KVR Audio

kritikon · Post by **kritikon** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:36 pm

Says it all really...we should have a new pay deal in the next few weeks. For once, it's actually a reasonable increase instead of the usual 1% per year pile of shite.

And there'll be back pay to July (6 months-worth) which should pay for my UAD card and all of the plugins I want from it.

The strange thing is...I'm not that excited about the compressors - all those Fairchilds, 1176s etc - TBH I have compressors I'm perfectly happy with, but finally I'll be able to use Eq like I want to. For ages I used Eq extremely sparingly simply because most native Eq is pants. It's just not good enough for boosting with (apart from URS stuff maybe, which is PACE and therefore automatically not getting on my DAW).

I'm really drooling over the EMT of course - that'll be plugin No1. I'll want the Precision multiband when it's out, and probably the Precision limiter, so that's No2 I suppose. The 3rd that'd take up what's left of the FlexiPak would be an Eq, and I might get the choruses and maybe even a 2nd Eq separately.

So what're the opinions on the UAD Eqs - why do you prefer which one over the other. Until I get the card, of course, I can't demo them, and it's quite a while since I heard them in action. By the way - nowadays I'm mostly into dub and some ambienty-ish uptempo noodlings, although I occasionally still do some dancey stuff. So I'll want an Eq that can get those rubbery subs without booming, and one that'll add some timkle at the top. Probably my bass end is the most crucial. I'll use some mid Eq, but not as much as the bottom and top. I quite like Eqium for its "glassy" top end quality...do any of the UAD ones stand in that camp?

(I'm actually tempted to just say "ah f**k it!" to myself, and buy the whole lot - but I really wouldn't use them all. Are there any other essential plugins I've missed out?

So many questions, too many days to wait for the fat cheque

soulata · Post by **soulata** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Lucky you!

I own the cheapest one, so can't really comment on the eqs (ok, haven't even started the demos, because I can't afford much before christmas) appart from the ex1, which is ok. I'll be adding the flexi pak in february though, and I'll take cambridge, plate and space echo if it's going to be there by then.

k

Signal chain · Post by **Signal chain** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:02 am

I'm going this way too ...

I've finally got the money (took me one year)

only a bit scare now about compatibility issues ...

cross my finger and have only to decide where

to buy them ....

we''ll see .

verstaerker · Post by **verstaerker** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:16 am

u're not excited about the compressors ? - u haven't heard and used them - if u demo the Fairchild and the 1176 u WILL change your mind!
Promised!

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:00 am

I'm interested in educated opinions on the better UAD EQs as well.

Like how do they stack up to current best of the crop like hydratone, PLpar or posihfopit? URS is has always sounded rather generic and those fancy graphics really don't fool me.

This flexi-whatever deal is probably going to have me jump on the UAD bandwagon as well.

LA-2A is the top choice (having heard it), the rest is yet to be decided. The 1176 is a rather boring obvious sound and I'll probably steer clear from it (having heard it as well).

jasonsantiago · Post by **jasonsantiago** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:30 pm

I didn't think the EQ's were anything to write home about. I have a full UAD except for the roland plugins. They are great plugins, but just as good as a lot of native plugins. The advantage is that they all reside on the UAD's processing power. Honestly the compressors and limiters are really what sets the UAD apart for me... and the reverbs are very cool as well.

It's sad how few plugins fit on one UAD card though :/

bobby yarrow · Post by **bobby yarrow** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:58 am

I use the pultec constantly, but if you don't like the compressors and you don't like the URS eq's, you shouldn't take advice from me.

For dub, ambient & dance music, I think you might be barking up the wrong tree with the UAD-1.

Signal chain · Post by **Signal chain** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 5:55 pm

can you tell us why, please?

bobby yarrow · Post by **bobby yarrow** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:30 pm

Me? Well, if so:

I love the UAD-1, have 2 of them and most of the plugins. Thing is, kritikon says he doesn't like the UAD compressors and the URS eqs -- these are, to my ears, the best I've heard. So what I like kritikon probably won't.

I have no idea how to mix dub & dance music. I mix indie rock, acoustic indie, freak folk, and maybe a little punk. 95% of the tracks I work with were recorded with microphones. Dub & dance music? The studios I've seen that do that have a vocal booth MAYBE, with 1 U87 and an avalon 737 and that's it. It's all plugins after that. Which ones, I have no idea.

kritikon · Post by **kritikon** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:45 pm

No, no, no...I didn't say I don't like the compressors - merely that they're not the main reason I want a UAD for. I just have a bunch of compressors already that I'm happy with. I probably will use some of the UAD comps, but it's not my 1st thing on the list is all.
As for the URS Eqs - the only reason I won't use them is PACE...not the sound or anything else, just PACE.

I'm just interested to hear what differences people perceive about the UAD Eqs. My musical tastes were just as a guide, really - it just shows that I need a decent bass Eq.
I'm wondering what the strengths of the Cambridge and Pultecs are. For example, what I'd mostly use Eq for are things like mid-highs to get brightness, or even an occasional harshness on brass hits or on synthesized guitar-plucking-type-ish patches. Or for getting generalised synthesised patches that I want to occasionally sound more realistic as instruments - which usually means emphasizing highish transient attacks, or even certain ranges of guitar fuzz emulations etc. And the other main ones is for top end - both for sparkle in mixes, and for hats - one of the only things I normally use any boosting for is hats - I'm a great believer in fine-tuning hats by Eq, so I want to know if any of the Eqs have, say, strengths in the 4.5-7KHz range. Because most native Eqs may as well not go up that high for all the difference they make. They tend to sound grating and scratchy in the ear, or just don't make any difference at all whether you're at 5KHz or 8KHz, or they sound like resonant white noise generators

Just general opinions/preferences on their Eqs might help me. For example - I'm assuming the Precision Eq is exactly that? A precision and surgically correct, but ultimately characterless Eq designed more for mastering or accurate Eqing rather than as being capable of specialFX?

soulata · Post by **soulata** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:39 am

Cambridge = surgical
Pultec = sweet

(i can't say anything about Cambridge really, as I haven't started the demo yet, but Pultec IS sweet)

Alan · Post by **Alan** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:42 am

I agree about the comps being the main attraction for UAD,but the Pultec EMU is excellent as well as the Plate 140.I'm not as enamoured with the Cambridge or the track EQ's though.I'm surprised the Sonalksis SV-517 or the Tritone Hydraton hasn't been mentioned on the native front here.Both are excellent and the Sonalksis is very low CPU-Wise,but sadly the Hydratone isn't and is saddled with high latencey figures as well as being saddled with Pluggo Runtime,but is one of the best sounding EQ's Iv'e tried native or otherwise.Voxengo Curve and Gliss deserve a mention as well on the native front.If money's no object,you may want to look in the Sony Oxford/Poco direction as well.

Tronam · Post by **Tronam** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:15 pm

One of the Cambridge's strengths in my opinion is the wide variety of LP/HP filters it offers, from traditional 6dB through 36dB/octave to multiple Bessel, Butterworth and Eliptic. They are some of the best I've heard; amazingly smooth. I would agree that overall it is a "cleaner" EQ than something like Sonalksis, but I think it still has more character than any linear phase equalizer I've used. It's a good workhorse EQ and you can load 20-30 of them on a single DSP card (if you needed that many). For really characterful, vintage EQ and bass boosting, the Pultec seems better suited and I believe it internally upsamples to 192kHz.

-Tronam

Spaceman Sounds · Post by **Spaceman Sounds** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:25 pm

Having had 2 uad-1's since they came out, I would say it's all about the compression with these. The Cambridge is good... much better at 96k than 44k but there are as good or better native eq's. But no native compressor touches the uad-1's.

kritikon · Post by **kritikon** » Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:54 pm

OK, so far I'd be leaning towards the Pultec then. Cambridge sounds good, but I like character in an Eq. Maybe the Cambridge is one I'd put on the backburner as one for the future, but not essential.
The EMT is a definite, precision multiband is a definite (when it's out), and I suppose I could go for the LA2A as well (after all, you can't have too many good comps).

What's the difference between the Pultec and Pultec Pro - is it that the ordinary one is just 2 band?

Pay deal - Back pay - UAD card - Eqs