Vegas and the UAD-1(pipe??)

Arnar wrote on 6/12/2003, 3:56 PM
Is there anyone here that uses the UAD-1 that could help me out with some issues??
I know that pipe uses it so maybe you could help me mate!?

Here´s a copy of the post from the uad forum...(posted here as im not sure if anyone ther uses Vegas)

Ok i have had the UAD-1 for two days now.
i have managed to listen to the quality of the plugins in Soundforge and thats about it.
When processing in Soundforge the tremolo for instance trimmed 500 ms off the end of the waveform....whats that!

I use Vegas as my DAW and it simply will not work properly with the UAD.
What happens is the "buffer message" i.e it says it has detected a different buffer size bla bla bla.... which means i cant really run it.
When i manage to stay away from the "buffer message" it just stutters all the time like im maxing out but i know i aint.

So i tried vegas 4 and ASIO.....bluescreen heaven.
(then again veg4 is always gonig bluescreen on me)

so im hoping that someone has here gone through these kind of problems and can assist me in sorting this out.

My system is like this..
1ghz HP kayak 256/Mb
Motu pci324/ motu 24i
Buffer size 512
Im not using ASIO.
Im using the Direct x version.

My biggest issue is the buffer thingey as i dont have a way around it ??

Thanks





Comments

PipelineAudio wrote on 6/12/2003, 4:26 PM
OK, BillyBk is probably the biggest help on this stuff, but so far as Ive seen only me and you have this buffer size mismatch error problem. Are you using the VST versions of these plugs thru a wrapper or the DX ones?

For your first problem there is a bug with the 3.x drivers where you must leave 1 seond ahead and one second after the area to be processed or ELSE. Hopefully they are fixing this, they DO know about it

For the buffer size mismatch, are you running asio or mme? Down around 23mS (1024) the card seems happiest, and youll get the least of these messages. Try doubling your 512 and see if it helps.

The other issue is where are you using these? A bug is known ( but not acknowleged) that putting certain fx such as LA-2A or pultec in a vegas channel insert, while sending that channle also to Realverb Pro, will cause a buffer size mismatch error. Also any type of lookahead plug in the chain with a UA plug will cause a buffer size mismatch error

About the skipping. A bug has been reported, but I dont think acknowledged, that using UAD-1 plugs in vegas will MUNCH CPU power. Hopefully they will fix this

Not much help at the UA forum Im afraid, the line goes " UA is great UA is God, they can do no wrong, if you have a problem with using the UA card you are obviously an unwashed peasant"
Arnar wrote on 6/12/2003, 4:47 PM
OK ill try changing the buffers on the motu.

Ok i can understand the lookahead bug but when a plug from ua is incompatible with a plug from eh...ua then we have a problem.

I dont understand this whole market anymore .....People can just sell you all kinds of crap and it doesnt even have to work.???

Im serious i dont get it...?

I bought Vegas 4....Its in the crapper.

I bought a UAD-1 and it dont work...even though they say all over that they have tested it with Vegas.

A question to SF...Do you allow this ?
Can they actually associate a faulty(or not) product to your product??
I use Vegas ,UA tells me it works with Vegas , stupid me believes them , buys another crap product.

Net result.....Im tired of messing with Vegas, either the software craps out on me or associated software.

Sorry for the ranting but im truly curious as to how SF percieves this.

thanks for your help pipe , i guess im back on the beaten path of searching the web for solutions as well as troubleshooting my Vegas rig....again....and again....and again.....and ....again....

PipelineAudio wrote on 6/12/2003, 4:58 PM
its amazing isnt it?

I take a LOT of crap around here for airing my troubles with software and stuff. Back in the days when we walked uphill to school both ways in the snow and all that, if you bought a piece of gear, it worked...or ELSE!

I understand that it is WAY more complicated with software stuff because of all the variables involved, but I think MS themselves have set a dangerous precedent by not being sticklers about the " standards". You can have two fully compliant CD burners for example, and yet they cant work together sometimes. Or RAM, or MOBO's or CPU's...its amazing

If I could give up the ease of editing and everything else PC's offer I would go back to tape and consoles. This stuff is too addictive tho
SonyEPM wrote on 6/12/2003, 5:09 PM
Arnar, Pipe others with these huge, disasterous, all-day problems...I feel for ya, and I am curious.

If you were to FREEZE your system completely right this minute, not changing anything at all, I mean totally frozen hardware, software, drivers, settings, everything, can you get another multitrack app to do the same exact type of projects you are doing and have everything work flawlessly? Acceptably?

I'm not talking this or that specific bug that we have and somebody else doesn't have (or vice versa- everybody has some issue), I'm asking: Do other apps that do what you need in your studio work perform far better on your same exact system? If so, what app(s)?




H2000 wrote on 6/12/2003, 5:25 PM
I can definately relate!

I just went on a rant in the latency thread, so I'll keep it short!

I went to set up my laptop sytem, and went about researching interface options. I ended up buying an M-Audio Quattro which states that it does 24 bit. Well, in the very fine print, it states that it only does 24bit in ASIO mode, not MME. O.K., that should be fine for v4, right? Wrong! For what ever reason, it doesn't work. M-Audio blames SF and says it works fine in Cubase (which it does), and SF blames M-Audio. Both products have been out for a while and both products advertise that this should work, but it doesn't!

It really sucks the life out of you (and definately sucks the creativity out of you)!
PipelineAudio wrote on 6/12/2003, 5:36 PM
"If you were to FREEZE your system completely right this minute, not changing anything at all, I mean totally frozen hardware, software, drivers, settings, everything, can you get another multitrack app to do the same exact type of projects you are doing and have everything work flawlessly? Acceptably?
"

Hell no! Vegas is the best there is, for me. Yeah I complain. There are problems, and problems thru this side of the bizz in general, but no I wouldnt feel any more confident in another app.

I hear all day long how everyone has this super app, how certain hardware companies and distributors try and steer me away from vegas, how so many users have systems that havent crashed since the Johnsosn administration, blah blah blah

I always come to find out that these "uber systems" have like 2 ins and 4 outs or some such nonsense that has no chance in hell of recording a real band

I push this stuff HARD, on a daily basis. The fact that I havent KILLED anyone yet means that it works for enough of the time to get my work done, even if I do have to eat a substaintial part of the time it takes to workaround a bug9 not to mention my own free time that I spend trying to avoid mishaps, and that is TONS of time, as you well know)

I know its too much to ask, but I do dream that I will have no problems recording 24 tracks at a time, or playing back 30 tracks and recording 2 more, without the skippies, without the crossfade glitches etc...maybe one day, its getting closer and closer
pwppch wrote on 6/12/2003, 6:23 PM
>>I went to set up my laptop sytem, and went about researching interface options. I ended up buying an M-Audio Quattro which states that it does 24 bit. Well, in the very fine print, it states that it only does 24bit in ASIO mode, not MME. O.K., that should be fine for v4, right? Wrong! For what ever reason, it doesn't work. M-Audio blames SF and says it works fine in Cubase (which it does), and SF blames M-Audio. Both products have been out for a while and both products advertise that this should work, but it doesn't!
<<
We DONT blame M-Audio. They tell EVERYONE accept US that it is our problem. We have REPEATEDLY said fine. Tell us what we are doing wrong. Have your driver guys call us and tell me what I am doing wrong. I have email their president endless numbers of times. No resolution.
Arnar wrote on 6/13/2003, 4:50 AM
Sonic EPM....Nope ...
I cannot imagine working on another app and that´s why i feel im being kept hostage in Vegas 3.

Dont get me wrong im not trying to bust your balls.
im genuinly interested in why these days it seems to be ok to sell you something that doesnt work when the reasoning is something like "well why are you complaining ? it dont work for anyone else either"
OR " would you rather be splicing tape ...eh?" its not about that is it?
its about advertising a product and saying it does this and does that and then it dont live up to it.


im being serious here...

About the UAD ...

I have now managed to use some of these otherwise gorgeous plugs on the busses in Vegas, i was very happy last night when i figured out that i could use them as long as i dont use them on an insert.

whee...now i can start the final touches of an album i have been working on (one reason i bought the UAD)...nice....sounds sooooo smooth...
I spend a few hours tweaking half of the album and then its render time.....

......Dropouts.....glitches......weird phasing....inverse dynamics.....hmmmm...there skips the vocal.....and there ´s a drop out on the drums.......

please...please...someone tell me how i can get this card to work!

Im glad the UAD can work with 192khz and has oversampling...it makes all the difference....NOT!!!

Again im ranting...ooops sorry....



billybk wrote on 6/13/2003, 6:47 AM
"My biggest issue is the buffer thingey as i dont have a way around it ??"

Arnar,
See my post on the UAD-1 forum. I am certainly not a power user like Pipe, needing to track, 24 tracks at a time. I have my humble little home studio DAW(which I built myself), which I use to record my own songwriter demos. I usually don't need to
record more than two tracks (guitar & vocal) at a time and a typical project will have 12-20 tracks of audio and MIDI when it is time to mix. In my particular situation, I have Vegas 4c and the UAD-1 (3.1 DX versions) running fine on my system. I only have one remaining problem and that is the incessant native CPU munching that occurs when first playing a project that has (7) or more PPI's. From my personal experience, I have found that the UAD-1, works best with Vegas 4 using solid ASIO drivers. Using the UAD-1 in Vegas 3 & 4 with MME drivers caused performance problems for me. My take on that, is the UAD-1 works best with solid low latency audio drivers and apps that support low latency drivers like WDM & ASIO. If your audio drivers and host app cannot reliably get at least as low as 1024 sample buffers, you will probably have performance problems. Fortunately, my Delta 66 audio drivers can get as low as 256 samples (5.8msec) in Vegas 4(low enough to run the Nigel amp sim in real-time, using input monitoring, and my Les Paul as a sound source). I know Pipe has had problems using certain PPI combinations when tracking in Vegas, but I have not had any problems using the PPI's in any combination, at any point in the signal chain, using Vegas 4c and my Delta in ASIO mode @ 1024 samples or less. I think some audio cards and drivers
play better with the UAD-1 than others. But then again, there are so many variables, when it comes to using differently configured PC's in a DAW environment.


Billy Buck
H2000 wrote on 6/13/2003, 1:10 PM
Thank you for clearing this up Peter! I just sent them another email.

I should note that the M-Audio Delta series ASIO drivers work just fine, and that the Quattro drivers don't (making them highly suspicious). Obviously, they are doing some tricks to get 4in/2out @ 24bits on a USB line. They should make this information available to all developers!

Also, it doesn't surprise me that they are not cooperating, seeing as how they have been engaging in hardcore marketing for Live. They are offering rebates for Acid users who switch to Live! (Hmmm, make your main products unstable with competing applications so that the frustrated user relents and uses your app. - sounds like a Microsoft tactic to me).

Anyway, I sincerely appreciate your efforts @SF and hope this gets fixed soon!