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 Ampex® ATR-102 Mastering Tape Recorder Plug-In
Old 4th September 2011
  #151
Lives for gear
 
YOHAMI's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Or do you master you final mixes to online video???????????>?>
All the time! youtube 2bus compressor is the ****.
Old 4th September 2011
  #152
Lives for gear
 
grooveminister's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rymdis View Post
The more i listen the more obvious becomes the difference. The hardware is actually sounding "like a record", whilst the plugin lacks depth, smoothness and that "expensive sound".

Just listen to the snare for example. A bit brighter and more forward in the plugin version, but with the hardware just "sits" better in the mix . It sort of blends in much much better and becomes a unit with the rest of the instruments. This goes for many instruments, but it's very easy to hear on the snare.

So listen ONLY to the snare. A tip!


And don't fall for all the great graphics. You pay for the sound in the end, don't you? And the price it tooooo much as already stated. Even on sale many people still can't afford it :(

/R
Yeah, great - I really like this one.
The guys with golden ears hear the huge difference between the hardware and the plug - maybe 0.5 dB more lo-mids in the original Ampex.

I might have even believed that some must have much better ears than me - If you just hadn´t mentioned the SNARE.
There is no SNARE in this loop - this one is called a TOM-TOM unless it's lars ulrich playing the snare as he will never dare to do it again.

Of course UA did a bad choice of demoing the plug with an already analog sounding multitrack recording.
I´ve demoed the UAD Ampex and put drums with crisp transients on it - and they were rounded out beautifully by the plug.
It´s true the kind of audio material shown in the video cannot showcase the potential of this audio tool.

Best Wishes,
Andreas
Old 4th September 2011
  #153
Lives for gear
 
kreeper_6's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rymdis View Post
Lexicon is unusable...

Get the Relab's Lexicon instead!
I'm sure more people would if it actually ever got released. Instead the company holds their initial $200 investment hostage until the other 3/4 of the $500 plugin gets finished, if ever.
Old 4th September 2011
  #154
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Based on a YouTube video. OK.
How do you fail to realize that on that very same video Hardware lexicon is sounding super smooth???? If that video can be enough to capture hardware smooth tail - it should be enough to capture their supposedly 1 to 1 plugin emulation (which sounds grainy and metallic).
Old 4th September 2011
  #155
It doesn't matter, it's still crazy to base gear buying decisions only or mainly on YouTube videos. Yeah, they can give you a few clues, a rough idea.
But the proof is in either testing a demo, or some time spent at a store trying whatever it is.
Old 4th September 2011
  #156
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpod View Post
How do you fail to realize that on that very same video Hardware lexicon is sounding super smooth???? If that video can be enough to capture hardware smooth tail - it should be enough to capture their supposedly 1 to 1 plugin emulation (which sounds grainy and metallic).
True.

This is the anomaly for all those who argue that YouTube is no place to adequately assess comparison video's...

They forget that the sounds are being judged relatively. While I was actually quite impressed by the UAD Ampex I noticed their Lexiconn 224 was not that good at all really. I made my decision on the posted YouTube demo and heard a significant difference between the hardware and software - yet people still argued that YouTube was no place to make that decision. Excuse me then gentlemen! - if I am considering climbing on board the UAD expensive platform, where the heck else am I supposed to judge their products... Those comparison files on YouTube better sound bloomin' amazing if I am gonna drop £1200 for the card plus those comparison files better bring me almost to orgasm if I am then gonna drop another $350 for the plug!
Old 4th September 2011
  #157
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by noiseflaw View Post
Excuse me then gentlemen! - if I am considering climbing on board the UAD expensive platform, where the heck else am I supposed to judge their products... Those comparison files on YouTube better sound bloomin' amazing if I am gonna drop £1200 for the card plus those comparison files better bring me almost to orgasm if I am then gonna drop another $350 for the plug!
Go and try them in your local music store perhaps. Surely there is one in London that would oblige?
Also you will find if you spend that money on a quad you will get a bunch of plugins/voucher for free.
Old 4th September 2011
  #158
Lives for gear
 
utters's Avatar
 

it would be really great if a few people chimed in about what the plug actually does to their own recordings

this thread is pure fail, just an excuse for UAD-bashing, whinging about the price... as if everyone should have a divine right to own whatever plugin they want

just give your opinions on the plugin itself already!!!
Old 4th September 2011
  #159
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by YOHAMI View Post
Its the chase for that slightly saturated, compressed, stereo melted, softened transients, enriched harmonics, "album" sound, that happens to be elusive when working in the digital world.
If you use ton of analog-typish plugins, you have the very same effect. Even if you reamp your recording through whatever you have at your disposal OTB.


Quote:
Originally Posted by YOHAMI View Post
I would buy a tape machine if it wasnt for all of the limitations (and noise) it brings. I want that sound though, or some of that sound, or a device with a mix nob where I can adjust, hey, 35% tape blend?
Two possibilities:
Get a second hand 1/4" inch one (2 track or 4 track) for experimenting. They go fairly cheap nowadays. Or try one of the many(!) alternatives in plugin form. UAD isn't the holy grail.

But the main question is... will it be the final fairy dust that your production needs/lacks?


Quote:
Originally Posted by YOHAMI View Post
Based on what I read on gearslutz only, the winner so far is Anamod. In the digital domain, maybe Nebula plus some impulses.
Apples (Hardware) vs Oranges (Software) again.


Of course such software creations help you get towards that tape sound, and you don't need to mess with calibration, maintenance, etc. But do you really, really need it?

Tape had one major advantage over the digital realm: it captured everything and it wasn't limited to 20Hz to 20kHz in terms of the soundspectrum like almost all AD/DA's are. It's wasn't limited to sampling, it used magnetizing. Now... if the AD/DA could for example go from 10Hz to 22kHz, even if our ears can not hear it, the game would ultimately change (IMO!) with 24bit recordings. Because then we're beyond the usual known digital "image".

Modern engineers are so known to abuse the digital medium that they think analog equipment (especially tapes and consoles) are the ultimate solution to glue things together, make it sound less harsh, more "analog" and "warm". But it wouldn't sound like that if several things were taken into consideration: one being proper filtering and compression (not over-filtering and overcompressing), and the other being using a proper gain staging and not pressing everything to it's limits.


The very same happened in terms of mixing consoles and tape machines. You were LIMITED. If you stepped over the limits, you got "rewarded" with a distorted sound (the soft clipping, or saturation if you want to call it). In digital you will be rewarded with a destroyed signal - so people grasp for that "old" behavior what engineers tried to evade like nobody's business (not touching the headroom, not going into the reds, etc).

In mid 80ies and especially the 90ies, gear abuse was more and more common and nowadays it's normal. Back in the 60ies and 70ies, it was evaded at all costs. It's no wonder that people go haywire about analog emulations. But on the other hand freak out if there is another "digital EQ".


I'm not disregarding these creations, they have a right of existence. I'm just somewhat stating the obvious.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rymdis View Post
But at the end, do we really need tape warmth? Well, as everything is now digital i think we actually do. I was at my brothers house a few weeks ago and had bought himself a record player. A bit old but had good reviews. It happened that he actually had the same album both on CD and vinyl, so we compared them of course. It was night and day difference i can say. The vinyl was MUCH more pleasing to listen to. Had a warmer, fullier bass and overall an "analog" touch that the CD didn't had. So i think we need some warmth in this digital world. Making everything inside the box will make the outside cry for warmth!
Where that facepa... oh, there it is...

This is a prime example why it's always "analog is better".


Both are still mediums, with their respective strenghts and weaknesses. Granted CD is more versatile, easier to handle and maintenanced, but saying that vinyl is ultimately the superior medium is somewhat false.

For example:
- Vinyl has a certain loudness limitation (this is actually a good thing!), but does have a certain noise floor as well (not so a good thing since you have a limited dynamic range).
- Vinyl needs a narrowing of the stereo field else the needle jumps ouf the rails
- Vinyl only sounds as good as the provided player and preamp

And this is the main reason why we prefer vinyl over CD. The record player has a built in RIAA module that inverts the courve used while cutting the medium. This one can differ greatly(!) among the builds (firms), resulting in an overemphasised sound which we think is "more warm". Add to that the preamp of your stereo for the recorder.

CD doesn't have these limitations (let's assume both mediums had the same level). It smacks into our face what the engineer actually did (with some missing harmonics beyond 20kHz of course). There is no sweetening RIAA courve, there is no whitewashing from playing from tape, there is no preamp that raises the signal to line level. Forget all that.

Take a look at Beatles recordings from the 60ies and early CD ports. The whole lowend was mostly missing. Why? Because the engineers worked that way! 2 to 3 Band EQs, and focus on speaker systems that couldn't reach down to 20Hz. (Transistor) Radios didn't have as large cones as we're used to now (think 2" to 4" max!). Also, the old medium back in the day was less forgiving if you had ton of lowend in your recordings.


If you want the old sound from yesteryear, know your enemy, know your limitations, forget all the tape machine "only" mojo to dirt up your recorded material. Especially if you want to overdrive these devices on purpose, or if you didn't know it better.


What you think is superior is actually a step back. I don't say it's bad, it's still great for learning how to do it "right" on the long run. But seeing it as only holy grail is just wrong in my opinion.
Old 4th September 2011
  #160
Lives for gear
 
feck's Avatar
These plugins can be used to enhance mixes in a very positive way. Or, of course, they can be used to the point of abuse. There is just no denying that anyone can find a way to use them in a way that makes their recordings sound better, or worse. Having used many great tape machines and pieces of audio gear, I know that it all comes down to the way I want music to sound in my head - and finding tools that make that a reality. With some time spent using this plugin, I have already found at least one instance in which it makes me get where I want to be sonically. So, that is what I will buy it for.
Old 4th September 2011
  #161
Lives for gear
 
scruffydog's Avatar
Post

well...woke up knowing i was gonna demo these plugs because ..
a) i really like this new breed of tape sim (MPX'd up so far)
b)i like vitalizers and use my old behringer dualfex to this day and 'more is more'...
c)i love UAD...

Perhaps there has been some UAD bashing....familiarity breeds contempt and all that...but in the cold light of day...we all know UAD have made the audio world a better place to be...
And i was impressed to hear Robert Plant on the 'advert' even if the plugin did little good for him!...''if it aint broke...don't waste DSP on it''!!
Old 4th September 2011
  #162
Lives for gear
Regarding youtube videos and people who ditch them

- On HD sound isn't that bad. It's not like it is completely screwed or something like that. By that analogy you should ask yourself - If difference is so huge (or subtle) on supposedly crappy sound source - then in real life difference will be even greater.

- but even so, even if sound is awful like many of you complain - somehow it is enough to capture all of hardware vibe - yet when plugin fails in that same video in vs comparison - you are all seeking cheap ways to defend plugin. This is not UAD related but am i the only one finding this hilarious? When in the same video hardware beat plugin people are complaining about sound quality. What? If plugin is real 1 to 1 emulation it should sound just the same as hardware!! Crappy or not crappy it should sound very same! In every other way it is not real emulation. Close or not close. Whatever!! It should sound SAME!

- It is hard to believe UA (or any company really) put the comparisons on the video, even real time frequency chart - for people to not talk about it

When company is making video for new released product You should want to buy the product immediately after you seen the movie, that's what its all about business these days! It is not that hard to expect that they put all of their efforts in sort of game changing plugin which is contained in video.
Old 4th September 2011
  #163
Lives for gear
 
grooveminister's Avatar
Software

Yes the plugin and the original machine in the video do not exactly sound the same. The deck has a bit more lower mids and that´s about it.
Guys who can´t keep apart a tom-tom from a snare advise us to listen to the drastic difference on the snare sound. That says it all!

Did you ever compare 2, 3 or 4 large studio monitors?
I´ve compared large systems from Quested, Genelec, Dynaudio and Geithain in the very same room - placed in the same postition - and THIS is what I call a BIG difference.
And they all claim to be super linear while their frequency response is +/- 3dB. The difference may be up to 6dB on any given frequency.

If I ever really get disturbed by the lack of 0.5 dB in the lower midrange - then I cut 0.5 dB less in the mastering eq BEFORE the Ampex plugin.
Because most of the time you cut in this region anyway to make it translate to comsumer systems.
Not really that much of a drama!
Old 4th September 2011
  #164
Lives for gear
 
YOHAMI's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Fox View Post
If you want the old sound from yesteryear, know your enemy, know your limitations, forget all the tape machine "only" mojo to dirt up your recorded material. Especially if you want to overdrive these devices on purpose, or if you didn't know it better.
Thanks a lot for your thoughtful response.
Old 4th September 2011
  #165
Lives for gear
 
marchhare's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by utters View Post
it would be really great if a few people chimed in about what the plug actually does to their own recordings

this thread is pure fail, just an excuse for UAD-bashing, whinging about the price... as if everyone should have a divine right to own whatever plugin they want

just give your opinions on the plugin itself already!!!

Didn't watch the video, but I've been demoing the plug since Friday.
I don't care if it sounds as good as the real machine since I had no
immediate plans to buy one. From what I can tell so far, I really like it.
I don't want to like it, because I already have the Waves one, but I'll
probably end up buying it. From what I can tell so far, it seems to sound
cleaner and less "hard" for lack of a better term than the Waves plug.
Old 4th September 2011
  #166
Gear Nut
 

Today I started with 14 days DEMO of ampex, vitalizer and bx digital 2. So what can i say?.. bx and ampex working together very nice for mastering. Using bx it took a little of time to make one of my favor progects by wich i was always unhappy, really wide and full soundig. By using ampex I easely made it sounding just balanced and glued together yet pro level bright. And now I`m happy with that, it sounds like a professional progect.
Now about vitalizer. I think it sounds better then original native spl plugin. I have a live progect with the problematic drums (drummer not really cool sounding). So using vitalizer I could be able to make overheads sounding really nice as well as a hall tracks with people noises, claps and so on. Also back vocals became fresh and alive.
Finally,I think this last v 6.0 upgrade from UAD is the best of all previous because all new plugins in this version are really usefull and worthy of every penny i have to pay for it.
Cheers.))
Old 4th September 2011
  #167
Lives for gear
 
Lenzo's Avatar
I just spent the last few hours moving the ampex around..from 2 Buss, to vocal subs to acoustic gtr subs to drums. I think it's pretty sweet. I kept putting the Kramer MPX on the same busses to compare and to my ears the UAD plug won every time. Not that I have golden ears...but they are getting bigger as I get older...meaning there's more sound going into them....anyway, don't judge it on youtube..if you have a card, roll the demo out and play with it..it does a lot of stuff I would have never thought it would in the way of delay and doubling. I'll still wait for it to go on sale at some point but it's on the wish list for sure.
L.
Old 4th September 2011
  #168
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenzo View Post
I just spent the last few hours moving the ampex around..from 2 Buss, to vocal subs to acoustic gtr subs to drums. I think it's pretty sweet. I kept putting the Kramer MPX on the same busses to compare and to my ears the UAD plug won every time.
L.
That's the true test. But the thing with the MPX is you can't just put it on the same busses. It is very sensitive to input levels. That's sort of like swapping out a master compressor after you built the mix with it on. Impossible to do without changing the balances. I too liked the UA version a touch better. But not enough to buy it.
Old 4th September 2011
  #169
Gear Head
 
synergyroom's Avatar
 

Just finished a project and i used the new AMPEX ATR 102 on the master bus. It sounds really good and it glues the mix very well. I also used the STUDER A800 on some of the tracks.


Take a listen here
Trip by synergyroom on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free
Old 4th September 2011
  #170
Lives for gear
 
Arichlsss's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by synergyroom View Post
Just finished a project and i used the new AMPEX ATR 102 on the master bus. It sounds really good and it glues the mix very well. I also used the STUDER A800 on some of the tracks.


Take a listen here
Trip by synergyroom on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free
can you take the ampex plug-in off and post it again

Pretty Please?
Old 5th September 2011
  #171
Lives for gear
 
Tubthumper's Avatar
 

Nice sounding track synergyroom. Well done. I'd be keen to hear it without the ATR plug also if poss.
Old 5th September 2011
  #172
Lives for gear
 
duvalle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arichlsss View Post
can you take the ampex plug-in off and post it again

Pretty Please?
that would be great: + 1
Old 5th September 2011
  #173
Gear Addict
It isnt to similar to the real machine in the video i gotta say.
Yeah i know, its a youtubevideo and all, but UAD put it out there.
Its a little like a three-stage rocket, where the tapemachine really comes out.
The shakers seems to be the most obvious sound in changing along the way.
Gets really kind of crisp.
Just have the UAD1 so i wont be demoing it...
Ill stick to the roundtone. :D
Old 5th September 2011
  #174
Lives for gear
 
Billy Buck's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tube World View Post
The reason they came out with this plug in is to go after Waves, plain and simple since Waves came out with a Ampex plug in.

Wrong, UA & Ampex have been developing this very plug-in for several years now. It started more than 2.5 years ago with their official "partnership" statement to develop "Ampex" plug-ins. This was way back in January of 2009.
If anything, this shows that UA & Ampex were quite methodical in truly developing the very best and most complete ATR-102 emulation that both companies could be proud of.

NAMM Winter 2009 UA/Ampex press release:

Universal Audio And Ampex Corporation Announce Partnership To Develop Magnetic Tape Emulations

Official press release announcing the UAD Ampex ATR-102 on Ampex website:

Universal Audio (UA) is proud to announce the release of the Ampex ATR-102 Mastering Tape Recorder plug-in for the UAD-2 Powered Plug-Ins platform


Cheers,

Billy Buck
Old 5th September 2011
  #175
Here for the gear
 

Yes. 350. I've tried it and Im buying it. I've had the original machine and used it to mix through off the repro and the pluggin is pretty close. And it has alot of options. Its more bang than the A800 and combined with Slate VCC ITS AWESOME

Sent from my DROIDX using Gearslutz.com App
Old 5th September 2011
  #176
Lives for gear
I already asked this in the other thread... but nobody answered. So, how many samples of latency creates the ATR102 in PT with 256 buffer? Thanks
Old 5th September 2011
  #177
LAU
Gear Maniac
 
LAU's Avatar
 

Brief tryout today.
Liked it a lot!!!
Made me go back to the tape days..
Wanna have both the plug AND the real one now....
Old 5th September 2011
  #178
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundBadge View Post
i'd love to hear a proper high quality blind A/B test
who's gonna have the plug and actual machine and step up?
I could do it if/when studio schedule permits, but how would you have me set it up "proper"? Off the top of my head there are potential problems. Alignment of my machine has to match that of the plug - do they state or allow control over bias settings for the plug-in? DA/AD conversion will affect results, as will levels hitting the 2 "machines". ' Might have to include an analog loopback in both versions... Ideas?

Regardless, after I finish these mixing projects next week I plan on Upgrading to UAD 6.0 and will do my own listening comparisons between hardware and UAD. I'll let y'all know if I have anything worthwhile to say about it.

J~
Old 5th September 2011
  #179
Lives for gear
 
YOHAMI's Avatar
 

Go Trackworkx go!

BTW did you ever try passing that UAD Massive through the B0 conversion? I think I remember you liked the UAD more until you tested the hardware through the Burl?
Old 5th September 2011
  #180
Lives for gear
 
utters's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Cheadle View Post
combined with Slate VCC ITS AWESOME
THIS
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