KVR Audio

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm

Ok, I can't comment on that LA-2A as I've never compared it to a real vintage LA-2A but on the 1176 test I did it was pretty darn close. The compression action itself was spot on but the 'sound' itself of the unit was not perfect (the sintefex does a better job here but a much lousier compressing emulation).

Could be that the LA-2A is harder to model than the 1176 but my main point was that how do you know what they've modelled and what not? Are you working for UA (my guess is not..

)? Are you spying on them for some other company?

Read it like this, they call it modelling, which it most likely is but the models them selves and the individual components in the models are probably simplified versions of the real deal which leads to the slight difference in sound/compression character.

About that "unit to unit variation" I agree with you, that's marketing hype, nothing more but the compression action itself on the 1176 emulatio is impressive and does give the feeling that it was truly component modelled.

Cheers!
bManic

omo · Post by **omo** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:30 pm

I don't need to work for them or spy on them to see him trying to hype those plug-ins in many ways. It's probably ok, but one needs to filter out some stuff and I see you do it too to some extent. They are modelled, no doubt about it, but imo that's false advertising to put it the way he did. You don't doubt those interviews are adverts, do you? My point is simple: be carefull and don't believe the hype. And don't be afraid to accept that there's a huge step forwared to make for one with UAD-1 even tho it was a step forward at some point as well. I mean huge. It shows a lot when you start using them. In fact some UA gear is marvelous for getting that smooth top and unfortunately the plugs modelled after them just don't cut it. Kiitos keskustalusta

CANE CREEK · Post by **CANE CREEK** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:13 pm

Ive only been making music for a couple of years , i bought a UAD-1 and was so impressed that within a week a bought a second UAD-1.

what you have to remember about UAD-1 plugins is that they are so simple to use , like the LA-2A compressor for example theres only 2 knobs so rather than tweeking threshold/ratio/knee/attack/release like usual compressors & making things complicated for a ameteur like me i can just turn 2 knobs and go by my ears.

Heres the first track i made using UAD-1 plugins Electro track......IT was actually the first track i made that sounded ok on my car stereo nothing ground breaking but it was far better than any previous tracks i made using native plugins , like anybody im constantly learning if i was making this track again i'd of tweeked the cutoff on the bass synth to make it more smoother for starters

snooky · Post by **snooky** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:24 pm

omo, It's great to see that it's not just me who thinks the UAD "must-have" syndrome is the result of overhyping the plugins as "vintage"

dear UAD devs:
I'm sure your plugins sound exellent in their own right, but "modeling" light photons?? come on, gimme a break!? that's some marketing hype bollocks.

CANE CREEK · Post by **CANE CREEK** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:28 pm

when surfing the net its very suprising how many well kitted professional studio's have UAD-1's in their gear list

CANE CREEK · Post by **CANE CREEK** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:32 pm

snooky wrote:omo, It's great to see that it's not just me who thinks the UAD "must-have" syndrome is the result of overhyping the plugins as "vintage"

dear UAD devs:
I'm sure your plugins sound exellent in their own right, but "modeling" light photons?? come on, gimme a break!? that's some marketing hype bollocks.

you'll find alot of the guys who make native plugins are just good programmers who try their hand at plugins , the guys a Universal audio are good programmers who actually make studio hardware gear as well.
Their in a different league

pitchdrifter · Post by **pitchdrifter** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:34 pm

The LA2A is an opto compressor, i.e. optical, i.e. resistors that react to light. Think lightbulb and phototransistors. When you model that you HAVE to somehow simulate light.

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:52 pm

CANE CREEK wrote:you'll find alot of the guys who make native plugins are just good programmers who try their hand at plugins , the guys a Universal audio are good programmers who actually make studio hardware gear as well.
Their in a different league

Some bloke on [url=http://gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php3?t=43831]gearslutz[/url] wrote:The best LA-2A on the market today is the Tube Tech CL-1B... it's WAY better at being an LA-2A than the UA reissue [which is kinda like the Ford Thinderbird reissue... kinda looks right [except for the plastic grill!!], and that's about as close as it gets].

putte · Post by **putte** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:56 pm

dedewe stratmann wrote:i really like the sound of my uad-1 plugins. i am glad i have them

lampert ashasha wrote:goodie! have fun with them mate!

CANE CREEK · Post by **CANE CREEK** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:59 pm

as far as PLugins go you'll struggle to find a native plugin as good as LA-2A and for the price....well

JeffSanders · Post by **JeffSanders** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:59 pm

putte wrote:
dedewe stratmann wrote:i really like the sound of my uad-1 plugins. i am glad i have them

lampert ashasha wrote:goodie! have fun with them mate!

Amen.

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:02 pm

xRAVENx, most 'esoteric' things are simulated with a clever connected low-pass filter.

When you turn the light bulb off and it fades away it fades away mostly like a low-pass filtered signal. It's like release in the compressor. Nobody cares about photons, because that's ridiculous (of course, they don't tell about modeling photons - they tell about some 'photon value'?). What's for sure - they COULD use another set of words.

snooky · Post by **snooky** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:11 pm

Aleksey! thank you! my point exactly, of course the UAD la2a "mimics" the sound of the optical process, but saying that the la2a has code to "model" photons values, well that's just silly...everyone see the point now I hope!?

pitchdrifter · Post by **pitchdrifter** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:13 pm

Well I'm just saying the whole physical modeling approach would suggest that also the light is being taken into account. I have no idea to what degree they do it, nor am I commenting on their marketing (got to know very little of that, I heard a uad and liked the sound, bought one, and I'm not reading articles about products I have anyhow).
I was merely stating that the idea of modeling the effect the light has isn't *that* far fetched for an opto compressor. Whether they just use a certain release slope or really model photons, I don't know nor do I really care, it's not a load on my cpu so they can model whatever they like as long as the sound is good

What I am aware of is that you don't use any fancy shmancy marketting terminology at all, Aleksey. I use your plugins because of how they sound, too. Not because someone says 'you'll get a better reputation owning these plugins'.

Hope I'm getting the mindset across that I'm trying to explain, it's rather late.

best

Markus

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:22 pm

My vintage initial release UAD-1 LA-2A sounds better than the later Mackie UAD-1 LA-2A. The newer ones lack definition. Maybe they just need to be broke in longer. Or it could be they started using inferior imported Pacific rim code produced in labor shops on the cheap.

Tons of off-topic BS inside! Sweet!