Incredibly true to the uniquely great character of the hardware.
#UAD VS WAVES SERIES#
I'm also particularly fond of their API 500 series stuff. Stick one on a rock snare, crank up some 5k, a little 12k and some 100hz and you're in slam-city. 1073s quite simply mangle the sound - in a good way when it works and in a bad way when it doesn't - and the plugs do just that.
They got the hard part right though - the character. Old Neve modules do vary a lot, and it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that the one they used for emulation was cleaner than mine (like some other ones I've used). The only difference was that the top end of the plug was slightly cleaner, which I liked. While the boost/cut knob positions required to match them were quite different (but not the frequency ones), I was able to match my real 1073 almost perfectly. The one direct comparison I did make was the Waves 1073 emulation ("V3 EQ") to my hardware unit. I only recently acquired these tools and they have made a huge difference in what I can do in a mix, both 'in the box' and out (I still do quite a bit of mixing via 32 channels out to an automated console). The Waves API, SSL and Neve (aka "V" series) are also similarly outstanding. This is the extension to a thread I made several days ago comparing the DBX 160 VU outboard compressor to the standard fare Waves SSL channel and elysia mPressor plug-ins. I do like their later LA3A and Pultec emulations, but again the Waves ones (in the CLA and JJP bundles respectively) are vastly closer to the originals' analog mojo. Firstly I want to thank Plec and Kassonica (from another forum) for providing the Distressor, DBX 160 and the UAD plug-ins for this test.
It looks like an 1176, but that's pretty much where the 'emulation' starts and ends. On the other hand, IMHO, the BF 1176 is crap. I haven't heard the UADs, and I haven't (yet) made a direct comparison to my hardware 1176s or LA2A, but for my money the CLA emulations are superb, and very close to the sound of the hardware units. It's the same thing we are trying to be for our y it. Is a paramount issue for producers/engineers The ability to recall mixes from the past without having to change the hard work one has already put into a detailed mix
#UAD VS WAVES SOFTWARE#
When your are doing all that work on the software with us in mind. Sometime one needs to change a word or out of tune note for a project and it is more than cumbersome to have to adjust a dialed in mix because of plug in incompatibility. Upgrading doesn't seem to respect the glory of virtuality to the level that it should Way to demonstrate the art of holding fastĪnd be "recall-able" for your mixes of the past 5 years or more. The downside is now having to have the PCIe card to run them! If you've ever used the originals then the UADs are the ones for you. The UADs are closer in their emulation, where as the Waves are better for grit and feel. That said I went back to Tiger and PT7.4 (from Leopard/PT8) and love having my TDM UAD 1176/LA2A back. I have all of the above and really like the CLAs.
0 kommentar(er)
