|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 10, 2013 13:17:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 10, 2013 15:32:31 GMT -6
Neat. I couldn't find the instance listing. How many instances per proc? Does it legitimately turn a Quad into a 48ch@96khz digital API desk? Or is it like the Massive Passive needing like a a couple procs just to run one instance?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 10, 2013 15:50:34 GMT -6
No clue
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2013 16:24:40 GMT -6
Interesting, I've been wanting to get a new channel strip for a while. This looks neat but I'd need at least 48 instances and I've never like API EQ for mixing, bus work only.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 10, 2013 16:46:11 GMT -6
I would imagine it sounds about as much like an API as it does a Neve with the Neve 1073 slapped on every channel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2013 20:12:35 GMT -6
Really tough to say.
We all know there are plenty of parts in an analog console. If we could create a null test with 10 different API Vision consoles do you think we could get them to null? I doubt it, the differences to some would be slight and to others night and day. Someone will demo this plugin for 14 days over at the purple site and immediately claim it sounds nothing like the Vision he's sitting in front of. That it's harsh, edgy and brings none of the API vibe he's been used to for at least 300 years. He might even be 100% right and able to confirm this in a blind test (not that anyone like this would ever consent to one, in my few years on these forums the loudest talkers are generally the last ones to back up their claims). This hypothetical poster probably has no reputable post content other than repeated "analog is better" musings in the same threads every week, his real name concealed along with any work he's ever done. Being generous I'd just assume his console hasn't been recapped in 10 years, is of a different vintage, possibly modded (he may not even be aware of it, might not even have the manual or any knowledge of circuitry) and is fusing a lack of understanding and both expectation and purchase bias into one, anonymously spewing false information around. Anyone who really knows these consoles (not me) is in a better place to say but they're also likely invested in the analog counterpart. Their purchase bias can't be ignored, by that same token it can't be ignored that I am a lowly public servants assistant (there isn't much further down to go) who does not have the financial means to even own API equipment and have used digital for at least 90% of my time in this field (I've done one all analog project in my life). I just don't buy it when people say it's not even close when processing power is advancing every year at an exponential rate. This kind of shit (whether it's true or even matters) makes my head spin and gets me away from my primary focus, recording and mixing for good artists. Whatever tool facilitates that process is the one I want. Hopefully these kinds of debates will one day take a backseat to discussions about technique, instruments and what actually makes things sound good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 10, 2013 20:58:18 GMT -6
It's all about the talent/source. I would venture to say Ray LaMontagne and band recorded through an mbox could and would be stunning with the right mixing hands.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 10, 2013 21:26:23 GMT -6
I'd venture that his albums sound 90% like they do when you push the faders up. So, as long as the mix engineer can subtly carve some stuff away for clarity...and NOT grand stand, it will sound good.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 10, 2013 22:18:27 GMT -6
Yes Jordan, we know you love ITB  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 11, 2013 7:14:08 GMT -6
I'd venture that his albums sound 90% like they do when you push the faders up. So, as long as the mix engineer can subtly carve some stuff away for clarity...and NOT grand stand, it will sound good. Shouldn't that be the way all records sound? (In a perfect world) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2013 10:17:56 GMT -6
Yes Jordan, we know you love ITB But that's not the nature of the post and by all means consider my bias towards it when I talk about it. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Oct 11, 2013 19:20:11 GMT -6
Neat. I couldn't find the instance listing. How many instances per proc? Does it legitimately turn a Quad into a 48ch@96khz digital API desk? Or is it like the Massive Passive needing like a a couple procs just to run one instance? I think between 12-30% referenced on the STCNBN from pro tools expert, russ builds the mix drums, bass, guitar and keys; all comes together around 13;00 don't skip ahead that is cheating !!! www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-page/2013/10/11/universal-audio-uad-api-vision-show-tell-review.html |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 12, 2013 11:17:09 GMT -6
I think between 12-30% referenced on the STCNBN What's that? STCNBN? |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 12, 2013 14:02:16 GMT -6
I bet that is Site That Can Not Be Named? Got it.
Yeah, I saw the thread that said he got what 24 instances over an Octo? Likely at 44...though, it would be interesting to see if they're internally up sampling. I don't see much performance difference between 48 and 88 for AUDIO on my machine--because a huge number are internally up sampling anyway when you use single rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 12, 2013 18:38:17 GMT -6
Gearslutz....there I said it...
Can I ban myself?
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 12, 2013 18:52:49 GMT -6
Gearslutz....there I said it... Can I ban myself? ^ no, you cannot be banned, you can only hope to be contained.... |
|
|
|
Post by scumbum on Oct 12, 2013 20:26:04 GMT -6
Everyone kept calling it the purple site , so I thought Purple Audio had a forum..........now I know they were actually talking about the Devil .
|
|
|
|
Post by timmyboy on Oct 12, 2013 20:30:35 GMT -6
I would love to try this plugin. I currently use the waves SSL channel strip plugin on every channel of my mix by default - because it's awesome. But I'm more in love with the API sound than SSL. I really like the waves API EQ plugins.
However - I wish waves had of made this new API plugins , because as if I'm going to buy UAD hardware just to use their plugins! What a scam! That DSP crap is just to stop you from pirating their software (at the same time as forcing you to buy their hardware). It's just like Protools used to be and why I never purchased Protools - because apart from not agreeing with it ethically - I'd like to do all my dsp in my computer, so that I have more DSP power. I don't want UA hardware limiting how many channels I can run their plugins on at once!
So thanks Universal Audio - you made a plugin that I would love, but will never buy
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 12, 2013 21:07:37 GMT -6
No need, they'll ban themselves eventually.
I do envy the firepower some producers have, when I hear they've got like... 60 instances of a single plug-in, ugh.
I think there is no real debate, it's all about finding the sound you want. If I was in a great sounding room with a great mic and preamp, digital, analogue, wouldn't make too much difference. If anything, the convenience of working with a DAW would probably help me get me closer to what I hear in my head than straight to tape would.
Me personally, I like what I can do with a DAW, but prefer a real pre, and eventually, a nice D/A like the Burl to finish it off nicely. To me, UAD and ReLab's reverb plugs sound great, there's little need for a hardware verb.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 12, 2013 21:36:44 GMT -6
Well, native is the answer MJB. UAD DSP is horribly underpowered....intentionally. It makes them more money on BOTH ends--they sell more cards...which gets you to buy more plugs to make the most use of all the card investment. Meanwhile, I almost never run out of steam at 88.2 on my 7 year old Core2Quad...although, it should be noted I don't run reverbs in software, and some of those at 88 WILL bleed the CPU quickly.
You use Logic, right? Use the built in plug ins in Logic, which are both quite good and for the most part SUPER CPU efficient. I would actually take the stance that you SHOULD use the Logic plug ins for everything you can....and save the UA DSP for the money stuff--compressor and Pultec on lead vocal...tape on a drum buss....maybe a nice EMT plate...
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 12, 2013 22:08:44 GMT -6
Thanks Popmann, I really like Apple's freebies. Your suggestion is kind of in line with what I'm doing.
I use Logic X. It has a simple, but transparent analyzer/EQ available at the top of every track, so I can do light clean up tasks easily, like when a track needs a little roll off on the low end or say.. a pinch up around 2k using a wide band. Apple's guitar sims are as good as any I've heard except one. Their Fender sims are spot on, and I've used or owned every one of the original amps at some point, hell, a couple of the stomp boxes are great. Apple's new Flex Time for vocal correction just kills Waves Tune, so I use that now, when needed. I use Waves SSL EQ a lot for general purposes, sometimes the API EQ. Then, the ReLab 480 XL for vocal verb, the UAD EMT 140 on almost every instrument. I add a few things here and there, like the Fatso on one track, 1176 on another, but I save the LA2 for vocals, which to me is indispensable, and the Ampex ATR-102 tape sim on the 2 bus with Slate's VBC, ( demo, I haven't bought it yet) and I'm waiting for Slate to upgrade the FG-X to 64 bits, (so it's unavailable in Logic X), but I've found you can't push the FG-X as hard as they say, otherwise it gets strident. I have UAD's Massive Passive, but have never used it, it takes way too much of a DSP hit. Unfortunately, when I got started a while back, I could barely afford the Apollo Duo I now use, if I'd known better, I'd have charged the Quad. I guess I'll have to start doing a mix, then a separate "mastering" session, so I can try the Massive out. I'm beginning to get bold enough to print some tracks with UAD's plugs, and it's helping a little. Sooner or later, I'll probably add a Quad satellite.
I'll post a link to a track soon..
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 13, 2013 14:41:14 GMT -6
I'm using a UAD2 Duo FW and then native plugs...Almost never run out...and if I need to, I just bounce the track down.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 13, 2013 18:37:45 GMT -6
Exactly. With the use of busses and creativity, no one really ever needs more than a good native system provides.
|
|
