Ploki wrote: ↑
Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:00 am
As far as protools and million dollar records go: Billie Eilish was done in Logic
Her first single was recorded using a $100 AT2020 in an untreated bedroom. She would sit on the bed and sing into the mic as her brother fiddled on the laptop. They went around the house recording cool sounds using their phone's onboard mic.
I would happily contest the whole "UAD invented this or that" but there's no point, because none of that means anything. Tech moves fast. An analog emulation that was made 10 years ago can no longer compete with an analog emulation made last year. It's a clean slate, any argument about decades of pedigree in music tools is just borrowing talking points from the marketing brochure.
When you talk plugins it is simple: can this DSP code team deliver? Can they do better than any of the other dozens of DSP teams making amazing plugins? Why are you convinced UAD does it better, because uncle Tom was around in the 70s? How would that have anything do to with the quality of the code they are planning to release this year? Is uncle Tom going to help them optimize the code and bring down the CPU requirements?
Nothing about their history (illustrious or not) gives them any type of edge when it comes to making plugins. It only sounds nice on the brochure, which seems a lot of people on this forum consume in large servings. By that logic Waves got into the plugin game many years before UAD did, maybe that means UAD is garbage compared to Waves then. Perhaps UAD is the "cheap Casio keyboard" compared to the illustrious pedigree of Waves.
Again, these are not valid arguments. If you want to say you have an OBJECTIVE point to make, you'll need some sort of way to measure the quality of the plugins if you intend to say that UAD's stuff is better than anything. "Uncle Tom was around in the 70s" is not a valid argument for plugins made now, any more than "Waves has been writing code since 1992" is a valid argument to say that their plugins are necessarily better either.