You are here

UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

Page 3 of 5

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:03 pm
by ConcertinaChap
It does of course mean it's pretty reliable and predictable. I used to work in a company with a heavy involvement in developing onboard software for satellites (I didn't do this myself but I knew plenty who did). The hardware they developed for was always years and years out of date. Satellites never have the latest-and-greatest processors or anything else. Instead they use completely understood and totally reliable bug-free older designs. So if you worry about UAD using old hardware just console yourself that the same chips are probably being used in telecoms satellites being lofted up from Canaveral right now.

CC

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:08 pm
by jellyjim
Why the platform has caught my eye:

Trivial reasons

The boxes are shiny and pretty
Great GUIs of cool vintage gear

Reasons that could be true of any hardware platform

Great features/flexible
Great sound quality

Reasons that could be true of any software platform

Great range of great sounding plugins

Reasons specific to UAD platform

My music laptop is under spec’d. If I can palm off processing to external DSP then, great!

Dislike

Cost
Aggressive marketing

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:28 pm
by ConcertinaChap
Whereabouts are you? If you're over near Wilshire way you'd be welcome to bring your laptop over and try it out with my kit and see what you think.

CC

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:30 pm
by redlester
jellyjim wrote:Aggressive marketing

Agressive marketing is not limited to UAD. I find Izotope and others far worse in that respect.

I dived into UAD fully aware of what I was doing and why - I also wanted a new interface with more inputs, so it suited me perfectly.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:52 pm
by jellyjim
redlester wrote:
jellyjim wrote:Aggressive marketing

Agressive marketing is not limited to UAD. I find Izotope and others far worse in that respect.

Of course not no, but if 'in-app' purchases find their way to the desktop I'm quitting!

redlester wrote:I dived into UAD fully aware of what I was doing and why - I also wanted a new interface with more inputs, so it suited me perfectly.

It all looks great. I'm very tempted.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:54 pm
by jellyjim
ConcertinaChap wrote:Whereabouts are you? If you're over near Wilshire way you'd be welcome to bring your laptop over and try it out with my kit and see what you think.

CC

That's a very kind offer sir. Wiltshire is a lovely part of the world but sadly, not a part of the world I'm in very often

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:59 pm
by redlester
jellyjim wrote:
redlester wrote:
jellyjim wrote:Of course not no, but if 'in-app' purchases find their way to the desktop I'm quitting!

Am not sure what you mean by that.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:04 pm
by jellyjim
redlester wrote:
jellyjim wrote:
redlester wrote:
jellyjim wrote:Of course not no, but if 'in-app' purchases find their way to the desktop I'm quitting!

Am not sure what you mean by that.

First of all, I don't know if this is how th UAD stuff behaves or not as I don't own any of it yet

But I don't like the idea of being marketed at 'within the application itself' (like 'in-app purchases' on mobile phone platforms)

Fine, email me, bombard me with offers if I visit your website, but I find marketing within an application too intrusive

But like I say, I don't know if this is how the software behaves or not and please don't feel the need to defend UAD on my behalf - whilst I might dislike aggressive marketing I understand the need and UAD are an amazing innovative company

I just like to be able to turn off the selling in the privacy of my own desktop :)

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:07 pm
by desmond
jellyjim wrote:Fine, email me, bombard me with offers if I visit your website, but I find marketing within an application too intrusive

No, the UAD software doesn't do that, don't worry.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:04 pm
by redlester
I’m not aware of any desktop plugins that do that?

Indeed, email marketing is fine because you can always just unsubscribe. And UAD do plenty of it.

The ones I find most annoying are Izotope and Waves, who both seem to have permanent “sales” on, a bit like DFS.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:26 pm
by johnny h
Hugh Robjohns wrote:Maybe it's just me, but you seem to have a nasty chip on your shoulder about UAD. It's as if you just resent their success for some reason. I can't quite fathom it out...

I don't see how the Sharc DSP tech, or the price of the raw chips, matters. It does what it needs to do. They make a profit from it... which enables them to invest in more plugin development. What's so wrong?
I didn't say there was anything wrong with making money out of music or music technology. Many software and hardware manufacturers take my money, and I'm happy for them to do so!

UAD have to be respected for what they've achieved in pushing the quality of digital plugins. My point was that there appears to be a perception from consumers that hardware "should" cost more money than software and that isn't necessarily linked to the cost of production.
Its Pentium III era technology they are selling here.

Yes... but so what? There are cheap-as-chips NE5534 op-amps in all manner of current analogue equipment, and they were invented way before the Pentium III. Oh the horror! :lol:
This is purely zeros and ones we're talking about. UAD have somewhat backed themselves into a corner; they can't keep up with the increasing power of native forever without refreshing their DSP, yet the development costs of rewriting all their plugins is not only a massive undertaking but risks alienating some of their large user base.
...if you are starting out thinking what to buy, I'd strongly advise anyone to steer well clear of this system.
Fair enough. I agree that there are a lot of excellent native plugins available that are as good (or maybe even better in some cases), and don't involve the cost and inconvenience of the DSP hardware. So yes, some thought should be entertained before deciding on which route to follow.
This is almost like we're agreeing with each other!

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:15 pm
by jellyjim
redlester wrote:I’m not aware of any desktop plugins that do that?

Good! Quick delete the thread mods, let's not give them any ideas!

I'm waiting for over zealous AI/machine learning driven suggestions and auto correct ...

"Hi! Sorry to interrupt your music making. If you like that delay on the main vocals then you're gonna love this one! [CLICK TO LEARN MORE]

"Hi! Sorry to interrupt your music making. The chord you just chose isn't in this key. Don't worry I've fixed it for you!"

"Hi! Sorry to interrupt your music making. My algorithm tells me the song you're writing is unlikely to be a hit. Have you tried Country and Western?"

Etc :)

The ones I find most annoying are Izotope and Waves, who both seem to have permanent “sales” on, a bit like DFS.

At least you can sit on a sofa.

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:23 pm
by Hugh Robjohns
johnny h wrote: My point was that there appears to be a perception from consumers that hardware "should" cost more money than software and that isn't necessarily linked to the cost of production.

Ah. I obviously missed that. Thanks for the clarification.

UAD have somewhat backed themselves into a corner; they can't keep up with the increasing power of native forever without refreshing their DSP, yet the development costs of rewriting all their plugins is not only a massive undertaking but risks alienating some of their large user base.

We'll have to wait and see... I'd be a little surprised if they introduced a 16-DSP card option, although that might be a possibility for more demanding customers. The UAD boffins are clever people and they have a sensible development roadmap. It would obviously make sense to move to a new generation of more powerful hardware processors at some point in the future -- UAD3 -- and when the time comes my understanding is that porting the code to new hardware platform would not actually be too difficult. But I don't see that happening any time soon.


This is almost like we're agreeing with each other!
:lol: Hey, it does happen sometimes! :thumbup:

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:25 pm
by blinddrew
jellyjim wrote:"Hi! Sorry to interrupt your music making. My algorithm tells me the song you're writing is unlikely to be a hit. Have you tried Country and Western?"

Etc :)
:bouncy:

Re: UAD Apollo min spec seems high given it's DSP anyway (quad core i7)?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 19, 2019 9:28 pm
by jellyjim
Great, so I just bought an Apollo Twin MKII Quad on the way home from work (damn you GAK!) I got suckered by one of the one-time only registration bundles, but it seemed like a good deal, and I am now happily downloading software!

I am excited.

Plenty to learn but looking ahead; If I want more DSP I can get a Satellite, correct? If I want more inputs I can get something like a Focusrite Scarlett OctoPre connected by ADAT?

A couple of those and I don't really need a mixer anymore do I?

Looks like I've gone Back in The Box! :headbang: