Curious about UAD-2

Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
cdickey
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 126
  • Joined: 2009/01/25 04:20:26
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/27 19:26:34 (permalink)
Pete Townshend: "I love the UAD plug-ins"

http://www.eqmag.com/article/tracking-townshend/Aug-07/32549
#31
RLD
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1990
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 10:11:26
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/27 19:40:22 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: cdickey

Pete Townshend: "I love the UAD plug-ins"

http://www.eqmag.com/article/tracking-townshend/Aug-07/32549


Isn't he almost deaf?

Pop/Rock Songs
Chief Firewater Surf Band
#32
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2729
  • Joined: 2005/03/24 19:46:28
  • Location: Sunny Southern California
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/27 19:55:54 (permalink)
Yeah but the vintage GUI's rock Pete's world.
#33
ImAllEars
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 17
  • Joined: 2009/03/01 21:47:00
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/27 22:24:51 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: rasmus II

So if you're gonna shell out that amount of money, wouldn't it be more future-proof to buy
something that's connected by firewire or USB?


I remember reading about this awhile back. I think there's a bandwidth problem in using Firewire or USB for this kind of processing. There was even talk (possibly unwarranted) of the PCIe bus getting overwhelmed, and a request for effects 'chaining' (defining a chain of effects that doesn't return from the UAD card until the chain is complete). As I recall, there was talk of an actual product that did effects processing with firewire, and it did have limitations for this reason.

This was awhile back, and I have no first hand experience in this area, so...
#34
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3029
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
  • Location: 6 feet under
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/28 18:50:49 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: inmazevo
I use a Mac Pro, 2.8GHz 8-core... one generation old. Plenty of drive space, plenty of memory.
Logic Pro and Live on the Mac side. Sonar on the Windows XP side (bootcamp).

Anybody have experience on these guys? (I'll ask on the Logic forum as well, but figured it would be worth asking here...

I have that same MacPro, UAD-2 Solo, MOTU 2408mkII and use Sonar on it most of the time. Works just fine. I don't use any DAWs on the mac side, and rarely boot OSX, in fact.

I will say that one thing that annoys me about the UAD plugins is the user interface. Plugin interfaces should not emulate hardware. Take the Neve 88RS for example. The hardware itself wasn't exactly user friendly due to the necessity of cramming all that functionality into a channel strip. Then UAD tries to duplicate the hardware interface in a plugin that you work with the mouse. Not good.

Pros:
The plugins sound good
UAD is a good company to deal with

Cons:
they are expensive
they are tied to the hardware card
the cards are finicky about hardware
bad UI design (but some people love the UIs, and put this in the Pro side)
#35
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/28 20:19:40 (permalink)

ORIGINAL: RLD


ORIGINAL: cdickey

Pete Townshend: "I love the UAD plug-ins"

http://www.eqmag.com/article/tracking-townshend/Aug-07/32549


Isn't he almost deaf?



:-)


#36
AJ_0000
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 738
  • Joined: 2007/05/05 01:32:03
  • Status: offline
RE: Curious about UAD-2 2009/03/28 20:45:01 (permalink)
Like I said, I'm willing to believe the plug-ins are as good as people say they are. I would definitely be interested in some of them if they sold them individually in native versions. I just can't see spending the money the way it's set up.
#37
Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1