
A. Damn right.

Q. Given this option, would you then suddenly feel as sorry for all the non uad card owners as you do at this moment?
A. Hell no.

In other words, if the ONLY option to run native versions was to have a card in your sytem, is it going to bother you that much. And the answer is obviously no, so I really don't get what the big deal is.
Old 19th November 2009
  #206
Lives for gear
 
Herb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbary Ape View Post
How about the Duende method still use the card but as a dongle and have the option to instantiate a plugin as powered or native. I doubt that it will get cracked that way, it doesn't completely solve it for iMac or some laptop users but it's a compromise.
Having a DSP solution as a dongle won't stop the plugins getting cracked. The only thing stopping them getting cracked is the fact you have to have the hardware to run them.

DSP plugs have been cracked before but you still have to have the DSP hardware to run them.

If someone was to go to the effort of reverse engineering the plugs and pulling the algorithms out so they can be recoded into a different format they may as well stick a new GUI on it and start selling it as their own plug.
Old 19th November 2009
  #207
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
True, a dedicated DSP is a hundred times slower.
Go native UAD!
It seems you don't quite understand how these things work - you just can't compare an embedded DSP system to a micro-computer chip and it doesn't make sense to compare their clock frequencies and flop scores.
A good example would be the embedded systems running the flight management systems in modern planes - their processors are just a couple of hundred Mhz fast, but even if it had only that one task to do, a core i7 couldn't compete, let alone running a complex operating system like Windows or OS X on top of that.

Anyway, if the UA guys read this thread, they'll be laughing their asses off just seeing the huge controversy they raised with a simple email :D
Old 19th November 2009
  #208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Hmm. No, not really. You're contradicting yourself further down the page, read on!
I'm really not. Having to put a PCI card in a computer just as a dongle is a stupid idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
I bought my first computer in 2003. ISA slots were all ready a thing of the past then, and pci 2.2 slots are still present in modern motherboards, so that's a good decade at least of use.
Now pci-e is the new standard, and that too will be supported for at least a decade too I'm sure. Is 10 years not long enough for you to get your money's worth out of a product?
It is for me, and unlike you, I'm not even making money off of it!
I didn't hear cries of woe that the uad-2 cards are pci-e only, did you?!
Well, as you've already pointed out, PCI IS a thing of the past to Mac users. Doesn't matter how much sympathy you have for them, they make up a large chunk of the music-making population (particularly those serious enough about it to invest the sort of wedge needed for a UAD card). I also think 10 years is very optimistic for any technology these days, though I take your point about ISA being long dead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Are you seriously telling me that there are HD users out there right now, in numbers, that are not using uad plugs solely because they run on a dsp card that takes up a slot?
I don't know anyone with an HD3 running on Mac who runs a UAD card. In fact, I don't know anyone running HD anything with a UAD card. I know a few people who used to use the UAD TDM plugins, but then they were discontinued. And again, Mac users make up the majority of HD users (at the present moment in time).

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
What about all the pro users that bought a magma chassis so they could run the full complement of uad-1 cards? Or the people that continue to use more than one uad-2 card?
Please point me to a pro user who has done this! I know of pro users with 2 or 3 cards in their system. I've never even heard of anyone with magma chassis for UAD cards (unlike the HD PCI to PCIe upgrade, it's probably cheaper to just upgrade the machine to one with more slots) - and I also don't see why you bring up using more than 1 UAD2 card? that's perfectly fine and normal in one machine!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
Anyone that really wants to use the plugs whether for pro or amateur work has all ready splashed the cash on a card and is using them, and really isn't complaining about the fact that they have the card in their system.
What they are complaining about is the fact that they have all this raw native power that they would love to run more uad instances on, and how do they know they would like to run more instances?
Because they all ready have a card in their system.

What I'm suggesting is that a card reamins in the system, but that you would never need to add a second, unless you really wanted more dsp power, one card gives you the right to use the dsp and run all your authorised plugs on native power as well.
And that makes total and utter sense - and I gave you credit for that. Like running RTAS versions of TDM plugins. What DOESN'T make any sense is to essentially have a blanking panel in your machine to do this, when an ilok license would do just as well, be portable, and work for laptop and desktop users alike. In fact - why not have the option? ilok for those of us who need it, and UAD card dongle for those who want/already have a "hardware dongle".

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
How are laptop users being penalised? They're being given an advantage. It just means they still have to have a laptop/solo card, as they do now, but they also can run native versions, so it's actually a gain for them.

If I tell you you can buy a car or a house, not both, are you going to tell me then that if you choose the car, you feel penalised because you can't have a house?
That's a ridiculous viewpoint.
And that's an analogy that doesn't work!

Assuming your "dummy card" idea, how does a laptop owner run only native plugins? assuming they don't need the processing power of the UAD solo. They could do it with an iLok. they could do it with serial number authorisation. They can't do it with your method. Sale lost. Dragon's Den fail! See, behind all this bigmouthery, I've actually got quite a sales-orientated brain...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatheredSerpent View Post
But this is the whole premise!
What do you care if that card is actually running dsp or not, if it effectively cost you nothing to obtain due to the purchase price being offset by plug vouchers?
You don't need to buy native versions of the plugs if you have a dsp card. If you own uad dsp hardware that automatically gives you the right to unlock the native versions, no extra charge, or at worst, a nominal charge, $5 per plug with a $100 cap to unlock all native versions of your current authorised plugs, something like that.

I've all ready said though that I don't have anything against ilok, so long as it is truly secure, I've never used one, only synchrosoft and I'm obviously not impressed with that.
I also think that if uad went ilok, then the momentum behind cracking the ilok would increase exponentially though.

Think about if this question appeared on the questionnaire, and what your answer would be to it:

Q. If you could run your authorised uad plugs using both dsp and native cpu power in your current system, would you be happy to pay $100 in order to achieve this?
A. Damn right.

Q. Given this option, would you then suddenly feel as sorry for all the non uad card owners as you do at this moment?
A. Hell no.

In other words, if the ONLY option to run native versions was to have a card in your sytem, is it going to bother you that much. And the answer is obviously no, so I really don't get what the big deal is.
And if YOU re-read my original response to you, you'll see (again) that I totally agree with the "DSP card as dongle for native plugins" premise - it's a very GOOD idea. What's a totally STUPID idea is to have a dummy PCI or PCIe card that takes up space, prevents portability and laptop/imac users from joining in, and generally offers nothing that an iLok or serial number dongle doesn't but with a whole host of downsides.

I love the way people are talking about iLok as if it's less than useless as copy protection, yet think that a dummy card or native plugins that use a DSP card as a dongle couldn't be cracked. There is NO DIFFERENCE in this, other than the shape of the thing acting as dongle. If iLok can be cracked (and this is a lot less prevelant than under tiger) then so can the UAD "PCI dongle".
Old 19th November 2009
  #209
Quote:
Originally Posted by choukette View Post
all i read here from people who want native version of UAD plugins are kids jealousy, people with laptop or imac toy. Use real tools and stop moaning about the fact life isn't like you want.

mixing isn't a funny game for funny people on funny laptops, it's a serious work that need serious tools.
Actually, I know a grammy winning mix engineer (foo fighters, feeder etc) who has an iMac as his production/mixing room computer. How many grammys do YOU have choukette? I've also been working with a writer/engineer who's written and mixed worldwide top 10, radio 1 A-listed tracks from his laptop. You?
Old 19th November 2009
  #210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
I have no idea where people is coming from by claiming that if UA goes native it will include an ilok.

Screw that. That's misinformation.

The moment UA goes iLOCKED or SynchroHARD that's going to be the moment they will get a free voucher from me and tons of us to make it quite smoothly into our black list.

However, that is NOT going to happen.

UA has an impeccable history of true caring for their customers, as opposed to many, including the many companies who are crying since some years now about how UA was able to kick them out of the throne (occuppied only due to no real competition). Why would UA copy the companies it kicked in the arse?


Korg just got rid of the dongle.

That is a true trend for many reasons already explained everywhere.



Native UA plugins is a remarkable idea from an already successful brand. A smart move actually. And that can only guarantee increased success due to the foreseeable fact that if they go for it, they will in a VERY ELEGANT way, without insulting their current customers nor their potential customers. That's what they always do, and I don't see why they would not.

Anyone not owning a UA plugin is missing out, and UA would be addressing that with such a move. That's just perfect, and ensures further growth in R&D and the future of this platform in general.

Fear not gentlemen. UA KNOWS already how valuable CUSTOMER LOVE is (again, as opposed to many). They won't screw up.
And for those of us WITHOUT an iLok-shaped chip on our shoulder (who still remember the customer love of UA TDM plugins), it'd be a great idea. The idea already suggested to have the option of hardware DSP dongle or iLok should keep certain grumpy mexicans happy, and also make happy those of us who might be interested should UAD become portable and non-DSP reliant.
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
theskids / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2
Joram / So much gear, so little time
2
jimmydeluxe / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
12
Mixocalypse / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
cww2 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
7

Forum Jump
Forum Jump