UA announces 64bit driver support in July WebZine!

[billybk1]

The July issue of the UA webZine is out. Among many issues discussed, in the Ask the Doctors segment is the announced x64 driver support, to be incuded in the next UAD-1 update. 8) Also, official Windows Vista support is on the horizon. Probably to coincide with it's release later this year or early next year. Some good articles on the LA-2A & Neve 1073/1073SE too.

http://www.uaudio.com/webzine/2006/july/index3.html

The only thing really holding me back from going x64 has been the lack of 64bit drivers, for my UAD-1 cards. My primary host, SONAR has been fully native x64 since last year. My Delta audio card has x64 drivers available. With the impending x64 dual core CPU price cuts later this month, it appears it is almost time to make the move and go fully 64bit, OS & all.

 

[Mark Edmonds]

If I read things right, they are saying they wont do Firewire in the future. Phew!

Mark

 

[afone1977]

A multi DSP card seems to be a futur gear 8)

 

[Guest]

Hell yes!

 

[macmusic78]

i found the whole artucle in the webzine very setteling - i like that UA let´s us know they are up to something new - and have a better ida than yet another firewire or worse USB2 solution. I find too many of them slow the system down.
I only hope theri solution will work with my G5 PCI mac.

 

[Dan Duskin]

If I read things right, they are saying they wont do Firewire in the future. Phew!

Mark

Nice that you are happy... most of us aren't!

 

[Ninja]

Don't know quite what to make of the article. They don't really say anything about how they will tackle the growing demand for a external device.

 

[Guest]

the article gives many clues right here.

So PCIe isn't such a bad idea after all. If it's so great, why didn't you use a x16 slot? Isn't there a law somewhere that says bigger numbers are always better?
Bigger numbers aren't always better. PCIe x1 is much faster than any other existing interconnect, and every PCIe x1 card will work in any PCIe slot. Since we have plenty of bandwidth, we decided to make our card compatible with every PCIe slot. Anything bigger would be like using an 18-wheeler as a golf cart.

Okay, we get the picture. All right, so why didn't you add more DSPs to the UAD-1?
Patience, Grasshopper. Technology is rarely the limiting factor in any practical product design. We sent men to the moon almost 40 years ago, and yet there's still no Disney Moon theme park where you can take mum and the kiddies on holiday.

Adding DSP chips to make a multi-card UAD-1 card might be an option if that were all we had planned for the future of the product line, but we're not stopping quite yet. We're actively developing new products based on new technology, but, sorry, no specific announcements just yet. We can assure you that your current investment in our platform will continue to provide value.

 

[Spiritworks]

\"We can assure you that your current investment in our platform will continue to provide value\".
This is really good news. They are, hopefully, working on an upgrade path that will allow implementation of current cards.

 

[Animix]

"We can assure you that your current investment in our platform will continue to provide value".
This is really good news. They are, hopefully, working on an upgrade path that will allow implementation of current cards.

Will this include a steep discount on a 64 bit PCI expansion chassis so 4 card system users can operate at 64 bit?....... :lol:

 

[macmusic78]

i also think in the direction of an magma like expansion chassis - with an strong dsp buld in and expandabe with more UAD cards.
And i am happy that they are NOT going the weak firewire or USB2 route - anyone who tried connection a lot of external audio devices from differen companies knows why....

 

[Stag]

i also think in the direction of an magma like expansion chassis - with an strong dsp buld in and expandabe with more UAD cards.
And i am happy that they are NOT going the weak firewire or USB2 route - anyone who tried connection a lot of external audio devices from differen companies knows why....

This is hardly an audio interface.
Being you using a Mac G5 you probably know that without Magma you are on big trouble, and with the new Mac´s even in more trouble to have anty DSP that worth to waste any PCI bandwidth.

I´m selling 4 cards and a Magma just because i consider plain stupid at this point in time having to lug the damn thing around.
I´m lucky for having a chassis because if not the temp inside my pute would gone sky high... Lisrening to those fans turning are not my idea of fun.

Who has tried a Sony´s Laptop or Macbook pro (Intel´s cpu) knows what i´m talking about too.



Bye.

 

[electro77]

They made a good point with the PCIe X1 argument. We really need to get an inexpensive proprietary PCIe chassis to tide us over till the next card comes out. Is the limit on UAD-1e 8 cards?

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

Nice that you are happy... most of us aren't!

I'm under the impression that they are working on an external device, just not a firewire one. Waves' use of ethernet on their APA devices has always seemed to be an exceedingly intelligent solution & I'd love to see UA move in that direction, as well. Does anyone know of a reason why that may not be such a hot idea?

 

[RobPain]

I agree with Eric - the article sounded like an external device is on their plan, just not connected via Firewire / USB / Ethernet. Is it possible to construct a PCI-e card that extends the bus via a cable plugged into the card (and into the UAD external box at the other end)? I got the idea that UA were talking about hooking straight into the PCI-e bus somehow...

 

[cAPSLOCK]

I will briefly come out of lurking to say that it seems obvious that UA intends to use an external PCIe device. The argument they make is quite compelling.

I have never thought Firewire is the best option.

cAPS

 

[Cass Anawaty]

I have never thought Firewire is the best option.

cAPS

Quite a few of us w/ a Poco FW would agree w/ that........

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

I´m selling 4 cards and a Magma just because i consider plain stupid at this point in time having to lug the damn thing around.

Portability is an issue but making a firewire device wouldn't necessarily solve things. If the Powercore Firewire is any indicator, you'd probably have to bring your own firewire card with you to any studio that's not on a Mac. I actually prefer the PCI card/chassis solution in so far as there's only one thing to carry around, unlike what happens with the firewire dsp solutions.

Instead of a massive 80 pound metal chassis, I'd love to see UA come out with some kind of Shuttle PC-style PCI card "lunchbox". It seems that something like that should be able to hold a good enough number of cards while still being easy to cart around (give it carrying straps at the top, a la the Solo boxes). Make it connect via ethernet & we'll be done.

 

[Suntower]

I don't usually get into geeky techno-discussions, but I agree.

Ethernet has the -slight- advantage of over 30 years of development. It's totally robust and all the bugs are worked out. Now with 10-Gigabit it should be fast enough to do -whatever-. So that's not the worry.

The trick is -still- going to be the PCIe buss. No matter how much crunching the device can do, it's still always a challenge designing device drivers that work reliably on many mobos and OS. Now add the idea that data streams from the equivalent of -several- UAD-1s will have to be managed.

So... here's how I view the current PCIe card... It's a test drive for the new UAD^X ( hands-off--it's -my- trademark :mrgreen: ). They'll sell some of those; work out various little nigglies with PCIe and then release a -clean- UAD^x next year.

A -great- strategy. Slow to market, but if true, I admire their 'make it reliable' strategy. Imagine how quickly the screams of 'Fucking Idiots!' will die down when they release a new card -without- all the issues that other (faster to market) products have had.

---JC

aka 'Karnak The Magnificent' :roll:

[quote="Dan Duskin":3kylvrbr]Nice that you are happy... most of us aren't!

I'm under the impression that they are working on an external device, just not a firewire one. Waves' use of ethernet on their APA devices has always seemed to be an exceedingly intelligent solution & I'd love to see UA move in that direction, as well. Does anyone know of a reason why that may not be such a hot idea?[/quote:3kylvrbr]