Is the UAD plugs really THAT much better?

[Sicklecell666]

I like pizza.

[JackoFato]

I like pizza.

bua bua buha

this guy...

[SJ_Digriz]

Dude. There is no objective standard for taste. Shame really, they could give you a kite mark.

I can hardly wait to find out what CD you think is a good benchmark to shoot for.

It's well bum.

oh well, I don't know what that is supposed to mean either.

[Henchman]

lol, so we have hate for PT now, how original. I can understand not likeing the price and other aspects of the business model, but recipe for shite? whatever

I haven't liek dpro-tools for along time. Not just now.

They're crappyy 888 IO's are a good example of their shoddy designs.

I use PT's atw ork everyday, and it is crap.

[nuffink]

oh well, I don't know what that is supposed to mean either.

I'll try to be a bit more serious.

I think good production suits the music. You appear to think there's an objective standard of production goodness.
I've just bought Rodney P's album "Future". Much of it sounds like it was recorded on a cassette player and it's drenched in delay. Naturally. It's meant to sound like an old dub plate. It's fantastic.
If it were produced up to your glossy west coast objective cleanliness dreck it would sound shit.
Just like that Bela Fleck stuff does.

[Moritz Morpheus MkIII]

jesus christ..

[SJ_Digriz]

I'll try to be a bit more serious.

nono, I knew there were jokes there, I just don't get them. Everyone seems to think I'm like raving serious about this (which is half the fun). I laugh at almost every post.

I think good production suits the music. You appear to think there's an objective standard of production goodness.

I see these as 2 seperate issues. I have many many many albums and CDs that sound like total crap but I love them. For example: I absolutely love Thin Lizzy's Jail Break album. It's full of stupid songs and it's a technical audio disaster area. BUT I LOVE IT!!! I have a ton of great sounding albums/cds but the music is so bad they are just great sounding beer bottle stands. Most "music" is a combination of shitty sound and shitty songs.

I've just bought Rodney P's album "Future". Much of it sounds like it was recorded on a cassette player and it's drenched in delay. Naturally. It's meant to sound like an old dub plate. It's fantastic.

I have no problem with this...see above. Again, you are lumping what I consider several issues into one thing.

Just like that Bela Fleck stuff does.

heh, you must be a player hater. Even at that the recording with Chic is so natural sounding and alive I don't know how you can dish the "sound", which has nothing to do with the music. I happen to like both in the first Acoustic Planet.

You must be a lofi man...too hip for money

[putte]

jesus christ..

.. would you please leave this man out of the game, eh? enough war over taste already ..

[donkey tugger]

jesus christ..

.. would you please leave this man out of the game, eh? enough war over taste already ..

I agree.

[Moritz Morpheus MkIII]

jesus christ..

.. would you please leave this man out of the game, eh? enough war over taste already ..

[MickGael]

Not at all a naysayer. Play with an API 550b and get back to me.

Just kidding.

Not really.

Did you not understand anything at all I was saying?

Never mind, you obviously didn't.

Hey Kingston,
Hope I did not come off as brusque or dismissive. I think I do understand what you are trying to say.

I was only trying to make the point that its one of those things you have to experience to see where we old dogs are coming from. Maybe its a fool's errand to try, and we might both agree its foolsih to try.

[Lawnmower Of The Damned]

Okay, let's stir the shit again:

How many people here have ACTUALLY USED a UAD-1? Do you own it, use it at a buddy's place, demo it in a store, etc?

How long did you use it? What did you think of it?

Thus far, it seems that all the people who have used it agree that it's pretty decent. No one is arguing that it is as mind-blowing as a Manley Massive Passive, but it's also $3,000-$4,000 less expensive.

And, if you would be so kind, if you haven't personally used one, mention that fact before you take a big steaming turd on it.

There, the shit is officially stirred.

[Peter Pan]

I had a uad which I sold, the system have a few shortcomings imo:

1. For every damn plugin you want to use you need to buy another card, cause they take so much dsp.

2. Doesn't work that well with Sonar.

3. No plugin chainer.

Besides I like Sonalksis, Sony, TC and Waves (at 96kHz) better.

[bugs]

For my part, I don't think that hardware emulation is a holy grail. That's only one thing that software can do. As computers get more powerful, we will be able to have super-sophisticated algorithms that will leave outboard hardware and their software emulations in the dust. We're on the cusp now--evidence the Waves and Voxengo plugs, and generics like convolvers--there is no hardware like HarmoniEQ. Most mastering studios use hardware because they're 10+ years in the business and made their investments during the last millenium. Give me a really fast computer, 8+ GBs RAM and good coders any day. The computer is the future--it will be whatever you want it to be and do it much better. It's already better in most areas. We've had this arguement (hw v sw) each time the computer + software started to replaced the hardware and it will continue until all the archaic little hardware devices are just museum displays. Horses are very nice, but their just not as efficent as getting you where you're going as automobiles. You could probably genetically engineer a horse that runs 80mph, but why not just use a '57 Chevy. One of the great ironies of "cutting-edge" contemporary music production is the number of reationaries who inhabit it. It is quite possible that the composer will be able to do without recording and mastering engineers as well as performers too along with dinosaur appliances. It is really comical--like the old Flintstones strip come to life. And music really isn't a jobs program for these people. The composer is going to fully absorb the performance and engineering aspects of new music production eventually, so dust off your CVs. Incidently, composers tend to have "golden ears" too--it's not a rarity in that end of the business, it's more like a prerequiste. So that's my rave for the month.

[nuffink]

Thus far, it seems that all the people who have used it agree that it's pretty decent. No one is arguing that it is as mind-blowing as a Manley Massive Passive, but it's also $3,000-$4,000 less expensive.

I'm quite happy to. Since the comparison is entirely subjective why shouldn't I (or anyone) consider the UAD to be better?
Until somebody finds a way of turning the subjective experience of listening to music into an objective measure of audio goodness (the Digriz?), this will always be the way.

As a side note, a little objective reality about the MMP. From an objective point of view it is a disaster. Attenuation followed by amplification always leads to an increase in the noise floor. This is exactly the case with the Manley.
It conforms to the tried and tested approach of US high end audio gear. Get some twit to design your circuit (in this case a certain Craig 'HUTCH' Hutchison) and pretend he's a famous, respected designer. Make a sales feature of the circuit's (passive) limitations. Do a licensing deal with another name (Manley) and plaster this all over the front panel. Front panels are important, make sure that yours is at least 1/4" thick or you're out of the game. Manufacture all but the front panel somewhere nice and cheap like China or Malaysia. Flog loads of said boutique junk to bedroom superstars who think they actually can buy talent.
Nice work if you can get it.