tbh I can see a lot of similarities there; if I was UVI right now I'd be asking the person they appear to have contracted to do this, wtf?
UVI Plate
-
- KVRAF
- 35295 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
-
- KVRAF
- 2357 posts since 24 Nov, 2012
exactly - and the answer might be - well they're the parameters from the original paper - or it might not.aMUSEd wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:56 pmtbh I can see a lot of similarities there; if I was UVI right now I'd be asking the person they appear to have contracted to do this, wtf?
-
- KVRAF
- 9577 posts since 16 Dec, 2002
Earlier versions of PA1 looked even more similar as it also had the plate graphic on the rightwoggle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:01 pmexactly - and the answer might be - well they're the parameters from the original paper - or it might not.aMUSEd wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:56 pmtbh I can see a lot of similarities there; if I was UVI right now I'd be asking the person they appear to have contracted to do this, wtf?
Amazon: why not use an alternative
-
- KVRAF
- 23481 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
Well, it's so super-obvious - if you don't see it then that's because you're fully determined not to see it. And if you are fully determined not to see it then you won't see it, regardless of how obvious it may ever be. You will only perceive the differences and your subconsciousness will hide the similarities from your conscious perception.
In short: you're just a hopeless fanboi.
"Preamps have literally one job: when you turn up the gain, it gets louder." Jamcat, talking about presmp-emulation plugins.
-
- KVRist
- 128 posts since 18 May, 2016
this isn't the first time UVI has straight-up ripped off interfaces and ideas. Compare Motu BPM (developed by UVi) with devine machine/fxpansion Guru. They probably don't give a f**k about it, and neither do their fanboys. I guess this is logical. If a musician ripped off your music, their fanboys wouldn't give a f**k about you either 
-
- KVRAF
- 7624 posts since 21 Dec, 2002 from MD USA
Is this actually against the law what they did or are doing? Does anyone know for real?
my music: http://www.alexcooperusa.com
"It's hard to be humble, when you're as great as I am." Muhammad Ali
"It's hard to be humble, when you're as great as I am." Muhammad Ali
-
- KVRAF
- 5755 posts since 29 Sep, 2010 from Maui
Yeah but look at this Reverb UI. It has a similar layout and also has nothing to do
with either the UVI or PA1 plugins. On top of that it uses 10x as much cpu...
Pretty suspicious...
with either the UVI or PA1 plugins. On top of that it uses 10x as much cpu...
Pretty suspicious...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- KVRAF
- 9577 posts since 16 Dec, 2002
And look at the angle of those knobs, amateurs
Amazon: why not use an alternative
-
- KVRAF
- 23481 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
This actually looks like a totally different thing...
"Preamps have literally one job: when you turn up the gain, it gets louder." Jamcat, talking about presmp-emulation plugins.
-
- KVRAF
- 35295 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
Obviously I would expect some similarity between physical models of the same thing in terms of params, they are modelling the same thing after all and I guess the underlying math is probably also likely to be broadly similar in at least some respects. But it's that exact sequence of metals, same types and order, plus the ranges etc, that I find harder to account for, particularly given other models, like Valhalla, have chosen very different metals. I'd be interested to hear how that is explained and think the PA developer deserves an explanation too, this (probably) isn't a legal thing but just about honesty and integrity.woggle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:01 pmexactly - and the answer might be - well they're the parameters from the original paper - or it might not.aMUSEd wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:56 pmtbh I can see a lot of similarities there; if I was UVI right now I'd be asking the person they appear to have contracted to do this, wtf?
-
- KVRAF
- 9577 posts since 16 Dec, 2002
Its curious how we tolerate software copies of hardware but not software copies of software
Amazon: why not use an alternative
-
- KVRAF
- 2357 posts since 24 Nov, 2012
agree - as I say though it may be a simple as UVI implemented the PA people's design from their public academic work, which includes all those things like materials and ranges. Or not - but I hope we do find out and I am holding off buying the UVI plate until we do. I wish PA was on windows so I could test that as well
-
- KVRist
- 45 posts since 13 Aug, 2016
Hi folks,
Stefan Bilbao from Physical Audio here---just got word of this thread from Michele and Craig.
Our own philosophy, in the Acoustics and Audio Group at Edinburgh, is to try to be open with the things we work on in our group. That is, we publish them, sometimes even before we have a product coming through PA. This was definitely the case for Michele and Craig, who made the details of PA1 public before it was available for sale. We also have a great relationship with others in industry (Eventide, UA, SoundToys, etc.) with whom we feel like we can enter into technical discussions without worrying about someone stealing an idea (rather than building on it, which is very different, and clearly so). It’s good for everyone, and we also learn a lot about the plugin business---and there’s a lot to learn, that’s for sure!
As far as UVI goes---I think the high road is best. We’re just going to steer clear of those guys in future.
To the person who said that having an acknowledgments section in a book makes it read like a PhD thesis---just check out any respectable audio or acoustics text. Like, for example, Pierce’s “Acoustics.” I used these texts as a kind of style guide. Plus, it’s polite.
In any case, it’s cool to see such a lively discussion about PA1. I’d be curious to get opinions about PA3 “Derailer,” which is the one I was directly involved with.
Stefan
Stefan Bilbao from Physical Audio here---just got word of this thread from Michele and Craig.
Our own philosophy, in the Acoustics and Audio Group at Edinburgh, is to try to be open with the things we work on in our group. That is, we publish them, sometimes even before we have a product coming through PA. This was definitely the case for Michele and Craig, who made the details of PA1 public before it was available for sale. We also have a great relationship with others in industry (Eventide, UA, SoundToys, etc.) with whom we feel like we can enter into technical discussions without worrying about someone stealing an idea (rather than building on it, which is very different, and clearly so). It’s good for everyone, and we also learn a lot about the plugin business---and there’s a lot to learn, that’s for sure!
As far as UVI goes---I think the high road is best. We’re just going to steer clear of those guys in future.
To the person who said that having an acknowledgments section in a book makes it read like a PhD thesis---just check out any respectable audio or acoustics text. Like, for example, Pierce’s “Acoustics.” I used these texts as a kind of style guide. Plus, it’s polite.
In any case, it’s cool to see such a lively discussion about PA1. I’d be curious to get opinions about PA3 “Derailer,” which is the one I was directly involved with.
Stefan
