UAD/Powercore...all they're cracked up to be?

kilroy wrote on 5/15/2003, 3:52 PM

Ok...the deal is this...we have a number of workstations that are used primarily for compositional platforms and we are considering augmenting the native processing with these one of these DSP cards to take a little extra grunt load off the host cpu.

I will tell you right now that I am not excited about this in the least but I am being pestered by some significant others to consider this route and I can understand their point to a degree. It will be *my* wallet that will be lighter off for it if this happens, though, so if you fancy one of these cards the holy grail you will have to be *very* convinving.

What I need is some good balanced perspectives from actual users. My main concern is stability. I don't really give a rats behind how "good" these things sound if they screw up my life when I need it the least. We have no shortage of good sounding gear. It's analog, it always works and it doesn't crash comuters...but quite frankly it's just too expensive to purchase multiple instances of these things for everyone's personal workroom.

The host apps that one of these cards will have to play nice with are as follows: Vegas, Acid, Soundforge, Samplitude, Sonar, CoolEdit. Some guys are using other apps of their own choosing but these are the major ones. Most of the writing room PCs are Win 98se. Notice if you will the lack of any Steinware...uh huh...not in this office...nobody...it's the only rule I won't bend on, and what a great rule it is, too.

So there you have it. I want the good, the bad, the ugly. I mean let the tomatoes fly thick and fast people. The janitor will handle the stain removal, so go ahead...make my day.

Comments

PipelineAudio wrote on 5/15/2003, 4:32 PM
in use in Vegas, UAD-1 plugs run under the CPU so they will tax the hell out of your system. Under other apps they do take the load off. Today theyre supposed to have a driver update which fixes this, theres some other wierdness but the plugs are cool.

I wouold be VERY surprised if any employee of THIS UA has ever set foot in a recording studio.
stakeoutstudios wrote on 5/15/2003, 6:40 PM
I have to say I'm not experiencing the problems to nearly the same degree.

The compression is the best I've ever, ever heard from a plugin and taking a load of my host processor has proved to be one of the best investments I made for the studio.

The quality of the plugins is outstanding overall.

Read everyone's posts before you decide, there's much info to be had off this forum, and the forum at http://www.chrismilne.com/uadforums/

Jason
billybk wrote on 5/16/2003, 7:39 AM
I have been using the UAD-1, for over four months now, in my rig. It is best used as a mixdown tool. Using the latest 3.01 update and the DX PPI's, I have not experienced any stability or performance problems that would keep me from productively using the card in my projects. There is one problem that still needs to be addressed though. In SOFO apps like Vegas 4 & ACID Pro 4, there is an inexplicable native "CPU munching" that occurs when using PPI's in a project. It is particularly evident, when using (7) or more PPI's in a project. There is a remedy, (disable and then enable the PPI's from the global on/off switch on the Performance Meter) which will restore the native CPU back to you system. But it is annoying, and hopefully, it will be fixed in the next 3.1.0 update, due to be released any time now. Other than that, the DX plugs, work and act just like any other native DX real-time effect. I am even thinking now, about buying another one. BTW, I am using a WinXP Pro OS and not Win98se though.


HTH,

Billy Buck
drbam wrote on 5/16/2003, 8:48 AM
Like you I'm still not sure about the UAD issue. However, with your concern about stability, I'm curious why you haven't moved to XP. Perhaps your 98se systems are unusally stable. . .
I have been stunned by the performance of XP in every way. Whereas with 98se I would have some sort of a freeze or lock up approx 1 or 2 times every couple of days or so (which I considered pretty solid for 98se from the research I did), with XP this might happen once a month! A couple of colleagues have also had similar experiences with increase in performance and stability moving to XP. All of us continue to comment on this improvement. We anticipated *some* improvement but nothing this dramatic.

drbam
kilroy wrote on 5/16/2003, 9:06 AM

Concerning the OS, I should have mentioned that this is a "gutted" Win98se. We use Win98Lite to emasculate the integrated browser, among other things. This goes a long way towards steadying down the OS, and yes, these particular machines are *extremely* stable for us, knock on wood. This is one reason why we (me in particular) are reluctant to make any changes at this point. The only issue really is one of extra horsepower and utility...but it's got to work.

These machines are "clean", no extra junk laying about, and have highly specified components, no shortcuts here at all. Makes a real big difference. We honestly can't complain about stability here, though I certainly realize this *is* a standing issue with other folks.

I will check that UAD forum link out. Thanks all. Cheers, prosperity, good health and all that.
WT wrote on 5/16/2003, 7:00 PM
I'd be wary about latency issues. I don't know if they've all been sorted out in recent driver releases, but I bought one and took it back. Having to compensate for added latency with the UAD card was hindering my workflow. I found I didn't really have the time or patience to mess with workarounds. I do music for a living, so any tool I add has to add to my productivity, not detract from it.

An alternative view...
WT
stakeoutstudios wrote on 5/16/2003, 7:05 PM
no latency issues with UAD1 here...
billybk wrote on 5/16/2003, 8:13 PM
"I'd be wary about latency issues. I don't know if they've all been sorted out in recent driver releases, but I bought one and took it back. Having to compensate for added latency with the UAD card was hindering my workflow."

Yeah, it would seriously hinder my work flow too! But, fortunately that is not the way the UAD-1, with the latest 3.01 DX drivers work in Vegas or ACID. :) I even held off buying one for a year, until UA finally announced it's DX implementation and full automatic delay compensation last December. The new 3.0 drivers were formally released in February and then updated to 3.01, later in the month. I do know, that as of the 3.01 update, SONAR, Vegas 4, ACID Pro 4 and Samplitude 7 all have full ADC when using the UAD-1. As long as you have stable low latency drivers (WDM/ASIO) you will not have a problem with latency when using the UAD-1. Once setup, like using any other DX real-time effect, it is plug in and go. OTHO, I tried the MME drivers for my Delta with the UAD-1 and the performance was absolutely terrible. Went back to the tried and true Delta WDM (ACID40_FIX) drivers, and bingo bango, no more performance or latency issues when using the UAD-1 at anywhere from 2.9 msec(128 samples) to 22.3msec(1024 samples) in Vegas 4b or ACID 4b. There are some minor issues (CPU munching) that remain, with the UAD-1 and Vegas, but latency should not be one of them.


Billy Buck

On a side note: It looks like the next 3.1.0 update (which will include a fully functioning 14 day Cambridge EQ demo) has been delayed until the end of the month, bummer :(
PipelineAudio wrote on 5/16/2003, 9:36 PM
I still get all the retarded buffer size issues when working at 48/24

If I have LA-2A on a track then send that track to a realverb pro on an assignable fx it will give me " buffer size mismatch"