|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 26, 2024 17:29:57 GMT -6
I am looking at the whole Solid State Controller UF8, UF1, UC1 bundle/set. Anybody using this with success? WINDOWS - CUBASE or NUENDO - Quality controller set? Sure looks intuitive.
I am dumping Softube Console and Fader after a few years of low-hour use. I have never bonded with the workflow. And the unfortunate dismal 2-3 day delays between each reply from Softube support. gets brutal after 10 days and no resolution which is where I am now. I'll take it as nudge to move forward.
I am looking for some input on the SSL full system form anybody using it.
(BTW I will listing the Softube Console and Fader units here on the cheap, or I'll donate them to a poor muso. Original owner, boxes, paperwork, low-hours. Requires license transfer and iLOK account.
|
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Apr 26, 2024 17:58:38 GMT -6
We had the bundle in for evaluation vs our Avid S1s and Dock. The SSL units are really well-built and thought out but we decided to keep our Avid setup because they just work better with Pro Tools.
|
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 26, 2024 18:51:56 GMT -6
We had the bundle in for evaluation vs our Avid S1s and Dock. The SSL units are really well-built and thought out but we decided to keep our Avid setup because they just work better with Pro Tools. Thanks Man. I appreciate the insight.
I am seeing some hiccups discussed with Cubase, so I am still researching a bit. I don't need alot of faders - just Drum Bus, Vocals etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Apr 26, 2024 20:20:16 GMT -6
I have the UF8 and UF1. I like them. SSL is doing a lot of things with their 360 ecosystem that are over and above what most hardware controller companies are doing. They're more customizable than a lot of the other stuff out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Apr 27, 2024 4:40:17 GMT -6
I have the UF8 and UF1. I like them. SSL is doing a lot of things with their 360 ecosystem that are over and above what most hardware controller companies are doing. They're more customizable than a lot of the other stuff out there. I was really sorry to send them back, but my Engineer does most all of the work here and I understand his concerns. He really liked the build of the SSL units better than the Avid, as did I but, ultimately, it was about work flow. The 360 software was what I was most interested in, including the fact that the SSL units fit nicely in a pull-out drawer under my console. I have the Avid units on a sliding tray on top of the console and I hate it that way, as they block access to way too much of the actual console. Perhaps if SSL ever address the Pro Tools shortcomings, I might revisit the Bundle. I am curious how SSL is looking at integration with Mixbus now that they are part of the same company. In reality, if I had the budget, I would buy a sixteen channel Origin....... |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 5:24:53 GMT -6
We had the bundle in for evaluation vs our Avid S1s and Dock. The SSL units are really well-built and thought out but we decided to keep our Avid setup because they just work better with Pro Tools. Thanks Man. I appreciate the insight.
I am seeing some hiccups discussed with Cubase, so I am still researching a bit. I don't need alot of faders - just Drum Bus, Vocals etc.
I’ve built a Frankendesk from Faderport 16 Faders, solo, mute, effects sends on faders. Behringer X touch mini - effects mutes. Console 1 for project navigation and control of UAD plug-ins. Avovet - monitor controller Stream Deck XL shortcuts I’ve customised each element and it’s like a poor man’s Avid S3  I’m surprised you don’t get on with Console 1 - I find it highly effective with Cubase. |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 6:42:00 GMT -6
I have the UF8 and UF1. I like them. SSL is doing a lot of things with their 360 ecosystem that are over and above what most hardware controller companies are doing. They're more customizable than a lot of the other stuff out there. Consensus is that it is well made. The more I read up, the more I am interested in the set. The UF1 looks perfect for transport and master buss. The one consistent comment is MMC for the UF8 and track selection auto follow, but some say SSL 360 has work arounds.
I have the UF8 and UF1. I like them. SSL is doing a lot of things with their 360 ecosystem that are over and above what most hardware controller companies are doing. They're more customizable than a lot of the other stuff out there. I was really sorry to send them back, but my Engineer does most all of the work here and I understand his concerns. He really liked the build of the SSL units better than the Avid, as did I but, ultimately, it was about work flow. The 360 software was what I was most interested in, including the fact that the SSL units fit nicely in a pull-out drawer under my console. I have the Avid units on a sliding tray on top of the console and I hate it that way, as they block access to way too much of the actual console. Perhaps if SSL ever address the Pro Tools shortcomings, I might revisit the Bundle. I am curious how SSL is looking at integration with Mixbus now that they are part of the same company. In reality, if I had the budget, I would buy a sixteen channel Origin....... I think SSL has shortcomings for all DAWs, at least while they get feedback from the field year after year. And new implementation is always slower than we like. But that seems to be more about each DAW company and the fact that these controllers are not specific to any one of them, more universal. As for the the rest, I understand. My own major limits are space. I need space, so whatever it is, it has to go on this desk.
|
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 6:57:16 GMT -6
Thanks Man. I appreciate the insight.
I am seeing some hiccups discussed with Cubase, so I am still researching a bit. I don't need alot of faders - just Drum Bus, Vocals etc.
I’ve built a Frankendesk from Faderport 16 Faders, solo, mute, effects sends on faders. Behringer X touch mini - effects mutes. Console 1 for project navigation and control of UAD plug-ins. Avovet - monitor controller Stream Deck XL shortcuts I’ve customised each element and it’s like a poor man’s Avid S3 I’m surprised you don’t get on with Console 1 - I find it highly effective with Cubase.
Well it is effective with Cubase, in that it functions well, despite the workflow. I don't think the majority of their plugins with / for Console 1 sound good. It should be about sound, function and workflow. And at the risk of triggering the 'selectively offended' or fan boys which is part of modern culture now, Softube support is the worst in the business in my decades doing this. Low-energy several days between replies' support. And replies that do not help but ask for information you have already sent and can see in the email thread, which result in several days again before another reply. Rinse and repeat until you give up. Health of mind and joy is more important. Feels really good to be uninstalling the company from my system.
|
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Apr 27, 2024 7:31:53 GMT -6
Another consideration for some is Eucon vs Mackie Protocol. The Avid units, running on Eucon, run and feel like they belong with Pro Tools.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 8:08:11 GMT -6
I’ve built a Frankendesk from Faderport 16 Faders, solo, mute, effects sends on faders. Behringer X touch mini - effects mutes. Console 1 for project navigation and control of UAD plug-ins. Avovet - monitor controller Stream Deck XL shortcuts I’ve customised each element and it’s like a poor man’s Avid S3 I’m surprised you don’t get on with Console 1 - I find it highly effective with Cubase.
Well it is effective with Cubase, in that it functions well, despite the workflow. I don't think the majority of their plugins with / for Console 1 sound good. It should be about sound, function and workflow. And at the risk of triggering the 'selectively offended' or fan boys which is part of modern culture now, Softube support is the worst in the business in my decades doing this. Low-energy several days between replies' support. And replies that do not help but ask for information you have already sent and can see in the email thread, which result in several days again before another reply. Rinse and repeat until you give up. Health of mind and joy is more important. Feels really good to be uninstalling the company from my system.
Thank for your reply. I've personally found Softube support as bad/good as any other major software vendour - well Native Instruments being the worse for long waiting times for replies. As for the Softube software. I conducted an extensive ABX double blind test (I only make audio conclusions with my own properly conducted double blond ABX tests) using the Softube Brit Channel and my favourite UAD strip the UAD 88RS channel (both Neve strips al be it different vintages) yet to my surprise setting the EQ by ear to sound as indentical as possible - I and the other people in the room were unable to pick out one from the other. So I'm happy and pleasantly surprised with the Brit channel. (I've not tested any of the other Softube channel strips) The control over the UAD plugins is very useful - especially now they have gotten rid of that ridiculous auto gain on the compressors. Ironically, my favourite function of the Control 1 is it's ability to chase channels using the 20 channel selector buttons. Mackie protocol seriously misses the EUCON ability to "go-to" channels not in the selected bank, so in the absence of owning an S3 the Control 1 is a pretty good solution for me. I'm with you, in as much as it'a nowhere near as useful as I thought it would be when I bought it - but Software have improved it's functionality and integration with Cubase and with the added UAD support it just about justifies it's desk real estate. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSL "digital anything" with a bargepole - they have imho THE worse driver and hardware support in the business - the polar opposite of RME. |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 11:00:43 GMT -6
Thank for your reply. I've personally found Softube support as bad/good as any other major software vendour - well Native Instruments being the worse for long waiting times for replies. As for the Softube software. I conducted an extensive ABX double blind test (I only make audio conclusions with my own properly conducted double blond ABX tests) using the Softube Brit Channel and my favourite UAD strip the UAD 88RS channel (both Neve strips al be it different vintages) yet to my surprise setting the EQ by ear to sound as indentical as possible - I and the other people in the room were unable to pick out one from the other. So I'm happy and pleasantly surprised with the Brit channel. (I've not tested any of the other Softube channel strips) The control over the UAD plugins is very useful - especially now they have gotten rid of that ridiculous auto gain on the compressors. Ironically, my favourite function of the Control 1 is it's ability to chase channels using the 20 channel selector buttons. Mackie protocol seriously misses the EUCON ability to "go-to" channels not in the selected bank, so in the absence of owning an S3 the Control 1 is a pretty good solution for me. I'm with you, in as much as it'a nowhere near as useful as I thought it would be when I bought it - but Software have improved it's functionality and integration with Cubase and with the added UAD support it just about justifies it's desk real estate. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSL "digital anything" with a bargepole - they have imho THE worse driver and hardware support in the business - the polar opposite of RME.
50% of UAD plugins (at least) sound mediocre, 2005 quality. There are many many many many to choose from, but few that are truly excellent or standouts compared to other plugins. 20 years later now that the novelty has worn off it is easier to assess. Comparing the Softube Brit channel with UAD is not a benchmark of any kind and I do have both here as well. Not a 'fan' of either per se. Not bad, not great. And UAD support as well, day 3 with a support ticket for UAD hardware and UA connect issues and still no reply. None. I look forward to selling my UAD hardware as well. There is nothing about it other than the ATR-102 that I would miss. I am in the middle of an album and I have zero UAD plugins inserted over 8 tunes now.
Is your assessment of SSL as a company support or the drivers? I have never needed support, but if drivers, it is not a shared feeling. Like all hardware, you have to learn how they work on any system. Plug and play expectation is foolish. You need a proper working system, well powered USB hubs, driver compatibility etc. Expect trouble shooting other driver conflicts if needed. Why wouldn't anybody? Modern SSL drivers have been as rock solid on my system as my RME. It just took understanding what kind of integration they needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 11:55:12 GMT -6
Thank for your reply. I've personally found Softube support as bad/good as any other major software vendour - well Native Instruments being the worse for long waiting times for replies. As for the Softube software. I conducted an extensive ABX double blind test (I only make audio conclusions with my own properly conducted double blond ABX tests) using the Softube Brit Channel and my favourite UAD strip the UAD 88RS channel (both Neve strips al be it different vintages) yet to my surprise setting the EQ by ear to sound as indentical as possible - I and the other people in the room were unable to pick out one from the other. So I'm happy and pleasantly surprised with the Brit channel. (I've not tested any of the other Softube channel strips) The control over the UAD plugins is very useful - especially now they have gotten rid of that ridiculous auto gain on the compressors. Ironically, my favourite function of the Control 1 is it's ability to chase channels using the 20 channel selector buttons. Mackie protocol seriously misses the EUCON ability to "go-to" channels not in the selected bank, so in the absence of owning an S3 the Control 1 is a pretty good solution for me. I'm with you, in as much as it'a nowhere near as useful as I thought it would be when I bought it - but Software have improved it's functionality and integration with Cubase and with the added UAD support it just about justifies it's desk real estate. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSL "digital anything" with a bargepole - they have imho THE worse driver and hardware support in the business - the polar opposite of RME.
50% of UAD plugins (at least) sound mediocre, 2005 quality. There are many many many many to choose from, but few that are truly excellent or standouts compared to other plugins. 20 years later now that the novelty has worn off it is easier to assess. Comparing the Softube Brit channel with UAD is not a benchmark of any kind and I do have both here as well. Not a 'fan' of either per se. Not bad, not great. And UAD support as well, day 3 with a support ticket for UAD hardware and UA connect issues and still no reply. None. I look forward to selling my UAD hardware as well. There is nothing about it other than the ATR-102 that I would miss. I am in the middle of an album and I have zero UAD plugins inserted over 8 tunes now.
Is your assessment of SSL as a company support or the drivers? I have never needed support, but if drivers, it is not a shared feeling. Like all hardware, you have to learn how they work on any system. Plug and play expectation is foolish. You need a proper working system, well powered USB hubs, driver compatibility etc. Expect trouble shooting other driver conflicts if needed. Why wouldn't anybody? Modern SSL drivers have been as rock solid on my system as my RME. It just took understanding what kind of integration they needed.
That's cool - I don't agree with any of your assertions - but that's the nature of making art and buying gear |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 12:23:32 GMT -6
That's cool - I don't agree with any of your assertions - but that's the nature of making art and buying gear Of course, but I already assumed that. All good here. You don't mention any actual experience with SSL drivers, so I have no idea where you gleaned your opinions. My question to you was a legit question. It is useful to know whether you are speaking from 2nd-3rd hand internet reading or personal experience.
I have read alot of things you post that you believe to be true that I know are not. You don't believe it is necessary to measure a studio room or control room either. Nor do you think it is needed to even measure a room or listening space before correcting it with acoustical treatment to see what or where you may need it. Randomly putting up bass traps and broadband absorbers is enough according to your opinion. You don't believe in the science of phase correction like Trinnov software or even room correction / eq. etc. etc.
Grain of salt.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,086 
|
Post by ericn on Apr 27, 2024 12:25:09 GMT -6
Thank for your reply. I've personally found Softube support as bad/good as any other major software vendour - well Native Instruments being the worse for long waiting times for replies. As for the Softube software. I conducted an extensive ABX double blind test (I only make audio conclusions with my own properly conducted double blond ABX tests) using the Softube Brit Channel and my favourite UAD strip the UAD 88RS channel (both Neve strips al be it different vintages) yet to my surprise setting the EQ by ear to sound as indentical as possible - I and the other people in the room were unable to pick out one from the other. So I'm happy and pleasantly surprised with the Brit channel. (I've not tested any of the other Softube channel strips) The control over the UAD plugins is very useful - especially now they have gotten rid of that ridiculous auto gain on the compressors. Ironically, my favourite function of the Control 1 is it's ability to chase channels using the 20 channel selector buttons. Mackie protocol seriously misses the EUCON ability to "go-to" channels not in the selected bank, so in the absence of owning an S3 the Control 1 is a pretty good solution for me. I'm with you, in as much as it'a nowhere near as useful as I thought it would be when I bought it - but Software have improved it's functionality and integration with Cubase and with the added UAD support it just about justifies it's desk real estate. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSL "digital anything" with a bargepole - they have imho THE worse driver and hardware support in the business - the polar opposite of RME.
50% of UAD plugins (at least) sound mediocre, 2005 quality. There are many many many many to choose from, but few that are truly excellent or standouts compared to other plugins. 20 years later now that the novelty has worn off it is easier to assess. Comparing the Softube Brit channel with UAD is not a benchmark of any kind and I do have both here as well. Not a 'fan' of either per se. Not bad, not great. And UAD support as well, day 3 with a support ticket for UAD hardware and UA connect issues and still no reply. None. I look forward to selling my UAD hardware as well. There is nothing about it other than the ATR-102 that I would miss. I am in the middle of an album and I have zero UAD plugins inserted over 8 tunes now.
Is your assessment of SSL as a company support or the drivers? I have never needed support, but if drivers, it is not a shared feeling. Like all hardware, you have to learn how they work on any system. Plug and play expectation is foolish. You need a proper working system, well powered USB hubs, driver compatibility etc. Expect trouble shooting other driver conflicts if needed. Why wouldn't anybody? Modern SSL drivers have been as rock solid on my system as my RME. It just took understanding what kind of integration they needed.
A discussion of UAD being outdated in a thread about a controller that is based around HUI a 30 year old protocol is hilarious. SSL can talk about their 360 architecture but let’s face it as long HUI is what the DAW is speaking to the controller HUI is the limiting factor. |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 12:39:37 GMT -6
50% of UAD plugins (at least) sound mediocre, 2005 quality. There are many many many many to choose from, but few that are truly excellent or standouts compared to other plugins. 20 years later now that the novelty has worn off it is easier to assess. Comparing the Softube Brit channel with UAD is not a benchmark of any kind and I do have both here as well. Not a 'fan' of either per se. Not bad, not great. And UAD support as well, day 3 with a support ticket for UAD hardware and UA connect issues and still no reply. None. I look forward to selling my UAD hardware as well. There is nothing about it other than the ATR-102 that I would miss. I am in the middle of an album and I have zero UAD plugins inserted over 8 tunes now.
Is your assessment of SSL as a company support or the drivers? I have never needed support, but if drivers, it is not a shared feeling. Like all hardware, you have to learn how they work on any system. Plug and play expectation is foolish. You need a proper working system, well powered USB hubs, driver compatibility etc. Expect trouble shooting other driver conflicts if needed. Why wouldn't anybody? Modern SSL drivers have been as rock solid on my system as my RME. It just took understanding what kind of integration they needed.
A discussion of UAD being outdated in a thread about a controller that is based around HUI a 30 year old protocol is hilarious. SSL can talk about their 360 architecture but let’s face it as long HUI is what the DAW is speaking to the controller HUI is the limiting factor. Well it's not the same conversation Eric. Nothing hilarious about it, we agree on the MMC limits here. It's well known. And was mentioned early on. It is a matter of implementing it despite the fact. And my experience with UAD over the past 20 years has little to do with SSL drivers or functionality.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 12:45:56 GMT -6
That's cool - I don't agree with any of your assertions - but that's the nature of making art and buying gear Of course, but I already assumed that. All good here. You don't mention any actual experience with SSL drivers, so I have no idea where you gleaned your opinions. My question to you was a legit question. It is useful to know whether you are speaking from 2nd-3rd hand internet reading or personal experience.
SSL Nucleus You don't believe it is necessary to measure a studio room or control room either. Nor do you think it is needed to even measure a room or listening space before correcting it with acoustical treatment to see what or where you may need it. Randomly putting up bass traps and broadband absorbers is enough according to your opinion. You don't believe in the science of phase correction like Trinnov software or even room correction / eq. etc. etc.
Grain of salt.
I have an SSL Duende DSP paper weight. A close friend has a somewhat useless SSL Nucleus MK1 (this could of been easily supported) I have an RME Multiface mk1 from 20 years ago - still supported by the very latest drivers! Choices. Good luck with yours (that's a genuine sentiment) |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 12:55:59 GMT -6
That's cool - I don't agree with any of your assertions - but that's the nature of making art and buying gear
I have read a lot of things you post that you believe to be true that I know are not ....
Hey I can except that, it's all good with me. I'm very successful at what I do - have been for many decades (never had a day job - been a full time creative/musician for 42 years!) .... just used my ears and my hard earned experience, all in my complete ignorance of science  Now it might not work for you (I can fully respect that) but it's hard for me to feel what I believe is wrong when it's worked so incredibly well for me .... guess I'm real world results kinda guy. |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 14:58:48 GMT -6
Thanks, you too. And I am genuine as well.
But you do make my point. Grain of salt. Duende hardware has been a discontinued legacy product for 15 years. And it’s 32-bit which is not supported by any major DAW without a bridge at best. And with most, even that won’t do. I expect it is a paper weight if you have moved on. This industry is jam packed with unsupported out dated legacy products/hardware. I lost all 32 bit plugins some time back due to upgrading Cubase. I am not sure how that relates to poor support? If you were the original owner, you were given all the Native 64-bit plugs you owned for free. Modern SSL drivers are rock solid. As you said - choices - We sometimes choose products with a shelf life. Technology surpassing out dated hardware or software is a reality we all deal with. It is a different era in computer audio. We are much more stable as a whole now but still subject to future technology.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 15:27:52 GMT -6
Thanks, you too. And I am genuine as well. But you do make my point. Grain of salt. Duende hardware has been a discontinued legacy product for 15 years. And it’s 32-bit which is not supported by any major DAW without a bridge at best. And with most, even that won’t do. I expect it is a paper weight if you have moved on. This industry is jam packed with unsupported out dated legacy products/hardware. I lost all 32 bit plugins some time back due to upgrading Cubase. I am not sure how that relates to poor support? If you were the original owner, you were given all the Native 64-bit plugs you owned for free. Modern SSL drivers are rock solid. As you said - choices - We sometimes choose products with a shelf life. Technology surpassing out dated hardware or software is a reality we all deal with. It is a different era in computer audio. We are much more stable as a whole now but still subject to future technology. …. and Nucleus mk 1 - you passed over that particular SSL white elephant I buy RME - they’ve won my loyalty big time and become my gold standard not only for what support can be but should be. Sennhesier, I avoid if possible after they refused to support my failed 0300 …. moved to ATC. For me, it’s about long term support, if I’m investing decent money into any type of equipment I want to feel I’ve a decent chance of being supported - I’ve never felt that with SSL digital. One man’s grain of salt is another man’s golden rule Generally, I’ve been very happy with UAD, Softube, Fabfilter, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, all the smaller venders …. most companies get it right. Most hardware manufacturers are very good, some I most definitely avoid. It’s all based on personal experience, that’s why we seemed surprised by other people’s accounts of their experiences - they’ve had different ones. We form our opinions based on our own experiences not other peoples. In that respect forums are pointless for recommendations or warnings - we have to dip our own toe into the pond |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on Apr 27, 2024 16:01:40 GMT -6
Thanks, you too. And I am genuine as well. But you do make my point. Grain of salt. Duende hardware has been a discontinued legacy product for 15 years. And it’s 32-bit which is not supported by any major DAW without a bridge at best. And with most, even that won’t do. I expect it is a paper weight if you have moved on. This industry is jam packed with unsupported out dated legacy products/hardware. I lost all 32 bit plugins some time back due to upgrading Cubase. I am not sure how that relates to poor support? If you were the original owner, you were given all the Native 64-bit plugs you owned for free. Modern SSL drivers are rock solid. As you said - choices - We sometimes choose products with a shelf life. Technology surpassing out dated hardware or software is a reality we all deal with. It is a different era in computer audio. We are much more stable as a whole now but still subject to future technology. …. and Nucleus mk 1 - you passed over that particular SSL white elephant I buy RME - they’ve won my loyalty big time and become my gold standard not only for what support can be but should be. Sennhesier, I avoid if possible after they refused to support my failed 0300 …. moved to ATC. For me, it’s about long term support, if I’m investing decent money into any type of equipment I want to feel I’ve a decent chance of being supported - I’ve never felt that with SSL digital. One man’s grain of salt is another man’s golden rule Generally, I’ve been very happy with UAD, Softube, Fabfilter, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, all the smaller venders …. most companies get it right. Most hardware manufacturers are very good, some I most definitely avoid. It’s all based on personal experience, that’s why we seemed surprised by other people’s accounts of their experiences - they’ve had different ones. We form our opinions based on our own experiences not other peoples. In that respect forums are pointless for recommendations or warnings - we have to dip our own toe into the pond
No flame here in the least. But I didn't pass over the Nucleus mk 1 - it's not yours, it's a 2nd hand account used to strengthen your position and its another decade old legacy hardware that ran it's course. Peer discussions are useful IMO, but by your definition of good support, all products should be supported indefinitely. That is unreasonable, particularly when the required software from other companies no longer supports it either. Me I am happy to get someone to respond to an email within 2-3 days. Seriously. But legacy products have limited resources, I know that going in.
I am a die hard RME user for 22 years, but they are limited in what they make. They don't make plugins. Although you were adamant in another post that you do not like the sound of RME converters. SO there must be some limits there.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Apr 27, 2024 16:12:54 GMT -6
…. and Nucleus mk 1 - you passed over that particular SSL white elephant I buy RME - they’ve won my loyalty big time and become my gold standard not only for what support can be but should be. Sennhesier, I avoid if possible after they refused to support my failed 0300 …. moved to ATC. For me, it’s about long term support, if I’m investing decent money into any type of equipment I want to feel I’ve a decent chance of being supported - I’ve never felt that with SSL digital. One man’s grain of salt is another man’s golden rule Generally, I’ve been very happy with UAD, Softube, Fabfilter, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, all the smaller venders …. most companies get it right. Most hardware manufacturers are very good, some I most definitely avoid. It’s all based on personal experience, that’s why we seemed surprised by other people’s accounts of their experiences - they’ve had different ones. We form our opinions based on our own experiences not other peoples. In that respect forums are pointless for recommendations or warnings - we have to dip our own toe into the pond
No flame here in the least. But I didn't pass over the Nucleus mk 1 - it's not yours, it's a 2nd hand account used to strengthen your position and its another decade old legacy hardware that ran it's course. Peer discussions are useful IMO, but by your definition of good support, all products should be supported indefinitely. That is unreasonable, particularly when the required software from other companies no longer supports it either. Me I am happy to get someone to respond to an email within 2-3 days. Seriously. But legacy products have limited resources, I know that going in.
I am a die hard RME user for 22 years, but they are limited in what they make. They don't make plugins. Although you were adamant in another post that you do not like the sound of RME converters. SO there must be some limits there.
I use RME digital interfaces - no RME converters actually I have a Baby Face FS I use to monitor my TD 50x system - those converters are pretty good. …. and that Nucleus belongs to close friend of 37 years standing - hardly “2nd hand” experience …. I’ve sat through far to many beers with him cussing SSL  All good with me, good luck with your new controller purchase, hope you find the right solution for your workflow. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 27, 2024 19:17:30 GMT -6
They’re tanks and match up 1:1 with the plugins they control unlike a Eucon or Console 1. The problem is the plugins they control are ports from SSL’s old C200 digital board. They kinda suck.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Apr 28, 2024 9:38:42 GMT -6
They’re tanks and match up 1:1 with the plugins they control unlike a Eucon or Console 1. The problem is the plugins they control are ports from SSL’s old C200 digital board. They kinda suck. I think their SSL channel strip and Bus compressor are as good as any other SSL emulation out there. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 29, 2024 16:51:56 GMT -6
Thank for your reply. I've personally found Softube support as bad/good as any other major software vendour - well Native Instruments being the worse for long waiting times for replies. As for the Softube software. I conducted an extensive ABX double blind test (I only make audio conclusions with my own properly conducted double blond ABX tests) using the Softube Brit Channel and my favourite UAD strip the UAD 88RS channel (both Neve strips al be it different vintages) yet to my surprise setting the EQ by ear to sound as indentical as possible - I and the other people in the room were unable to pick out one from the other. So I'm happy and pleasantly surprised with the Brit channel. (I've not tested any of the other Softube channel strips) The control over the UAD plugins is very useful - especially now they have gotten rid of that ridiculous auto gain on the compressors. Ironically, my favourite function of the Control 1 is it's ability to chase channels using the 20 channel selector buttons. Mackie protocol seriously misses the EUCON ability to "go-to" channels not in the selected bank, so in the absence of owning an S3 the Control 1 is a pretty good solution for me. I'm with you, in as much as it'a nowhere near as useful as I thought it would be when I bought it - but Software have improved it's functionality and integration with Cubase and with the added UAD support it just about justifies it's desk real estate. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSL "digital anything" with a bargepole - they have imho THE worse driver and hardware support in the business - the polar opposite of RME.
50% of UAD plugins (at least) sound mediocre, 2005 quality. There are many many many many to choose from, but few that are truly excellent or standouts compared to other plugins. 20 years later now that the novelty has worn off it is easier to assess. Comparing the Softube Brit channel with UAD is not a benchmark of any kind and I do have both here as well. Not a 'fan' of either per se. Not bad, not great. And UAD support as well, day 3 with a support ticket for UAD hardware and UA connect issues and still no reply. None. I look forward to selling my UAD hardware as well. There is nothing about it other than the ATR-102 that I would miss. I am in the middle of an album and I have zero UAD plugins inserted over 8 tunes now.
Is your assessment of SSL as a company support or the drivers? I have never needed support, but if drivers, it is not a shared feeling. Like all hardware, you have to learn how they work on any system. Plug and play expectation is foolish. You need a proper working system, well powered USB hubs, driver compatibility etc. Expect trouble shooting other driver conflicts if needed. Why wouldn't anybody? Modern SSL drivers have been as rock solid on my system as my RME. It just took understanding what kind of integration they needed.
UAD made some cool plugs but the circuit modeled dynamics pretty much sound like crap to me compared to the Softube Weiss DS1 and Molot GE. Most of the Softube plugs are pretty scrappy compared to the Weiss bundle but you can tailor the distortion on the strips and the effects are cool. I dig the new bad speaker emulation they made. It’s perfect for getting a certain controversial artist’s guitar tone after a pedal. |
|
|
|
Post by FM77 on May 4, 2024 9:04:03 GMT -6
UC1, UF1, UF8 - Impressive level build quality. The setup, downloads, installs, reg, iLoK were fast. This may run Cubase/Nuendo with MMC, but for the information it needs to communicate with, I haven't found a single limit or hiccup that hasn't been solved in the past year. SSL has already configure so much in advance. Here in 2024, it is more functional and deep out of the box, even without any personalization assigned to the controllers yet. Quickly evident how much more superior the layout and functionality is. Impressive. Exceeded my expectations.
Got a song to mix by Monday, i'll use it as a surface level learning curve tune and deep dive after that. After dumping UAD and Softube, I am really looking forward to finishing this album on this.
Planning how to build an offset frame for it in the coming weeks.
|
|
