• 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.

Should UA Replace the UAD-1 with...

Should UA Replace the UAD-1 with...

  • An EXTERNAL Firewire/USB/Ethernet Unit

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • An INTERNAL PCI-X/PCI-e Card

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

electro77

Venerated Member
Both.

An external firewire unit able to max out the bandwith of 1394b @ 192Khz. Many are using firewire audio cards so there could be some bandwith conflict with alot of UAD plugs. The firewire unit should be able to house 4 existing 32bit 66Mhz UAD PCI cards. Is a firewire 1394c spec planned yet?

A PCI express card could be made more powerful than the firewire due to more bandwith.
 

jcat

Active Member
I voted for PCI-e because I believe that it may be a faster and more robust solution, but will all depend on how PCI-e develops, and how many slots we'll get or need on future mobo designs, and how powerful this new UAD will be, and and and and .... ...lots of things.

So I guess I'm saying that really I think it's still too early to call. Which may be what UA are saying as well...

As long as it's much more powerful, and still scalable (use of multiple UAD's) then I don't really mind. I tend to buy my PC's around what my mixing needs are, so I'd get whatever's appropriate to the latest UAD thang.



Cheers,

jcat
 

Tarekith

Member
I voted for external, because a laptop is all I really need or want for my music.

PCIe is not something I would purchase since I will not be upgrading the desktop system, and would thus end my love affair with UAD :(
 

anha

Member
External unit but with PCI/PCIe/Cardbus/ExpressCard host controller. This way you have maximum compatibility, flexibility (can easily move between computers) and possibly also easy expansion. Units could possibly be chained.

Look at the RME multiface/digiface. Excelent solution.
 

olafmol

Member
Tarekith said:
I voted for external, because a laptop is all I really need or want for my music.

PCIe is not something I would purchase since I will not be upgrading the desktop system, and would thus end my love affair with UAD :(
same here
 

ed_mcg

Member
I voted Firewire, however, my real preference is for native. I have a dual core processor with a fast FSB, why waste all that time on interrupt handlers, context switching overhead, and latency?

PCI-X is a very bad idea - it's a transitional bus definition and will quickly be replaced by PCIe.

I don't like the idea of PCIe because I just upgraded my DAW and made sure it had PCI for the UAD, at the expense of no PCIe.

As a Sonar user, with the err=21 issues, native is overwhelmingly the best alternative.[/b]
 

h4nc0

Active Member
anha said:
External unit but with PCI/PCIe/Cardbus/ExpressCard host controller. This way you have maximum compatibility, flexibility (can easily move between computers) and possibly also easy expansion. Units could possibly be chained.

Look at the RME multiface/digiface. Excelent solution.
This actually is an excellent idea. :D
 

sontrinh

Member
i said firewire cause its a standard that has better chances of lasting longer than pci-express cause its a standard supported by many popular devices as well as two platforms.. AND you can use it with laptop without buying the rip off magma chasis
 

GerhardS

Member
I'm quite unshure...
from my point of view, it's not a decision for one or the other. So I have to find out how I can manage a friendly coexistence between:
UA / Neve
Waves / SSL
Powercore / Sony

I want to have ALL 3 ! But UAD and Powercore via Firewire in parallel ?
So UA and TC should provide ALL options so that I can find the ideal/most performant combination.
And what's with >1 UAD / TC PC ?
br
Gehard
 

guitarz

Active Member
I voted internal because I probably couldn't afford a Firewire box, based on the competition's pricing (not to say they shouldn't produce one. There should be a \"both\" option on the poll, IMO). However, I don't see them producing both a PCI-X AND a PCI-e card.
 

Dan Duskin

Established Member
The problem with an internal card is that current motherboards only have a few slots, and you'll need at least one of those for your soundcard, and maybe another slot for something else (like an additional FW controller to split the bandwidth... that's what I do with the powercore, it has it's own FW controller).

And future mobo's will have EVEN LESS slots. I suspect by next year we will see lots of mobo's with only one slot, and lots with no slots. Everything is going FW external. If you want more bandwidth, make it FW-800 compatible!

BTW... as of right now, the Powercore Firewire is more reliable than the Powercore MKII PCI card... just go to the powercore forum to see this reality.
 

guitarz

Active Member
Dan Duskin said:
The problem with an internal card is that current motherboards only have a few slots, and you'll need at least one of those for your soundcard
...unless you use a Firewire audio interface. The UAD-1 is my only PCI card.

I might point out I (and other project studio folk like myself) wouldn't have likely bought into UAD if it weren't for the affordable $399 price of the Project Pak. Powercore Firewire starts @ $799, right? Obviously a Firewire box from UAD would cost more than a PCI card, (but I'm sure plenty of UAD fans would buy them up). An affordable PCI option is a great way to draw in new customers (who also buy a few plugs along the way).
 

neil wilkes

Venerated Member
External unit every time.
Current mobo's just don't have the slots available, and make it much harder for me to go to other studios & take my UAD-1 cards (or whatever) with me unless I splash for a magma chassis.
Additionally, it will take a serious load off the PCI buss.

I don't know of any current mobo that have, dsay, 5 PCIe slots available.
I would need 6 slots if no AGP port...
3 UAD-1
sound card
Graphics card
SCSI controller

Where would the UAD go, as most boards seem to be limited to 3 or 4 slots max.
 
reversi??? solitaire???

I´m using a Intel 950 CPU and 4 UAD cards.
Next time around or UAD goes native or something external or i just sell or give away the cards.
I don´t think that next year me and most people will need anything else than a laptop to record and mix a tune, infact today is possible to do a lot with a single laptop but the pos-prodution and film guys will need a quad octox2 cpu 8) , but then finding a server board with 4 free PCI is really tricky... what will those guys do with the huge amount overhead their machines wil have??? reversi??? solitaire??? :mrgreen:
 

remdeck

Member
Has anyone ever heard of SuperMAC or HyperMac??
These are new Ethernet based audioprotocols, developed by Sony.
Supermac based on 100Mb Network does 96Channels of 24Bit and HyperMac on 1000Mb does 384Channels with 3 Samples Latency.

Don't know if this would work for UAD Plugins...
So I think Ethernet Based would be good.

I think, Universal Audio is not able to develop a new Card from Scratch, because it costs a lot of Money, as they are rather small company.....
A good thing would be to work with Roland or Neve, they did a lot of development with DSPs and stuff.
But it would be good if UAD would again be Graphic Chip based, these things
Rock defenitly more than ordinairy DSPs.

Remdeck
 
UAD Bundle Month
Top