KVR Audio

Guitarjeff · Post by **Guitarjeff** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:45 pm

I have to admit that although I LOVE most of my UAD-1 plug-ins, I am a bit underwhelmed with this one. I need to test the demo a bit more, but I don't hear a huge difference between this and the DM-1.

I guess maybe I don't really NEED a Chorus that badly.

jdg · Post by **jdg** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:56 pm

CANE CREEK wrote:CE-1 using similar amount of DSP power as the Plate140 reverb is kinda off putting to me

something is wrong with your system then.

i run 2xUAD-1 cards

1 CE-1 = 3% dsp
1 Plate140 = 11% dsp (and 5% ram)

i like the plug alot.

i just turn all the settings way down.. and the output way up.. instant dub bass. love it!

it is expensive.. agreed

CANE CREEK · Post by **CANE CREEK** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 8:58 am

'Jdg' im only quoteing what 'AndrewSimon' put in his thread , i havent used the CE-1 yet , he said it was as hungrey as the plaTE 140.
so i didn't bother testing it , im still on version 3.8

AndrewSimon · Post by **AndrewSimon** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 5:07 pm

Sorry my mistake.
I tested again and I am getting:

24% on the plate (with heavy signal)
7% on the CE-1

Results are for a single card.

billybk1 · Post by **billybk1** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 5:52 pm

AndrewSimon wrote:Sorry my mistake.
I tested again and I am getting:

24% on the plate (with heavy signal)
7% on the CE-1

Results are for a single card.

Yep, that is about right. I am getting 3% DSP usage, for a single instance, using (2) cards, which comes out to about 6% or so, for a single card.
It does have a nice lush analogish sound to it. I tried replicating the chorus aspect, of the CE-1, with Voxengo's AnalogFlux Chorus plugin, which comes very close, but at it's high quality setting, in vintage mode, (1) instance was sucking 25%-35%, of my native PIII 1Ghz CPU @ 5.8msec latency, using live input monitoring.

While the UAD-1 plugin, because of it's use of DSP, hardly moved my native CPU.

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:01 pm

The fact that this plug sounds so good without using hardly any cpu or DSP makes it very useful IMO. I find it really fattens up leads, keys and bass without clogging the mix. At $99 it's well worth it for us UAD-1 owners. I can't wait for the other Roland plugs if they're as good as this one is.

I just wonder if Roland will release a 808 or 303 for the UAD-1. They released some softsynths for their own PC integrated hardware a few years ago but it never really took off.

Lawnmower Of The Damned · Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:57 pm

I don't really get the feeling that the UAD-1 was intended for softsynths. The guys at UA have a great talent for making outstanding EQs, compressors and other effects. Synths are a rather different beast, and I'm not sure if the results would impress me as much as the effects have.

AndrewSimon · Post by **AndrewSimon** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 11:53 pm

OK I have some sounds.
I recorded two small clean guitar takes.
I ran them in the same setup exactly except once I used the Boss CE-1 and once I used the Kjaerhus GMO-1.
I did not try to make the two choruses sound the same I just adjusted both until I heard something I liked.

So tell me, do you prefer Chorus-A or Chorus-B ?

Song-1 Guitar with bridge pickup.
Chorus-A
Chorus-B

Song-2 Guitar with both bridge and neck pickup.
Chorus-A
Chorus-B

JeffSanders · Post by **JeffSanders** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:09 am

On first listen, A sounds a little more lush on both.

multree · Post by **multree** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:24 am

yup A's better as said in the other thread...

and you're playing is quite nice on all versions btw

multree · Post by **multree** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:57 am

billybk1 · Post by **billybk1** » Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:58 am

To my ears, both verions sound great, but I actually liked the depth and spaciousness of the B versions a little better overall.

Boss CE-1 Chorus for UAD-1 is now available