UAD Neve 1073

[electro77]

Neve 1073 message To UA, most DAWs now have freeze so don't skimp on DSP cycles at the expense of authenticity. If a spot on 1073 takes up 2 UAD cards at 192Khz, its acceptable. It is all about sound quality now.

 

[the lewis bros.]

I suppose that's tongue in cheek, as there's no way they could cut out one card users.

 

[orangeoctane]

Perhaps an authentic, power hungry version and then a less authentic, more efficient version would be a good choice. You know, like how they did the 1176. That way, one card users could still use the plugin in it's more efficient format and multiple card users could knock themselves out with the real deal.

A 1073 would be a welcome addition to the line up I would think.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Surely the cost of a piece of hardware isn't relevant to the amount of DSP power required to emulate it?

UA have done well with the Pultec Pro, the Fairchild etc so far.

 

[electro77]

I suppose that's tongue in cheek, as there's no way they could cut out one card users.

2 cards @ 192Khz.

Surely the cost of a piece of hardware isn't relevant to the amount of DSP power required to emulate it?

UA have done well with the Pultec Pro, the Fairchild etc so far.

EQ is a delicate thing to do a spot on emulation of. We should not be able to tell the difference with good D/A, even at the most extreme settings. This means oversampling and lots of DSP cycles.

 

[Mark Edmonds]

Neve 1073 message To UA, most DAWs now have freeze so don't skimp on DSP cycles at the expense of authenticity. If a spot on 1073 takes up 2 UAD cards at 192Khz, its acceptable. It is all about sound quality now.

Sorry but I think that is ludicrous! Two UAD cards to run one EQ?!?! Aside from the technical difficulties of splitting the load across two cards, it completely blocks out any other UAD plugins. It would be a bonkers decision to code it like this.

I am not against the cycles being used as long as there is real justification for it rather than simply ramping up on oversampling but with the CPU-light URS models out there, UA would have to bring this one in on an economic DSP scale or people will simply ignore it.

Anyway, we don't know for certain whether this plugin is real or not, do we?

Mark

 

[Suntower]

Ditto Sir Mark's comments.

First of all (in faux-techno mode), since there is no direct communication between cards I can only imagine how horrid the latency would be when a signal had to make FOUR trips round the block.

Second, if it's that CPU intense, I wouldn't want it---I'd just wait until the technology caught up with it.

Remember early adopters of Windows---where the hardware simply wasn't fast enough? Boy -that- was fun. And the internet before broadband? Another joy-fest.

I want the Holy Grail of sound, fer sure Arthur, but OTOH, things are pretty great right now so I see no reason to rock the boat.

YMMV

---JC

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

I'll wager money that the plug-in will NOT take up two cards at 192kHz. Seriously, let's gamble!

 

[electro77]

I just found this in the manual
\"Most UAD-1 Powered Plug-Ins support up to 32-bit, 192KHz operation (exceptions:
Plate 140, Precision Multiband, and Nigel cannot run at 192kHz).
Resolution is limited only the by resolution of the host application. Please note
that Powered Plug-Ins running at 96KHz use twice as much UAD-1 DSP resources
than those used at 48KHz, and so forth.\"

I thought I didn't have enough DSP to run Plate 140 @ 192Khz on 2 cards and thought that the Neve EQ plug could be similar. This entire discussion might have to be deleted now.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

hmm, good point. I'm still down to make a bet even if the odds don't seem like such a sure thing after all.

 

[Henchman]

I've checked out both the URS and Mcdsp plug-ins. They don't use tons of DSP and sound great.

 

[Akis]

AFAIK, a plug can not be spread to 2 DSP's. Same happens with Powercore, with the exception of the Sony EQ+Filters, where in higher sample rates 1 DSP would run the EQ and another the filters; however, that is on the same card, not 2 separate ones.

 

[Cat5]

I can't wait to hear an official annoucnement on this. I think the URS plugin is based on the EQ section of the 1081. The 1073 is a more coveted device. Also, comparing the Pultec to the Fultec shows us two different animals. I think the same will be true here. My only hope is that UA uses higher internal sampling for a sweet high end. I love the URS A and N series, but huge amounts of high end are the weak point IMO.

The R84 ribbon is one app I need lots of sweet high end for. It's great for almost anything with the right eq, even vox, but it needs a fair amount of upper range EQ. Even the URS get a smidge grainy.

 

[polygen]

(maybe not-so-)wild guess: if the pultec runs at 192k internally, so will the 1073

 

[Akis]

(maybe not-so-)wild guess: if the pultec runs at 192k internally, so will the 1073

That's what I think, too.

 

[Paul Woodlock]

The R84 ribbon is one app I need lots of sweet high end for. It's great for almost anything with the right eq, even vox, but it needs a fair amount of upper range EQ. Even the URS get a smidge grainy.

You should try the algorithmix EQ plugs. no grain there. They outshine anything for the UAD-1 or the URS stuff.

 

[Cat5]

The R84 ribbon is one app I need lots of sweet high end for. It's great for almost anything with the right eq, even vox, but it needs a fair amount of upper range EQ. Even the URS get a smidge grainy.

You should try the algorithmix EQ plugs. no grain there. They outshine anything for the UAD-1 or the URS stuff.

Yes, but they are a frikkin' fortune. When i have that kind of dough in the budget I'll hold out and put it towards a Great River EQ-NV. THAT is a sweet sounding EQ.

 

[t.winn]

I've been thinking about picking up a UAD-1 for a while and hearing about the 1073 has pushed me over edge. Any idea when this might be released? I'm planning on getting the flexi pak and using the 500 bucks toward the 1073. I'm not going to be forced into picking my plugins before the 1073 comes out if I get the card now am I?

 

[baronluigi]

t.winn using the flexi pack $500 for the 1073 is almost pointless, its atleast a year off , probably two.

That's a guess of course, I really have no idea, except based on past uad experience.


but.......You'll love most of the other plugins while you are waiting....

 

[t.winn]

Thanks for the info baronluigi. I really hope its not two years. Humm things I could do to pass the time . . . have 2 and 2/3 children . . . track New Horizons till it gets to Jupiter . . . wine on message boards about how badly I want the 1073 to be done. I'm sure I'll figure something out. Thanks!