|
UAD X
Sept 7, 2018 15:46:31 GMT -6
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 7, 2018 15:46:31 GMT -6
So JK, are you demoing the new X ?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 7, 2018 15:50:28 GMT -6
So JK, are you demoing the new X ? I’m a patient guy. I’ll probably wait until there are a few revi....oh fuck it. I just posted a new thread with an initial impression of it. Lol
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 7, 2018 17:18:23 GMT -6
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 7, 2018 17:18:23 GMT -6
John's got the X6, can't wait to hear more. So, does this mean there's no more Duo's, Quad's, just the Hex?
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 7, 2018 17:21:22 GMT -6
Post by Guitar on Sept 7, 2018 17:21:22 GMT -6
John's got the X6, can't wait to hear more. So, does this mean there's no more Duo's, Quad's, just the Hex? That's right. In the words of Gannon K, "Now people just choose based on I/O rather than DSP differences"
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 7, 2018 17:22:12 GMT -6
Cool news, thanks monkeyxx
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 8, 2018 6:40:57 GMT -6
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 8, 2018 6:40:57 GMT -6
Does the +24 button eliminate the need for a cloudlifter? It might. It's only a 4dB shift up but if that's all you were needing....
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 8, 2018 10:38:40 GMT -6
Post by subspace on Sept 8, 2018 10:38:40 GMT -6
So, specs:
Avid HD I/O - ADC Dynamic Range: 122dB ADC THD+N: -114dB (.0002%) DAC Dynamic Range: 125dB DAC THD+N: -110dB (.00032%)
Apogee Symphony MkII ADC Dynamic Range: 122dB ADC THD+N: -115dB (.0002%) DAC Dynamic Range: 126dB DAC THD+N: -119dB (.00014%) 2x6SE - ADC Dynamic Range: 124dB ADC THD+N: -116dB DAC Dynamic Range: 131dB DAC THD+N: -118dB
UA Apollo X16 - ADC Dynamic Range: 124dB ADC THD+N: -115dB (.00018%) DAC Dynamic Range: 127dB DAC THD+N: -123dB (.00007%) Monitor DAC Dynamic Range: 133dB Monitor DAC THD-N: -129dB (.00004%)
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 8, 2018 10:54:03 GMT -6
Post by Blackdawg on Sept 8, 2018 10:54:03 GMT -6
Anyone have the cliff notes version of the new Xs? Im too busy for the next 2 weeks to read this whole thread...
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Sept 8, 2018 11:08:25 GMT -6
Anyone have the cliff notes version of the new Xs? Im too busy for the next 2 weeks to read this whole thread... Improved conversion, 6 chips in all models, they moved the logo.
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 8, 2018 11:27:50 GMT -6
Anyone have the cliff notes version of the new Xs? Im too busy for the next 2 weeks to read this whole thread... 6 chips in all models. all new conversion and clocking across entire line. +24dBu operation. TB3 standard. built in talkback. Surround Sound support (coming Q4).
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 8, 2018 11:43:36 GMT -6
Anyone have the cliff notes version of the new Xs? Im too busy for the next 2 weeks to read this whole thread... It’s better. On par with Symphony MkII. If you love the softer top of the Apogee stuff, this will seem brighter. I would say this is more like the Dangerous Audio approach.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
UAD X
Sept 8, 2018 12:42:04 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2018 12:42:04 GMT -6
xtwin ?
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 8, 2018 20:10:13 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Mister Chase on Sept 8, 2018 20:10:13 GMT -6
Anyone have the cliff notes version of the new Xs? Im too busy for the next 2 weeks to read this whole thread... It’s better. On par with Symphony MkII. If you love the softer top of the Apogee stuff, this will seem brighter. I would say this is more like the Dangerous Audio approach. Ok par with Symphony mk II? Yowza.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Sept 8, 2018 20:18:11 GMT -6
The x8P is the tempting model for me. I'd really want to take advantage of Unison tech here. I'd want 2 eventually to be able to track 16 channels at a time. However, if they allowed use of DSP across both units for Unison tracking, I would pretty much be on board. The Unison analog modeled pre's sound pretty good, but they actually sound cleaner to me in every blind test I've done against the hardware. Still would be useful and isn't necessarily a bad thing. And it's about getting sounds down tracking rather than later, not just accurate modeling, per se. I'd have to work with it a bit in practice to really be convinced and pried away from my Aurora (n) that I love so much.
I will certainly keep this in mind moving forward especially after JK's comment on the conversion. I'm sure they wouldn't sound bright to me as a Lynx guy.
Thanks for the great thread and examples etc. Interesting stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 8, 2018 22:11:33 GMT -6
I could really see myself using the Apollo plugs going in now.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 9, 2018 5:09:23 GMT -6
@chase4u
I don't quite understand your point ?
The X8p splits a half share chip per channel (1-8), so if you had 2 X8p's all 16 channels would have a half sharc chip for tracking, plus you would have 2 extra chips per unit.
So, you could run 16 instances of the 73 unison plug, for example, plus have the other 4 sharc chips.
Its true you cannot gang them across both units, but at least they are there for aux etc.. ?
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 9, 2018 6:27:37 GMT -6
What he said.
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 9, 2018 10:29:26 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Mister Chase on Sept 9, 2018 10:29:26 GMT -6
@chase4u I don't quite understand your point ? The X8p splits a half share chip per channel (1-8), so if you had 2 X8p's all 16 channels would have a half sharc chip for tracking, plus you would have 2 extra chips per unit. So, you could run 16 instances of the 73 unison plug, for example, plus have the other 4 sharc chips. Its true you cannot gang them across both units, but at least they are there for aux etc.. ? Oh interesting. Is this how the mkii did it as well? So you have a designated amount per channel. I just remember them discussing this in a.mkii video that you could not share dsp with multiple interfaces which led me to believe a different situation with the dsp than you describe. That's pretty cool. I can't find it in the manual though. What page is that info on?
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 9, 2018 10:50:12 GMT -6
Yeah, no change from the MKIIs.
Each channel in Console can't exceed one chip. IOW, no chip spanning.
And all DSP for Console inputs are "local". So with MKIIs, you could use all DSP for inputs and not have nay left for the DAW. With these 2 more, we can have the best of both worlds in tracking sessions.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Sept 9, 2018 11:06:59 GMT -6
Yeah, no change from the MKIIs. Each channel in Console can't exceed one chip. IOW, no chip spanning. Cool! Now I understand! This is the first time I've heard it explicitly explained that way and it kind of makes sense to me. You're killin' me, smalls. This is more and more tempting. So just to be clear, since they share half a sharc, the unison portion doesn't take advantage of the extra processing power in the x6? So its the same unison dsp as mkii?
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 9, 2018 11:32:13 GMT -6
Correct.
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 9, 2018 12:29:39 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 9, 2018 12:29:39 GMT -6
Drew, since the unison pre only works in the top slot in console and either has 1 sharc chip or half per channel (x8 vs x8p), can you now run say a 76 or 2a on a channel on the other 4 plug slots, with say a 73 unison pre while tracking or you could put the 76 or 2a in your daw downstream and use console recall to keep console and daw synced?
How does this work real world ?
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 9, 2018 13:17:52 GMT -6
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 9, 2018 13:17:52 GMT -6
Drew, since the unison pre only works in the top slot in console and either has 1 sharc chip or half per channel (x8 vs x8p), can you now run say a 76 or 2a on a channel on the other 4 plug slots, with say a 73 unison pre while tracking or you could put the 76 or 2a in your daw downstream and use console recall to keep console and daw synced? How does this work real world ? Nothing has changed in this regard from MKIIs, you are still limited to one chip per Console input. The difference now is, you have all 4 chips to service all 8 mic inputs, with two chips left over. The equivalent with MKIIs would be only using 4 mic inputs, serviced by 2 DSPs, and having the other 2 for the DAW. Make sense? Or am I misunderstanding something?
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 9, 2018 13:31:41 GMT -6
Post by Mister Chase on Sept 9, 2018 13:31:41 GMT -6
My math skills are abysmal, so I'd like to run a couple things by here.
So according to the instance chart which is a percentage @ 44.1khz for one sharc chip - the Neve 1073, for example, uses 40.1% DSP in mono. I noticed it mentioned that in Unison the plugins may require more DSP to maintain low latency. So if it's 40.1 % for a single sharc, and each channel has half a sharc, that means the 1073 will take 80.2% of that one channels DSP, perhaps more for low latency? Am I calculating that correctly? And does the load-lock being disabled free up DSP in Unison console mode as well?
|
|
|
UAD X
Sept 9, 2018 13:49:12 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 9, 2018 13:49:12 GMT -6
People have already proven with the 8p that you can run 8 73 unison pres while tracking: that’s a fact not a supposition.
But that was about it as in board dsp including console load was pretty well maxed.
Now, with X you still have 2 more sharc chips per apollo.
So, I was hoping Drew would say, yes , in addition to the 16 instances of 73 unison pres,you could add , say 1176’s and 2a’s in the daw and or run your aux verbs in console ?
|
|