R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: UAD Vs Native  (Read 14403 times)

SafeandSoundMastering

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 222
  • Real Full Name: Barry Gardner
  • My analogue rack
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #30 on: August 03, 2011, 12:29:12 pm »

After whittling it all down and having some great fun which is still ongoing, I think there may well be a chance of getting a solo card afterall. (no rush)

Had some very good fun here of late.
Logged
Barry Gardner
SafeandSound Mastering UK based online mastering studio.

Randyman...

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #31 on: August 06, 2011, 08:24:01 pm »

While this is more of a mastering forum, what is the latency penalty of the UAD series for "Through the DAW" tracking duties, etc?  Just curious how much additional latency one should expect by running such DSP cards in a tracking environment...

 8)
Logged
Randy Visentine
Semi-Pro Engineer

Cass Anawaty

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #32 on: August 07, 2011, 08:06:10 pm »

While this is more of a mastering forum, what is the latency penalty of the UAD series for "Through the DAW" tracking duties, etc?  Just curious how much additional latency one should expect by running such DSP cards in a tracking environment...

 8)
Can't give an exact figure, but me and the artist are always aware when I've left a UA plug on the rough, lol.  It's not workable as real-time.
Logged
Cass Anawaty, Mastering Engineer
www.sunbreakmusic.com

Randyman...

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #33 on: August 07, 2011, 08:27:22 pm »

Can't give an exact figure, but me and the artist are always aware when I've left a UA plug on the rough, lol.  It's not workable as real-time.

That's what I was figuring - I'll stick with native DSP on modern i7 CPU's and keep the talent happy :)  Thanks for the reply...
Logged
Randy Visentine
Semi-Pro Engineer

KAyo

  • R/E/P Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 237
  • Real Full Name: KAyo
  • Business Videos 24/7
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #34 on: August 11, 2011, 10:49:58 pm »

Keen to know what plugs are being run, native or DSP while tracking?
Never done it.. would like to try it some time.

KAyo
Logged
www.kantabiz.com
Business Video Directory

Randyman...

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #35 on: August 12, 2011, 09:21:00 pm »

OT, but the question was posed.  I'm certainly not a top level pro (if you are even asking me  :o ), but I use a good deal of VST plug-ins in the playback mixer in Cubase/Nuendo to give the talent a more finished sounding mix.  I find it makes their takes fit "in context" better than monitoring a completely dry signal when you know the final mix will have all kinds of dynamics and effects the artist isn't hearing while tracking...

I use stuff like modeling/character dynamics, delays and reverb, and even L3's on the master HP outputs to keep things under control.  I'm always aware of the current plugin delay compensation offsets, and I NEVER track with any plugs that have a latency higher than 32-64 samples.  Linear-Phase EQ's and most stuff with a lengthy lookahead is out of the question as round-trip latency will sufer, and we are talking about realtime talent monitoring "through the DAW".

To clarify - I'm not printing the VST effects as they are in the "Track Mixer" portion of the DAW.  I do have a few choice DIY Hardware compressors that I also track with.  I generally do a "dry print" straight off the mic pre and a "parallel compression print" (mult'ed off the Mic Pre to the Compressor Input) to 2 separate AD inputs to use true analog parallel compression "in the digital mix".  Eats up 2 channels for 1 track, but the flexibility is a godsend (and I have oodles of I/O at my disposal).

With a fast i7 PC and a good soundcard (RME HDSPe MADI runs @ 32-Samples of ASIO over here), the latency is un-noticeable, and the HP mixes (up to 8 discrete HP mixes - each with their own master section) sound GREAT!  I couldn't fathom working any other way unless I had a high-dollar $$$,$$$ console that cost more than all of my gear put together and some more outboard gear as well.  That's not going to happen, and my current workflow suits me perfectly.

I don't think I'd have such flexibility with a DSP card due to the additional latency.  Then with my setup, it's just so convenient to have your "wet" HP monitor mixes and main mix all come up with the main project IMO.  No manual recalls on an analog console and outboard gear, etc.  Launch, arm, and go.  Fast!

If you weren't asking me directly - forget everything I posted  :'(

 8)
Logged
Randy Visentine
Semi-Pro Engineer

KAyo

  • R/E/P Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 237
  • Real Full Name: KAyo
  • Business Videos 24/7
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #36 on: August 16, 2011, 01:34:06 am »

Thanks for the set-up run, Randy.
So, no plugs being used live while tracking. For example Comps, or limiters etc.. ? I thought you were tracking live with plugs, thus, the earlier question.

Ciao'
KAyo
Logged
www.kantabiz.com
Business Video Directory

Randyman...

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
Re: UAD Vs Native
« Reply #37 on: August 19, 2011, 09:51:40 pm »

"Monitoring through" the plug-ins while tracking?  Absolutely.  But these plug-ins are NOT actually "printed" with the tracks (I insert them in the channel/track mixer for monitoring, not in the input mixer which would then get printed to disk along with the “dry” take).  The talent is indeed hearing all of the VST's "wet" in the headphones, thus my latency concerns are indeed valid for the artist  ;)  No "Direct Monitoring" or any of that crap - The artist hears themselves and the mix "wet" through the DAW with VST's and all.  No complaints yet, but I'm not exactly "Big Time" at this juncture  ;D

I even print the "real" hardware compressors to their own track so I can still get true analog parallel compression "in the digital mix" - however the "dry" mic signal and the "parallel compressed" signal were both captured from the 1st generation analog domain (before any AD/DA conversion) - the results are digitized to 2 individual tracks so I'm not having to use a DA/AD I/O insert loop (and associated conversion artifacts, etc) to do my parallel compression "in the digital mix".  Eats up more inputs while tracking, but it's well worth it IMO (also makes the headphone mixes sound that much better when you have parallel compression options from the get-go!)

Marriage of hardware and VST processors for tracking and monitoring - works incredibly well for my workflow.  The headphone mixes sound great and offer endless flexibility.  Latency is not a concern with a fast system and a good I/O card assuming you stay away from highly latent plug-ins like Linear Phase EQ’s and limiters with a lengthy lookahead delay, etc…

Back to mastering before I get kicked outta here!

 8)
Logged
Randy Visentine
Semi-Pro Engineer
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up