interesting posts about this over at the unofficial UA Forum here http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17085

"

neil wilkes wrote:I still have 3 UAD-1 cards and got just over 10 years use out of them - and they still work on older systems.
You cannot seriously expect the UAD-1 card to run properly on a 64-bit OS.

Err, yes, of course you can... if the PC has a PCI slot and the card has run then 32 bit or 64 should not matter at all. It's only a driver issue.

UAD1 was working, and with no problems and the accepted fate was no more UAD1 plug-ins. Fair enough, No complaints.

With the arrival of new 1176s (and a new driver set) not only were they UAD2 only (no problem), but UA deliberately, cynically and possibly illegal, forced obsolescence of UAD1 cards onto many of their oldest and longest term 'customers'. (big problem)

UA have acted in a manner I have never seen. It's a disgrace. I don't know another single example of hardware that stops working if you want to use a new version... Shameful. Bad UA. There was absolutely no need to do it."  

Gregmang


With the arrival of new 1176s (and a new driver set) not only were they UAD2 only (no problem), but UA deliberately, cynically and possibly illegal, forced obsolescence of UAD1 cards onto many of their oldest and longest term 'customers'. (big problem)

UA have acted in a manner I have never seen. It's a disgrace. I don't know another single example of hardware that stops working if you want to use a new version... Shameful. Bad UA. There was absolutely no need to do it."  

If it's no problem that new plugs are UAD-2 only, then it's irrelevant whether or not UAD-1 cards can run under the new drivers because there won't be any increased functionality for the UAD-1 cards. Again, it's either freeze your system and use UAD-1 cards or a mix of UAD-1 and UAD-2 cards, or move on to UAD-2 and 64-bit operation.


I'm not a fan of technology progressing at such a rate that it's impossible to maintain older gear. I had a motherboard fail that was two years old and it was not possible to find a replacement. I couldn't believe that the mobo manufacturer didn't at least have one or two around, and the only option was to find a sketchy used model on eBay. TWO YEARS!! But that's a more, uh, "universal" topic than how Universal Audio chooses to adapt to that world. 


It's never fun to have hardware relegated to a doorstop IF you want to move into next-gen gear, but you can still use UAD-1 cards. I found a couple interesting viewpoints on UA's forum:


“I think the reason you see the two differing points of views here is because some realize or know that this happens everyday with technology. The CPU/motherboard example is spot on and I relate to because I just upgraded a few months ago. Every time Intel upgrades a processor, you can guarantee you have to buy either a) memory, b) motherboard, or c) both. Intel never comes back and says, "hey, our new CPU just made your mobo/memory obsolete, so we are going to give you a $50 trade on your old hardware towards your new CPU." Intel will never do that. I am not arguing the point that what UA did is right or wrong. I'm just noting that the fact that UA is even giving a pretty generous $200 trade on a card that is probably only worth $50 on Ebay now is not a bad deal if you are in the US. Try getting a rebate on your iPhone when they make something on it obsolete and you have to upgrade.”

And another one:

“Either way the PCI slot is done...and obviously UA need to drop UAD1 to support 64 bit. Since it's an EOL product, meaning support resources go towards new profitable products, just like with any company, future dictated the current case. It's that simple. Keep me and use me till they burn up if you want, just use 6.1. If you want to go forward, it's unfortunate but uad1 and uad2 can't co-exist in a 64-bit environment. Since it will be 64-bit going forth, bam. At least they gave us the upgrade deal.

"As far as making uad1 work as an independent setup, well that takes money and resources and it would be a bad business decision to use those towards an EOL non-profitable product....just to hear people **** and whine that they can't purchase new uad2 only plugs for heir uad1s.

"I agree it's a bummer, but it's the right business decision and UA is a business.”

Craig -

  Great reply however I counter than no mobo manufacturer ever released a bios update with a "feature" to disable old mobo's.  That's just....wrong.


"If you want to go forward, it's unfortunate but uad1 and uad2 can't co-exist in a 64-bit environment" Of COURSE it can.

  "As far as making uad1 work as an independent setup, well that takes money and resources "  Well yes I guess it does.  But not many resources evidently as someone the on the UA forum had a "workaround" that allowed the UAD1 to peacefully co-exist with the UAD2.


That is until UA found a way to get rid of that workaround in 6.4.   Not real warm and fuzzy for long term customers methinks...

Gregmang


Craig -

  Great reply however I counter than no mobo manufacturer ever released a bios update with a "feature" to disable old mobo's.  That's just....wrong.


"If you want to go forward, it's unfortunate but uad1 and uad2 can't co-exist in a 64-bit environment" Of COURSE it can.

  "As far as making uad1 work as an independent setup, well that takes money and resources "  Well yes I guess it does.  But not many resources evidently as someone the on the UA forum had a "workaround" that allowed the UAD1 to peacefully co-exist with the UAD2.


That is until UA found a way to get rid of that workaround in 6.4.   Not real warm and fuzzy for long term customers methinks...

The BIOS update that disables an older mobo is actually a good analogy, but I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion. Any BIOS update is for that mobo alone, and past a certain point, the company will stop making updates for that mobo and newer updates will be applied only to their newer mobos. So, you can still use the old mobo and freeze its capabilities, or if you want new BIOS capabilities, you need a new mobo. That's exactly what's happening with UA (except that with the mobo, you don't get a free update of your peripherals to be compatible with the new mobo ).

I don't know if 6.4 deliberately disabled the option of doing that workaround, or changes in 6.4 made the workaround irrelevant. If it was done on purpose, while that's certainly not an ideal solution (they could have implemented the dual driver system and just said "if you do this, forget about any support for either the UAD-1 or UAD-2, you're on your own") I suspect they simply don't feel they can devote resources to a ten-year-old product that was discontinued four years ago.

It's sad that hardware is subject to the same rules as software in this modern world; I have a raft of software plug-ins that are dead in the water due to OS changes or changes in host programs. The difference with plug-ins is I don't have a piece of hardware staring me in the face and reminding me of physical obsolescence.

I really think the core issue goes way beyond UA. All companies have to figure out a way to surf technology waves. Some feel Microsoft has been at a competitive disadvantage compared to Apple due to their attention to backward compatibility, whereas Apple is more than happy to tell their users to "get with the program." Each company has made their decision about how to deal with technological change. In this case, UA has followed more of the Apple model, but with more generous upgrade options for users.

Also note that UA's entire roadmap involving the UAD-1 was announced in a letter to all UA users in April 2012; if enough UAD-1 users had protested at that time, maybe matters would be different...or maybe not.

Of course, none of what I'm saying should be interpreted as "hey, it's cool your hardware won't be supported any more." But the reality is that in today's high-tech world, all hardware stops being supported at some point. Compared to the track record of other companies, I think four years with decent upgrade options is relatively generous.

I too have a Mackie branded UAD-1, and I used it for a long long time.

When UA announced the end of the line for the UAD-1 I was a bit bummed. I had kept it, along side a UAD-2, primarily for access to Nigel, and a few more DSP cycles<G>.

But I am going to take the flip side of the argument... I think UA handled the whole matter with about as much class and concern for the existing customers as they possibly could. I don't thing they sold anyone short...

You were provided with two options:
1) since no future plugins would work on a UAD-1 you could 'freeze' your system at rev 6.1 and continue to use your UAD-1. It would not matter that you couldn't upgrade the software - heck, in some ways that's a bonus, you don't have to upgrade your software!

2) you could trade in your UAD-1 on a UAD-2. I don't remember the numbers, but it was a very good deal! I now have two UAD-2/solo cards (couldn't afford to go any bigger unfortunately). I miss Nigel, and I really do hope they bring back the algorithms some day, but I get a lot of processing out of my current cards.

There is one group of users that got caught in the crossfire - if you had a mixed system (as I did) you couldn't keep the UAD-1 and keep updating the software. That is unfortunate.

They laid out their business case for discontinuing support for the UAD-1 in future updates. You can question the wisdom if you like, but we don't get to tell them how to do business. Ultimately they had to make a call, and they did.

Someone mentioned that perhaps more UAD-1 users should have complained when the announcement came out. I read an interview somewhere with someone from UA (Tape-Op maybe?) and they were quite shocked at the volume of complaints that came in.

They just could not justify continuing to support software development for the older architecture. It was PCI based (although the did have a PCIe version I think), and it used a really archaic GPU for DSP. Porting all of that over to the two 64 bit architectures they support at the driver level was just too much.

So they offered to take the cards back... I think that was a good move on their part, and fair to all concerned.

wst3


 I had kept it, along side a UAD-2, primarily for access to Nigel

Pssst...try the AmpliTube Free, Guitar Rig 5 Player, and POD Farm 2.5 free versions. They don't cost you anything, they all work, and it's a nice selection (and you probably have X2 Producer, so you already have the TH2). You won't miss Nigel at all, and you'll probably wonder why you didn't switch sooner. And UA won't make your UAD-2 card stop working if you upgrade to the full version of AmpliTube 3

Anderton

Gregmang


BTW - I was surprised at how many of my projects had Nigel in them.  Nice of UA just to *SURPRISE* make it go away...


Never again....

Actually, you can "thank" Spinal Tap's Christopher Guest for that one. He sued UA for calling the amp sim "Nigel" and UA was in no position to get into a legal fight, so IIRC it was basically a "cease and desist" situation. I don't know the terms of the settlement and whether it precluded doing amp aims in the future, whether Guest demanded a royalty from any amp sim product, or whatever.


He ALSO sued Digidesign for calling their rack "Eleven." Digi had a lot more bucks and a team of lawyers, and again IIRC, told him to go screw himself (in legally polite terms, or course).


Knowing about these incidents kind of reduced my joy in watching "Spinal Tap."

This is very interesting to know,as I found out quite early in the piece[?] that they[Spinal Tap's writers] got a lot[most?] of their material,from going on a short tour with "Saxon"[with Saxon totally unaware,as to how they would be used?] in the very early 80's,and I always seem to treat,serious,so called "satire" with a hefty dose of suspicion.


As far as UA,I'm totally 64bit,as I find everything,just a little,or a lot more stable,depending on the situation,and although I'm pleased they're finally getting 64bit Windows capability,what with the cost[especially here!]do I really need more plugins?


I know,I know,they're the BEST at emulations,but seriously I'm sure with what Iv'e spent with Waves,Plug and Mix,and Nomads excellent "Pulse Tech",among MANY others,I have more than enough,especially coupled with X2's included[Breverb is amazing] to keep my relatively"new to this engineering thing"braincell depleted mind,busy for the next few years at least!
Cheers
Bob

Anderton

wst3


I had kept it, along side a UAD-2, primarily for access to Nigel

Pssst...try the AmpliTube Free, Guitar Rig 5 Player, and POD Farm 2.5 free versions. They don't cost you anything, they all work, and it's a nice selection (and you probably have X2 Producer, so you already have the TH2). You won't miss Nigel at all, and you'll probably wonder why you didn't switch sooner. And UA won't make your UAD-2 card stop working if you upgrade to the full version of AmpliTube 3

I have the full version of Guitar Rig, and the free versions of both Pod Farm and Amplitube, all of which offer some cool sounds, none of which covers all the bases. But then if you saw the pile o' pedals I keep around you'd probably wonder about me anyway<G>!


I haven't tried TH2 yet - just installed the X2 demo this morning and still finding my way around. But I did want to mention one other amplifier emulator that I use a lot - Flying Haggis from dbaudioware, which was recently reduced to $29. By far the best Vox sound I've heard, and a lot of the other colors are cool too. I also use the hardware Adrenalinn... 

I do wonder why I did not switch sooner, and now I wonder why I didn't just buy the Octo<G>!

UAD is just a hype. Don't buy into it. 
Sure the plugins sound good too but there are so many other 3part native plugins that sounds so much better then UAD. Some brand are even included in UAD platform too like SPL and Brainworx. Today do we really need any DSP cards? For $2000-4000, for that kind of cash £$€ you can buy a real FAT and FAST computer that will run-over any 32bit Quad-DSP-UAD2card and back it up and run over it twice again.


3part plugins that sounds better or the same are:
 
Nomad Factory - these plugins run over the most out there.
http://www.nomadfactory.com/
Plugins alliance - that offer the whole Brainworx series + all the SPL modules for less money then UAD2 plugins. They actually programed many of the included UAD plugins too. 
http://plugin-alliance.com/en/index.html
Native Intruments /Softtube - Softtube plugins and Native Intruments plugins sounds really good.
http://www.native-instruments.com/#/en/
Softube - Great plugins
http://www.softube.com/

iZotope - Great plugins
http://izotope.com/

Wavearts - Great plugins
http://wavearts.com/


Waves -
http://www.waves.com/

Voxengo - Great plugins EQ and Spectra included in new Cubase 7
http://www.voxengo.com/

Cakewalk Pro Channel - Great plugins inside X2, X1
http://www.cakewalk.com/

For anyone that need DSP functionality we have that already included today in our Video cards. Start develop the use of CUDA support instead. Much more powerful and faster calculation then any UAD2 cards. It's like UAD try to invent something that already exist? Try to invent the wheel twice...

My two cents....