UAD Spark Native VS UAD Plugins | Is Universal Audio telling the truth about Unison technology?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2024
- WIN FREE GEAR!!!
sweetwater.sjv.io/y2mAxv
BEST DEALS ON GEAR!!
sweetwater.sjv.io/Py6EqX
Is Universal Audio telling the truth about Unison technology?
A full null test against UAD Spark Native VS UAD Plugins
0:00 No BullSh*t Intro
1:20 Important Backstory
2:11 Variables during testing
2:42 Variable 1
3:08 Variable 2
3:46 Variable 3
4:42 Variable 4
5:14 The final testing approach
5:50 Test 1
7:36 Test 2 - Sine wav
8:39 Test 3 - White Noise
9:28 My thoughts & Interpreting the Results
12:15 My most important though
12:41 Outro
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
👉 My UA PLUGIN PRESETS thestevekinney.com/
☕️ Buy me a coffee- bit.ly/3yXUxjp
🔔 SUBSCRIBE - ruclips.net/user/TheSteve...
WORK WITH ME {Music Production, Mixing, Mastering and One on one mentoring}
stevekinney.one43@gmail.com
IG & FB @thestevekinney
www.thestevekinney.com
#stevekinney #UniversalAudio #UADspark
USE MY LINK TO GET $50 OFF LANDR STUDIO HERE bit.ly/3kURJkl & GET:
🔸Vocalign Project 5
🔸Unlimited Distribution, keep 100% of royalties
🔸36 WAV Masters/YR
🔸MixBox SE
🔸Arturia Rev PLATE-140 & more!
----- ALSO WATCH -----
🔸 LUNA Basic Series- Part 1
• Universal Audio Luna B...
🔸 UAD Console deep dive | Apollo solo
• UAD Console deep dive ...
🔸 I Produce Songs With EZDrummer
• I Produce Songs With E...
🔸 Hybrid Mixing with Luna & Logic
• Hybrid Mixing with Lun...
🔸 UAD DSP LIMIT EXCEEDED
• UAD DSP LIMIT EXCEEDED...
🔸 Building a FULL SONG start to finish in UNIVERSAL AUDIO LUNA with the APOLLO SOLO pt 1
• Building a FULL SONG s...
🔸 DON'T BUY APOLLO SOLO USB
• Don't buy the Apollo S...
🔸 WATCH THIS BEFORE BUYING THE APOLLO SOLO: • Watch this before buyi...
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
👉 MY GEAR LISTED BELOW 👈
👉 DESKTOP DEVICES:
Universal Audio Apollo Twin X DUO Thunderbolt 3 sweetwater.sjv.io/q42bMj
UNIVERSAL AUDIO APOLLO SOLO sweetwater.sjv.io/xkN4MA
Solid State Logic UF8 sweetwater.sjv.io/Qy6mDM
Solid State Logic UF1 Advanced DAW Controller sweetwater.sjv.io/jrOobv
Presonus FaderPort Production Controller sweetwater.sjv.io/k0oB6n
👉 MY RACK GEAR:
Universal Audio Apollo x8 18x24 Thunderbolt 3 Audio Interface with UAD DSP sweetwater.sjv.io/rQ26mQ
Summit Audio TLA-50 Tube Leveling Amplifier sweetwater.sjv.io/k0oBrz
Warm Audio Bus-Comp 2-channel Stereo VCA Bus Compressor sweetwater.sjv.io/anWaMW
Furman M-8X2 Merit Power Conditioner with lights sweetwater.sjv.io/g1WZxr
Neutrik NYS-SPP-L1 Stereo TRS 1/4“ Modular Patch Panel for 19“ Rack Mount sweetwater.sjv.io/B02Zv1
👉 MY 500 SERIES GEAR:
Solid State Logic VHD+ sweetwater.sjv.io/nL2056
Purple Audio Action Fet sweetwater.sjv.io/6egrYK
Ironage Audioworks QP5 www.ironageaudioworks.com/
XQP 2531 www.xqpaudio.net/
XQP 535A www.xqpaudio.net/
👉 MICROPHONES
Warm Audio WA-47 Large-Diaphragm Tube Condenser Microphone sweetwater.sjv.io/vNZRJd
Aston Spirit sweetwater.sjv.io/4PWQv9
Shure SM7B Cardioid Dynamic Microphone sweetwater.sjv.io/da71MM
AKG P420 Studio Condenser sweetwater.sjv.io/y2mdXV
Shure SM57 sweetwater.sjv.io/Y9yQMJ
Shure Beta 52A sweetwater.sjv.io/KjZnMn
Aston Halo Portable Microphone Reflection Filter sweetwater.sjv.io/m52WPe
👉 HEADPHONES
DT770 Pro 250ohms sweetwater.sjv.io/ZQy97q
Sennheiser HD280PRO sweetwater.sjv.io/JzmE7R
HD9 PRESONUS sweetwater.sjv.io/Vm6q7A
AKG Pro Audio K240 sweetwater.sjv.io/eKAVYr
👉 SOUNDPROOFING- Auralex
ProMAX v2 Portable Panels bit.ly/334kZvJ
ProPanels bit.ly/3DFI2tx
StudioFoam Wedgies bit.ly/3oE4Jd7
ProPOD Acoustic Decouplers bit.ly/3pLeJ3B
Studio6 Bass Trap bit.ly/31QlPvm
👉 CAMERA & FILM
SONY A7C amzn.to/3DACuAB
Wireless Lav MIC sweetwater.sjv.io/XYXD7o
👉 LIVE RACK GEAR:
Roto-Molded Shockmount Rolling 12U Rack Case sweetwater.sjv.io/nL20Y6
Presonus Studiolive 32r sweetwater.sjv.io/6egrmK
Tascam US-1608 Interface sweetwater.sjv.io/21WxZz
Sennheiser EW-500 G4-Neumann KK205 sweetwater.sjv.io/3edDgK
Sennheiser XSW IEM Wireless In-Ear Monitor System sweetwater.sjv.io/R56v79
Shure PSM300 Wireless System sweetwater.sjv.io/da71YM
RF Venue Combine 4 Antenna Combiner sweetwater.sjv.io/MmN67J
Pearl Mimic Pro Drum Module sweetwater.sjv.io/m52WYe
Westone Audio Pro X20 Earphones sweetwater.sjv.io/LXZb7j
Shure Beta57 Vocal Mic sweetwater.sjv.io/Qy6mkP
Rack Drawers sweetwater.sjv.io/rQ265Q
👉 DEVICE STORAGE
OWC Express 4m2 bit.ly/30rlgrm
OWC THUNDERBOLT 3 DOCK bit.ly/3DitdOe
Recording is the cheapest, easiest, and best sounding in history and yet we still talk about negligible differences while listening to a terribly distorted acoustic guitar.
Great comment!
Cheers mate!
Thanks for posting this! It compelled me to run my own test, and I think it does actually make a difference, in the way that it is intended. First, plug Output 1-2 into Input 1-2. Don't forget Unison works on Line and Hi-Z, not just Mic Input mode. Then run a 1khz tone at -12db through the output loop and place a spectrum analyzer at the end. Then, insert a UAD plugin like the API Vision Channel strip between the generator, I/O, and the analyzer. You will see it generate a very distinct, fixed set of harmonics. Now, run the same API channel strip inserted on the Unison slot for Input 1-2. Then look at the analyzer. You will see a much thicker set of harmonics with less combing and more scooping between the frequencies. You will also see the frequencies subtly oscillate, just like an analog desk. Inserting the plugin into Unison and running analog signal through it creates an output that is effectively the same as my analog desk and preamps. As far as I am concerned, this works.
Analog signals have a chaotic randomness to their signal that causes the left and right channels to move somewhat independently - this is what creates the pleasing, natural, and life-like sound of analog equipment. Run the same signal through an "analog" plugin, and the signal and harmonics stays perfectly steady. If you know how to look for this "dancing" in the signal, you can understand why analog sounds so good - it's because of the randomness with which the left and right channels move. Now if you want to see why your favorite channel strip sounds "analog," just look at the harmonics it generates - but understand these harmonics are fixed, and will not oscillate randomly like real analog gear.
Thanks so much for sharing this! Clever approach too, I’m gonna fool around with this.
Right on man! Thanks for the feedback! Steve @ Tranquility Base, Portland@@TheSteveKinney
Horatio Bannister
0 seconds ago
I am confused, can i luanch Luna and record and mix a project WITHOUT a uad interface (without apollo) if I subscribe to Spark? How do I luanch Luna without a uad interface? Or is Luna still only available to use with a uad device?
I bought my Apollo Twin a few years ago because my 2013 Macbook Pro was struggling to keep up with some sessions and I figured that the Unison would enable me to track without crashes and reduce the number of plugins that I used because I would focus more on getting the right sounds going in. I was correct. It improved my workflow and attention to detail a LOT to the point where even with my M1 Mac Mini and available UADx plugins I will still track everything through Unison so I know that I can rely on the sound I'm getting. Just because the M1 came out last year and now has enough juice to make the DSP chips less of a necessity does not mean that UA were or are scamming anyone. They were absolutely necessary for those of us who didn't have top of the line computers. Technology always has and always will move forward though. Imagine all the people with 500k in outboard gear that has been replaced to various extents by technology. The best part is that we can use these UADX plugins without worrying about DSP and if you have a mobile rig like a VOLT or a Focusrite you can use those on the go without having to be connected to an Apollo. If anything, this shows UAD are acknowledging that technology is catching up and refuse to gouge us by insisting we stick with DSP. I also appreciate that the UADx versions of plugins I own were given to me for free. Class move!
I have never and will never be on the bandwagon of “M1 has made DSP accelerated hardware obsolete.”
Outboard gear is 100% better and not obsolete at all.. if it were, pro studios wouldn’t have the gear. There was a great point made by CLA - who basically said (and it’s true) that digital didn’t come about because it sounded better, but because tape and analogue was running the industry into the ground. It was not financially viable any longer and you couldn’t sell things in music stores. Etc
So. It’s all an answer to practicality. Not for sound quality. Now - that said - of course, everyone is striving for sound quality. I don’t think it’s possible for digital to completely emulate hardware.
I think there is a lot of waste on technology -for example, there has been endless versions of amp simulators over the years - but the marshal plexi, still rocking.
Another example. Is the current Apollo going to be sought after in another 7 years?... likely no. But a real 1176... without a shadow of a doubt.
Just my take on it! I hear what you’re saying brotha!
In either case - workflow is definitely nice and couldn’t agree more with the attention to detail point! Great point brotha! Cheers!
@@TheSteveKinney Hope you didn't think I was saying that oubtoard gear is obsolete!! Just so I can be clear I said outboard gear has "replaced to various extents" meaning that I agree there will likely always be a use for hardware but in many cases it's not essential (like using a Pro Q 3 for corrective EQ or stock plugins for minor elements of a mix vs hardware).
I'm not sure how much I believe that "outboard gear is 100% better". I personally cannot make comparisons as I never used a significant amount of it and have traded in most of the stuff I did use. When people like Andrew Scheps and Michael Brauer are switching to ITB or mostly ITB and a significant amount of music is made on laptops I suspect that the sound quality has become close enough to justify the practicality in MOST cases.
The reality is that audio nerds like us can (and do) have this discussion for days but the only opinion that usually matters is the end user. The average person will not be able to tell if you did your vocals through a real 1073 and blue stripe 1176 or a digital one. Side by side in an acoustically treated studio? sure but the average person will never do that.
I'm just a songwriter who records my own stuff for demos and indie releases but really I only make money if my songs chart with other artists so I don't claim to be a pro. You are the audio professional so you definitely know more than I do about the recording side. That's why I watch your videos. I just know that the end user usually listens to our stuff on streaming services through ear buds and the things that matter most, as you say in the video, are song, arrangement and performance.
One thing I have learned though is when it comes to recording and mixing, technique trumps gear. CLA rips digital sometimes but if he had to mix a song on stock PT plugins I bet his mixes would still sound amazing.
I know that YOU could do more with your stock logic plugs than I could with my entire UAD rack! Thanks for the vids!
@@christopheroneilmusic9867 oh dude, 100%. I was on board with ya brotha!
Just sharing a perspective. 😎👍🏻
I think you make fantastic points mate.
A REALLY interesting thought experiment is that since some major hits were so popular and were made with ITB sounds... a lot of top dog producers now kind of think ... to get THAT sound, you gotta be in the box. Etc.
Similar to how people swear by using auto tune, even with retune speed at slowest setting - just because it has a weird mid range thing. And that’s what people are used to hearing in a vocal.
So it’s kind of like that now too.
Plus convenience. Etc.
I try to say it as much as possible, it’s my main thesis in production period - is that.
It’s all entirely about the song, arrangement, etc.
It could sound completely like shit - from a technical perspective. But if the song is good - it’s gonna be great. Haha ya know?
Stoked to hear that you’re doing your own thing, making tunes, jamming. It’s what it’s all about! Cheers dude!
Hey Steve thanks for making this test, appreciate your perspective. I would be interested in the physical API to plug-in comparison. Best to ya!
I actually still have my blackbird session. I have some of the footage likely somewhere - hopefully.
It really is something how close the plugin sounds.
Hi Steve, thanks for taking the time to make a vid. And for your passion on the subject. Unison is all about 3 things. Impedance, gain staging, and coloration. The coloration is in both plugins which is why sonically they're the same. The Ω and the gain staging are operational and improve the accuracy of the workflow. For example, when you plug a guitar into an Apollo, without Unison you're "guessing" what level to set the preamp to and how that's going to impact the amp model. With Unison, the Apollo's preamp gets "taken over" by the model and behaves EXACTLY as it would in real life. Same goes for a Neve 1073. Without Unison, you're again "guessing" how hard to drive the Apollo (or an external pre) into the model. With Unison, the guess work is gone and you end up with the closest approximation of how the hardware would react. Ω is of course a subtle change in tone that has been demonstrated in other vids. Matt Hepworth did one on the Fender for example. Be sure to check that out. We hope this helps you understand what's going on a bit better and be sure to let us know if you have any follow up questions.
Hey guys!
First off - thanks so much for taking the time to watch, and thoughtfully respond to the video. I love the insight. I'm 100% going to watch the video you refer to by Matt. Thanks for this!
I was a bit nervous to post this video as I didn't wanna have anything taken out of context or get it misinterpreted. My reaction to the test in the video was shot as it happened, so it probably was a bit more reactionary than I'd normally prefer to be.
That said - I think the censuses found throughout my comments on this video is pretty fair to the general feeling. I don't think anyone is disappointed with any of their investment. Myself included. I'm sure you're all aware of my channel and my love/affinity for UA, UAD, & Luna.
I learned a ton from this test. And it actually makes me wanna attempt it even more fairly... Think "real hardware/Apollo Unison/Apollo Clean Pre/Random interface.. just to show the Authenticity vs other interfaces.. could be fun.. Just kind of a "time" thing at this point. and it brings me to a similar point that I make in the video, which is that - it's just almost a pointless rabbit hole. The Apollo, the UAD plugins, some other plugins out there all sound fantastic really - and they are just tools....Good tools can make a beautiful house... but those Tools are useless if you don't have a good foundation/blueprint to build off of... you have to have a great arrangement, song, etc..
A few interesting "technical" observations that I've learned - Impedance is going to make the biggest difference cumulatively, and like you say the guesswork of the gain stage on the preamp feeding into the model.. I'm going to assume that as you gain up the "unison model" - there is some sort of calibrated inverse gain being applied (for lack of a better explanation)... or at least - the "gain" part of the model is bypassed, but the non-linearities & distortion characteristics with each increase in gain - are in fact being applied.... .HA I'm probably completely explaining this terribly, but I'm almost 100% certain that I'm on the same page with your point with respect to the how gain is managed... I wanted to include the block diagram to hit on the fact that there is something PHYSICAL happening before AD/DA - but I didn't want the video to get too crazy intense...
In any case - I greatly appreciate the feedback, and encourage you guys to keep rocking.. and if you need any golden units on some 361a's.. I got you! This test is likely also a testament to the plugins themselves. So there's that. The Apollo as a device itself, is fantastic. Even without unison, I think it would stand on it's own as a tool BECAUSE of the workflow.. which is pretty much the sentiment in the comments.
It seems as though - Unison gives you something cumulatively. Track a whole session and there will be a big noticeable difference in dynamics, subtle tone, etc.. which is that next step between owning a $60,000 API 1608 vs anything else. This video certainly didn't highlight that and there is something to be said for it... perhaps in a later video. 🤓
As always guys, thanks for the passion and hard work that you and the rest of the team put into your projects! Looking forward to the cool new stuff you all put out in the coming years.
Cheers!
Steve
@@TheSteveKinney You're welcome! We're happy to have such passionate and thoughtful users and really appreciate all the time and energy you put into your vids! Rock on!!!
Hey Steve!
Thanks for your videos, been watching them lately and finally decided to order my own Apollo twin x, hasn’t been shipped yet though! This one makes me doubt my decision a bit hehe.. Even though Spark came out I still decided that I wanted to spend the extra money on an Apollo just for the hype around the Unison tech thing. One question I have - is there a reason this test you’re doing in this video could not be carried out before Spark came out? I don’t know if I understand it wrong but I thought before you could also either record with unison and print the audio OR you could also record a clean signal and then afterwards use a Uad plugin to process it post recording - and this last method would not take advantage of the unison tech and basically give the same results as you’re getting now with a native insert? Or does the Apollo somehow always use the unison technology even in post recording processing? I could be completely wrong, I don’t understand everything about the unison tech yet so that’s why I’m asking 😀
Truthfully - the test probably could have been done.
But for whatever reason, the thought to test like this never crossed my mind, as it wasn't/didn't ever seem relevant.
It probably was just that this was a totally different line, and a lot of people would wanna see how they would compare, myself included.
When I saw others doing the null test in post the way the did, I kind of naturally though - hey wait, what about unison?.. right?
The thing I find really interesting, and would be curious to test - is.. for one..
does the accuracy of the "model" of the plugin work best because it's "calibrated" for Apollo specifically?
To test this - it would be even harder because we would want the "golden" unit they modeled in the first place.
And would compare against the unison, then native through clean Apollo pre, then native through other interfaces and just see what's really happening.
The test really is kind of DEEP down a rabbit hole, and once you get this far - it seems to kind of be so far down that it's almost pointless .. outside of just keeping UA honest.
The truth is - the Apollo is a great high quality interface, great AD/DA, great pre's and dynamic range, and the lowest latency around when you use the onboard monitoring etc.. just didn't see a need to have shady marketing lol
You'll love you're Apollo mate! Cheers!
Thanks Steve, totally get it and agree! The Apollo is on the way and I’m sure I’ll be happy with it regardless 😀
I’m still blown away by the sounds I get tracking through Unison preamps. My recordings have never sounded more alive. Tracking through Unison is unique.
Yeah.
I’m sure there is something to it. Even if it is only inspiration.
Who knows. Still love my Apollo. Cheers mate!
After multiple video comparisons ... I'm not hearing Unison being unique. Largely hype from what most are concluding.
@@musiccreation1198 have you seen many videos that do a comparison via unison? And not just a wav file in post production? I’d love to see some others.
Every video I watch is just comparing the post production situation, which doesn’t use the unison tech.
@@TheSteveKinney Well, unless I'm misunderstanding at this point, unison does not impact the sonics. In the comments here, we have UA saying "sonically they are the same". Over at reddit (sorry for the double post): Commenter writes "unison is less to do with sound than it is to do with being able to use the unison preamp in the same way as you can the hardware". UA's Drew responded: "Correct". Going on to state, those of us (me) who were expecting Unison tech to deliver better sonics had "misassumptions" about Unison. Ok. I have no doubt that I have numerous "misassumptions" but ....
those "misassumptions" were created by UA themselves!! Quotes from UA's website on Unison tech: "allowing UA audio interface mic preamps to sound and behave like the world’s most sought-after tube and solid-state designs. By capturing the all-important impedance, gain stage “sweet spots,” and component-level circuit behaviors, Unison gives UA interfaces the tone and feel of legendary mic preamps from UA, API,® Neve,® SSL,® Manley,® and more.
"emulate the input impedance..." "This is crucial to capturing these unique devices’ signature tones."
"Crucial", "all-important" in relationship to "sound", "tone". "Unison gives UA interfaces the tone".
Suddenly ... now...Unison isn't about sonics. Give me a f'ing break. Add in, today I watched a UA produced comparison where they had their plugins 2-3db louder. I think UA makes some great products - even class leading - but my trust in UA is severely damaged. Probably irreparably.
@@musiccreation1198 yeah mate - I totally hear you. I think you’re on the same page with my initial reaction in the video.
You’re still on the money.
After sitting with it for a minute - the Apollo itself as a device is still absolutely fantastic and being able to track in real-time with processing - with complex monitoring - still incredible - for the money - nothing else like it until you start spending big money for complex PT rigs. Or have a bunch of outboard gear etc.
Plus the plugins still sound killer - and go on all my mixes.
But again - I think you’re on the money at the same time.
thanks for taking the time of doing this comparison and sharing it mate :) I'm learning but happy to see that I made a good choice by getting a mac M1 and a presonus quantum 2626 (this interface with the studio one has like a 0.00000001 latency 🤣. I can even track with waves abbey road chambers on 8 tracks with no audible latency. (basic M1 mini) The pres are crystal clear. But I got trapped by the idea of getting some of that analog gump from my favorite records. And UAD marketing almost got me. I better put that extra money on a really good mic and external pre from Warm Audio.
Hello MR Dennis. My name is Maggie, We have a NEW MAC MINI M2 PRO CHIP AND A QUATUM 2626... And an Apollo Twin x quad... THE UNISON TECHNOLOGY IS FANTASTIC. IT SPECIFICALLY INTERACTS WITH GUITAR PICK UP MAGNETICA. AND THE DELICATE MICROPHONE DIAPHRAGM SENSITIVITY IS NOT THESE WITH NATIVE THE NATIVE. If you need sensitive warm tons. and if you lay guitar . bass .. any instrument with a pick up. UNISON RULES..
WE HAVE BOTH. A APOLLO AND M2 PRO CHIP. mega track mixing. LOGIC on a MAC PRO 2 CHIP AND 2626. GREAT.. BUT IF YOU WANT TO PLAY guitar direct... the interaction with the pics up an UNISON rules...OTHING LIKE IT. As per my comment above... WE found a 7000 mb read and write NVME SSD by SAMSUNG for $100 940 model. 1 gig . and an OWC ENVOY external drive case. $89 bucks..
WHAT DO YOU GET?
An Apollo with 1 gig storage thunderbolt 3 7000 read and write speed,
I will never get rid of my UNISON TECHNOLOGY... MAGNETIC FEILD INTERACTION... awesome. Maggie
I’ve never really been under the impression that the Apollo had some kind of magic sauce to it. It is just plugins that is running internally in the interface.
For me the Apollo is all about workflow. I really treat it as if I’m running into hardware while recording. It simplifies my workflow and I don’t have to make a bunch of decisions later.
Also, Unison will put the preamp at the right impedance and gain for the emulation so I won’t have to think about that.
I just love the workflow it provides.
You’re last bit about impedance and gain was what this whole video was about.
It really doesn’t do much of anything.
But I do get the workflow comment. And I generally agree with everything you said.
Great points Henrik! Cheers!
Very good video and good test! The differences are small and really the most important thing is the music. Although the internet is flooded with all kinds of attempts at making music, it is perhaps still an advantage that nowadays many more talented musicians can afford nice plugins to work with.
Couldn’t agree more! Great point! Cheers!
Hey brotha exactly wat I wanted to see and listen always had the curiosity of doing this 😂 and to be fair the results are just astonishing, surprised keep up the amazing work brotha cheers✌️
Low key it’s my b day today and this is wat I wanted to see😂 thx
Ha ha 😆 that’s awesome! cheers bro! Happy birthday!
It’s worth it to me because the native versions free up SHARC space. I have a Twin and a Satellite Octo so not doing badly on DSP power but it’s nice to be able to keep some always available. Plus, I record everything at 96/24 so I’m using a decent amount of resources when I work. This test makes that an even more valid option. How could you not see that as a plus unless you’ve got unlimited DSP power on your UA hardware.
Weeelllll. It IS a plus, but … if you look at it is UA being misleading for .. their entirety of the Apollo reign… then.. you’d probably be pretty pissed that they essentially kind of lied at worst, misled at best about a ton of things related to the Apollo.
But from a workflow standpoint, it’s a net positive.
Steve -- have really enjoyed your channel. I just downloaded and started using the Spark deal with an Apollo Twin X but for some reason my new UADx plugs don't run in console. I haven't once found a single statement online (from UA or elsewhere) stating explicitly you can't use the UADx plugs for no latency monitoring but I guess it's intrinsic to them being CPU based that they won't run in console? I value the no latency a lot and was assuming (still hoping) the UADx plugins can run in console somehow. Could you clarify if they work or not? I'm not sure if I have a technical issue or I'm just bumping up against how the new plugs were designed! Again.. really appreciate your UA / Apollo / Console stuff and I still think the UA setup overall has a lot of advantages, regardless of the A/B issues
Hey mate!
Thanks for the great question, and yes. I agree they don’t actually clear this part of it up at all.
Short answer, UADx cannot run in UAD console.
Long answer:
UADx was a port of the DSP accelerated software code that runs on their sharc chips - to run natively on regular CPU’s.
Because of this - there is physically no way to induce no latency.
Your signal hits your Apollo -> gets converted to digital -> gets interpreted by your CPU -> then gets processed by the CPU with each plugin instance -> then gets spit out of your host back to your Apollo -> gets converted back to an analogue signal.
No way around it; now more powerful computers can handle the load at a faster rate or lower latency. But physics kinda prevents the sub 1ms that the Apollo’s get.
If you were able to run the UADx plugins in console - it would just be the UAD-2 code, so you’d actually not be using UADx at all in that instance.
I think the main selling point here is that you can use UAD-2 plugins in post without taxing the limited DSP availability in most Apollo’s.. freeing it up for the real-time tracking when you’re session gets larger.
Long story short, UADx is traditional CPU based plugins, and UAD-2 is DSP acceleration based.
If you need the zero latency, you want the UAD-2 version of whatever plugin. 😎👍🏻
This was super helpful. This is wayyyyy closer than I had imagined.
Crazy right?
I had a hard time telling a difference in the AB test, and I agree it would not be audibly different in a mix. Any difference could be attributed to the Unison technology vs the gain staging you had to do to compensate. A question for me would be whether the Unison impedance matching is done through circuitry or done through digital emulation. If done through circuitry, it would seem to introduce some randomness that would be impossible to null out. Another test I would like to see would be a vocal tracking session using a microphone, preamp, compressor and EQ on both DSP and on Spark. Would there be a difference in a blind A-B? And would the vocalist be able to tell any difference in latency through their headphones? Maybe also try it with reverb.
If you read the block diagram in the Apollo manual, it shows that is before AD/DA - so it should be physical circuitry.
I guess for me. There should be a big audible difference. Otherwise - there are plenty of audio interfaces that have similar I/o for much less.
And could have parlayed the extra cash into legitimate hardware.
Again. None of this is even a big deal because if you don’t have a good song, no hardware or software is gonna save you.
Cheers mate!
@SteveKinney Thanks for creating these tests and making the video! For me, the discussion in the comments has been equally informative. Definitely changed some of my thinking on the topic = less "negative". ;). Edit: I'm back to feeling very disappointed in UA's "integrity".
Yeah man!
I was a little nervous about posting the video because I didn’t wanna seem so down on the Apollo.
It’s still a cool device. I think it’s just that I hate sham marketing haha 😂
Anyways, thanks so much for sharing your point of view mate! More videos to come!
Cheers!
First of all let me say you did a fine job with the test. I knew this would be a rabbit hole since I went through this years ago when I saw my first stand alone mic preamp with a variable impedance control. Impedance has a huge impact on transients which is why the signal wasn't consistent at different impedances. It always seemed to me that the higher the impedance the more transient heavy the audio would be and the lower it the impedance the more squashed it would be. But remember the magic of music isn't in the gear its in the ear. You could also try the 1073 since it has a high and low impedance switch on it as well if you want to jump back in to the rabbit hole! Cheers!
Hey mate!
I've been waiting for you're reply and thoughts here! Good stuff.
Yeah - it was definitely a rabbit hole. I think I should have definitely tried the 1073, just didn't have enough time, plus, I figured - I'd rather see people's thought's before going further on it.
I knew impedance was definitely messing with stuff. I'd be willing to bet the 1073 has a much larger impact.. but it does pose a bigger question that is rather hard to track down - what exact ranges of impedance does the apollos provide?
I feel like I saw it once but never again. I tried to search quickly before responding, but alas.. nothing.
cheers dude!
@@TheSteveKinney As far as I know the mic preamp impedance ranges from 500 ohms using the UA 610 in the unison slot and up to 5000 ohms on the gen 1 apollos and 5300 ohms on the gen 2/3 apollos with nothing in the Unison slot. If you are in Nashville go over to blackbird in berry hill and ask to rent a mic preamp with variable impedance like a focusrite ISA (it has multiple impedances on a dial on the front) or ask to talk to Mike Simmons he is a super nice guy who can give you some really cool tips on how to test impedance changes. I'm 100% sure if you take your camera with you they will be more than happy to help you and give you some valuable information. I think renting a ISA preamp for a day is just a few dollars, maybe $35. So that might be an idea on how go about testing for impedance. You have given me a great idea for a test as well!! As soon as I post it I'll let you know!! Cheers!!
@@joesalyers right on dude!
It’s funny because. My initial thought was that - “okay weird. The low-z impedance on the neve is 300.. so. Does it really even make its way down there?”
Strange stuff. I swear I saw something that suggested the current gens didn’t go down that low. And I never even thought to put two and two together that it’s not really even emulating that properly.
Damn. LOL 😂
@@TheSteveKinney I forgot about the low 300 ohm impedance on the Neve 1073, I was trying to remember what was the lowest one from memory LOL and the lowest I could remember was that the 610 was at 500 ohms. It's not hard to lower impedance so I'm sure they can go down to 100 ohms.
Because there are literal adapters for xlr cables and even 1/8th inch in ear monitor headphones cables that you can use to change the impedance to match the recommended spec of those UHF, In Ear Monitor systems.
I know I learned about the Unison impedance tech by reading the last few pages of the Apollo Manual a few years ago so that might be where you saw it.
😀📕📖
@@joesalyers yeah - I read about it somewhere!
I browsed over the manual a few times now. For some reason - I thought I remember seeing 1200 the lowest on the mic pre side.
But hell. Idk. Haha
Question: do you also get Console with the Spark subscription?
Further, great that you address the Unison part of the comparison! I asked this specifically in other reviews of Spark, because I was wondering if that would impact the recording (positively).
What I find interesting is that nobody did this test of comparing Unison with non-Unison recording before. There was no need to ‘wait’ for a native plugin of UAD to test this or hear this, right? This conclusion could have been made years ago 🤔
Well.
Not entirely - because. What if - they were in fact not a 1-1 code port.
So it kind of could and kind of could not. Hind sight is twenty twenty.
It also wasn’t really a relevant thing to test. Now that it’s native, I guess it kind of made sense.
But totally dude! A lot more to dive into. There is a nuanced difference for sure - but is it really worth it in the a/b scheme of things.
I may have to test further!
Also / to answer your question - that’s a negative on UAD console.
That’s the companion software that controls what’s happening inside of the Apollo device.
@@TheSteveKinney That’s at least something the Apollo has going for it 😉
I think recording the plugins with another interface makes it differently (not better or worse, just different).
And I like the facts that Apollo /plugins owners now have the best of 2 worlds (Unison with DSP and Native without need to expand DSP to run multiple plugins in one session). And the best part, if you own the plugins you do not need to pay the monthly subscription 👍🏻
As a new Apollo user w/Satellite octo purchased 4 months ago, I'm not sure what to think right now. I'm super excited and waiting for a Townsend Labs Sphere L22 to arrive in about 12 hrs. Took a nap and just woke up like a kid thinking about the Apollo & L22 joys and clicked on your video Steve. *sigh* ... I'm mind $%^#ed as well. I appreciate your time, patience and honest feedback from your testing results. Guess I will just have to focus on the quality of my sessions and enjoy playing my horns. The tech is gratifying, but somewhat stressful to keep up with it all. Please DIG into this Kenny, I'm very curious to see more of what you will explore ... Thx
I mean.
The more I sit with it. The more silly it really all is.
Obviously - the problem here was the marketing department.
We all love the sound. It sounds great. Before we did the test - we all love it.
After the tests, it’s not gonna change my workflow or anything. But still 😂 come on marketing department...
But anyways.
You got some crazy good sounding stuff, so enjoy and make you’re good tunes mate!
Cheers!
@@TheSteveKinney Cheers ... enjoy the coffee and keep up the great work mate!
@@DMV-SaxTv thanks! 🙏🏻
Plenty more planned. Cheers.
Check the value of all that now resale
Great video and test! I just bought my Apollo twin X a month ago, and I really thought unison was totally different until I meet this video. But I still like the workflow:) There is a question. Do you think real-time low latency is practically useful? Or it may be another marketing trick? Thanks
Hey mate!
I think you’re view is the general consensus. I still love the workflow too!
That said - to your question.
The real-time stuff is TOTALLY useful. Definitely not a marketing trick.
Hello Steve - I am new to Universal Audio and bought a Apollo Twin/X and running it through a IMac. I would like to know the differences between a native plug in, a UAD plug in and a Unison plug in? Do you purchase them separately? Thanks - Pete
Hey Pete, right on.
So - the UAD-2 plugins are the same plugins as native, except they are DSP accelerated, meaning - your Apollo itself processes the signal, relieving your CPU and GPU etc resources from being used.
This is a HUGE advantage when you have big sessions and still need to create a signal chain during tracking without latency.
No matter who says it, latency is still a thing with modern computers and during tracking, it’s problematic .
The unison plugins, are mostly the mic preamp and guitar amp UAD-2 plugins, it’s an extra feature of those particular UAD-2 plugins. The feature itself works on a hardware level with your Apollo, allowing your Apollo to change the impedance of the mic pre on your Twin to match what the real hardwares impedance would be (for example, a neve 1073) so that the emulation is that much closer to the real thing.
It makes a very subtle difference, but it does make a difference.
It also aims to match the gain structure - so that as you gain up your apollos preamp, it’s matching the gain structure of the model of the hardware it’s emulating.
As far as licenses, if you buy a UAD-2 plugin, they give you a perpetual license of the native version.
Not the other way around.
Unison is a feature, not a type of plugin, so that part of it is included in those plugins that have it.
Hope this makes sense, cheers!
@@TheSteveKinney Thanks for the clarity - For a beginner it's hard to connect the dots. Glad your videos are out there!
@petepapania2700 for real, the UA stuff is certainly dense. Cause you’re learning both about the physical hardware devices that the plugins emulate PLUS the digital nomenclature that they use lol
It’s all sorts of confusing up in here ha
Just came to tell you sorry u fell for the hype
I invested a lot of money into UAD over the years and I alway this nagging notion I was deluding myself falling for the exclusivity hype.
I never really heard much difference, my music did not improve. Im now recording on an iPad Pro with Cubasis, auv3 Izotope plugins etc,using a Volt, Rode mic. I’m more productive, creative and sounding very good.
Dude, good for you brotha! That’s badass. So hard for people to be that aware of themselves, truly a great quality to have.
It’s all about whatever makes you most creative and actually produce music.
Cheers mate!
Hey Bo, see my reply above for details. It's NOT hype.
@@UniversalAudio thanks again for taking the time to not only watch, but share detailed feedback! Means the world mates!
In my general opinion, the unison preamp tech is about workflow. For me, I prefer committing with some preamp saturation and compression on the way in. And clients love being able to hear real-time autotune / reverb effects in their ears. LUNA + Apollo is an amazing pairing for that experience. Good plugins and workflow in a nice package, that's what I like.
As per the test itself, and you might hate me for sharing this (=P), but what if you run the test through a line instead of the microphone to cut down on the variables. Play some sounds from an external device through the line input and that way you should have more consistency. Just a thought.
Darcy, bro. Couldn’t hate ya if tried!
I couldn’t agree more. Like I say in the video. It’s really hard for me to be disappointed with my Apollo. The real time stuff is ALWAYS gonna be a massive advantage. Even with m1 and modern processing. Especially as they develop more complicated plugin models and code.
I think there is definitely more testing to be done.
Another subscriber pointed out that impedance affects dynamic mics a lot more than condensers. So doing another test with that is worth a try.
And also doing tests with non Apollo devices would make for a very interesting test - when compared to the real hardware. Essentially - what gets you the most accurate emulation... answer would likely be obvious, but still a great test.
Cheers dude.
@@TheSteveKinney those are some good points. I don’t fully understand the impedance but that’s part of the sauce for having the Apollo. I personally feel like recording through the unison preamp and applying the plugin after the fact should be someone’s goal. In my opinion, going through the unison should give you something different character otherwise why have the unison slot and not just an insert slot in console.
Hearing the impedance effects dynamics more than condensers is going to send me downs rabbit hole now lol
@@MusicByDarcy
100%. Well said. It’s very interesting. I pulled out the block diagram and was gonna walk through my theory on what’s actually going on with the signal - but the video was already pretty long ha
Maybe for another time 😆
@@TheSteveKinney I hear you, it’s a struggle to find the balance with making these videos to the point but comprehensive. ❤️
@@MusicByDarcy if you go off of the basic concepts of electricity, impedance is simply the amount of resistance in an electrical circuit to an altering current. Simply put, a higher impedance would use more coloration since it’s symbolizing the process of the tubes/transducers resisting the current running through the circuit whereas a lower impedance will lead to a cleaner signal. This is all in theory, I could possibly be wrong, but that’s what I got from it.
Interesting tests, they didn’t null so there’s definitely something different. The difference might be even more depending on the plug-in used because the mic pre’s normal impedance might be close to the impedance the unison enabled plugin changes it too.
I’ve noticed di boxes with variable impedance change guitar tone and transients a lot so I’d expect the same with a mic pre. Either way the plug-ins are really good and being able to use them with out latency is a big deal
Totally agreed!
Something else in the test that is almost impossible to account for is the calibration of the interface.
The plugins were designed for the Apollo. In other words, the plugin emulation is going to sound the most authentic when the signal is captured through the mic pre of an Apollo. Regardless of if that’s in real time or applied in post.
I’d be curious to retest with multiple interfaces to see what happens. But at the end of the day - it’s kind of pointless.
I think at the time / I was kind of thinking about the whole thing in the wrong mindset.
Fun test none the less, but not really relevant.
Just gotta make good music! Cheers mate!
You have to remember in audio, and that includes back in the analogue days too, that audio gear has always gone from basic level to top pro level and the difference in sound is relatively small. It always has been. The degree's of 'better" are minute, relatively speaking, but the difference in price has always been utterly mind blowing. Ever decreasing returns for massive outlay..And then then end listener just listens to the end product as an MP3 on a pair of computer speakers or ear buds. It's unsustainable.
Dude.
So accurate.
It’s funny. Like. Again. I’m still really happy with my device. Like I say in the video - I really was just expecting to have an obvious difference between the two sounds.
Just the marketing on it kills me. Didn’t think UA would be like that as they have always stuck to their guns for so long. Crazy!
But totally good point mate! Thanks for sharing!
I've run into this issue with high end photography. On the extreme you have the Phase One IQ4 system at almost $60,000 US. But does this camera really capture a better image than a $12,000 Hasselblad X2D, or an $800 Nikon Z50? I can tell you the differences are subtle and it takes years of looking at images to see the difference even using calibrated monitors. The ROI on "perceived" results is, as you say, unsustainable and unjustifiable in 99% of the cases.
I’m surprised this video has not gotten more traction. Despite different testing methods that could have been used, it is eye opening as a prospective buyer of Apollo hardware.
I do think the Solo in a minimalist setup is still a good buy over something from the Volt lineup, if even purely for tracking.
I appreciate this comment.
A number of people misunderstood the test, a few mentioned that I needed to simply take two wav’s and put plugins on them. LOL obviously that would null.
But ultimately, this video holds the marketing departments foot to the fire..
The truth is - as hardware, the Apollo’s (all of the current lineup) is some of the best interfaces out there.
The ad/da conversion is amazing,the dynamic range is amazing.. the DSP is REALLY useful.
The could have and SHOULD have only lead with that.. lol
The gimmicky stuff was not necessary and now kind of hurts the image.
But again, the truth is that there are very few interfaces better from a technical perspective and all of them are more costly.
@@TheSteveKinney I'd be curious to hear your projections, if you're willing, on what a new release of Apollo hardware would look like.
I don't see UA moving completely away from DSP based units. That said, there may be room for a new mid-tier lineup without DSP that has upgraded components (e.g. converters) and is higher end than the Volt series. It could turn out to fragment the hardware lineup, but from a personal standup I'd like to see something like this.
Second would be when new DSP units end up dropping. Despite Spark and native getting traction, my take is DSP is still relevant for some use cases. I like the hardware design on the Apollos today and UA may not change that up, rather just an upgrade to components and the onboard DSP chipset to something more modern.
Great video, very informative
Cheers brotha!
I'm thinking buy an RME UFX III & native UAD Native Signature Edition for 300 bucks, coz damn those UAD plugins sound bloody good !
lol
I know you made another video on a similar theme, but I post my response here because it's related to how the plug-ins sound and if they can co-exist for existing users.
I think UA needed to get in on the general market USB audio interface - hence the Volt. Instead of customers picking Focusrite, they now have a reason to go with UA. From that, Spark is born (or maybe they were developed side by side).
Now, the issue is once you have the software version of UA unison plug-ins, and you aren't a professional producer, what is the point of the Apollo line of interfaces?
To me, the Apollo interface is basically the box that allows you access to UA Luna. I happen to love using and learning on Luna because I view that as my preferred DAW (even if when it initially came out people didn't rank it with the established DAWs). Without an Apollo interface, I can't see a way to even use Luna. I do wonder whether UA may "unlock" Luna in a future update so as to allow people to use it without the need for a Thunderbolt 3/Apollo interface connected and use it with a Volt and Spark/UADx natively.
But then the next question is, if you prefer using Logic or Cubase, or Pro Tools, is it worth purchasing an Apollo unit of some kind for access to Luna? I think that depends on: If you already use Luna and like it, you're going to need an Apollo interface of some kind. Otherwise, you use Volt/Spark and whatever DAW is your preferred one. What I mean is, if you've never experienced Luna and have no intention to, the Volt and Spark/UADx will be your route to UA quality plug-ins (via UADx).
The whole UADx vs UA hardware is definitely a murky water now. I'm sure it's been an incredible success for UA - taking the wind out of Focusrite and getting in new customers who were on the fence about UA, - Volt/Spark/UADx is their entry into it. But if you're established with Apollo hardware and UA's Apollo plug-ins (which are very expensive), having bought into Apollo interfaces for their DSP and Unison, you're left scratching your head. The writing is on the wall about the processing power of Apollo DPS compared to M1/M2 apple chips, and if you want complex mixes with tonnes of plug-ins firing off, the Mac M1 with Spark/UADx is going to do that better than the limit you may reach just by using Apollo DSP units alone.
Perhaps the conclusion is just simple: Let them co-exist and utilise both on your computer and DAW of choice for as and when necessary. Unison on Apollo for latency free tracking utilising the DSP you have and the UADx software plug-ins for complex mixing and multiple effects on top of that which your Mac can handle instead (before reaching your processing limit).
great points mate!
I agree for the most part honestly. I think DSP acceleration is almost a must.. at least for high track counts and still having great latency.. the m1's are cool, but it's only another year before they are just a standard computer.. what I mean is that software dev's will soak up that power, and then we will be right back to where we were a year ago.
idk. I just wanna make cool sounds ha.. I'm going to continue investing in hardware. IMHO - it's a better investment overall.. not as convenient, but sound quality is not matched.
In a mix, you can always argue the plugin sounds as good, which I'd agree with. but.. that plugin has a lifespan and you can't resell it. hardware you can.. and you can fix it.
All this really ended up doing for me is making become more of a hardware nerd haha.
but either way - it's all in the name of getting better! cheers mate!
No regrets about my Apollo (and Octo), I could not have lived without the Capitol Chambers and Ocean Way plugins in my studio. 🙂
That’s good to hear.
I don’t have regrets either! It’s a great device, and plugins sound great. No doubt about that.
Cheers mate!
Yep. I won't consider selling my Octo until Capitol Chambers & Ocean Way are included in UADx. That said, the IK Multimedia Sunset Sound Studio Reverb plugin is really good ;)
@@musiccreation1198 dude. Right on!
I have to give sunset a go - I haven’t tried that one yet.
I bought an Apollo and always just assumed that the Unison feature wouldn't have a huge effect given its mostly just impedance switching. That the two signals are that close is not surprising to me so it also doesn't make me regret buying it or feeling like UAD cheated me. You still got an interface with great preamps, latency-free tracking, other added features and access to the plugins. I could see someone who thought the impedance switching would be more obvious being upset but that's down at least in part to the person with those expectations.
Eehhhh.
Idk. Because it’s heavily marketed as a unique sound that you couldn’t get without the Apollo.
That it follows very specific gain structures of the hardware unit that it’s modeling. Etc
They hype it on all the office hours. Etc
I don’t disagree at all with what you’re saying, I’m still pleased with the device overall. Just a little shocked that there was no real audible difference.
Meaning. I literally would never have needed to put the plugin on the unison slot.. ever.
Or ever commit the sound. Or run console, unless for some sort of special monitoring needs, or the real-time shit.
Truthfully. If I had known it was this was from the start - I would have likely spend a lot of money on outboard gear.
Which I already have a decent collection of.
Again. Still a great device. Just quite a bit misleading.
@@TheSteveKinney I thought there was an obvious difference in the blind sine wave test, not much in the white noise. The acoustic guitar one was so clipped and distorted it was too difficult to listen for nuanced differences. Did you only try the one plug-in too? Maybe different plugins take advantage of the impedance differently and also different mics may respond differently.
@@walrusgumboot I agree. I think I mentioned in the video too that the sine one had a true obvious difference.
But it’s crazy that you’d need a test tone to hear it haha
You bring up a great point. I just didn’t have enough time to test the other one and put together. I also just wanted to get peoples feedback - see if there was something I didn’t considering during testing.
At the moment - the only other one to test would be the neve 1073. And I really should do a follow up.
I’ll try to plan it out better. Use a better speaker.
With respect to the acoustic sound - I actually tried to dig into the pre on purpose. As I figured that it would show it’s “character” better. And really highlight the way unison could have been different with harmonics etc.
Again. I was wrong 😂
The part that really makes my mind twist is that - it’s just the amount of effort to really go through to hear that much of a difference.
Like. This test is still crude and a little flawed. I’m sure there are really great testing devices out there - but if you can’t hear a blaring difference in a practical setting... I don’t see how it matters.
I’m gonna chew on all this before I do another test, but I’m starting to think I should just to have a different approach!
Thanks for sharing! Cheers!
@@TheSteveKinney oh that all makes sense, I can understand the logic with the acoustic test too. Maybe others tests, plugs, mics will show more of a difference, but I think whatever difference is there will be minor. I’ve never found much difference between tracking with a plug in on unison vs simply adding the same plug after recording. Is there a difference? Probably, and certain conditions are likely to be more substantial than others. My understanding isn’t that doing it through unison sounds better, more that they’re more closely able to match the original hardware being emulated by matching the impedance that the original hardware has.
I’m almost exclusively only track with unison.
Primarily because it keeps from burning DSP.
I guess that doesn’t matter much now ha
But. Still. I always commit a unison, and it takes my mixes much further in post since I’m not burning a bunch of DSP etc.
I guess maybe that’s the real draw. Idk haha but it’s all good. Still sounds cool.
I have the 6176, The API channel strip hardware among other pieces of hardware; are they the same as the UAD plug-ins? No. They don’t sound the same. However the plug ins still sound great. They are better than the logic stock plug ins, doenst mean you can’t get great mixes with stock plugs in either. From my experience you can have all the best analog gear at your disposal and end up with sub par mixes. A lot of is due to the hands the tools are in. I remember the first time I used the Neve preamp plug in recording some guitars on a song, a week later I bought the Heritage 1073 Preamp (hardware) and recorded he same guitars. They were infinitely better. So from my experience hardware may or not be better than these emulations, but they are definitely ‘different’
I think the main thing for me is being able to track and print in real time with the plug-in. I get the unison impedance probably isn’t all it’s hyped to be and that sucks. But in hip hop tracking where rappers are used to recording through big templates that usually have 100+ ms of latency+ pro tools 64ms of latency every plug-in you add needs to be well thought out or your artist is going to complain about the lag. Adding the neve spark plug-in would add 55ms of latency which is too much to be tracked in real time imo.
Dude for real.
I agree. Still love the workflow & like you say - the real-time is the winner here.
Also. Tell this to M1 Mac fans 😂... most of them think the M1 is lawd almighty himself in computer for ha ha
For me, my biggest gripe with UA for several years was always running into a “DSP Wall”
I’m just excited to be able to record and mix without that being an issue. Can’t wait to see where my imagination takes me 😂
Totally!
The sky is the limit now with native.
And side note. I LOVE the synth opal.
Cheers brotha!
@@TheSteveKinney But can you record with Luna or even launch Luna without an apollo?
@Horatio Bannister nope you need the hardware on and connected currently.
@@HoratioBannister You can now with the latest release - it has a Core Audio mode. You still need to own an UAD product though and have a UA account.
What is everyone’s take on the UAD Satellite DSP devices especially the Quad and Octo, “do you think they will discontinue these products line and stop supporting it like what Focusrite did to Liquid Mix”?
I personally don't think so, I think that DSP accelerated systems are always going to be a thing - those particular ones will likely eventually just become obsolete like a computer - and they will have newer more advanced devices etc.
Currently just got a Mac studio.. not as impressed as everyone else is.. it's great and worlds ahead of my last machine, but I have no idea why some people are saying it's the holy grail.. lol. it still takes time to render videos.. latency will always be a thing.. but anyways!
cheers mate! great questions.
@@TheSteveKinney Cheers for sharing your thoughts 💭
You sound really disappointed by this, but I’m not really sure why.
I didn’t expect a lot of difference, because even before UADx I couldn’t hear much different between tracking with a plug-in vs adding it after the fact. I’m happy they’ve come out with Spark, nice to have the option to run it on cpu vs dsp
Yeah mate!
I was a little nervous to share the video because I didn’t wanna come off as hating UAD or Apollo etc.
I know I say it at some point in the video - but I’m still quite happy with the device, how it functions. The ad/da. The plugins themselves. It all sounds great.
I think it was just that I hate deceptive marketing - and up until that point, I didn’t put it past UA to have shammy marketing. They always seemed like they really stood behind unison as a tech.
In the video - my reaction was actually filmed totally in the moment LOL so I didn’t really have time to internalize it.
It’s all really silly. But it does kind of hit me a bit, that this is gonna hurt me as a client. I’m probably just gonna go the route of hardware purchases only in the future.
No sham marketing there! Ha ha 👀... or is there ha
Thanks for sharing! Cheers mate!
@@TheSteveKinney Yeah. On one hand, we don't want to over blow the marketing bs, but it isn't a "feel good" situation. To use another cliche, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. :). I think your point about hardware is SPOT ON.
Not sure any further tests are necessary. You’re an experienced engineer/producer and you can’t hear any difference between Unison and Non-Unison, with everything else pretty much the same. It really does seem that UA over-egged the story on Unison somewhat. I’m quite pissed off really. I got in UAD just a few months back with a Twin X Quad Heritage, which set me back £1300/$1600. These are going on ebay for under £900. I’ve spent another £200 on plugs, so a £600 or almost 50% hit/loss in a few months if I sell now. But I’m still thinking of doing it because of the price of the plugins, if I stay in. I’ve learnt about the difference in computing power between the SHARC processor and the M1 Max. It’s so vast that I’m thinking of selling my 2015 MacBook Pro and the Apollo Twin and buty a Mac Studio and a cheapish interface, like the Audient ID14 Mkii (£160) or a used Thunderbolt 3 one. Then carry on with all the AU stuff I have anyway. I’ve the other hardware I need already. It might just be best to get off the treadmill straight away and not be tempted into more UAD2 plugin purchases. I’m pretty pissed off to be honest now that Spark has come along. The Apollo can be thought of as little more than an oversized dongle for overpriced plugins. The only upside really is printing with FX and Zero latency using the onboard DSP. For mixing and mastering it becomes pretty irrelevant. Shit
Hey mate!
Any update on the situation? Personally - I still see a few key uses for Apollo's.
1. The interface and conversion is just better. So there's that.
2. it's becoming more apparent that m1 is basically just a new format, but in reality- it's not THAT much further ahead than where the previous gens were at, and the moment that software devs start exploring the architecture more,... we will need DSP acceleration again.. ha ha..
3. Workflow of recording with some settings baked in makes you a better producer and engineer.. and it speeds you up. Now this isn't necessarily an Apollo thing.. if you had outboard gear, it would be a very similar workflow. you don't always need to do stuff in post.
4. That said, the UAD plugs, in my honest opinion are still far ahead of everything else.. but of course, that doesn't really require an Apollo, just the "spark" version when it's available!
Hope you got your spot situated to where you like it mate! at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if you've got a portastudio from 1980, a hackintosh w/ a presonus interface, or a fancy Apollo x16 and an m1... it's all about enjoying making music and making good sounds! Cheers dude!
@@TheSteveKinney Hi Steve - so here’s the situation now. I saw a deal for a used Octo TB2 with 75 plugins for $1100 and bit. Most of the plugins were ones I was excited about, like Capitol One and there were not too many duplicates. I still don’t enjoy having to use Console and jump between that and Logic, I’d rather it was all ‘in-house’ And there are too many pop-up warnings going on - it all detracts from making music. The other frustration is I haven’t managed to get any great sounds from the UAD guitar amps and when I want to use my native amp sims the latency of the Twin is not good enough. I like the sounds from my AU plugins and get things to a good place much quicker so…
I bought a an RME BabyFace Pro FS which has the lowest latency out there and I’ve been having a lot fun with that - it’s set and forget and start making some music. So now I have a BabyFace, a Twin and an Octo with about 100 UAD plugins and I’m not sure which way to jump. At the moment I’m thinking of ditching the Twin X and keeping the RME for tracking with the Octo and plugins for mixing and see how I do. I’ve got licences to all the Spark stuff without a subscription as well so that’s cool, especially as they start porting more. It’d be nice to try LUNA, but I’d need to keep the Twin as well and it’s not essential.
I take your points on board - the UAD gear may make me a better producer in the long run. I wish they’d would write better drivers, but I guess it’s against their interests to do so as they want you to keep buying more of their plugins. Anyway, I’m just gonna let it all brew for a while and see how it comes out.
Thanks for interest
Btw i don't understand why you need to keep recording twice????
Just use a signal splitter and use 2 inputs, and have unison active on one, use spark on the other.
Part of “unisons” technology has to do with microphone line impedance...
If you split the signal, then you’re messing with the impedance in a big way.
@@TheSteveKinney a splitter would apply the same "impedance voodoo" to both signals.
It probably still wouldn't null out, but it would be closer to the unison vs unison null you saw at the end.
@@pb25193 your spreading line resistance across two lines. It’s physics I would think..
@@TheSteveKinney sure, thanks.
maybe UAD is just Waves with really good marketing and product design
I’ll tell ya first.
If it is ... it got me.. ha
I mean. I can’t REALLYY be that upset - it still sounds absolutely incredible.
I’ve tracked on real api console in blackbird and split the signal through unison / I still have the session. It sounds damn near identical. Even the spectrum is identical. So - I mean.
It’s not like it’s a complete fast one.
I think my problem is specifically with the marketing - now that there is native available. It kind of makes the claims on the Apollo fall completely apart.
And they literally destroyed their own hardware (satellites).. no reason to have them anymore.. at least, in time.
Either way - having an Apollo has helped my career in so many ways. It’s better ad/da for sure than many, and the real time stuff is still damn awesome.
But now it makes me realize that I’m probably gonna skip plugins for the foreseeable future and strictly get hardware. 🤷♂️
@@jameslewis3325 totally man. It seems that sky is the limit with native.
Very weird.
I do still love the real-time tracking with plugs though. That would be hard for me to give up.
@@TheSteveKinney I agree, they got me too, also I gotta appreciate the live clases during the pandemic, kept me alive and I learned a lot, there is a few things at least you gotta have an apollo to use Luna and its instruments, not sure for how long, same as the summing and all that juice, great interface but somehow is been loosing its "better than the rest status" fast, but obviously they are making more money, SSL is coming strong also. let's see what happens, Lately i started to think that what suit me best is Fab filters plugs and that's is it!
@@TheSteveKinney Do you have a video of that traking at Blackbird?
@@destinationmusicrecords5934 I still have the session and the video was the one I made about how to track a vocal.
I was actually gonna make a comparison video of UAD versus the real api.
But I didn’t have enough time while I was there to film another intro, and then just never got around to redo’ing one at home.
But I could totally make a unison vs api comparison.
It was super interesting.
Great video, shocking results. I agree, what is going on over at UAD.
Makes me think the supply chain stuff has reallyyyyy hit them hard.
I have no way of confirming this.
But just from the outside looking in - this whole native release kind of kills their entire mojo.
For 1. It’s weird right now. Who’s gonna spend the money for a small library, while, it’s super worth the money from a value standpoint, and no doubt they will have more titles included - I’m sure many people have skipped signing up because they wanna wait until the big library is included.
And 2. It kinda makes new UAD-2 releases not worth buying. Because - why pay even the 50% off price, when you can get the entire collection for the same amount..
In other words. Buy one 50% off plugin a year and get their entire collection?
I’ve spent like 11 years worth of subscriptions in the last 2 years alone ha 😂 of course, If they were to disappear off the face of the earth, I’d keep my license. But. Still.
Strange times. As cool as it is that it’s native... it’s also kinda weird. Especially given that this test has been so ... eye opening .. 😀
@@TheSteveKinney Yeah, I work in Scotts Valley and UA is right down the street. I also have a buddy tight with UA folks. I shared your video with him. I will be interested to hear his take as well. You are in Nashville? I have a couple of friends living there who you might have heard come across. One is Kenny Schick (producer/songwriter and the other is Greg Camp (former Smashmouth songwriter and band founder). Love your videos. Keep it up. I have learned a lot from you. :)
@@LanceHulsey yup! I’m in a suburb of Nashville now. The gulch traffic was killing me lol
But yeah - good stuff!
I feel like the name is quite familiar, I’m sure we have mutual connections and what not. Small world, smaller in Nashville. LOL
Thanks for sitting through my slow talking videos haha 😆 can’t do the wild hyped talking these other creators do.
Cheers mate!
@@TheSteveKinney you also have to consider the market UA is going after because what’s the point in DSP for a new potential customer if host processors are already extremely powerful like the M1?
@@tylerdengler6960
You have to consider that statement would have been the exact same statement someone would have made when the first intel core 2 duo would have came out...
The m1 is “insanely” powerful right now. But as soon as software developers learn how to take advantage of it, we’ll be right back to square one.
So it’s not a vacuum. And no matter what. Piling on the synths, and tracks, and plugs, you still won’t get less than 1.1 milliseconds of latency WITH plugin processing on the track you’re working with - with native.
At least not in pro sessions. But I digress...
It’s not to take away from your point, it’s just to say that there is a little nuance to it.
I think your point about the “market” is correct.
Cheers mate!
My takeaway is that impedance undoubtedly changes the sound, it's just not nearly as big a difference as one might believe with all other variables matched.
It makes you wonder if it’s really one of those
“Cumulative effects” where it makes a massive difference when used across all tracks.
But yeah - just simple a/b - barely noticeable in a practical setting.
@@TheSteveKinney I watched Matt's Fender vid and wow(!) did I learn a lot about how to use that plugin. Fantastic vid imo. But regarding the sonic advantages of Unison via Matt? Not so much. Reading UA's comment above -> "sonically they're the same" and then further comments about how Unison is better confuses me. If they're sonically the same, how can Unison have advantages, cumulatively (Steve) or not in the final sound of a mix? My takeaway is, I have a lot to learn. :).
Fwiw, any investments I make over the next 12 months will be in something like a BAE outboard mic pre + tube compressor (maybe Audioscape) versus further investments in proprietary UA dsp hardware or dsp hungry plugins based workflows. Those hardware investments provide a ROI I can EASILY hear vs UA's Unison tech.
Edit --> From Reddit discussion: Commenter writes "unison is less to do with sound than it is to do with being able to use the unison preamp in the same way as you can the hardware". UA's Drew responded: "Correct".
@@musiccreation1198 I agree mate.
Hardware it is for me for the foreseeable future. Odd. A lot of conflicting information now huh?
That Reddit comment is very interesting when juxtaposed against the UA comment on the video. Weird.
I’d still imagine some sort of cumulative effect.
But I agree. Real gear will always trump software. IMO.
@@musiccreation1198 I agree mate.
Hardware it is for me for the foreseeable future. Odd. A lot of conflicting information now huh?
That Reddit comment is very interesting when juxtaposed against the UA comment on the video. Weird.
I’d still imagine some sort of cumulative effect.
But I agree. Real gear will always trump software. IMO.
@@musiccreation1198 I agree mate.
Hardware it is for me for the foreseeable future. Odd. A lot of conflicting information now huh?
That Reddit comment is very interesting when juxtaposed against the UA comment on the video. Weird.
I’d still imagine some sort of cumulative effect.
But I agree. Real gear will always trump software. IMO.
I think its just like how protools was locked with its own devices till few years back....the plugins where locked to bad all the time .... now they just made it universal.... still the UAD as an interface is a well made product :))))
I think we got screwed here :)))
100% - I still enjoy my Apollo as a device. I’m scratching my head as to who thought they would have needed to market it like that ha
The device on its own stands up - nothing else has real-time tracking with processing - or at least - nothing like the Apollo until recently with antelope etc.
I wouldn’t say screwed but - definitely taken a bit back. Didn’t expect it from UA. They always seemed to be so genuine.
@@TheSteveKinney realtime tracking itself is a winner... well built device... I might go for another one...
@@stanlee24 same - I’ll likely go x16 to incorporate a full outboard 24/24 in/out
Get a small formate console eventually. 😎
Someone should lend Julian Kraus an Apollo and have him do all the great tests he normally does. But now to specifically check the Unison vs non-Unison. If there is no (significant) difference there could be basis for a legal case because of false advertising 🤔
It was kind of my initial reaction LOL 😂
But upon looking back - they were way ahead of it because they make a vague claim of how good unison is, not a definitive claim.
Which makes me think even more that it turns out it’s BS ha
Who knows. It still sounds great.
But I’ll keep it real - my eyes have went to reverb and non stop looking for hardware. Already had a decent collection - but now I’m going to get more of it.
I´m going by minute 4 of your video. I think a good ideato test it is to create a bus for an instrument already recorded and test 1176, for example, 1176 from Sparks and 1176 from Apollo. For me, are not the same. You are trying to test unison preamps which i think are not close to what sparks is offering. Indeed, Neve preamps for unison cost the same as the whole Sparks pack for a year.
Great point mate!
Unison has always been purely marketing - x8p owner here.
Ha!! You got UA to comment. On another note, I'm not sure why you thought there was going to be much of a difference. Another way you could have tested this was to run the interface into itself via cable after recording a clean guitar track. Almost like reamping. Good job though
Well.
I thought of that - but I didn’t think it would be affected the impedance as much as a microphone itself would be effected.
Microphones “react” more than a line out would, at least I’d imagine.
@@TheSteveKinney in theory yes. However, its seems you shot holes in that theory. Obviously more rigorous testing is needed, but it looks like the plugin is the element doing all the heavy lifting.
I would recommend a dual-mic setup with matching mics for the purpose of getting the source signals as closely matched as humanly possible. You have a ton of eyes on so you should really capitalize on this. Just saying
@@nathanieljohnsonjr775 yeah - I totally feel ya.
It’s certainly interesting to hear a sort of “back pedal” all of the sudden from a bunch of sources on unison.
I mean - at the end of the day - the plugins IMO are far superior and really do take you 96-98% of the way there and I haven’t been dissatisfied by the sound of my devices since I’ve gotten it .. so outside of a technical “gotcha” kind of test... practically speaking, it all still sounds good and again, best in class plugins IMO.
My real API console vs plugin comparison experience is pretty nuts.
I think the best follow up would be to test if it’s some sort of calibrated authenticity
Where their plugin sounds closer to the real hardware when used with their interface preamp.
Again - if you check the block diagram there IS in fact something happening before AD/DA. But It makes you wonder if it’s literally just essentially native processing/distortion characteristics being printed rather than allowing for the flexibility in post. Idk.
But again - probably the best follow up test.
Real hardware / Unison / Native with clean Apollo pre / native with basic interface pre
And with that test would come better attention to keeping the signal the same.
I’ve already got a plan for that as well.
But essentially - it would require a few hours at blackbird 🥴... pretty rich for my blood.
@@TheSteveKinney LOL, I completely understand, BlackBird will kill a budget quickly. Well, I know I'll be watching, keep up the good work!!
good job. Yes, test the hardware against it next time And i agree iwth you, we will look back on this era and realize we were TOO hung up on all the particulars of recording. We have forgotten, its all about a GREAT song, a GREAT vocal, great energy and performance, and yes, a great mix. But we have forgotten the proportins of what makes a great recording. and gone too nuts over gear. Now thaot said, i like to still get the best of gear, BUT, you have to slow down and realize what makes it great. NOBODY is going to say you have a great song and recording if its recorded and miexed great, but the song is just ok, and the vocal is mediocre.
1000%
Love that you took this away from the video. That was the biggest point to making it!
Cheers David, thanks for sharing!
Maybe, I missed it but are you just testing the sound difference? The point of uad plugs in console is lowest latency while recording . If you are just testing 1 track , with one plug in you have very little latency.
The uad and uadX plug ins are the same code just reskinned to run native. Other then impedance matching under unison, the sound should null. No offence, I think you are confused about what you are testing and why.
Offense not take.
See: block diagram on Apollo manual..
They definitely shouldn’t null.
Unison = they give louder headphone feedback so that you feel like freddie mercury
Show me the evidence.
I would, if I was a RUclipsr. But I've taken the L and moved on. The price of admission amortized over the last 5 years is acceptable to me, as a premium for living in the future. But I can't imagine using unison ever again. M1 pro gives razor thin latency and near infinite processing power... also the ability to blend signal chain with other non uad stuff..
To each their own haha
@@pb25193 razor thin latency is relative per user .. I think for most this is the case. But I promise I have sessions where this wouldn’t be and isn’t the case.
@@TheSteveKinney may I ask (I am an EECS engineer) what parameters of a session determine latency?
If your answer is "buffer size", then you might genuinely run out of steam on an m1pro if you have trillions of tracks like so many people claim. But in that case, how are you using satellites to reduce the buffer size?
Presumably by printing the effects on to your trillion tracks? Couldn't you do that natively?
Let me know if I'm missing something, I might be using these wrong. cheers!
Interesting test concept. Unfortunately, your're doing it all wrong! You say you'd like to compare the native version v. the dsp version, but you're not. You're comparing the entire signal chain twice with random influences thrown in, that heavily scews the results. Even if your did the test twice with the exact same setup, the resulting audio files wouldn't null!
If you really want to compare the native and dsp versions of a plugin, you need to remove anything that can scew the result. Such as interface, speaker, room and microphone. You don't even need to make a recording. It's preferable that you don't.
It's dead easy to do.
1) Take an audiofile and send it to two audio channels in your DAW.
2) Add a native version of the plugin to one channel, and a dsp version to the other.
3) Bounce, or record, the channels to two separate audio files. Make sure that the plugins are included in the bounces.
4) Import the audio files and check for any differences in phase incurred by any latencies, by zooming in as far as you can. Preferably to sample level.
5) If there are none, skip this step. If there are, time shift one of the audio files so that the waveforms line up exactly.
6) Shift the polatioty of one of the channels.
If there's total silence, there is no difference between a native and a dsp version of the same plugin. If there is any sound, there is some difference. It appears that you went through step 1 & 6 with the noise test. But because you skipped step steps 3, 4 & 5, we don't know if the null difference is cased by variations in the plugins or is a latencey issue.
This is a very important question. Unfortunately, I don't have access to any Apollo hardware, but if someone who has would care to do the test correctly, the result would be very interesting.
The whole point of the test is to point out and compare the entire point of the Apollo ... unison.
These plugins that UA marketed for so long were marketed as a more accurate model when paired with the Apollo’s mic preamp.
So the ONLY way to test that was with an Apollo.
I get the idea of testing in a vacuum.. and everyone immediately tested that way ... but no one was testing / calling out UAD’s marketing approach for the last 12 years.
The core DSP of the plugin is not changed. UA themselves said this.. so doing two instances of a plugin in post would and SHOULD null.
But the question I am testing is, does the unison tech of the Apollo even do anything. Does that make sense?
Your signal waveform already looks much quieter, come on, this is ridiculous.
Whatcha mean?
why is the crest factor so different?@@TheSteveKinney
Wow ..they played us all this time
I mean - not entirely.. it's just that the difference was definitely exaggerated and exploited.. I think they should have focused on the "cumulative" benefits of tracking everything through Unison rather than the current marketing.
and also explaining the work flow benefits better.
ugh. I hate marketing departments haha
@@TheSteveKinney ..respectfully!! Between sales and marketing they don’t always convey accurately. Thank you again
Thanks for posting this test. I've been an Apollo owner since the early days and have been pleased with most of their plugins and even have some that I can't live without (you know, the ones that appear on every mix and project). I've been aware for some time that this may be a psycho-sematic effect and heavily based in conformation bias... but I'm a willing participant and enjoy using their plugs. When they released Spark I questioned their branding, as now it appears with Spark they're having their cake and eating it too. I'll continue to use their products but I feel the value of their products have dipped and should be priced accordingly. This is clearly all about sales and less about integrity.
Also, their email to customers a few months ago that boasted a giant virtue signal by not selling their products to Russia really didn't land well. Go woke and go broke...
Yeah man.
I’m sure the whole unison thing was pushed a little too hard by the marketing department.
I mean. The devices rule on their own from a workflow standpoint, real-time tracking, routing, ad/da etc
No need to have pushed some generic claim that may not have been entirely true.
And I agree to a degree, I think it’s just all the marketing department that failed.
Essentially what they have done has offered expanded native systems to their users that have invested in the DSP based systems. Now they have a free native companion. Kinda cool.
Although - I’m sure in the future, there will be a catch.
And yeah - with the messaging, I’m sure there is a reason that we don’t understand as to why they did that, outside of just being woke.. although,.. they have done that with the volt too which IMO was distasteful and completely irrelevant to the product ...
that said - There’s a lot of software developers in that area - so it’s possible that maybe that had something to do with it. I don’t know, grasping at straws.
There is also tube manufacturers in Russia and Ukraine too. So maybe they just got pissed about not being able to get tubes as easily. 😭
Dude. Who knows. I definitely feel ya! Weird times. This is the kind of major events that cause shakeups in industry’s and giants to fall.
It will all make sense years from now.
But until then, I’ll keep jamming with my gear. Haha 😎
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and watching, dig it!
Cheers dude!
You spent $$$$ to conclude everything sounds good nowadays! Unfortunate. ☹️
😅 chill mate!
A lot of this stuff has been acquired over time.
And the point was really wisdom I’ve learned while producing music.
A lot of people get caught up in the technicals and stuff, and I’ll admit. I’m pretty geeky, so I like deep diving it, it’s cool to know.
But most importantly, you can make hit records on anything.
You don’t need a nice mic.
You need a great song, great arrangement.
The rest is excuses! Cheers mate!
@@TheSteveKinney As someone who spent £3300 on a UAD x6 and plug ins less than a month ago, I ain’t chilled!!
@@Yourweakminds I’ve spent a similar amount over a similar amount of time. I feel the pain mate!
The good news is that:
1. It’s ad/da is top notch.
2. Real-time track is still unmatched, especially with incredibly good sounding plugs. Don’t let anyone kid you - m1’s still can’t match the latency of a real session.
3. The pres are legitimately damn good
4. The plugs are still the best in the industry.
5. You still probably wouldn’t find any of this in any other package for the same price.
So I mean.
Really - I think what you and I are kind of bummed about is the marketing specifically.
@@TheSteveKinney Agreed. And still planning to buy more. 😀
@@Yourweakminds well over the next few months, you’ll find some deals because a lot of people are dumping their satellites and stuff!
A buddy of mine trolls reverb.com all the time to find deals for his studio and he’s said they’ve been popping up like crazy.