KVR Audio

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:33 pm

Since1980 wrote:I don't much about what these DSP chips can and cannot do. But I do know what a Quad Opteron(2 dual) 270 setup can do, and how much it costs. I've seen results that started to make these DSP based setup(Protools HD, UAD, Powercore) look overpriced and underpowered.

I too have seen people state this over and over again and never actually been working on a Pro Tools setup. Do you REALLY think that you can run well over 100 compressors and EQs simultaneously without having to worry at all about running another 128 audio tracks at the same time on a native system? I'll give you some facts: No, you couldn't have done this. Only NOW, this very year, will this be possible (dual dual-core opterons will be the first to go easily over the 100 plugin count).

I don't know about TC and UAD but I do agree with you here about power, however, they price their units NOT because of power but rather because of the R&D that has gone to the plugin development and the quality of the algorithms.

Cheers!
bManic

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:37 pm

Since1980 wrote: But that's why I say that it is important to hear how accurate these plugins are. Cause if these plugs suck, than it's not worth it...

Well, I can tell you right away that the Liquid mix EQs will be very accurate (both the EQ itself AND the "vibe" of the original unit) but the compressors are NOT accurate at all. The "vibe" or "sound" of the unit will be very accurate but the compression action is way off. It's not even nearly the same. It's just a fairly basic (but very high precision) compressor algorithm that is "pasted on" to the dynamic side of the effect. It's not a bad compressor, not at all, but it does mean that every emulation will sound about the same, except for the basic vibe/character of the compressor. It does NOT emulate each models personal compression behaviour.

Cheers!
bManic

Since1980 · Post by **Since1980** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 9:50 pm

bmanic wrote:I too have seen people state this over and over again and never actually been working on a Pro Tools setup. Do you REALLY think that you can run well over 100 compressors and EQs simultaneously without having to worry at all about running another 128 audio tracks at the same time on a native system? I'll give you some facts: No, you couldn't have done this. Only NOW, this very year, will this be possible (dual dual-core opterons will be the first to go easily over the 100 plugin count).

Cheers!
bManic

bManic, that why I made sure to type the Quad Opteron setup. I'm usually on the TDM side, but as of late I'm starting to rethink this whole thing. Especially since I'm about to make a big purchase on one of the platforms.

I don't know about TC and UAD but I do agree with you here about power, however, they price their units NOT because of power but rather because of the R&D that has gone to the plugin development and the quality of the algorithms.

I kinda figured that, but it sucks that you have to get atlest 2 Uad-1 to fully apreciate the platform. Yeah, can can have just one card, but I don't ever freeze my tracks while mixing...

Also bManic, thankyou for you knowledge on these dynamic convolution results. From what I've read you own a Sintefex unit. So I know you know what you are talking about. Do you think that maybe Focusrite updated the dynamic algorithmns to closer emulate these compressors? Also how would you compare the Sintefex emulations to the Uad-1 emulations?

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:00 pm

God! 100 plugins on one song. How did the Beatles, Bob Marley and David Bowie ever get anywhere?

AD80 · Post by **AD80** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:05 pm

Its been said before but I'll say it again. Just because you CAN use 32 plug-ins, doesnt mean you HAVE TO use 32 plug-ins.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:10 am

Since1980 wrote: Also bManic, thankyou for you knowledge on these dynamic convolution results. From what I've read you own a Sintefex unit. So I know you know what you are talking about. Do you think that maybe Focusrite updated the dynamic algorithmns to closer emulate these compressors? Also how would you compare the Sintefex emulations to the Uad-1 emulations?

I've demoed the Liquid channel too and as far as I could tell the dynamic side of the thing is identical to the sintefex. They actually use a FX 8000 to capture all their "models" (mentioned in their manual) then they just port it over to the liquid channel.

For instance, the 1176 model in the sintefex doesn't compres at all as the UAD-1 version does but the overall "sound" of the unit is IMHO closer to the real thing (though I've never tried a real revision E or D blackface so this makes my statement rather vague. I have experience with early 1178 and revision H 1176). I have captured some compressors myself and it is impossible to get the compression action itself identical to the original unit. You can get pretty close but not nearly as close as the UAD plugins are. However, on the other hand you can get the "tone" of the box so close that I have not been able to find it in a blind ABX test (I tried this on my crappy DBX 376 tube channel thingy). This also applies to EQ units, they can be captured pretty much identical to the original which makes the Liquid Mix very good value.

So, to sum it up, liquid mix is: Good for EQ/tone, mediocre for Compression emulation (but the compressor itself is better than average).

Cheers!
bManic

Muzik 4 Machines · Post by **Muzik 4 Machines** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:50 am

i_personaly_think_it's_a_nice_choice,generic_compression,AND_the_impulse_of_the_tonal_characteristic
many_people_want_the_SOUND,they_don't_even_know_how_the_real_thing_was_compressing,they_know_the_"tone"
i_say_it's_great,i'need_the_eq_more,so_the_tone_coloration_of_the_comp_models_is_a_bonus

beej · Post by **beej** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:53 am

Space bar broken?

Muzik 4 Machines · Post by **Muzik 4 Machines** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:56 am

beej wrote:Space bar broken?

y_e_s_
see_
my_
sig_

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:23 am

munchkin wrote:God! 100 plugins on one song. How did the Beatles, Bob Marley and David Bowie ever get anywhere?

Pot?

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:24 am

M4M wrote:
beej wrote:Space bar broken?
y_e_s_
see_
my_
sig_

Way to press on, but PC keyboards cost, what, about $15?

Alan · Post by **Alan** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:05 am

Tony Ostinato wrote:theres still no native fairchild plug or la-2a or 1176 etc etc that doesnt sound like ass.

While I like the UAD versions better,I hardly think of Bomb Factory's RTAS Emu's as sounding like "ass". The owner of the company may have sounded like one at times though.

beej · Post by **beej** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:24 am

Anyone heard of Erik G since Digi bought Bomb Factory out just to kill off the bad PT vibes..?
Wonder what he's doing, and whether his mood's improved...

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:11 am

Frippertronix wrote:
munchkin wrote:God! 100 plugins on one song. How did the Beatles, Bob Marley and David Bowie ever get anywhere?
Pot?

Lennon: "This acid's shit..."
McCartney: "What about another compressor on that hit hat?"
Lennon: "No it's workin'..."
McCarney: "We need another UAD-1 card."
Lennon: "Paul, you're trippin' again you c**t!"
McCartney: "Analogue eq'zzzooopppllleerrzzxx..."

zircon · Post by **zircon** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:19 am

The hype in the ad kind of irks me a bit. My CPU is more than capable of handling 32 EQs and compressors. In fact, I routinely use over 100 VSTs in most of my projects. Perfect realtime playback? Maybe not, but I don't need to shell out another $600+ for that.

Add some DSP horsepower! Watch out, TC & UAD, look at this!