UADs Paradise Guitar Studio

[Uncle E]

I bought their amp sims, and think they are more than useable. However, I prefer tonex with amalgam audio captures now.
This really only interests me as an effects bundle.

Yes, same. The EP-III alone is worth the $79 to me.

[jens]

The allegory doesn't apply. No one here is claiming that they're low CPU.

I didn't imply someone claimed that - the high CPU would be the price of the new clothes.

[Uncle E]

Your name is Jens! You’re not allowed to misinterpret Hans Christian Andersen this badly!

[DerKastellan]

Had another go at it yesterday, starting from plain Woodrow as a base.

First observation - is there no way to set it to initial?

Second observation - removing a pedal is not well thought through. As far as I can see, you need to go to pedal selection for the slot, then scroll up and select None. Speaking of interface: Right click only brings on automation. Seems like the pedal bypass, however, is not automatable?

I then found some very nice gain tones - from overdrive to fully boosted to adding the black pedal. Whether boosting mids or scooping mids up front with the 3 band EQ. When you include the multi-chorus and/or the digital delay, you get very 80s/90s tones instantly. Think for example "Beverly Hills 902010" theme. (The mix knob is probably rather high on each as default. I didn't try to turn them down yet, so my impressions are of what they sound like the minute you add them. They do sound super-processed and digitally clean, which isn't a criticism. I still have to see if they can be "tamed.")

Third observation - there is something weird going on with CPU usage. It seems that the DSP engine included there is a resource hog, and that's probably no surprise. But... when I first pulled the plugin this morning, it would constantly demand CPU, even when bypassed in the DAW. I tried various things, including closing the GUI (to exclude this wasn't even the sound engine), but it still did - until removed from the track altogether. This kept happening even after readding and restarting my DAW. BUT. At one time I switched to the direct cab IR option, and since then, no matter what I do - DAW restart, deleting and readding plugin on track, sending my computer sleeping - it behaves as it should: Bypass it and the CPU load goes idle. A rare bug? Something hanging? (It could have been the DAW, but the CPU load stats were constantly updating...)

Fourth observation - the most CPU-bound of the amps is... the Ruby (AC30)? Next one is probably the Blue Dream Fender. The Lion is definitely better and the Enigmatic and Woodrow are the lowest - also the newest offerings in there. Not what I expected. To compare, I pulled up the amp/pedal-as-separate-plugin versions - and they are substantially worse! If the Ruby on Paradise Guitar Studio sends my CPU into the mid-30s, percentage-wise, it easily jumps into the 50s at times in the Ruby plugin. Same for the Lion - a total (not relative) 20% higher than the studio version. They could add some of that magic sauce back into their "old" offerings, I say. The Ruby plugin even sends past 100% spikes in occasionally while not armed (but not bypassed). It seems that the longer you have any of the plugins loaded (Studio, the separate ones), they become less "spiky..?"

For comparison I pulled up Softube Amp Room.
Bypassed - 2%.
On but track not armed - 7-10% - in fact I accidentally instantiated 10 amps instead of switching amps. Didn't really make a difference.
On and armed - in the 20s, depending on how much gear you have. Maybe two pedals but the basic amp setup (parallel mic). As you add pedals or other stuff to the flow, it goes up. Ended up in the 40s.

I filled all the pedal slots of the Paradise and it shot into the mid 50s. Again, it doesn't care what the input signal does - track armed or not armed. It seems like you pay a consistent basic load in this DSP engine. This needn't be a bad thing - if it avoids spikes.

[DerKastellan]

I agree. Regardless as to what you think of the UAD models, they're awfully CPU intensive. Even if I did a rigorous a/b and decided they were better, they would have to be substituted for something lighter during the recording phase.

This! So much. Have one of these latency spikes and you're off in your timing and monitoring. For reamping and especially rendering this wouldn't matter so much.

[DerKastellan]

I got more curious about what the plugin does, CPU-wise. So I kept comparing. I have set the DAW's CPU usage meter to "current" instead of "average." The numbers are... who knows how accurate. But anything close to or above 100 will typically make the audio glitch unpleasantly, so that's what they are useful for.

I set the DAW to real-time priority for this one to prevent most (some?) impact from other tasks. Still, IIRC, the scheduler favors tasks in focus, so when switching back to the DAW from writing, I wait also a while to see "the real picture."

Line 6 Helix Native - on a typical preset, around the low 20% mark. When not armed, even less. Occasional spikes (in the 60s?).

Guitar Rig 7 - first load time is of course atrocious. Use is more in the mid 10s, even with an ICM amp. Keeping adding a chain, also with ICM devices being stimulated - ends up close to high 20s. Not really spiky.

Softube Amp Room. Arm the track and you're in the 40s. Occasional spikes - 50s, 60s, have seen 70s, I think.

Paradise Studio - wildly inconsistent from one attempt to another, same DAW session. Had it loaded up before pulling up the others for comparison - and just on being armed it would spike above a 100% quite often. (Above 200 once... so I guess we can say it spreads its load over multiple cores. ) Wait if it would change. Nope. Behaved like that until I deleted the instance. Pull it up after the others, idles around the mid--30s while armed, spikes to the 50s often. Waited a while - while writing this. Switching back - and back to observing. Now I see 80s spikes and the occasional above 100. Even when waiting, occasional 120.

Ruby plugin - sits in the mid-50s just when armed. Spikes often, 70s, then occasional 120, 130% range spikes.

I don't mind if the DSP engine makes the CPU sweat - that's what it is for. But the spikes...

[zerocrossing]

I agree. Regardless as to what you think of the UAD models, they're awfully CPU intensive. Even if I did a rigorous a/b and decided they were better, they would have to be substituted for something lighter during the recording phase.

This! So much. Have one of these latency spikes and you're off in your timing and monitoring. For reamping and especially rendering this wouldn't matter so much.

I'll still use their individual models for times when I'm doing ambient guitar stuff, where there's not much else going on. The CPU is high, but acceptable. I do feel like the sound can be excellent, especially how natural the dynamics are. What I won't do is pay $99 to get what I already own in a single plugin. Yeah, I know there are some things that only exist in Paradise, but I have good alternatives made by other developers. I feel like this is something that should be $49 for current users. Think about this: you can often buy Amplitube 5 Max for $99. I think I bought it from someone for $75.

[jens]

Your name is Jens! You’re not allowed to misinterpret Hans Christian Andersen this badly!

1) I'm Djörman, not Dansk

2) I didn't (it seems you're not very familiar with widely accepted modern applications of this quasi-satirical Eventyr regarding consumerism)

[DerKastellan]

I played around with DDMF PluginDoctor to make this a bit more objective than me trying to read my DAW's CPU meter.

Here's some Helix Native preset vs. loading the Ruby in Paradise Studio:

HelixNativeVSParadise.png

The upper line is the UA Paradise Studio.

As for what it means:

Performance: how many milliseconds are really spent in your plugin’s audio processing callback (as a function of buffer size)

So, the UA takes significantly longer to process the buffers.

For comparison, here is the UA Ruby plugin (also top, bottom line still Line 6):

HelixNativeVSRuby.png

The version in the Paradise Studio is significantly faster! (But still heavy in terms of processing time.)

It's funny seeing the faster plugin update the line several times while the slower one is still busy rendering the line once.

Yesterday's gear, requiring the computers of tomorrow.

This, of course, says nothing about the quality, the dynamic response, the closeness to a particular original unit, etc. But you need a bit more oomph to run it.

[zvenx]

You seem not willing to blindly drink the UA kool-aid.
I like that.

And before the UA fans jump on me, I have been using UA plugins since 2004... Back then their stuff was superior to almost everything else out there.

They still make good stuff, some of them even great, but a lot of the industry has caught up and in some areas surpassed UA...

But their marketing and hype make it seems like everything they do is fantastic, out of this world, superior to everything else out there, and they alone have the keys to the manna from heaven.

(and don't get me started on their DSP installer which thinks it needs to dump all their plugins in all formats onto your hard drive, or their UA Connect which likes to run all the time, even though it technically needs to just run to install and authorize (assuming you not using Spark like I don't))
rsp

[Uncle E]

2) I didn't (it seems you're not very familiar with widely accepted modern applications of this quasi-satirical Eventyr regarding consumerism)

You're right, I'm not familiar with that application. Hans Christian Andersen's story was not about consumerism.

[Uncle E]

But their marketing and hype make it seems like everything they do is fantastic, out of this world, superior to everything else out there, and they alone have the keys to the manna from heaven.

Paradise is most of the UAFX pedals, including the effects, rolled up into a single plugin. There's nothing groundbreaking about it, but for the person who'd been wanting those pedals, it's a significant value. This is also the closest thing to an Ox in plugin form, too, which is one of the main things I'm using it for.

[jens]

Hans Christian Andersen's story was not about consumerism.

Sorry, but that is irrelevant. when it is about a certain general tendecy regarding human behaviour (which it is), this behaviour might present itself in a variety of different situations. But I'm pretty sure you know that already and have a good understanding of what I mean. But hey, thanks for playing anyway.

[Uncle E]

Sorry, but that is irrelevant. when it is about a certain general tendecy regarding human behaviour (which it is), this behaviour might present itself in a variety of different situations. But I'm pretty sure you know that already and have a good understanding of what I mean. But hey, thanks for playing anyway.

Yes, now that you have explained it, I understand. I was only confused by the use of "The Emperor's New Clothes". Stakkars Hans, misunderstood in life, misunderstood in death.

[zerocrossing]

I played around with DDMF PluginDoctor to make this a bit more objective than me trying to read my DAW's CPU meter.

Here's some Helix Native preset vs. loading the Ruby in Paradise Studio:

HelixNativeVSParadise.png

The upper line is the UA Paradise Studio.

As for what it means:

Performance: how many milliseconds are really spent in your plugin’s audio processing callback (as a function of buffer size)

So, the UA takes significantly longer to process the buffers.

For comparison, here is the UA Ruby plugin (also top, bottom line still Line 6):

HelixNativeVSRuby.png

The version in the Paradise Studio is significantly faster! (But still heavy in terms of processing time.)

It's funny seeing the faster plugin update the line several times while the slower one is still busy rendering the line once.

Yesterday's gear, requiring the computers of tomorrow.

This, of course, says nothing about the quality, the dynamic response, the closeness to a particular original unit, etc. But you need a bit more oomph to run it.

I expect a high quality model to need more resources, that's for sure, and something like this has to account for arbitrary parameter changes in a way that something like Tonex does not.

So, I spent the morning doing more of a "deep dive," and boy oh boy, that is difficult. So many different factors that have to be accounted for. I was literally running sine waves though them and trying to match harmonics.

My end feelings are, based on only the Lion model and various IK Marshall models, is that the UAD is plain and simply a bit better when it comes to dynamics. There's just something a bit more natural sounding about it, while the Amplitube models seem like they're being compressed and a bit band limited. That said... who doesn't like to compress their guitar a bit? In a mix, the Amplitube really stood out nicely without anything. It does have a very mid-forward tone, which is great for someone like me who does a lot of synth stuff as well. I put it on a busy track that I just finished mixing and it took a lot of EQ to make it fit in the track, compared to the previous plugin, which was just Tonex.


No doubt that I got great sounds from Amplitube, but when you really compare them, I've got to admit that the extra CPU cycles that UAD are using are doing something. If you're into classic sounds and guitars are featured in a sparse mix, it's worth it. I sort of wish it wasn't just classic amps, and there were some high gain models in there, like at least an SLO-100 or Triple Rectifier. As my friend Dee would say, "I want to rock."

So, for fun, because everyone knows me as a paragon of all that is fun, I put some Super Lead captures from Tonex against Lion. Now the difference is not as apparent, or maybe none. Hard to say because there's no way to know how the amp was set up, mics, etc. Just going on a general idea of quality and vibe, I'd say that Tonex is on par with Lion. So, that's great, but it means going though captures instead of just loading up a model and setting it up as you'd like. There's tweaking to be done in Tonex, for sure, but it's just not the same. That said, I found something that was pretty close to what I'd set up Lion to do in about 6 tries, which probably took less time than setting up something myself.

So, to close, I preferred Amplitube when I wanted something modern and tight. I could never really get Paradise to get there with boosts, EQ or gain effects. I also miss being able to just "move a mic around" to find a sweet spot. It would be nice if I could load my own IRs into it, as well. I found a bug with the volume effect where it seems to go from -60 db to infinite and if you've got some gain stuff happening, you get a bump when controlling it with a MIDI pedal (FCB1010) Super annoying. I also love Amplitube's room convolution. It's seriously great and no one has anything nearly as good.

I preferred Paradise when I wanted something more 60s-70s vintage sounding. There's something loose and natural about the sound that's really pleasing in some respects. Harder to fit in a busy mix, but on it's own, it was beautiful sounding. Maybe I will plunk down the $99 for it. What else am I going to do with my money? Save it?