Can you use uad plugins without the apollo attached
The benifit from Audio DSP systems has been in a time where computer cpu power was not good enough for some audio sessions. Yes, cubase 9.5 has some really good features for cpu management.Ĭlick to expand.Sadly no.
at this point, might as well wait for the thuderbolt 3 versions or go with waves that uses ethernet and cat 6 cable that is more future proof. when you use thunderbolt 2k you slow that bus down. I think i am going to hold off, the thuderbolt 2 is a factor as well, i cancelled an order for an apogee unit as well for that reason.
#Can you use uad plugins without the apollo attached Pc#
it does not sound like a good solution for maschine rpoduction, but a good one for a DAW and a large multitrack project mixdown, in fact it seems like it would be simply better to use a second computer with machine, say a mac or pc mini, for something like just kontakt, reaktor, or massine.etc, and use midi to sync and a pair of audio ins. Interesting, it sort of sounds like they are just channel inserts and it is streaming the audio rather than working from the ram.įrom reading about the latency issues and the dependance on the hardware, it appears that waves may have a better solution, where you can run the plug-ins, using the studio rack plug-in, using a sound grid server with better latency and be able to use the plug-ins as well without the hardware on the host computer DAW. īut anyway, I like the plug ins and I use them for mixing.Īnd recording with Unison Plug Ins is also a new option in the digital word of tracking. But UA has given this old "trick" a new face. And most Audio Interfaces have a zero latency monitoring Signal. The worsest thing is that UA always talk about "zero latency". But in the DAW UAD Plug Ins makes only sense when mixing with a very good working Delay Compensation. in this discipline the system makes a lot of sense. UA makes a lot of promo for the realtime "tracking" (with people like Jacquires King (Producer of James Bay, Kings of Leon. It depends on your workflow if UAD DSPs make sense. Every time you "stream" the audio signal from DSP to native (CPU) or the other way around your Systembuffer is the bridge. but it is always a compromise to combine the native and the DSP world. Yes, I also had to learn a lot things about DSP Systems the last yearsĭSP Systems works best when you stay inside the DSP signal flow. Of course you still have to check about latency. Nowadays there are so many other plugin developer with the same quality but without hardware binding (brainworx, slate, sonnox, softube and many many more). Since the beginning I had to change UAD-Hardware because of changing computer technology/incompatibility (PCI, PCI-X, PCI-Express, Thunderbolt) If it's broken you can not use your plugins. This latency can be annoying also with plugin delay compensation. I'm mixing always during composing the song. It won't be a problem for you if you use these Plugins for mixdown as a final process. But even on a DAW with plugin delay compensation you still have the latency. So you will hear latencies between tracks with and without UAD plugins (My workaround is to put that plugin on every timing critical channel … mostly EQ and compressor). MASCHINE does not have a plugin delay compensation. But would I start with UAD again today? No! UA makes high quality stuff and I love them. UAD-Plugins sound great and has been a good alternative back in the day to support a lame G4, G5 CPU. Should it work for you? It depends on you.
I'm using UAD from the beginning (with Logic Pro) and still using it with MASCHINE now.