KVR Audio

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:27 pm

ericj23 wrote:Still doesnt change that the idea that tc (or emu or anyone else with buggy software/hardware)arent trying or don't care is self pitying nonsense

Sounds exactly like all those people threatening to sell their expensive cards because of an incompatibility with their cheap motherboards - it speaks of some odd belief that everything revolves around them...

...then you follow it up with your uad works fine - wtf has that got to do with it - so no-one has ever had problems with them then ? they work as designed out of the box do they ?

(hint think the osX problem - and they solved the x2 one all of 3 months ago - 9 months after the things came out)

Eric, your support suggestions are valid to some extent. But even buying a mobo recommended on one of the working systems threads doesn't guarentee the poco will work. Then there are the problems with cards not working and needing to be sent back.

What I'm disputing are your judgemental comments as quoted above. When you characterise criticism as "self-pitying" and blame "cheap motherboards" then that's not very constructive because it doesn't address the problems.

I don't understand why you think it's not appropriate to compare the performance of DSP cards. Anyone intending to buy one should definitely compare all aspects of these cards before making a decision. Judgeing by the UAD-1 forum, UA actually take the time to respond to issues raised on that forum. Their support system has been much easier to access than TC's in my experience. And, more importantly, UA actually own up to problems with their cards and attempt to fix them.

If people like you have had a good experience with the poco then that's great but that doesn't discount those of us who haven't. I think it's important for people to be aware of the potential problems with the poco and I still hold to my impression that the UAD-1 has been less problematic.

In terms of whether DSP cards are worthwhile I still believe that they've had their day when compared with modern processors and plugins.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:38 pm

Left Headphone wrote:I wonder why WaveArts and Nomad Factory can make plugs that use very little cpu and other developers don't?

I don't know about wavearts but Nomad Factory plugins do not sound very good, IMHO. My guess is that they are of not so high resolution, but that's just a guess.

Cheers!
bManic

Left Headphone · Post by **Left Headphone** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:50 pm

I have the Blue Tubes Demo and its CP-2S compressor uses half the cpu that Neodynium uses. So, you're probably right.

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Sun May 28, 2006 9:51 pm

we will have to agree to differ OK - but i just wanted to clarify a few things first

the cheap motherboard comment was in reference to expensive dsp cards - not that they are cheap as in nasty but thay they cost a lot less than any troublesome powercore

and I agree people should find out about dsp cards before they buy - there are problems and bug bears folks

what i was rallying against was your unconscious inference that uad's support is better because you have no problems. There defintely are problems there too.

To make assumptions on the level of support by comparing a company owned forum and a user driven one with no links to the actual company in question seems a little pointless to me

If you want to see what problems there are with powercore I suggest you try TC's support forum -it's not great but its something. Contacting tc has always worked well for me - always got a response within a couple of days

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Sun May 28, 2006 11:17 pm

Left Headphone wrote:I wonder why WaveArts and Nomad Factory can make plugs that use very little cpu and other developers don't?

There are 'bread and butter' plug-ins and those that are not. It is usually easy to make low CPU demand plug-ins that are mostly basic in their operation (despide the included UI look). But as for me, I'm trying to explore more possibilities - and that adds CPU load. It can be compared to order of mathematical equations. 'Bread and butter' is 1st order while adding various things to it increases order and complexity (for example, dynamic behavior in Voxengo GlissEQ). Of course, results are usually different as well. However, I admit, results may not be obviously different. But if you have ears tuned, you'll usually hear (sometimes results ARE obvious).

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Mon May 29, 2006 12:51 am

ericj23 wrote:we will have to agree to differ OK - but i just wanted to clarify a few things first

the cheap motherboard comment was in reference to expensive dsp cards - not that they are cheap as in nasty but thay they cost a lot less than any troublesome powercore

and I agree people should find out about dsp cards before they buy - there are problems and bug bears folks

what i was rallying against was your unconscious inference that uad's support is better because you have no problems. There defintely are problems there too.

To make assumptions on the level of support by comparing a company owned forum and a user driven one with no links to the actual company in question seems a little pointless to me

If you want to see what problems there are with powercore I suggest you try TC's support forum -it's not great but its something. Contacting tc has always worked well for me - always got a response within a couple of days

I'm not discounting that there have been problems with the UAD-1. As a long term owner I've had problems but UA have responded in a much more constructive way than TC with regard to solving these problems. UA haven't told me to get a new mobo for example.

As for "cheap" mobo's I'm not really clear what you mean. Are you refering to the number of features included with the mobo or the chipset? Mobo manufacturers usually release their mobo's with a particular chipset. Even the low end of the range has the same chipset but with less features. I seriously doubt that a mobo at the low end of the range is going to be incompatible with a poco if the poco works with one of the high end boards in the same series. Even if this is the case, if there are mobo's to avoid, then TC should advise us like other audio card manufacturers do.

I had a mobo (ASUS A7A 266) that was notorious for not working well with RME cards. This was very clearly stated in their FAQ. If TC had compiled this sort of info I would give them more credit but as far as I'm aware their customers are the only ones posting this info on the unofficial forum.

The UAD-1 forum has not always been linked to UA and I'm not sure if UA have taken it over. It started life as an independent and unofficial forum. You could say that if UA have taken it over that it's a sign of how they try to integrate themselves with their customers unlike TC's complete absence from the Pocoheaven forum.

Left Headphone · Post by **Left Headphone** » Mon May 29, 2006 1:02 am

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:
Left Headphone wrote:I wonder why WaveArts and Nomad Factory can make plugs that use very little cpu and other developers don't?
There are 'bread and butter' plug-ins and those that are not. It is usually easy to make low CPU demand plug-ins that are mostly basic in their operation (despide the included UI look). But as for me, I'm trying to explore more possibilities - and that adds CPU load. It can be compared to order of mathematical equations. 'Bread and butter' is 1st order while adding various things to it increases order and complexity (for example, dynamic behavior in Voxengo GlissEQ). Of course, results are usually different as well. However, I admit, results may not be obviously different. But if you have ears tuned, you'll usually hear (sometimes results ARE obvious).

My hearing sucks... So, why not make a good plug low cpu plug without the extra features? I mean, if it sounds good and has low cpu, its much easier for the user without the compromises from the use of heavy cpu plugs...

AVBunyan · Post by **AVBunyan** » Mon May 29, 2006 1:23 am

Left Headphone wrote:I wonder why WaveArts and Nomad Factory can make plugs that use very little cpu and other developers don't?

Is it possible they are not as strong as other plugs? Just asking? Not knocking them.

Later

Plexi Head · Post by **Plexi Head** » Mon May 29, 2006 2:39 am

Stupid American Pig wrote:in 1998ish Waves were the shiz.

in 2006 they are not so much so.

In 1958 the Fender Strat was the shiz.

In 2006 they still sound pretty good to my ears.

Waves have created a couple of classics, Ren Comp, C1 and the Ren EQ's. They will always be around. There are many top notch engineers that still use The Ren Comp in studios chock full of hardware heaven. Why? The Waves stuff is tried and true, reliable and has "a sound" that is good.

AVBunyan · Post by **AVBunyan** » Mon May 29, 2006 2:49 am

Plexi Head wrote:Waves have created a couple of classics, Ren Comp, C1 and the Ren EQ's. They will always be around. There are many top notch engineers that still use The Ren Comp in studios chock full of hardware heaven. Why? The Waves stuff is tried and true, reliable and has "a sound" that is good.

I also like the above 3 - the Ren EQ and Ren Comp along with the Doubler is why I went with Waves and chose the Musicians Bundle II (and could afford it) - since then I have really grown to like the RenVox also.

Later

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Mon May 29, 2006 2:55 am

Left Headphone wrote:My hearing sucks... So, why not make a good plug low cpu plug without the extra features? I mean, if it sounds good and has low cpu, its much easier for the user without the compromises from the use of heavy cpu plugs...

In GlissEQ you can disable dynamic behavior, and it will be as effective CPU-wise as most other 'bread and butter' plug-ins. So, it is not a problem of implementation of such 'easy' plug-ins - it is just true that I'm not much interested in releasing plug-ins that contain bread and butter approaches alone: they are not competitive in my opinion since they do not offer anything in comparison to built-in FX of most audio sequencers (beside maybe a bit different user interface).

Adding some harmonic distortions, phase coloration, and other creative elements requires CPU resources.

The irony of 'bread and butter' EQs (based on common biquad filters) is that they all have equal phase response for the given frequency response (it is basically a system of equations with four free variables +1 for gain, while user directly changes three of them). So, usually difference between several EQs you hear is related to a way developer implemented EQ's bandwidth/Q changes, and calculation precision used. Beside this observation I've read a paper that proves this to be true.

Killvehicle · Post by **Killvehicle** » Mon May 29, 2006 2:57 am

Plexi Head wrote:
Stupid American Pig wrote:in 1998ish Waves were the shiz.

in 2006 they are not so much so.
In 1958 the Fender Strat was the shiz.

In 2006 they still sound pretty good to my ears.

Waves have created a couple of classics, Ren Comp, C1 and the Ren EQ's. They will always be around. There are many top notch engineers that still use The Ren Comp in studios chock full of hardware heaven. Why? The Waves stuff is tried and true, reliable and has "a sound" that is good.

Right on, I too am a huge fan of those plugs.. And I have 1 vintage compressor unit a DBX 165, Which is great, but the Ren comp and C1 are exactly that, tried and true and they always seem to work for me.. and to AVbunyan, you are also right on, since that Musicians Bundle II is exactly what should have been offered in version 1. That bundle is f**king great deal. As soon as I saw that, it would have been the only bundle I bought now with 20/20 hindsight..

AVBunyan · Post by **AVBunyan** » Mon May 29, 2006 1:44 pm

Killvehicle wrote:Right on, I too am a huge fan of those plugs.. And I have 1 vintage compressor unit a DBX 165, Which is great, but the Ren comp and C1 are exactly that, tried and true and they always seem to work for me.. and to AVbunyan, you are also right on, since that Musicians Bundle II is exactly what should have been offered in version 1

Since this thread is dying down I guess I'll summarize my thoughts for what it is worth:
Waves seems to take a lot of bashing these days so I started the thread to say for the small setup they were not that expensive.

1. If I owned a commerical studio where anything from a rock group to a car radio commercial would come through the door I'd own Waves Diamond.

2. If I were a smaller studio and all I did was music then I'd have some Waves and the best of other musical plugs.

3. For folks like me (the small hobbyist) the smaller packages of Waves - the Musicans Bundles and Power Packs - are great packages and cover the basics.

4. Yes - other smaller independent plugs are nice and do a good job - the Voxengos, Kjearhus, maybe WaveArts (can't get into them yet) and others are gaining ground and have a loyal following (and rightfully so).

I chose Waves - Every ear and wallet is different.

With that - I'm out - enjoyed the chats.

Godo bless

Waves Over Priced? Maybe - Maybe not...