Who makes your favorite Analog Emulations?

[jens]

Whenever I tried their stuff it sounded as weird as it behaved to me. Huge CPU and memory consumption, laggy, weirdly behaving GUI and nothing worth writing home about soundwise at all in return... and on top of that it's even expensive.

And all this while there's Cytomic, Fuse Audio Labs, Audiority, PA, IKMM, Overloud, etc. etc. - I just don't get why anyone in the world would voluntarily use their stuff - it doesn't make any sense to me personally.

Your mileage varies and that's fine - but it makes you a nutty follower of an absurd cult in my book.

Edit:

You'll notice that CPU was one of the critiques I've made of Acustica, and I'm not even arguing whether or not the CPU usage is necessary or a useful tradeoff. My argument is quite simply that plugins which draw heavily on CPU are not going to be as heavily favorited, because for some segment of the user base the processing tax will be seen as an impediment to usability and workflow.

I don't really think that is true. People tend to be fine with high CPU-load, as long as they get something worthwhile in return. Waves Abbey road Chamber comes to mind.

[Boy Wonder]

Yeah. Prior to my discovering with LatencyMon what was making my CPU spike (a useless AMD driver), I was reluctant and wary about using Pigments, Chromaphone, Massive X and Diva. I'd demo'd all four and they sounded fantastic, but every time I loaded one up, my laptop would flip me off. And, as regards effects, I can use convos like Paragon and Altiverb without that dang laptop threatening a lawsuit.

[bmanic]

All this thread has done is show me how many bad sets of esrs there are by those not using Acustica Nebula 4. Tgey are far and awsy the best sounding plugs in the box, nothing really even close other than Acustica Aquas.

I can agree, to a degree. But you need to actually spend some time investigating what programs are truly good and what programs are bugged/weird. Luckily a lot of the N4 3rd party program developers have become a lot better in the past few years (mainly AlexB and Cupwise, who both had some questionable quality to their programs in the past).

.. or you could just get a bunch of Tim Petherick's libraries and be done with it. Those programs are actually amazing sounding and super reliable, no matter if it's a compressor, EQ or some kind of modulation mayhem.

London Acoustics also deserves a mention. Their official 3rd party programs are absolutely stellar.

[dionenoid]

the amount of cruft installed in the plugins folder by Acustica is shocking. At least their installer allows me to put them off to the side in their own folder. I asked their support if there was a way to just install the pre-amp or individual components of a given plugin and was given a terse no and scolded like a child. For some of their plugins (Amethyst), they can't even decide if the manufacturer is Acqua or Acustica, within the same plugin. Maybe if they cleared up all these little problems (and the big CPU problem) they'd make it on to more favorite lists.

Many asked multiple times for independant installers for ZL versions and samplerates. AA (including the boss) promised to take it into consideration, which is now some 2 years ago.

Just yesterday i deleted a bunch of stuff again : By deleting ZL versions and some unused samplerates i saved around 30GB on my system disk.

[_leras]

[quote=jens post_id=8433274 time=1653057040 user_id=8022]
[quote=Trancit post_id=8433216 time=1653052342 user_id=34695]
I personally don´t really buy the narrative that the UAD plugins would be noticeable ahead and would never invest in such a closed and limited system...
There are so many great plugins available why should the UAD ones be special...
[/quote]

Yes, it's just a myth that has been completely debunked by now, not the least thanks to Plugin Alliance.

Those PA plugins that were UAD exclusive were highly regarded amongst the UAD users; they were in no way considered inferior to the other UAD plugins.

Now the same plugins (i.e. they are identical procsssing-wise) exist natively and do not use more CPU than other native plugins. On any medium-priced modern machine you could run a multitude of how many instances could run on even the most expensive UAD system - the whole UAD thing is just absurd. You need super-expensive hardware to run a very limited amount of super-expensive plugins of high, but in no way superior quality.
[/quote]
Well, like that's your opinion.

I also have a bunch of PA effects and some of them are very good. I find they are a good compliment to UAD. I don't think they are quite at the UAD level though, say of emulations e.g. channel strips. And of course PA have no tape, reverb or delays of note, while UAD excels at these.

UAD have just been consistently great. They model some really great sounding equipment and do it really really well. I feel very lucky to have such a toolkit.

Lots of electronic music artists use UAD, though I think the quality really comes through more when used on real instruments and voices.

UAD quite often get knocked at Kvr, but mostly by people that don't have UAD, and like here for reasons other than the plug ins themselves. I think you'll find UAD users are very happy on the whole.

They aren't really any more expensive that other top tier brands. They have regular sales.

Yes getting a card is a barrier to entry and pcs have gained performance etc since UAD started. Yes other companies make some great stuff. Yes it will be good when we can also run UAD natively. Yes it sucks how they seem to be Mac first in development.
But...
Yes I would still recommend many of UAD plugins over other offerings. They have an outstanding catalogue imo. Yes, especially for electronic music wanting to run lots of cpu intensive instruments, I even think the DSP taking some of the strain is helpful.

But purely soundwise I think UAD are pretty much the benchmark. Tape, filters, distortion, delays, reverbs, channel strips, compression, EQ. They do it all brilliantly.

All that said, I think we're past the point where mixing tools should hold anyone back. I'm sure I could make good mixes with almost any set of tools these days. But I wouldn't want to give up my UAD plug ins.

[jamcat]

I think the UAD modeling is great, and above all, they model the RIGHT gear and have full endorsement from the brands.

But their attitude towards their customers is too much like Roland's.

I would get everything from BOTH companies if they just acted like normal companies that wanted to sell software to people without all the artificial barriers they've created.

[MogwaiBoy]

It's true AA plugins are insanely heavy CPU, laggy, glitchy, unintuitive, require precise gainstaging or they break, etc

I can totally see why a music producer, mixer or mastering engineer would avoid them.

But damnit, they're as close as it gets to analog - at least for EQ.

[jens]

Well, like that's your opinion.

No, it's not my opinion. You must have fully misunderstood my whole post it seems.

I was talking about the general opinion of the UAD userbase.

Just as an example, look around on the UAD forum and you will often find the Fuchs Overdrive Supreme mentioned as one of the finest amp-sims for the platform. You'll manage to load two instances of it on a single DSP (which leaves you some headroom of a little more than 20%).

You can combine a maximum of 4 Octo Satellites in a system. That would give you a total of 32DSPs, on which you could run 64 Fuchs Overdrive Supreme. This would also set you back by around 5000$.

My 1400$ laptop however can easily run more than 250 instances of the Fuchs Overdrive Supreme, which - remember - is one of the finest amp-simps available for the UAD plattform, according to numerous users.

Yeah, facts are a real drag, I know. But the great thing about them is that you can chose to simple ignore them and go on as if nothing happened.

[_leras]

Well, like that's your opinion.

No, it's not my opinion. You must have fully misunderstood my whole post it seems.

I was talking about the general opinion of the UAD userbase.

My 1400$ laptop however can easily run more than 250 instances of the Fuchs Overdrive Supreme, which - remember - is one of the finest amp-simps available for the UAD plattform, according to numerous users.

Yeah, facts are a real drag, I know. But the great thing about them is that you can chose to simple ignore them and go on as if nothing happened.

I haven't disagreed with this. I also understand that this gen of UAD2 has gone on too long and is not as powerful relative to plug in dsp required. And yes it made the cards expensive for what they were. I'm happy they have decided to move native.

I'm just saying, that fortunate enough to have the cards, that the plug ins are really really good. I can run all the plug ins I need to mix. So I don't feel too much of a lack of DSP.

And the plug ins themselves are definitely excellent.

And still, to me, from what I have used UAD do the best analog emulations.

It's also not lost on me that my mainly electronic music doesn't always need, or get, the full benefit that e.g acoustic or voice sounds would get from the uad tools.

[jamcat]

I'm happy they have decided to move native.

So are you going to be going native?
Will you get a subscription, or do new UAD plugins end here for you?

[Jeffguitars]

The thread asked people for their favorites, not what they thought were the best sounding. Whether Acustica plugins sound the best is debatable and has been covered ad naseum elsewhere. What is not debatable is that Acustica has significant shortcomings, heavy CPU usage being one, but also the amount of cruft installed in the plugins folder by Acustica is shocking. At least their installer allows me to put them off to the side in their own folder. I asked their support if there was a way to just install the pre-amp or individual components of a given plugin and was given a terse no and scolded like a child. For some of their plugins (Amethyst), they can't even decide if the manufacturer is Acqua or Acustica, within the same plugin. Maybe if they cleared up all these little problems (and the big CPU problem) they'd make it on to more favorite lists.

Nebula libraries are not not even close to the cpu of several other plugs these days. My IK tapes, I love them to death but they are WAY WAY worse on my cpu than any Nebula library I have, same with Waves AR plates and chambers, Far worse on cpu.

If you are e creative you can easily manage cpu use with Nebula. I simply bounce my reverb to a track and by doing that I retain mix control using the volume on the verb and I can nudge the track to the right and have predelay. Turn off the neb plug and reverb is done and I can always just put a different verb on if I want and quickly bounce again, easy peasy.

As for tape and pre libraries, simply burn those in right in place. If you were using a real console those would naturally be burned in when you record through them.

I have ZERO problems with Nebula 4 and CPU. They are easily the best sounding plugs. Go to yt and watch the hardware comparison of TimP TLA 100 vs the actual hardware, no debate about it, it is far and away the best analog alternative than any other plug.

Thd post about Nebula not allowing freeze is nonsense. YOU DONT HAVE TO USE FREEZE, Cakewalk allows you to burn the effect in right in place, THEN YOU ACTUALLY DELETE THE PLUG, CPU TOTALLY FREE AFTER. That post tells me that the user has no idea how to use Nebula properly and goes around putting out silly statements about it. I can assure you, when you ACTUALLY DELETE THE PLUG, IT FREES UP ALL THE CPU. There are plenty of plugs now that use way more CPU power than Nebula.

I have 7th Heaven pro and yet the far older EAR Neb verbs of the Bricasti sound much more realistic, really, it isn't even close.

So anyone that cant figure out how to use Nebula that's because of YOU not knowing, that doesn't mean there isn't ways. I use it every day with total ease, no hiccups, no problems with CPU, it just works and I would ALWAYS choose Nebula libraries over algo plugs. Algo plugs feel 2d and fake to me. When I do use them I always add Nebula versions of tge same unit to add mojo to the algo.

[_leras]

I'm happy they have decided to move native.

So are you going to be going native?
Will you get a subscription, or do new UAD plugins end here for you?

Err. Dunno. I think they will honour all owner plug ins to run native.

Them hopefully I can just buy anymore that I want....

I'm on PC. I haven't followed too closely what they plan to do tbh as I'm quite set on plugins for now.

[jamcat]

Maybe when they're all completely native VST3 on Spark with M1 and Windows support I might buy a super cheap old used UAD card just so I can BUY their plugins and not have to rent them.

If that day ever comes.

[_leras]

I'm happy they have decided to move native.

So are you going to be going native?
Will you get a subscription, or do new UAD plugins end here for you?

Err. Dunno. I think they will honour all owned plug ins to run native.

I'm on PC so that's not ready yet I believe.

I haven't followed too closely what they plan to do tbh as I'm quite set on plugins for now. When PC is ready for native I'd switch, but would still keep the cards. Will have to see how it all runs natively I guess.

[vurt]

Well, like that's your opinion.

No, it's not my opinion. You must have fully misunderstood my whole post it seems.

I was talking about the general opinion of the UAD userbase.

Just as an example, look around on the UAD forum and you will often find the Fuchs Overdrive Supreme mentioned as one of the finest amp-sims for the platform. You'll manage to load two instances of it on a single DSP (which leaves you some headroom of a little more than 20%).

You can combine a maximum of 4 Octo Satellites in a system. That would give you a total of 32DSPs, on which you could run 64 Fuchs Overdrive Supreme. This would also set you back by around 5000$.

My 1400$ laptop however can easily run more than 250 instances of the Fuchs Overdrive Supreme, which - remember - is one of the finest amp-simps available for the UAD plattform, according to numerous users.

Yeah, facts are a real drag, I know. But the great thing about them is that you can chose to simple ignore them and go on as if nothing happened.

not relevant to the point, but am i the only person who now wants to hear, 250 overdrives, in series, on a guitar riff?