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
New Apollo Twin MkII Desktop Audio Interface for Mac and Windows Systems Now Shipping Audio Interfaces
Old 18th January 2017
  #31
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PassionFlower View Post
Just because you can doesn't mean you have to.
you can also take it for what it is : an ironical comment.

Quote:
But it would actually be pretty cool if they could make it possible to use UAD with iPads.
for sure
Old 18th January 2017
  #32
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by choukette View Post
"Users of Apollo Twin MkII can combine up to four Apollos and six total UAD-2 devices — adding I/O and DSP as your studio grows. Once you expand your studio with an Apollo 8, 8p, or 16 rackmount unit, you can use Apollo Twin as a desktop monitor control while still tapping its additional I/O and DSP power."

It seems I need to buy another house if I want to continue to use their plugins,

virtual UAD tools take more and more physical space too.
I would already invest in hardware units in that scenario..
Old 18th January 2017
  #33
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simppu View Post
I would already invest in hardware units in that scenario..
no doubt with that, if it wasn't the case, UAD would go native for a while.
Old 18th January 2017
  #34
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by choukette View Post
no doubt with that, if it wasn't the case, UAD would go native for a while.
Noob question coming now, but what do you mean by "going native"?
Old 18th January 2017
  #35
Here for the gear
Well I have three apollos; a twin for desktop control and on the go AD, an Apollo 8 Quad to get 4 Unison preamps + two stereo line level ins and an Apollo 16 for use with outboard preamps (vin tech, focusrite red and manley). I need those boxes for I/O, plus as a benefit I get 10 DSP cores. Considering the cost and problems of avid hardware I'm very happy to have the UA hardware footprint. I'm going to add 1 satellite onto to the mix so I can have 10 cores on the go as I seem to travel a lot now days.

Most rock mixes with live drums end up using about 70% of my DSP from the two quads that I have in the rack. I don't foresee a world where I have to have 16 cores just to pull a quality mix.

I'm also very happy to offload my DSP from my CPU even with modern powerful machines, I reserve that power for the DAW and virtual instruments.
Old 18th January 2017
  #36
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simppu View Post
Noob question coming now, but what do you mean by "going native"?
software that run with the CPU of your desktop/laptop and doesn't need to run on a specific DSP like UAD-2 pci-e cards

Quote:
Smoking the peace pipe.
Old 18th January 2017
  #37
Here for the gear
 

The new twin is finally live on the UA website...
Old 18th January 2017
  #38
Lives for gear
 
projektk's Avatar
 

I think the twin should be offered in quad because the twin is a perfect voice over, interview, podcast and rap solution. Not everyone needs a lot of IO but additional juice on the plugins can always help.
Old 18th January 2017
  #39
Quote:
Originally Posted by projektk View Post
I think the twin should be offered in quad because the twin is a perfect voice over, interview, podcast and rap solution. Not everyone needs a lot of IO but additional juice on the plugins can always help.
it is now offered in Quad.
Old 18th January 2017
  #40
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by projektk View Post
I think the twin should be offered in quad because the twin is a perfect voice over, interview, podcast and rap solution. Not everyone needs a lot of IO but additional juice on the plugins can always help.
It's a heat and power supply issue!
Old 18th January 2017
  #41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
So in a world where DSP is optional, hardly necessairy, we will have this conversation every time, until UAD decides to allow for the UAD plugins to run natively.
Wouldn't that be perfectly good reason not to bring it up in every single UAD thread?
There are plenty of good options out there. Why not just pick something else that fits your workflow and let those who want to use DSP do so?

Honestly, I have a feeling that a lot of those who complain would never buy the plugins if they were available natively. It just seems like simply the fact that it exists provokes a lot anger in some people.

Look, I refuse to buy software that requires an iLok dongle or similar. But I don't go complaining about it in every single thread. I tell the company once that I'm not interested and why. Then go to find another product.
Like I said, there are plenty of options these days. It's not like UA is some kind of evil monopoly that oppress people and that you have to start a revolution to change their ways.

While I would love to run their plugins natively I don't want them to go native for various reasons. I think they have a great platform and that they should expand it rather than bending over for the masses. You can't please everyone.
Old 18th January 2017
  #42
Lives for gear
 
projektk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverb View Post
it is now offered in Quad.

Yeah I know I was replying to the what y'all think post above. As for the other guy that thinks it's a heat issue? Why is that relevant, they did it... Deal with it? Lol
Old 18th January 2017
  #43
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassionFlower View Post
Wouldn't that be perfectly good reason not to bring it up in every single UAD thread?
There are plenty of good options out there. Why not just pick something else that fits your workflow and let those who want to use DSP do so?
No it's not. At least I don't see it.
Regardless I don't bring it up in every thread. I'm very new to this discussion.
I can't speak for other people. Personally it doesn't anger me in the slightest that it works for others. I'm interested in using these plugins but I won't BECAUSE they are DSP. I don't want to go back to DSP and I think now more than ever, the choice for UAD to remain DSP ONLY is questionable. I have no problem with UAD being DSP per se. I'm disappointed that it's still DSP only. I don't see it as destructive to bring that up in a UAD thread. I think it's constructive.
Old 18th January 2017
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Sebastian N's Avatar
 

Old 18th January 2017
  #45
Lives for gear
 
GeneHall's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian N View Post
Thanks for sharing this . It looks to be a welcome upgraded Apollo, function wise.
Old 18th January 2017
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Sebastian N's Avatar
 

two optical ins would have been so much better as the perfect mobile system. especially at the 1000 euros. 18 channels can be enough to record a full band and have this in a laptop bag to take with you to studio sessions. but some nice upgrades for sure and for those that are into the uad platform, it's a great system.
Old 18th January 2017
  #47
Lives for gear
 
andersmv's Avatar
 

I'm glad they are offering the twin in quad now, but I don't think I can justify the price to upgrade from my duo. If they are not going to update the chips, I don't understand why they didn't phase out the solo and just offer them as duo and quad at the same price? Can you even run 2 of the Neve unison preamps on a solo?
Old 18th January 2017
  #48
Quote:
Originally Posted by andersmv View Post
I'm glad they are offering the twin in quad now, but I don't think I can justify the price to upgrade from my duo. If they are not going to update the chips, I don't understand why they didn't phase out the solo and just offer them as duo and quad at the same price? Can you even run 2 of the Neve unison preamps on a solo?
Yes you can, but that's about it. At least if you are going to use the EQ.
Old 18th January 2017
  #49
Lives for gear
I agree. Mk2 Duo and Quad should have taken the Mk1 Solo and Duo price spots.
Solo's DSP power is unacceptable.
Old 19th January 2017
  #50
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Disappointing release I have to say. Why do they still offer the SOLO? It should not have been released the first time around. I would have hoped that they'd ditched it and sold the DUO and QUAD at the old price points.
I think it's fairly safe to assume that people were buying the Solo…if it hadn't sold, they they would have ditched it this time around.

Quote:
And still only one headphone output. They are either too cheap to implement it or they don't understand the scenarios in which these kind of products are used.
I think they're very aware of the scenarios in which their products are used…and my guess is that they are aware that most of their users are too cheap to pay more for it, which would be necessary to keep the price point the same with the other improvements that have been made.

Quote:
Don't get me wrong the product is valid, I just don't think I could look people in the eye and tell them it offloads their processor significantly.
I think that the bigger selling point for the DSP in the Apollo is the ability to track reliably with plugins active without having to worry about latency.
Old 19th January 2017
  #51
Gear Addict
 
dwaynedelario's Avatar
 

So how exactly is the "Alt" speaker routing implemented? If Outputs 1&2 are "Monitor" outputs, do line outputs 3&4 serve the purpose of feeding a second speaker set? Is there some kind of software setting that tells the Apollo that 3&4 are also to be controlled by the volume knob?
Old 19th January 2017
  #52
Lives for gear
 
Sebastian N's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dwaynedelario View Post
So how exactly is the "Alt" speaker routing implemented? If Outputs 1&2 are "Monitor" outputs, do line outputs 3&4 serve the purpose of feeding a second speaker set? Is there some kind of software setting that tells the Apollo that 3&4 are also to be controlled by the volume knob?
in the sonicstate video i posted above i think towards the end it explains the configuration using it as the only interface with 2 sets of monitors as well as connected with a bigger apollo and running 3 sets of monitors. you can configure everything in their control software
Old 19th January 2017
  #53
Gear Addict
 
dwaynedelario's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian N View Post
in the sonicstate video i posted above i think towards the end it explains the configuration using it as the only interface with 2 sets of monitors as well as connected with a bigger apollo and running 3 sets of monitors. you can configure everything in their control software
Cool, thanks man. Been looking for a nice converter for my laptop setup and this looks to be a good alternative to my behemoth HDX rig and a nice gateway into the UAD addiction
Old 19th January 2017
  #54
Gear Nut
 

Something interesting I noticed starting at around 17:08 of the video. The presenter shows an input chain consisting of the Fender Tweed, Api Vision, Fairchild MKII, Studer A800, and Cambridge EQ. This chain is not possible on current Apollos because the DSP required would exceed the limits of a single Sharc DSP chip. Looks like they found a way to get around this on the new MK2 Twin.
Old 19th January 2017
  #55
Lives for gear
 
beau_mckee's Avatar
Is it possible to run this unit directly off Adat inputs and power (no thunderbolt connection?)
My current computer does not have thunderbolt, so I want to run through my current interface but get the benefits of the D/A conversion on the apollo. Hopefully someone can chime in!

Last edited by beau_mckee; 19th January 2017 at 01:56 AM..
Old 19th January 2017
  #56
Gear Head
For those who would like to get into UAD plug-ins and Unison pre-amps, the new Quad Twin hits the spot. At
$1299 it has less inputs and outputs as an Apollo 8 Quad, but it is also just over half the cost.

If you own a non-UAD interface that has an ADAT out port, you can plug it into the Twin to add inputs. And you
can enjoy all of the UAD plug-ins on those tracks as well.

BTW, if you plan to add a lot of UAD plug-ins during tracking and you don't already own other UAD hardware,
I recommend the Quad for the extra $400.

Be aware that during tracking, the only DSP cores available on a track are those available in the hardware it is plugged into.
So, for example, if I plug my guitar into a Unison pre-amp on my Apollo 8 Duo, I cannot use the DSP from my SF Quad to
run a UAD amp sim.

Once the track is laid down, however, the DSP from any hardware unit in the system is available to be used on any track.

I currently own an Apollo Quad SF, and an Apollo 8 Duo and a Quad Satellite. So I have plenty of inputs and outputs available to me.
I am considering a Twin Quad because of the new monitor control features.
Old 19th January 2017
  #57
Gear Head
You must connect the Apollo hardware to your computer via either Firewire or Thunderbolt. The
new Twins only support Thunderbolt.
Old 19th January 2017
  #58
Gear Head
 

I think I'm going to finally make the jump from my Duet 2 to the UA Twin MKII. The zero latency tracking is the big selling factor for me. I have a quick question about the included plugins: are the UA610, LA-2A, and 1176 plugins that are included in the Analog Classics bundle different from the LA-2A & 1176 Collections sold for $299? This is my first foray into UA plugs so I was thinking I'd get a 6 plug bundle along the lines of: 1073, API Vision Strip, LA-2A, 1176, and maybe Oceanway and EMT 140 (I'm focusing on tracking plugs mainly since I've got a good collection of Waves and other native plugs.) But I don't want to duplicate if any of those are in the Analog Classics bundle already.
Old 19th January 2017
  #59
Gear Head
Another couple of things to be aware of with UAD system's Unison plug-ins and pre-amps.

The first Silver Face Apollos do not support Unison technology on the Hi-Z inputs. Only the Blackface Apollos
and the Twin series (Mk 1 and Mk2) have Hi-Z Unison inputs. So Unison guitar plug-ins (amp and pedal sims)
won't provide the interaction between the amp sim and your guitar's pickups.

A second Unison fact involves tracking. As soon as you use a Unsion plug-in while recording, the plug-in gets printed
to the track. You can't just run it in your monitors as an effect and record with the plug-in bypassed. So I split my
guitar's output by feeding it first to my Radial JDV direct box. I send one output to a Hi-Z input on my Apollo 8, and load
whatever Unison plug-in I want. It gets printed with the plug-in's added effect. But I send the JDV's balanced output to a
line level input on my Apollo to record a dry track.

If I like the recording of the track with the Unison plug-in, I use it. If not, I can re-amp using my Radial X-amp, and feed a
new track with or without a Unson plug-in.
Old 19th January 2017
  #60
Lives for gear
 
beau_mckee's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by scratch17 View Post
You must connect the Apollo hardware to your computer via either Firewire or Thunderbolt. The
new Twins only support Thunderbolt.
Cheers!
Topic:
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump