Questions about UAD Amp sim plugins...

[fastriver]

I'm searching through old threads - but if anyone wants to chime in....
— Why is the Chandler amp the only not-Unison amp? Other Brainworx amps are Unison, but not the Chandler.
— Why is there a Ruby pedal but not a Vox amp sim? Softube has made one, why doesn't UAD have it, if they have the Softube Marshalls?
— Why did Universal Audio make 1 great amp sim plugin (Fender), and then stop?

....and anything else you know that you can share....

Thank you!

 

[d0gmA]

Chandler was never made unison and came out at the same time as the distortion pedals so the thought then was to use distortion in unision before the amp. I asked several times and was told it would be up to brainworx to update but by that time Brainworx was done working with UA.

We can only really speculate on the last two questions. UAFX pedals were a change of direction for UA to start making guitar hardware products which was probably sparked from the great success of the fender amp sim.

 

[klong]

I have historically been opposed to amp sims because I never thought they felt/sounded good for years. The UAD ones like Buxom Betty were my favorites for a long time. Times have definitely changed, a lot of amp sims sound very good now!

These days I'm personally getting the most satisfaction out of Neural Amp Modeler (free/opensource) and the Tonex CS (Free version). They both do the "Kemper" thing of playing amp "captures" essentially.

I like to control my own reverbs and delays with separate plugins in the DAW. I still use UAD AK BX 20, Capitol Chambers, Ocean Way etc for that sometimes.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

— Why is the Chandler amp the only not-Unison amp? Other Brainworx amps are Unison, but not the Chandler.

AFAIK, none of the Brainworx amps are truly Unison in the way that the Fender and mic preamps are. They work in the Unison slot but I don't think they do anything with input impedance.

 

[klasaine]

AFAIK, none of the Brainworx amps are truly Unison in the way that the Fender and mic preamps are. They work in the Unison slot but I don't think they do anything with input impedance.

The literature "says" that the BX amps (other than the Chandler) utilize the Unison impedance matching. I may be hearing things but I have noticed a difference when I've had those amps in an insert as opposed to the Unison slot. They seem to be more gainy in an insert. *I may be imagining that. I just wanted to check the latency with arm off and the buffer lowered.

 

[BeingHumans]

I LOVE tube amps and have used primarily class A amps live for decades, but I’ll use solid-state amps, play with different gauge picks (thinner picks give a brighter tone) or try anything on a track if it serves the song.

I used to cringe at amp sims not more than 3 years ago, so I was still skeptical when I bought into the UA universe about 2 years back, but once I played with them a bit I must confess, I really like the UA amp sims.

It’s not quite the same feel (kinda hard to have studio monitors react the same as lower wattage speakers on an amp - even less in headphones) but it’s MUCH closer than the Line 6 and similar offerings (I never understood the appeal of the 11 rack,.. not for me) and has gotten to the point that it’s close enough to get me into the zone, so I do find them useful. Plus setup time is minimal.

I’m mostly using the the Marshall Plexi Superlead 1959, the Fender 55’, Ampeg B15 (beautiful sim) & SVT. I also have the Pete Thorn one. They’ve all shown their value for me.

I do hope UA will port something like the architecture of the Ruby and others over to plug-ins. (Pssst) Supro please? Maybe a Dragon-like Supro?

I still use my amps, but less these days. And remember, they’re always free to demo. I do hope you’ll find something that lets you get your groove on.

Cheers!

 

[hotspot]

Supro please

Interesting thought. Although I don't have a Supro, I know them and think they're great.
But when I think about it, that's actually something I wouldn't want to have as a sim.

I have a Benson Monarch myself, which goes in the same direction, quasi the simplest pre-war technology.
When I run it through the OX, for example, it sounds good, but still no comparison to the pure amp through speakers.
As soon as I play through the pure amp, I immediately realise that it still makes a difference compared to all the digital amps.
At least for the direct playing feel. There's no question that this isn't really relevant on recordings.
But every now and then I need the direct amp/cab as a resetting experience.

 

[klasaine]

I used to cringe at amp sims not more than 3 years ago, so I was still skeptical when I bought into the UA universe about 2 years back, but once I played with them a bit I must confess, I really like the UA amp sims.

It’s not quite the same feel (kinda hard to have studio monitors react the same as lower wattage speakers on an amp - even less in headphones) but it’s MUCH closer than the Line 6 and similar offerings (I never understood the appeal of the 11 rack,.. not for me) and has gotten to the point that it’s close enough to get me into the zone, so I do find them useful. Plus setup time is minimal.

Same experience here.
I’ll add that even in most large format studio work, the guitar and bass players are often pretty detached from their badass tube amps. The amps may be iso’d or you may be in the control room. You’re probably wearing cans. The volume levels are not optimal, etc.
But when this is your work, you get used to it.
When I work at home, with a sim, I feel perfectly comfortable.

 

[BeingHumans]

Same experience here.
I’ll add that even in most large format studio work, the guitar and bass players are often pretty detached from their badass tube amps. The amps may be iso’d or you may be in the control room. You’re probably wearing cans. The volume levels are not optimal, etc.
But when this is your work, you get used to it.
When I work at home, with a sim, I feel perfectly comfortable.

I worked in various studios over the years and became comfortable with the mic’d cab in the tracking room and listening/playing in the control room. I remember decades ago this configuration took a bit to get used to, when I was 1st exposed to it.

Since that’s comfortable, the UA amp sims feel and sound to me like an amp in the other room and there’s really not enough of a difference to beat my head against the wall about it.

@hotspot I agree that sometimes I need a refresher on playing next to a real amp. Makes me feel like a kid again.

& I’ve not heard a Benson Monarch, but I do own two Supros and I’ll just say, most Supros bark in a pleasing way when you smack a chord on your guitar…VERY dynamic and they take pedals like a boss.

 

[fastriver]

UAFX pedals were a change of direction for UA to start making guitar hardware products which was probably sparked from the great success of the fender amp sim.

So... maybe the pedals are better money-makers than the plugins?

 

[klasaine]

To a degree.
No one is gonna pay $400.00 for an amp sim plug in.
Folks are paying $400 for the pedals. Most who start with one, get another.

 

[fastriver]

To a degree. No one is gonna pay $400.00 for an amp sim plug in.

I wonder what the over/under is... A plugin once made, takes no man hours to reproduce, or physical materials, or shipping....

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

The Fender plugin is currently $49. Build cost on the pedals is certainly less than $50. UA has to give up some margin to stores and distributors on the pedals but they're still making at least 4x as much profit.

 

[fastriver]

The Fender plugin is currently $49. Build cost on the pedals is certainly less than $50. UA has to give up some margin to stores and distributors on the pedals but they're still making at least 4x as much profit.

OK. I see.
So....do folks think that there won't be more UAD pedal plugin sims?
Are they stopping at one?

 

[BeingHumans]

To a degree.
No one is gonna pay $400.00 for an amp sim plug in.
Folks are paying $400 for the pedals. Most who start with one, get another.

You’ve almost described me to a T here @klasaine , I’ve had my eye on few pedals lately (fuzz, like I need more lol) which is why I mentioned the hope of UA bringing some of these to plugs-ville, although my guess is, not likely soon (if at all).
So I must ask you, as a guy who I believe has used the UA Plexi plugin, are you finding more value in the Lion VS Plexi 1959, in regards to what it can do for you especially as far as recording? Feel?
I was about to pull the trigger on a $300 pedal (beautiful for the price) but I’m very tempted to save my $ up for a Lion, so I thought I’d ask. Forgive me if you’ve not used the UA Plexi plugin and I’m misremembering such.

Cheers!

 

[Bear-Faced Cow]

The Fender plugin is currently $49. Build cost on the pedals is certainly less than $50. UA has to give up some margin to stores and distributors on the pedals but they're still making at least 4x as much profit.

Sorry, but you miss a whole lot of expenses than simply manufacturing. Programmers, design engineers, and a host of other people behind them also have a salary. The team to build hardware is often greater than building a plugin.

jord

 

[Philomyth]

FWIW, UAD has only released four guitar specific plugins developed internally: the tweed deluxe and the fuzz, TS-808, and rat pedal clones. Of course there are other effects that can be used for guitar.

The last Brainworx amp simulation was in Nov 2019; the last Softube plugin was May 2019. Those outside developers seem focused on building native plugins and marketing them through their own channels and not through UAD. in some cases they haven’t updated the UAD versions to match features on the native versions and don’t intend to. (Softube Amp Room, for example.)

I think the question is whether UAD wants to use its own resources or hire outside developers to port some of the unique amp, cab, and effect models from the pedals to the UAD Apollo platform. if they do, the question is how difficult this would be and how high a priority it would be compared to other projects, such as Luna.

The pedals have reached an entirely new customer base for them; the ports would be more about serving the existing base.

I’d personally like to see an IR plugin that would work using DSP for live tracking and allow the use of third-party DSP. My next priorities would be a blackface Fender and Vox amp sims. Maybe also an advanced customized fuzz pedal, ideally one that could get both fuzz face and tone bender sounds and be used in Unison mode.

 

[klasaine]

You’ve almost described me to a T here @klasaine , I’ve had my eye on few pedals lately (fuzz, like I need more lol) which is why I mentioned the hope of UA bringing some of these to plugs-ville, although my guess is, not likely soon (if at all).
So I must ask you, as a guy who I believe has used the UA Plexi plugin, are you finding more value in the Lion VS Plexi 1959, in regards to what it can do for you especially as far as recording? Feel?
I was about to pull the trigger on a $300 pedal (beautiful for the price) but I’m very tempted to save my $ up for a Lion, so I thought I’d ask. Forgive me if you’ve not used the UA Plexi plugin and I’m misremembering such.

Cheers!

I do have the Lion and currently I am using it more than the Marshall plugins (and my amps). Primarily because it’s “new”. I personally think that the Softube/UA Marshalls, especially in the Unison slot, are great. The Silver Jubilee in particular.
The feel of the Lion is I think a little more immediate, you get more speaker choices, a boost, room sound, and technically it’s three different Marshalls.
Is the Lion $350 better than the 1959 plexi, for you? … I don’t know

 

[slamthecrank]

... currently $49. Build cost on the pedals is certainly less than $50.... they're still making at least 4x as much profit.

Man, that's not even CLOSE to how it works.

Not. Even. Close.

 

[BeingHumans]

I do have the Lion and currently I am using it more than the Marshall plugins (and my amps). Primarily because it’s “new”. I personally think that the Softube/UA Marshalls, especially in the Unison slot, are great. The Silver Jubilee in particular.
The feel of the Lion is I think a little more immediate, you get more speaker choices, a boost, room sound, and technically it’s three different Marshalls.
Is the Lion $350 better than the 1959 plexi, for you? … I don’t know

I appreciate your reply @klasaine , thank you for taking the time. The “more immediate” comment in this regard was the clincher.
Yeah I’m going to get one. The Super Bass will probably actually be more useful for my needs (fuzz) and I do the like cleans of the VH mode when ones’ volume knob is rolled back (I might even crank it up and put my right index finger on the fretboard again for fun).
Add the extra cabs/mics/boosts/rooms and ability to save a few presets and use it live kind of make this a hard one to pass up.

Cheers!