Does anyone not care that the Uad-1e is shipping?

KED · Post by **KED** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:19 am

Just wanted to know if I missed something. I thought more people would be discussing it here and maybe ordered one by now. I saw on UA's website that it's shipping and Sweetwater has it. I know I'm getting one.

BradLyons · Post by **BradLyons** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:02 am

I would have talked about it, but last time I did that I got flamed

monkey man · Post by **monkey man** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 6:45 am

BradLyons wrote:I would have talked about it, but last time I did that I get flamed

Aaw, c'mon Brad; you know we all love ya!
Go on, then; give it to us....

I believe you were telling us how...

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:56 am

Brad, how well does the new card run compared to the old one, meaning, any benefit to the faster bus? Can you run it past 80%? I believe I get hit with the AMD bug.

Did I mention I *love* the new Neve plugin? I am waiting for a promotional deal to pick it up.

Question, I've been running my vocals through the 1176, do you think I'd be better off using the LA-2A? I don't have a lot of vocal processing experience, but was rather intrigued by the optical compression modeling.

giles117 · Post by **giles117** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:14 am

Visit the uaudio forums we talk about the UAD stuff around the clock.

The UAD-1e is merely a UAD-1 for PCIe. No big deal. Of course you avoid the AMD-8131 Issue the PCI-x G5's had with the card. Otherwise it's the same card. Same processing power. blah blah blah....

And Brad, when asked.... Telll.... Then you might not get flamed. You were flamed for acting like a walking billboard. After 2 years of that a few of us finally spoke up (and I piggy backed

)

addendum. We did also say that we dont care if you "advertise" in the off topic forum....

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:48 am

I will have to go over there some time, just so busy at the moment, I tend to stay on one board, and that is this one

(Since DP is what I use the most out of everything I own).

I was curious if running on a faster bus gives you a little more overhead with the card. Of course, as you've implyed, probably not. I'm sure it's probably not exactly the same since the timing characteritics for the PCIe bus are a lot higher with the higher bandwidth, so maybe some bus contention latency might be reduced. This is one of those things that is hard to measure, it would show up I imagine as CPU usage if the CPU was waiting on the bus.

Outside of that, I would expect it to behave the same, minus the stupid AMD problem.

I'll wait on the other answers then when I can pop over there...

monkey man · Post by **monkey man** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 5:09 am

Oh, Braaa-aaad... Braaa-aaad...

KED · Post by **KED** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:07 am

I only mentioned it because one of the downsides to buying the Quad was not being able to use UAD cards, and since DP's compressors have a lot left to be desired

, I figured Quad people using DP (myself included) would run to get it.

I've been away for awhile, is there something that sounds better that you guys are getting? Let me know before I shell out the cash for this thing.

grimepoch · Post by **grimepoch** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:10 pm

I will tell you this, I use my UAD a lot in my work. for single track issues (meaning, just on the drums, just on the vocals). Since I do more dance music, I use Ozone3 for my overall mastering. I like the flair I can get it with it. I spent a LOT of time playing around with compressors, but felt that for dance tracks, I just cannot get as easily what I can get out of Ozone3. Now don't get me wrong, I have to tweak the hell out of Ozone3 till I get what I want, but it's all there for me (plus I use it to dither from 24 to 16 bit).

I also tend to use the MW eq right before Ozone because I feel the MW eq is really nice for adding non-coloring EQ to a track. I use the Neve for vocal EQing though, the difference is not even subtle.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:32 pm

grimepoch wrote:
Question, I've been running my vocals through the 1176, do you think I'd be better off using the LA-2A? I don't have a lot of vocal processing experience, but was rather intrigued by the optical compression modeling.

The LA-2 is great with the right source but not so versitile with it's fixed slow release time. I tend to prefer the faster release time (and slow attack) the 1176 offers, and I dig it's sound.
An 1176 and LA-2 in series can be pretty cool too.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:35 pm

KED wrote:I only mentioned it because one of the downsides to buying the Quad was not being able to use UAD cards........

I did not know that.
How crappy.

chrispick · Post by **chrispick** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:06 pm

grimepoch wrote:Question, I've been running my vocals through the 1176, do you think I'd be better off using the LA-2A? I don't have a lot of vocal processing experience, but was rather intrigued by the optical compression modeling.

Traditionally, the LA-2A has been used in vocal chains. That doesn't necessarily make it better for all voice choices, but it is something of an old school standard.

BradLyons · Post by **BradLyons** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:36 pm

Okay, not the UAD1 card but on ProToolsHD....it's the SAME plugin. But I mix live television at my church (we mix on VENUE front of house down to ProToolsHD in the studio where I'm recording 40+ tracks for posting later, but mixing a live television feed as well via ProTools) and use the LA2A plugin on all Vocal channels, Acoustic Guitar, and horns as Limiters. I use the 1176 plugin on Bass, Electric Guitar, Kick/Snare/Toms and some on Percussion. I really don't know what I would do without these plugins both in the studio and live, they are wonderful plugs! FYI I use the LA2A ONLY as a limiter, not compressor.

monkey man · Post by **monkey man** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:22 am

Thanks for heeding the call, Brad.

swiftness · Post by **swiftness** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:06 am

FWIW, UA has ceased TDM development.