Quantcast
Native Instruments Premium Tube Series - Page 8 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Native Instruments Premium Tube Series
Old 15th September 2012
  #211
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
The bands of the PASSIVE EQ operate in PARALLEL????
Old 15th September 2012
  #212
Gear Addict
 
ronwasserman's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Bummer. AAX, but not AAX DSP.

"Pass" for me. (I have all the other Softube stuff and am hell bent on only buying AAX DSP plugs now.)
Old 15th September 2012
  #213
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic ➡️
A great EQ is a great EQ. The massive passive is used for a lot more than just mastering. Heck, surely you are aware that there is a mastering version with proper switching knobs versus a "normal" version which is indeed meant for mixing.

Personally I've used one mainly on vocals, guitars bass and on the drum bus or overheads.

It's incredibly versatile.

The UAD2 is ridiculously underpowered. This was the case already at the moment of release. Sure, their plugins are great but the hardware is almost a scam. Yeah, I'm a former UAD user and I'm not planning on returning. Native is where it's at. Heck, even digidesign/avid understood that in the end.

Latest generation intel i7 processors are extremely powerful and can run hundreds of plugins + hundreds of tracks without any issues so there really is no excuse for DSP stuff any more, unless somebody creates a seriously powerful one (like 50x the power of the UAD2).

I tried the NI Passive EQ and Vari Comp and indeed they sound absolutely awesome. Make sure you properly gain stage the passive EQ. It sounds and behaves quite a bit differently depending on how hot a signal you are hitting it with. In a 64bit float daw like Reaper you can easily attenuate the signal with -24dB or more before hitting the plugin.. and then compensate on the output. This makes it sound very different compared to hitting it with full blast (also useful as it kind of compresses stuff).

Cheers!
bManic
I have lots of other eq's I can use for vocals(pultec),but I was talking about when I had the hardware version of the MP which was one instance.And my i7 can still get taxed w/16 gig of RAM.The UAD MP still has what is important and that is the interaction btwn the bands and works just fine.I am trying all the NI stuff also though.

Sent from my PC36100
Old 15th September 2012 | Show parent
  #214
Here for the gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Sonya ➡️
That one made me smile too.

- c
In the context of the music production software business the description is accurate IMO.
Old 15th September 2012
  #215
Lives for gear
 
Aiyn Zahav's Avatar
 
11 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Most likely going to get these plug-ins.

I find the passive EQ perfect for the drum bus and the enhanced EQ perfect for synths.

I am able to really clean up the drums and give them punch, the synths I am able to bring to the front even if they seem quite far back. I love how easy it is, set a target, 6 or 8k, push the volume! I also love how easy it is and how reasonable it sounds cutting the highs.

The compressor is less impressive initially, but it's curves are really smooth. It's a great one for getting a bit more punch and it is especially good are carving out large chunks of volume when you use it in side-chain (for dance music). It is something I need to spend more time getting use to though to decide how much I would actually use it.

I find the greatest strength with these plug-ins is how well they all work together and how useful they all are. They are the kind of all-rounders that could work on almost anything. It makes the bundle a great deal.
Old 15th September 2012
  #216
Lives for gear
 
dotl's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Passive EQ could be handy (mid/side, parallel) and it sounds pretty good but it adds too much of harmonic content... I know that it models Massive-passive with 7 million tubes but for most occasions -40 dB of it as a minimum?! Hmmm...too much!

Vari MU? Nice but nothing special really... Only that it reminds me how great would be if Slate Digital decide to release FG-X's comp as a separate plug-in. I can't find better soft comp...especially for mastering duties.

For the third plug-in I couldn't care less.
Old 15th September 2012
  #217
Gear Guru
 
Jeezo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
yep slate comp is excellent , also my Xcomp does the job well and the api 2500 also we have a lot of toyz now , and also a lot of multi comp/limiter too ...
Old 15th September 2012 | Show parent
  #218
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
FLYINGJAY, Which one of your last audio examples was UAD and NI?
Old 15th September 2012 | Show parent
  #219
Gear Guru
Hey,

I have tried the NI Massive Passive vs the SPL Passeq and while the Massive Passive had cleaner highs, the Passeq gave weight to the tracks and I like that a lot more. I prefer the Passeq, never tried the UAD one, and I have used a Massive Passive and Passeq Hardware, both a much better than plugins!
Old 15th September 2012 | Show parent
  #220
Lives for gear
 
6 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
The VariComp is the standout for me in this trio. It's a very good ITB compressor, one of the best I've heard. I bought it. I prefer the UAD massive passive model to this softube passive model, though this softube ain't bad. The enhanced EQ is kind of a pultec-style unit that adds harmonics and does the bass add/cut pultec trick. It's fine, but OvertoneDSP has one I like better.

To me this bundle is better than the Summit Grand Channel stuff Softube just released, which I didn't care for at all. I think they should have sold the Summit stuff to NI and kept this premium tube stuff as Softube products
Old 15th September 2012
  #221
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Yeah its quite surprising that this bundle is sold by NI and not by Softube. Altho I have to admit that I'm very happy for the price, and I do suspect it would be more expensive if sold by Softube
Old 16th September 2012
  #222
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
EQS like this are stupid. I highly suggest to you to put EQS like this on a track with white noise and voxengo SPAN (long integration time suggested) and then watch what they do. Not only watch the gain behavior but also the Q behavior.

Then learn how to proper eq and then get EQS like PSP Neon and build your own "musical and natural" curves. Noobs.

p.s. " Oh Oh Oh, I raised 14 db at 8k and it still sounded so smooth" lol.lol.lol.
"Yeah guess what fool, you did not raise 14 db at all"
"And Why didn't you hear it? Just because your knob was at a position labeled 14db"?
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #223
Lives for gear
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Lago ➡️
Hey,

I have tried the NI Massive Passive vs the SPL Passeq and while the Massive Passive had cleaner highs, the Passeq gave weight to the tracks and I like that a lot more. I prefer the Passeq, never tried the UAD one, and I have used a Massive Passive and Passeq Hardware, both a much better than plugins!
ofcourse the hardware is better then plugins
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #224
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Full song .wavs Just a quick run thru but enough to hear the difference.The original is the whole song so skip near the end to hear the part about 3:00.

Originalhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/Orgnl.wav

UADhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/UAD.wav

NIhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/NI.wav
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #225
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nznexus ➡️
ofcourse the hardware is better then plugins
I'm really not trying to start a debate but has anyone other than me actually owned the hardware? I used the original every day for almost 5 years, the UAD has nailed the sound of the original, otherwise I would have scraped the money together and bought it again. This was my favorite piece of gear every day that I owned it and if I hadn't hit a rough patch I would probably still have it. When I first tried out the UAD I did extensive comparisons with mine (sold it to a friend so I still have acces to it) and the only barely discernible difference I could hear was that the plug sounded slightly tighter in the low end. With all due respect, unless you have first hand experience with the unit vs the plug then this statement (in this particular case mind you) is just not true
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #226
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Does the UAD actually work in parallel? Does this mean when you boost lows or mids, it boosts the highs less than if you boosted highs alone? The NI doesn't seem to work this way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
Yep, just started messing with these and Ur right. They don't match and like I said before, the source has a lot to do with it. This EQ sounds nice though and does a trick I always liked to do with the hardware. Any guitars recorded with a POD always have this really hashy top that I would fix by cranking the LPF as high as it'll go (6K) and then giving it the top I want. The MP has always done this better than any other EQ I've ever tried and the NI version does this very well. Having a native more cpu friendly version would make this EQ worth my while but they ( so far ) don't sound the same to me. I'll report back later, gonna play some more
You are saying the NI can do the POD guitar trick very well, but not AS WELL as the hardware MP, and by virtue, the UAD MP, since you think the UAD is spot on. Do I understand you?
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #227
Brb
Lives for gear
 
Brb's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingjay ➡️
ok fellas here it is,uad mp vs ni tupe eq.

I threw in uad precisin eq to see how it stack up to the big boys.

ps.ill tell later which is which...ill only tell which is the precision eq enjoy.oh its rap cover your ears...

lol blacker than the street
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #228
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
I used the original every day for almost 5 years, the UAD has nailed the sound of the original
What is your opinion about the NI version, how close it is to the hardware?
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #229
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melodeath ➡️
Does the UAD actually work in parallel? Does this mean when you boost lows or mids, it boosts the highs less than if you boosted highs alone? The NI doesn't seem to work this way.

You are saying the NI can do the POD guitar trick very well, but not AS WELL as the hardware MP, and by virtue, the UAD MP, since you think the UAD is spot on. Do I understand you?
COrrect. I still think that the NI is great value because it does for guitars (especially crappy ones) what I need from it. Freeing up my quad for the mastering version and all the other stuff I want to use. I can't say for sure what the topology of the NI is but seeing as the design goal was the MP then it probably does work in parallel
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #230
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Dappolito has a good point. Not the point that EQ's like this are stupid, of course. But that settings should be analyzed to ensure they are equal amounts of boost and cut. For example, try a nice +6 dB setting to compare. On the NI that 6 dB boost is actually read around 13.5. And the Q should be turned counter clockwise just a tad to match a bit better. Where as the UAD is straight up the middle for level to be set +6. Q is good pretty much in the middle.

I found the UAD to be bit more fuller in the low mid's, exhibiting more of a punchy power thing. I did have a file rendered with the hardware for my personal reference as I do not have access to the HW at this point in time and the hardware has this power in the lower mid's just as well. Nebula came closest to matching the hardware "feel"; there's this kind of knock to it. I personally liked UAD over the NI. Having said all of that, there's no way one could go wrong with any of them provided you make the right decisions with them. They are all at a level of realism and quality, just pick what you like best and be on your way.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #231
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
I'm really not trying to start a debate but has anyone other than me actually owned the hardware? I used the original every day for almost 5 years, the UAD has nailed the sound of the original, otherwise I would have scraped the money together and bought it again. This was my favorite piece of gear every day that I owned it and if I hadn't hit a rough patch I would probably still have it. When I first tried out the UAD I did extensive comparisons with mine (sold it to a friend so I still have acces to it) and the only barely discernible difference I could hear was that the plug sounded slightly tighter in the low end. With all due respect, unless you have first hand experience with the unit vs the plug then this statement (in this particular case mind you) is just not true
I had the hardware for quite a while.The one I had would get a little hard to control the bass sometimes.But I had other tube gear so I got rid of it.I love the UAD version.

Anyone listening to the files I posted?
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #232
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by devastat ➡️
What is your opinion about the NI version, how close it is to the hardware?
I started doing comparisons by putting them on a mix with no processing. The MP imparts a particular personality simply by being on the track. The NI does this as well but seems, for lack of a better word, softer than the MP. When applying eq the Massive feels a bit more solid and the NI leans toward a little more airy. I know these are not the greatest descriptions but I can't think of how else to describe it. How close does it get to the MP? Besides the tonal differences there's a tiny bit more depth (3dNess?) in the UAD.
Hope this helps
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #233
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
I had the hardware for quite a while.The one I had would get a little hard to control the bass sometimes.But I had other tube gear so I got rid of it.I love the UAD version.

Anyone listening to the files I posted?
One thing that sometimes bothered me about the MP was that the lows sometimes felt a little mushy. Was that the same thing you experienced? The plug feels a little tighter in that regard. When I heard this it really made me smile PLUS the mastering version had filter values I hadn't heard before that flat out blew me away. I simply love it on the Mix
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #234
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM ➡️
Dappolito has a good point. Not the point that EQ's like this are stupid, of course. But that settings should be analyzed to ensure they are equal amounts of boost and cut. For example, try a nice +6 dB setting to compare. On the NI that 6 dB boost is actually read around 13.5. And the Q should be turned counter clockwise just a tad to match a bit better. Where as the UAD is straight up the middle for level to be set +6. Q is good pretty much in the middle.

I found the UAD to be bit more fuller in the low mid's, exhibiting more of a punchy power thing. I did have a file rendered with the hardware for my personal reference as I do not have access to the HW at this point in time and the hardware has this power in the lower mid's just as well. Nebula came closest to matching the hardware "feel"; there's this kind of knock to it. I personally liked UAD over the NI. Having said all of that, there's no way one could go wrong with any of them provided you make the right decisions with them. They are all at a level of realism and quality, just pick what you like best and be on your way.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #235
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
Full song .wavs Just a quick run thru but enough to hear the difference.The original is the whole song so skip near the end to hear the part about 3:00.

Originalhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/Orgnl.wav

UADhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/UAD.wav

NIhttps://dl.dropbox.com/u/3786838/MP%20Test/NI.wav
Cool comparison. The UAD sounds MASSIVEly better. The NI makes the vocal sounds processed and lifeless.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #236
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
One thing that sometimes bothered me about the MP was that the lows sometimes felt a little mushy. Was that the same thing you experienced? The plug feels a little tighter in that regard. When I heard this it really made me smile PLUS the mastering version had filter values I hadn't heard before that flat out blew me away. I simply love it on the Mix
I go right to the mastering version of the plugin.The hardware unit is great for high end air on a mix,but the low end can get pillowy,which is probably not a word.Did you give a listen to the files I posted back a few posts?I did a quick run thru with a file.I tried to match the settings visually and according to the settings but they may have to be matched.The low mids on the UAD did have a little more heft,but you could probably get it out of the NI with some tweaking as well.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #237
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
I go right to the mastering version of the plugin.The hardware unit is great for high end air on a mix,but the low end can get pillowy,which is probably not a word.Did you give a listen to the files I posted back a few posts?I did a quick run thru with a file.I tried to match the settings visually and according to the settings but they may have to be matched.The low mids on the UAD did have a little more heft,but you could probably get it out of the NI with some tweaking as well.
I'm not at the studio right now but I'll check them out later, and yes pillowy is probably a good description of the low end thing I was talking about
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #238
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
I'm not at the studio right now but I'll check them out later, and yes pillowy is probably a good description of the low end thing I was talking about

Yup, always noticed this with tube stuff. I was more inclined towards solid state for low end duties. But like anything else, it could be a desired thing at times.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #239
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User ➡️
Cool comparison. The UAD sounds MASSIVEly better. The NI makes the vocal sounds processed and lifeless.
I like them both.They both bring the drums out nice.Like I said above,they are both great emulations and I am sure you could tweak either to get what you are looking for.The UAD does have different LP filter settings,a greater range anyway.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #240
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
I like them both.They both bring the drums out nice.Like I said above,they are both great emulations and I am sure you could tweak either to get what you are looking for.The UAD does have different LP filter settings,a greater range anyway.
I can't see why anyone w/ access to the UAD would want to use the NI one. The UAD one is massively clearer. The NI one sounds way processed and exactly what everyone complaims about w/ ITB sounds.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 57 views: 14772
Avatar for Alécio Costa
Alécio Costa 5th September 2008
replies: 66 views: 7521
Avatar for bewareofdogs
bewareofdogs 24th January 2009
replies: 575 views: 71418
Avatar for NuSkoolTone
NuSkoolTone 12th June 2011
replies: 186 views: 29059
Avatar for _Mark
_Mark 12th March 2015
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump