By | 04.09.2019

microsoft onenote 2013
Autodesk AutoCAD LT 2017
New UAD-2 user here, running Win7 64, but cubase 32 bit many of my favourite or essential plugins won’t work or bridge in 64 so not for me at this time. This is probably going to be sad news for you, but from what I gather, the UAD plugins are 32 bit and are not designed to work in a 64 bit environment. As mentioned above though they do claim to be working on 64 bit versions so I would contact UAD and see if they can give you a more solid date as to when your useless chunk of plastic and solder will become an awesome production tool.
uad plugins without hardware

UAD Plugins Authorization

Henchman , Never been really happy with their stuff. Always found it all to be just “ok”. So, over the next two weeks I’m going to be testing and changing my template. I already had 4 uad-1cards from the days I primarily did music. Ive been fortunate enough to have never bought any Waves plugs. All the studios had them. On my main dialog tracks I’m replacing the Q10 with Equick for notching. I have been using Equality for Eq now for awhile, and really like it.

And replacing the C4 with the UAD multiband dynamics. Cool thing is, they now have the Lexicon , which I’ll be getting. Anyone else here using the UAD stuff? I’m not familiar with UAD plugins. McDSP has a very good de-esser. EQuick is an awesome notch filter. Only problem is it needs more notches. Matt82au , The UAD stuff seems like fantastic processors, though I don’t really see the appeal for post work.

Easily replaceable with Cedar and VisLM. I also don’t mind WaveArts for multi band dynamics when needed. Good luck, and as I said, keep us posted on how it is in 3 or so months time! JohnO , I think they’re great for post. Clean and colorless. Equality sounds so much better than the EQIII, and has features like a built-in spectrogram and solo function, like a Urei big dipper.

Just want to step the quality of my processing chain up. I’m looking forward to checking out the Massive Passive and I’ve really been missing a rich verb for my music. Now they have released the plug-in, and that will fill that need. For easy natural things, it’s still the best. But cannot think any more of their plugs which is essential. They are all different in interface and controls. A FB has also some saturation algorythme built in, eliminating digital clipping.

But for me they are just tools I can achieve the same results with. They are “dressed” look different though. BobbyDazzler , I like the overal sound better. And the solo feature and built in analyzer is what makes it great. I have found that different EQs can sound quite different.

I would kill for a plugin version of that processor, however, if I wanted to add some analog color to something, a Neve DFC EQ would not be my choice, it’s just too clean. Kuba Pietrzak , I also did a long comparison between Digi’s Eq III and SonyOxford now Sonnox Eq with GML mode and I found, that you can just copy settings of parametric eqs, do a little tweak with filters and shelves and you end up with almost the same sound.

Unfortunately I did not test Equality, which had really good reviews. I should be testing my template next week. I’ll report back. Or you can actually hear the difference in sound processing by a single inserted plugin vs other one?

Or may be you like slopes better? Also notch filtering is a bit different story. Henchman, can you use the UAD plug-ins without their hardware? The EQ is good. I wish the compressor sounded a little bit more like RenComp, but it’s good, too.

Expander is very easy to use. Henchman You need a uad card or FireWire box to use the uad plugins reichman , I need portability, and my studio gig-bag already has 2 hard drives, laptop, iLoks, headphones, SPL meter, and input devices. Heavy user of his De-esser, too. Funny enough, I find myself using his VT-3 eq from time to time. I never used Waves’ eq. Digi’s EQ3 is good enough for me.

I hear their stuff sounds great, but a hardware add-on is a deal breaker for me too. Such great hi hi hi end. Never heard of it for post, but why not. A few thoughts Would not a portable firewire box run into trouble at Mojo establishments?

NIce for FX though.. Bullet proof automation. I could be weaned from the Sonnox eq, but you would have to tear me kicking and screaming away from Sonnox dynamics due to its warmth control and post dynamics eq – stick that up yer DFC! For me, nothing more from them, but the doppler. Regarding to the channel strip, I think it wouldn’t be such a huge thing for Avid to offer a not channel strip version of the Euphonix.

But I won’t bet on it they would. In my opinion, they should include revibe in the package, or at least a revibe light. DAW without a real pro built in fx. I understand why they don’t include some in the cheaper package, but I cannot understand this with HD. Maybe it’s only my gripe though. The install was painless.

Leaving Equality for correcting wider bands. I had to keep the C4 as there is no real replacement for it just yet. On the main dialog buss, I got rid of the waves de-Essers, and replaced them with the precision de-Esser. I use two, because, just like I did with the waves de-Esses, I have one set up to cut down the annoying midrange, to soften up the dialog. A one band multiband compressor if you like. And then one for regular de-essing.

Followed by an LA-2A. I had the center dialog track up, from a show I recently mixed. And imported the tracks from the original mix session, so I could A-B the two. So far, I’m really happy. The dialog sounds much more open, and has more depth. Curious to know what round-trip to the UAD box and back incurs. Haven’t had any problems. The one plugin that has a very high latency is the precision multi band.

But I’m no using it. ADC, is taking care of everything else. Do you use it on Voice Overs? It is Little Labs. I am using it for thin sounding production dialog.

Up your digital signal processing game with these Universal truths…

Why should I buy a UAD-2? But it means that UAD-2 plug-ins not only sound like the original vintage hardware; they behave like the original devices, at even the most extreme settings. This ensures that UAD-2 plug-in emulations are as close to their analog counterparts as possible. You may have experienced, on occasion, that your computer lacks sufficient power to run the number of plug-ins that you desire. The end result is that you can run more professional mixes on your system, and can add substantial power to your studio. If you need to bolster the overall power and performance of your system, then a new computer is certainly a good solution. First, the UAD-2 Powered Plug-Ins Platform offers an integrated solution — the software and hardware are specifically tailored for one another to provide optimum performance and reliability for audio plug-ins.

VIDEO: Review: Universal Audio plugins – Audio Media International

Using UAD plugins without using hardware?. January 5, by James King. p 10/6/ · if you just want to use the plugins in cubase during. Mar 2, We’ve picked our favourites from the most popular UAD plugins of plugins that are available – from incredible recreations of classic hardware, . to stick its head above the mix parapet without just making it louder?. tained in this manual is subject to change without notice. Universal Audio computers. The UAD hardware device can be installed into either platform; it C:\Program Files (x86)\Universal Audio\Powered Plugins\ Mac.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *