Anyone here want a 'normal' multiband?

[rdolmat]

I have the Pre MB, but that takes half my card's CPU....

Will we ever see the day for an SE type of multiband? One that I can load into 12 separate channels...


(OK, before all you anti-MB start going off about why I'd need 12 of them, answer is: I don't. But I DON'T like loading ONE Precision MB and having no more CPU left for anything else)...

 

[Fundy]

It's a fair point however it's not really a thing most people would use in a track by track basis, so it could be a waste of resources. Then again, you could make a part of a driver pack at a much reduced cost by building in into the package of Precision MB.

I wouldn't mind a tape emulation or transient modeller personally.

 

[Paul Woodlock]

I have always asked for the ability to turn off bands. I use the PMB for de-essing ( nothing better ) and would like to chagne it to a 3 band so I can de-ess the 2k -> 8k range.

 

[Fundy]

Yeah there is that, although I tend to use my Powercore for that.

 

[imdrecordings]

I'd settle for a Desser.
They can perform miracles on harsh guitars or drum overheads with too much hihat or crash cymbals. Why not come out with one (for free of course) based off the PMB.
Desser, I love you. yOU'VE SAVED SO MANY POORLY RECORDED,BAD SOUNDING, HARSH TRACKS.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

It seems like a de-esser has a very good chance of emerging out of the licensing deal with Valley People.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

I didn't even want a \"precision\" maul-the-band.

Although admittedly, I'm glad I got it - It makes a fantastic frequency-conscious noise gate.

 

[rdolmat]

I have always asked for the ability to turn off bands. I use the PMB for de-essing ( nothing better ) and would like to chagne it to a 3 band so I can de-ess the 2k -> 8k range.

Exactly...!

Or using a single band to tame the harsher middy piercing range of a loud vocal recorded with a condenser...

Or touching up a badly recorded acoustic guit...

Or a crappy bass through a DI....

Or fixing a live recording...

Or....etc..etc...

(and don't reply saying "well, just re-record it properly")... 8)

 

[kleinholgi]

I never thought of posting a product of a competitor in the UAD forum, but if they continue to let us wait for hardware that can match their Plug In´s DSP consumption, if that´s what UAD wants... they get it.
So since Sony Oxford announced to sell their plugins as native VSTs as well - whithout the need to go TC Powercore - there´s the alternative.
If you want dynamics - choose what you like, if you want to push the main bus to the limit, without sounding like Beatles, take inflator.

Really sorry to say that, but I asked for these things for years, and nothing happened.

Helios is great, O.k., Neve is great O.K...
But why can´t they give us one. ..only ONE modern sounding dynamics tool ?

Since the Native Versions came out, I shouldn´t get upset anymore about it. So my recommendation is, if you need vintage and coloration , stick to UAD, if you need some more modern style tools, take the Oxford ones.
I would have loved to leave my money at UAD, but if they don´t offer it - from now on -their problem..sorry.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

I would have loved to leave my money at UAD, but if they don´t offer it - from now on -their problem..sorry.

Why should we want UA to create something that is already available done well as native software?

 

[rydan]

Why should we want UA to create something that is already available done well as native software?

Yes! Very good point. Why does some people seem to think that you can only use UA stuff? Do you feel like you're cheating on a loved one if you would load another plugin? I gladly use other stuff, Sonalksis is great, as is OhmForce and FabFilter. Also, using other plugins as well to complement the UAD actually means that I can afford to run "expensive" plugs on my UAD:s where it matters the most, since I don't use up all my UAD power for stuff that native can do just as well (or in some cases, better)

 

[Fundy]

I never really understood why I would ever want to use a Multiband Compressor/Expander until I got Ozone 3. Although I only really use it for final mixes it does have it other uses like fixing bad mixes.

 

[rdolmat]

I would have loved to leave my money at UAD, but if they don´t offer it - from now on -their problem..sorry.

Why should we want UA to create something that is already available done well as native software?

'cause UA kicks arse!

:wink:

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

'cause UA kicks arse!

Sure, it makes perfect sense to hope for a UA version of something if there aren't any alternatives. There were no good choruses, tape echoes, or Neve's before UA stepped in & I should hope that was a big part of the reason for them taking on those projects. However, to ask for a UA version of an SSL when both SSL & Sonnox have pulled it off already makes no sense at all.

 

[kleinholgi]

\"Why should we want UA to create something that is already available done well as native software?\"

That´s true. But the Oxford native ones are out for only a couple of months.
Before that you had to use a powercore card, which I didn´t want.

Using other native plugins is O.k., I also love the voxengo ones or kjaerhus, no problem with that.

But the UAD card came out for a reason and that was saving CPU and offer exceptional effects that are hard to find, CPU intensitive or connected with risk of copyright and pirate infringement, if offered as an unprotected native VST. So a PCI DSP card was the perfect solution for it.

That the DSP resources are rather old now, I don´t have to comment on that one. There are plenty of postings about and I think most of us will agree that a new card would be the finest gift for whatever x-mas to come.

Regarding the Plug Ins itself, they are really fine. With their latest Helios for example I first tought \"Ehh, not anoher EQ!\", but it is really a lovely one, no problem.


I also agree with the idea to model old vintage electronics that are expensive, not produced anymore, hard to maintain etc.

But come on, would it be that much of a sacrifice, if UAD only once came up with an emulation of gear that was build after 1970 ?
If they don´t want to create new Plug Ins from scratch like Inflator, I would still wish for it, but can understand it someway. But why needs every piece of electronics be part of the Beatles, Who, Hendrix era ?

I don´t ask for a total new policy. If they are keen on modeling another whatever legendary 1968 Nasa Houston Control intercom, let them do it.
I count 12 vintage models now. Isn´t there space for at least one, only one modern sounding unit ? Too much to ask for ?


Greetings

kleinholgi

 

[afone1977]

But why needs every piece of electronics be part of the Beatles, Who, Hendrix era ?

because they have sonic very pleasant character we searching for (and when i heard helios EQ i will be very happy if an helios comp comes, or if neve 88R channel strip becomes a reality)

I count 12 vintage models now. Isn´t there space for at least one, only one modern sounding unit ? Too much to ask for ?

precision bundle aren't modern gear ?

and may UA webzine talk about enhancing (i would not be surprised if UA purpose a \"Precision enhancer\" soon with exciter/bass enhancer/maximizer/transient shaper processing)

 

[Paul Woodlock]

If they are keen on modeling another whatever legendary 1968 Nasa Houston Control intercom, let them do it.
....

Absolutely not!! :twisted:

The 1969 Nasa Houston Control intercom is the one to emulate if you're gonna do it at all!!!!

 

[kleinholgi]

\"precision bundle aren't modern gear ? \"

O.k. you´re right on that.

What I wish (ed) for [before there was the native version] was something like Inflator or Master X3/5 on one hand or some emulations of some younger units like the big ones from dbx, Avalon, Focusrite Red, Manley, distressor etc.




\"The 1969 Nasa Houston Control intercom\"

*lol*


O.K., let´s say thought about in early 1968 by Arthur C. Clarke & Stanley Kubrick, boards soldered together in late 1968, final testing by Neil Armstrong in 1969.

Although there are voices who claim that \"Jose Jiminez\" Alan Sheppard may have been a very early beta tester of a prototype device )

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

What I wish (ed) for [before there was the native version] was something like Inflator or Master X3/5 on one hand

Precision Multiband is UA's version of the Master X3/5. No offense to UA but TC outdid them with the MD3.

 

[kleinholgi]

The concepts are somewhat similar.
I only tested the Multiband during the demo phase.
But my experience compared to many of the TC products was, that UAD always keeps this vintage bias in most of their products.

Sometimes one likes to compress or limit a signal without loosing energy on bass and kick even in complex situations with many tracks layered. My impression was, that Inflator or MasterX3 is a lot better on that ( let´s name it house, techno, electronic material).
Never had the chance to test the more expensive tools like MD3 though.

Maybe I should give the UADMultiband another try.