Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

UAD-1 Ultra Pack

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 8:39:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting this suite of powered plugins and have 2 questions:

1. I know these plugins don't draw on much CPU power, but do they *sound*
better than the ones I am using now, which are Sonitus (which comes with
Sonar) and the TC Electronics Native Bundle?

2. Since I am running my Motu 2408 mrk III soundcard on the PCI bus, will
the UAD-1 put a load on the PCI bus such that I can record either fewer
tracks or thing move more slowly than now?


My DAW is a Pentium 4, 2 ghz, with 768MB of RAM.


Thanks in advance,

Jerry Gerber
www.jerrygerber.com

More about : uad ultra pack

Anonymous
March 2, 2005 8:39:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jerry Gerber wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm thinking of getting this suite of powered plugins and have 2
questions:
>
> 1. I know these plugins don't draw on much CPU power, but do they
*sound*
> better than the ones I am using now, which are Sonitus (which comes
with
> Sonar) and the TC Electronics Native Bundle?

I'm not familiar with the two sets of plugs that you mention, but I'm
quite familiar with Waves. The UA plugs are very useful, especially
the compressors and eqs. Some people like the 'verbs, some don't.
Some people say the emulations are "just like the real iron", some
disagree. For me, I use them for critical applications (lead vocal,
lead instrument, 2-bus effects) more than any other set of plugs
(including Waves).

>
> 2. Since I am running my Motu 2408 mrk III soundcard on the PCI bus,
will
> the UAD-1 put a load on the PCI bus such that I can record either
fewer
> tracks or thing move more slowly than now?

Your best source of information is this online forum -

http://www.chrismilne.com/uadforums (google for UAD forum if this link
doesn't work. Some of the UAD support folks post answers and topics
there.

In your research, I think you'll learn that you can have a 424 and a
UAD on the same PCI bus without much if any system performance hit . .
.. I do on my Mac that I have now (Dual 1.8 GHz) and I did on my
previous Mac (souped up 7300!).

Some new Mac's - especially the "PCI-X"-bus models - don't work as well
with the UAD card . . . you have to keep the audio interface and the
UAD on separate busses (those Mac's have two), and even then you don't
get the full use of the UAD's DSP, and it loads the CPU down a bit.

I highly recommend the UAD card and plugs - and you can get assurances
on how they'll play in your system at the forum I mentioned.

Good luck!

Peter
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 8:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

">
> I'm thinking of getting this suite of powered plugins and have 2
questions:

> 1. I know these plugins don't draw on much CPU power, but do they *sound*
> better than the ones I am using now, which are Sonitus (which comes with
> Sonar) and the TC Electronics Native Bundle?

You're wrong about the cpu thing. 1 card doesn't do a hell of a lot. You
might want to test somehow before purchase. I didn't feel comfortable with
less than 3 UADs.

>
> 2. Since I am running my Motu 2408 mrk III soundcard on the PCI bus, will
> the UAD-1 put a load on the PCI bus such that I can record either fewer
> tracks or thing move more slowly than now?
>
The UAD and the 424 canNOT run on the same bus. At least, not on a Mac.

Good luck.

Kaiser
Related resources
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 9:06:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <K4nVd.26602$Ze3.360@attbi_s51> fb30@insightbb.com writes:

> You're wrong about the cpu thing. 1 card doesn't do a hell of a lot. You
> might want to test somehow before purchase. I didn't feel comfortable with
> less than 3 UADs.

Wow! I thought that those with plug-in bragging rights bragged that
unlike hardware processors, you only need one plug-in and you could
run it as many times as you wanted - just like having a rack full of
compressors, equalizers, and reverbs. A hardware DSP card just made
for less load on the CPU.

Guess it really isn't that way, huh? At least not for you.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 1:00:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

It's dependent on the processing power inside the UAD card. Some of
the effect algorithms take more processing power than the others, so
there are limited instances of individual effects (and combinations
thereof) you can use per UAD. Sorta like digidesign's farm cards, etc.

RP
March 3, 2005 11:00:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> Wow! I thought that those with plug-in bragging rights bragged that
> unlike hardware processors, you only need one plug-in and you could
> run it as many times as you wanted - just like having a rack full of
> compressors, equalizers, and reverbs. A hardware DSP card just made
> for less load on the CPU.
>
> Guess it really isn't that way, huh? At least not for you.

Mike,

On with most Native plug-ins (e.g. Waves, TC, etc.), you can run the
plug-in as many times as you want until you run out of power on your
computer's CPU. So it has never been possible to run a plug-in as many
times as you want. It's been possible to run them as many times as you
want, until your processor chokes. The UAD card works the same way.

The UAD-1 card has it's own 933mgHz processor. You can use as many
instances of the UA plugin-ins as you want, until the CPU is running at
full capacity. Some of the UAD-1 plugs are very processing intensive,
and therefore, you cannot run more than a couple of instances before you
run out of horsepower. You can see a chart on UA's site that is a
guideline for how many instances of a plug-in you can run. Scroll almost
to the bottom of this page:
http://www.uaudio.com/support/software/UAD-1/compatibil...

I think what the chart is trying to show is how many instances of one
plug-in you can run. So if you only run the 1176LN plug and no others,
you can get about 7-8 instances before the card chokes. Since each plug
takes a different amount of processing, they can't really give you chart
that shows what happens with all the different combinations.

UA give you an alternate 1176 plug that is much more efficient, the
1176SE. You can run about 3 times as many. To my ear they are very
similar, and I choose the use the more efficient 1176SE almost exclusively.

The reverbs also hog a lot of resources, as do any other decent reverb
plugs.

I find that on a typical rock mix, with about 24 tracks, I don't usually
run out of processing power. I can run one RealVerb Pro, a couple of
Pultec EQP-1's, and a bunch of 1176SE's and still be OK. I find the real
strength of the card is in the 1176's, LA-2A, and the Pultec EQP-1A. I
think they sound very close to the real hardware.

For fb30 to say "one card doesn't do a hell of a lot" is not correct in
my experience. While I do wish I had another card, 1 card is well worth
the price in my book. I can't imagine mixing ITB without it now.

To Jerry, the original poster, I am not familiar with the Sonar
plug-ins, but I do have the TC Native Bundle. I rarely have any need to
use the TC plugs now that I have the UAD-1. I also rely less on my WAVES
plugins as well now.

--
Eric

www.Raw-Tracks.com
www.Mad-Host.com
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 3:29:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <38ojdgF5mq3l6U1@individual.net> eric@Raw-Tracks.com writes:

> The UAD-1 card has it's own 933mgHz processor. You can use as many
> instances of the UA plugin-ins as you want, until the CPU is running at
> full capacity. Some of the UAD-1 plugs are very processing intensive,
> and therefore, you cannot run more than a couple of instances before you
> run out of horsepower.

Of course I understand that. It's just like any other computer except
that it doesn't do anything else but run plug-ins designed for it.
Still, it's a matter of "you can do anything you want, until you
can't any more." It's difficult to predict the limit - take away one
reverb and you can run four more compressors. Switch to a different
flavor of EQ and maybe you can't apply it to all the channels you
want. With real hardware, you absolutely know your limitations all the
time and you can plan around them. No surprises, no doubts.

> I find that on a typical rock mix, with about 24 tracks, I don't usually
> run out of processing power. I can run one RealVerb Pro, a couple of
> Pultec EQP-1's, and a bunch of 1176SE's and still be OK. I find the real
> strength of the card is in the 1176's, LA-2A, and the Pultec EQP-1A. I
> think they sound very close to the real hardware.

That's nothing to sneeze at. It doesn't matter to me whether a process
with a name similar to a piece of hardware sounds the same as the
hardware, just that it's useful. How come there are so many 1176 and
LA-2 plug-ins and few if any 160 (dbx) or RNC plug-ins? <g>


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
March 8, 2005 7:25:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

fb30 wrote:
> ">
>

>
> The UAD and the 424 canNOT run on the same bus. At least, not on a Mac.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Kaiser
>
>

It works well with the 424 in my Mac G5 Dual 2.5.
March 8, 2005 7:32:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bryson wrote:

> fb30 wrote:
>
>> ">
>>
>
>>
>> The UAD and the 424 canNOT run on the same bus. At least, not on a Mac.
>>
>> Good luck.
>>
>> Kaiser
>>
>>
>
> It works well with the 424 in my Mac G5 Dual 2.5.

Oh yeah..it's got two PCI busses.
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 9:41:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <MO9Xd.6113$603.2281@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Bryson <redbugg@mindNOSPAMspring.com> wrote:

> fb30 wrote:
> > ">
> >
>
> >
> > The UAD and the 424 canNOT run on the same bus. At least, not on a Mac.
> >
> > Good luck.
> >
> > Kaiser
> >
> >
>
> It works well with the 424 in my Mac G5 Dual 2.5.


Are you sure they're on the same bus? Does the dual 2.5G have both PCI and
PCI-X slots?

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
March 13, 2005 12:49:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis wrote:
> In article <MO9Xd.6113$603.2281@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Bryson <redbugg@mindNOSPAMspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>fb30 wrote:
>>
>>>">
>>>
>>> The UAD and the 424 canNOT run on the same bus. At least, not on a Mac.
>>>
>>>Good luck.
>>>
>>>Kaiser
>>>
>>>
>>
>>It works well with the 424 in my Mac G5 Dual 2.5.
>
>
>
> Are you sure they're on the same bus? Does the dual 2.5G have both PCI and
> PCI-X slots?
>
> -Jay

Yeah, they are. I didn't know it was a supposed problem when I
installed it. I had a scsi card on the other buss but not anymore, so
I'm gonna move the UAD to slot four and see what happens with the cpu
meter.
!