• Welcome to the General Discussion forum for UAD users!

    Please note that this forum is user-run, although we're thrilled to have so much contribution from Drew, Will, and other UA folks!

    Feel free to discuss both UAD and non-UAD related subjects!

    1) Please do not post technical issues here. Please use our UAD Support Forums instead.

    2) Please do not post complaints here. Use the Unrest Forum instead. They have no place in the the General Discussion forum.

    Threads posted in the wrong forum will be moved, so if you don't see your thread here anymore, please look in the correct forum.

    Lastly, please be respectful.

Anyone compared UAD 33609 to Portico 5043?

peter a

Member
Hi everyone!

I haven´t updated in a while but being intrigued by the Neve-stuff, I just discovered that the UAD-updates are no longer meant for us Logic PC-owners(cheers for that, UA :wink: ). So, being shut out from using the 33609 I´m now trying to find an option. I managed to demo the 33609(inbetween continuous craches)and compare it to my Drawmer 1968. Still prefering the Drawmer in that that it has more low end punch, I think it´s the best plugin compressor for mix work I´ve heard so far! I really liked what it did to the overall tone of the mix!

Well, sadly I won´t be able to use it(or the beautiful sounding eq´s) so I´m considering getting a Portico 5043 instead for drumbus/mix work. Supposedly being similar in sound, I´m curious if anyone has compared the two? I saw Eric Dahlberg mention something about it in another thread and I would be much interested in hearing more about their similarities/differences.

Oh, and if this belongs in another forum, please move it, thanks!

Peter
 

Eric Dahlberg

Purveyor of musical dreams fullfilled.
We compared the Portico to the 33609 & Alan Smart C1. In Feed-Back mode, the Portico cops the 33609 sound, whereas in Feed-Forward mode it cops the SSL sound. Surprisingly, during our testing, the 33609 was really my favorite drum bus compressor, I just thought it had more character than the other two. The Portico was close, just a little less dark. Equally surprising, I thought the Portico could cop a better SSL sound than the C1 could!
 

peter a

Member
Wow, that was fast!

Ok, sounds interesting, nice to be able to get two good flavors...Did you try it on the mixbus aswell?

BTW, I e-mailed you about that other comp.
 

peter a

Member
Ah, sorry if I was a bit unclear about that! I was thinking of the 33609 plugin compared to the 5043 hardware...

Thanks!

Peter
 

Trebor Flow 2

Established Member
Peter

I'm on Logic 5.51 PC SP1 - UAD-1 4.5 works perfectly here - no CPU hit to run - the things a dream - totally rock solid.

I'm sure at some point they'll leave me behind and I'll need to change DAW or platform but so far Logic PC has remained compatible will all my plugins inc Melodyne 3 and all my VSTi's - Trilogy DFHS etc etc

Trebor
 

peter a

Member
Thanks Trebor,

Ok, that´s strange...What happens here during my testing of 4.5 and the Neve stuff is this:

When I try to open up a song in Logic PC, Logic \"disappears\" and cannot be reopened again unless I restart the computer first. I can load files into the Autoload and fiddle around with the demos but after a while - and this seems connected with all the bypassing involved with testing - Logic disappears and restart of computer is needed.

At the UA support they told me that Logic PC hasn´t been supported by the UAD for a long time, suggesting this might be the reason. They helped me with a demo reset just before this started, but he didn´t think that could be the reason.

I guess I´d better try and work this out before the 31st...
 

Trebor Flow 2

Established Member
Hi Peter

That sounds strange - I don't do anything special here with Logic.

I'm on XP home edition - SP1 NOT SP2

I keep a nice clean install with very little extra stuff -

My machine is

P4 2.4G HZ
MSI 845PE MoBo
1GB RAM (max you can use with Logic PC)
RME Multiface
AMT8 - serial connection NOT USB

I use 2X UAD-1 /4.5 drivers
1X Powercore /1.91 drivers

my settings in LAP are:

ASIO Drivers
Process buffer range - medium
Large disk buffer - ticked

IMHO there is no reason that uad-1 4.5 should not work in Logic as to date (unlike Waves) UA have kept there VST plugins nice and simple and stuck to the VST 2.0 standard.

when they change to VST 3.0 then I suppose the game will be up for LAP PC :cry:

I am sticking it out as long as I can with LAP PC as :

a. I still earn a living with LAP

b. I hate and loath and spit in the general direction of Cubase/ Nuendo it has the worlds most rediculous GUI - IMVHO)

c. The next DAW I learn will be Pro Tools HD (when I can afford a HD3 rig)

d. point b again


Trebor
 

sniper

Established Member
Trebor Flow 2 said:
b. I hate and loath and spit in the general direction of Cubase/ Nuendo it has the worlds most rediculous GUI - IMVHO)

Trebor
Same here, cubase's "happy party mit tanz und colors"-GUI really sucks.
But the app in general is pretty well thought out, lots of useful features. the trick is to forget you ever worked on Logic and try to keep an open mind.
Oh, and Merry Christmas!
 

Middleman

Active Member
peter a said:
Ah, sorry if I was a bit unclear about that! I was thinking of the 33609 plugin compared to the 5043 hardware...

Thanks!

Peter
Well the 5043 is better because it can create a real pump. The 33609 plug sounds a little darker, not as transparent but I feel you lose some low end with this plug that makes it through the 5043. If I need glue and low end is not a critical issue the 33609 is a good value but it can't do what the hardware can do.
 

peter a

Member
Thanks everyone for your answers!

Trebor,
Your specs look a lot like mine(although I´m on a athlon 2200xp). I´ll try and get to the bottom with this and see if anything else might have changed, besides the driver update. Not to keen on switching to cubase either...

Sniper,
Merry christmas to you fellow swede(It´s christmas eve that counts for us swedes :D )

Middleman,
That sounds a lot like my experience with the 33609/Drawmer 1968. Might have to go with the portico, then. To save the bass...

Merry christmas everyone, I´m off to get some porridge and glögg!

Peter
 

peter a

Member
Hi all,

Just a small update to this topic: UAD 4.5 drivers were not the reason for my problems here. A week before installing 4.5 I got some new drivers for my iLOK, and now that I´ve backgraded to the old ones everything seems to be working great with 4.5. I have no idea why, but I´m happy nonetheless. Before installing 4.5, on the other hand, I had no problems with the new iLOK drivers either, so I don´t really know what to make of it...

Oh well, now it works and I´m getting the 1073 and the 1081!

Thanks again for the help,
Peter
 

Eric Dahlberg

Purveyor of musical dreams fullfilled.
Middleman said:
Well the 5043 is better because it can create a real pump. The 33609 plug sounds a little darker, not as transparent but I feel you lose some low end with this plug that makes it through the 5043. If I need glue and low end is not a critical issue the 33609 is a good value but it can't do what the hardware can do.
It goes both ways, the 5043 can't quite do what the 33609 can do, either. I'd choose the 5043 over an SSL, though, since it does the SSL sound so well.
 
UAD Bundle Month
Top