I think too the idea of having a DSP co-processor is great, but SHARC is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Note Avid dumped the SHARC and went with the TI 67x series DSP's for their new HDX boxes because those do floating point (as well as fixed, but why bother when you have floating) and are three times as fast. Some chip models have 8 processors on one die. To me, that's where UAD ought to be going...

I have a Damage Control "Glass Nexus", it uses a SHARC processor at 96k to process the audio, also uses high voltage to some tubes (which implies it is NOT a starved plate design)...

For a floor box it is one of the BEST phasor/reverb/delay units made, very sweet and creamy...(a little hard to tweak though/limited knobbiness)...

For a hardware unit (using a sharc) these things are great and are probably a sleeper product since Damage Control is moving AWAY from Sharc...

This was the effect I was trying to use today in External Insert (never did get it to work)...

But you are so right...SHARC days are limited

The UAD SHARC DSP-chip are in x32bit architecture itself meaning convert the plugins to work in x64bit native architecture takes time and are a long process. The best thing would be to change the DSP-chip to native x64bit-DSP-chip that are more powerful and modern then the UAD SHARC DSP-chip from the late 90ths. There are those chips on the market but then all the UAD plugins need to be re-programming from scratch again for that new DSP-chip and that is not going to happen by UAD.


To solve the UAD-plugins to work in native x64bit DAW the fix will probably be VST3 x64bit only. For user on SONAR x64 that means it will still not solve your problems because SONAR still doesn’t support VST3 format.
Hope it helps!

Actually, it's kind of a half and half process. 

I mean, X64 processing really refers to the internal VST and audio interfaces on the PC itself (as well as Sonars internal processing), not the DSP. The DSP really only needs 32-bits for floating point and that's 1000s time more dynamic range than our ears can handle. The problem with the fixed point is that when you sum signals together, they'll quickly overflow (clip). Floating point handily solves that. Makes programming easier too!

So, technically, there's no reason why UAD shouldn't work with Sonar with their existing systems if they're providing (proper?) 64-bit VST interfaces (using a 64-bit datalink to the external box also.?). Sure, we can run some 32-bit VST's in X2/64 - but things will always run smoother if the PC doesn't have to thunk back-and-forth between 64 and 32 bit modes. My guess is there's some technical issue going on - maybe their drivers were some sort of hybrid and now Sonar is forcing the issue, but I'm just guessing. They'll get it worked out, they just have to dodge all those annoying brickbats being thrown at them while they get it done....

Cheers!

I have to say, before this, 64-bit and UAD got along just fine so for me patiently waiting for official 64-bit support was fine. Now, the operative word is 'was'. 

Hm...Freddie do you have any indication from UAD (or anyone) that the 64bit versions will only be VST3? Where are you getting that?

Dean

Psychobillybob


I have a Damage Control "Glass Nexus", it uses a SHARC processor at 96k to process the audio, also uses high voltage to some tubes (which implies it is NOT a starved plate design)...

For a floor box it is one of the BEST phasor/reverb/delay units made, very sweet and creamy...(a little hard to tweak though/limited knobbiness)...

For a hardware unit (using a sharc) these things are great and are probably a sleeper product since Damage Control is moving AWAY from Sharc...

This was the effect I was trying to use today in External Insert (never did get it to work)...

But you are so right...SHARC days are limited

Hey PBB....wow, you still never got that EI thing to work? That's really strange...I'm actually using a few EI's right now. Let me know if I can help out any more. BTW, how do you like those Mohogs? I was actually thinking about getting a pair of them...OTOH, I probably need more 1176 hardware like I need a hole in the head.


Dean

Brandon (Owner of Mohog) is married to my second daughter, as a "get closer to my son-in-law" we built a set of mnats versions almost 4 years ago (He was running a studio in San Diego using Sonar)...anyway he took the ball and ran with it, has done a ton of research (he pretty much builds the "F" version only) and is constantly improving every aspect of his product.

You would be amazed at who is using his stuff now, MAJOR Grammy Producers swear by his stuff...AND he's a huge Cakewalk supporter...

I have a couple of units and am building a third...we had 2 of the UA 1176's in the studio there and did some A/B comparisons...the noise floor difference alone sold me, but having the extra transformer inside (Its based on a Neve style so you get some British kind of color if you want)...

I'm trying to convince him to reset up a mixing studio there because he's really talented at that as well...currently he has several other boutique gear builders asking to trade for his stuff...

So yeah I'm a little baised (but I was involved on the initial development/I build mostly tube stuff now)...

His prices are more than fair considering each unit is hand built, tested by him and guaranteed...(they are also hand numbered)...

And on the EI thing...I'm going back on it today...I never did get it to work, so I'm going to try the 32 bit version of X2 and see if that makes a difference...

By the way, my UAD stuff seems to be working in X2/Win7/64 but I ma on 6.0.??? with them...

Still holding out hope for a miracle with UAD!!!!

It's just a waiting game right now. The 64bit versions have been developed, but they're still beta testing. They have never announced a release date, but did suggest they'd have them ready for release this year. So, fingers crossed, we'll get them next month.