Focusrite Liquid Mix vs UAD-1 vs TC Powercore

[brandondrury]

Hey dudes,

It's about time I finally got around to upgrading my plugins from Waves Platinum. The Focusrite Liquid Mix, UAD-1, and TC Powercore all look very good. Has anyone used any of them and what do you think? As always price is an issue.

My gut is leaning towards the Focusrite Liquid Mix. The only thing I'm not excited about the Liquid Mix is the fact that is only EQ and compression. Don't get me wrong, eq and compression make up 95% of the plugins I use, but I've got a got feeling that I'll want to upgrade my reverbs soon as well. While I could always go Native for the reverbs..... I don't know.

I'm considered about plugin count. I thought someone mentioned recently that they could only get 4 instances of the 1073 EQ from a single UAD-1 card. This kind of sucks. Then again, if the EQ is that badass, it may be worth using an entire card for just 4 EQs. (I don't use EQ THAT much anyway).

Brandon

[richiebee]

I'm surprised to hear you say you're looking to upgrade to hardware after reading your opinion on preamps. What do you expect to get out of a 1073 that you can't get out of waves?

R.

[brandondrury]

I'm not looking to upgrade to hardeware. I'm looking for plugins that.....how do I put this into words?....make my job easier.

For example, I've mentioned many times that when Wagener tracked the song at the workshop, it sounded kind of dull or dark. It sounded kind of boring. Then when about 3/4 done with the mix, he slapped a Manley EQ on the 2bus and did a high shelf. The mix all of a sudden leaped out with excitement and everything came to life. Of course, it was a $5,000 EQ.

When I came home, I tried it with my Waves Plugins. It was a complete failure. It was blatantly clear that Waves EQs (both the REQ and the Q series) were not in the league of that Manley for this particular application. The Waves seam to accentuate the parts of the signal I didn't want boosted. It's not exactly a frequency response thing. It's a character thing.

While I'm a huge proponent of pushing newbies to learn their craft and not focus on the tools, there is also a point where a person needs to improve their tools to grow.

I'm not 100% against buying high end preamps. I just get a little dissapointed when I read all the hype online about how AWESOME a preamp is and then when I use my Vintech 1272 or Trident S20 I'm still dealing with all the problems I used to.

I try to keep a nice stock of recording magazines. Most of them agree that the last generation of EQ plugins are starting to get a little "character" to them. I define that as boosting the stuff I want to hear and not boosting the harsh stuff, for example. So, out of curiosity, I downloaded a demo for some EQ. I liked it. A LOT! Maybe it's pyschological, but I was able to get sounds I wanted to acheive more easily. The plugin was "Blue Cat Triple EQ".

Because of a monitoring issue, I had to EQ my big rock guitars in a track. (The guitars had WAY more low mids than the Mackies were telling me and I even tracked with a SM57 instead of my usual Royer) I've NEVER liked using my Waves plugins on guitar, but this new plugin sounded good....really good! I could use EQ on electric guitars and come out happy with this plugin.

So, this got me thinking that I need to explore my options in terms of improving my setup. I'm always afraid of the hype, but I think I could benefit from some new EQs. I would have just bought the Blue Cat Triple EQ, but I figured if a $40 plugin was that much more fun than my Waves stuff, maybe I could see what DSP stuff sounds like.

Brandon

[lividone]

Hey guys,

I'm in the same boat as Brandon here and have done some exaustive research ( though I've only just begun ) which may be of some aid here.

First off, I have very little first hand experience with this equipment other than various demos online and live auditions at the meager selection of gear outlets here.

So...

From what I've read, the UAD-1 is extremely inefficient as far as plugin instance count is concerned ( you probably know this already ) , where as you can effectively use many more simultaneous plugs from a PoCo/Liquid Mix. The explanation given is in the modeling. To compare the PoCo/Liquid Mix and UAD-1 plugs would be to say that the PoCo/Liquid Mix plugs model the frequency response of thier hardware counter parts where conversely the UAD plugs model the actual schematics and they're relative characteristics of the hardware. This would in turn explain the differences in sound quality as well as efficiency. Assuming this, the UAD plugs sound "quality" would be superior. There's no way to know for certain ( that i've found so far anyway) if this is correct. However, from what 've heard of the 3 systems first hand so far, I'd have to agree.

After considering this for some time, I've considered staying with native plugs , as Brandon has mentioned as well. At first thought , It sounds like a much better plan....for the future anyway. Computer processing power is accelerating much faster than these DSP card offerings. While I am able to eat-up my dual core cpu with about 20-25inserts ( a guesstimate) in a 40 track session with vsti's etc. I could easily grab that quad-core Mobo and CPU I've been eyeing and suddenly have 50% CPU "headroom" on the same session...for the same price or less than a UAD/TC Electronics setup.Yay, more power for me to destroy a mix with sloppy reverbs and other mess.

Anyway, within the same bout of research and consideration I realized the other side of it.

Do you really think the very "best" sounding plugs will ever be native?

I don't think so. For obvious financial reasons. Whether it be to rope in the customers to buy more and more weak dsp cards to keep up with the newer plug-ins ( hence the racks available to house 4 UAD-1's externally, etc ) or to stay off the pirate's radar which of course would also affect their bottomline.

As far as my own position...At the moment I'm not 100% certain but I think I'm going to go with a Powercore first and compliment it with a small UAD-1 pak.

Still thinking it over though...

[brandondrury]

To compare the PoCo/Liquid Mix and UAD-1 plugs would be to say that the PoCo/Liquid Mix plugs model the frequency response of thier hardware counter parts where conversely the UAD plugs model the actual schematics and they're relative characteristics of the hardware.

In the marketing world, there is a clear distinction between features and benefits. For example, "Coca Cola 2008 will contain 2% more carmel hydrogen syrum". This is a feature. It's feature because I couldn't care less about the ingredients in Coca Cola unless I was allergic or something. "Coca Cola 2008 tastes better" is a benefit. This I understand. If everyone thinks Coca Cola 2008 tastes better, I'll give it a shot.

I kind of feel that focusing on the methodology used in the technology is unnecessary for me. I just want to know if the given tool is going to make it easier for me to make kick ass recordings.

Assuming this, the UAD plugs sound "quality" would be superior. There's no way to know for certain ( that i've found so far anyway) if this is correct.

I don't know. I don't really see it that way mainly because I really don't know the difference between modeling frequency response and modeling components. How do you model a resistor? By modeling it's frequency response?

I'm too stupid about this sort of thing to know the difference. The only way to really know is to try them both out.

Do you really think the very "best" sounding plugs will ever be native?

This is a good question. It's very hard to say. As you mentioned, piracy is a problem. A big problem. We could always say that the new computers are finally overpowering the UAD-1, but when did the UAD-1 come out? 2002?

I would have bought a UAD-1 3 years ago if I would have known they would have held their value. In other words, I expected a UAD-2 to come out last year and I didn't want to get sucked into the upgrade game.

As far as my own position...At the moment I'm not 100% certain but I think I'm going to go with a Powercore first and compliment it with a small UAD-1 pak.

Still thinking it over though...

It's a tough call. I'm still leaning on the Focusrite Liquidmix for EQ and compression and then I'm considering getting some higher end native reverbs. I'm not sure if that's the "smart" approach, but I find myself reaching for EQ and (especially) compression all the time during a mix. It would be nice to know that that the 2 most used processes are taken care of.

Most guys seam to agree that you need 2 UAD-1 cards to cover your needs for a usual mix. By the time I bougth 2 UAD-1s and all the plugins I wanted, I'd be into this WAY more than I really want to be.

Brandon

[lividone]

I don't really see it that way mainly because I really don't know the difference between modeling frequency response and modeling components. How do you model a resistor? By modeling it's frequency response?

I can definately see where you're coming from on this. Don't get me wrong it seems a little to much like "hype" to me as well, which we all have to dig through to find our answers.

To put it differently, I understand it this way...

Modeling the frequency response of the unit, to me, would be like modeling the final stage response so as to achieve the same final results of using such hardware by simply tacking on the output stage onto the original sound.

On the other hand, modeling the "schematics" as I put it, would mean to me to model an entire signal chain ( and their frequency responses ) for the sound to modeled through.

Again, this could be total marketing fluff, but it makes sense on some level.

Even so, I have demo'd all 3 at local shops and can say I have heard subtle "character" differences that would support this. There's something about the UAD plugs that I enjoy more, however it's mild and they all sound good. That was the overall point I was trying to make.

Whether or not all that techno-babble has anything to do with it, is a whole 'nother story.

[lividone]

Oh also, that was meant to explain the reasons why uad-1 plugs seem to be more "dsp hungry" and effectively inefficient.

On that note, I've found something new today. It seems the inefficiency stigma that the UAD-1 carries is abit unfounded. I've found a few tidbits of info describing this problem as almost exclusively on G5 (or possibly other Mac ) systems. I read somewhere else that on their PC system the Neve plugs take up about 3-5% dsp on a PC system. 15-20 high quality plugs per card doesn't sound nearly as bad.

I really need to get my hands on one to test this out for certain.


Later,

[brandondrury]

Wow, 15-20 plugins per card doesn't sound bad at all. I don't use THAT many plugins anyway. With that said, I'm probably not going to get too wound up about the compressor I use on weird delay noises or whatever. Drums, bass, and vocals is where it's really at for me with compressors.

I've heard that some plugins use more DSP power than others. I heard the 1073 used quite a bit more. I'll need to do a search on here from a while back.

So you did like the UAD-1 better at the store? You said "subtle". How subtle? Subtle as in you MIGHT pass a blind test? Subtle as in it's all in your head? Subtle as in the little stuff that makes a real difference when you are slugging it out in the trenches. I HATE the fact that recording has so many "subtles".

I never really considered the idea of trying out plugins wherever. Is this the kind of thing you can try at Guitar Center? My closest Guitar Center is 2 hours away.

[newrigel]

Originally Posted by lividone

Hey guys,


Do you really think the very "best" sounding plugs will ever be native?

Why couldn't they? If you think about it... the processing speed of computers are always going to get faster so dedicated hardware has only so many resources to a plug whereas a computer with multiple cores could have way more resources to a plug... The Sony Oxford plugs have been ported to the "native" side so why if native systems couldn't pull it off why would Sony go this route with their so called Oxford sound? Just give it some time and you will see that with 8 cored MacPros (with Leopard 64 bit) and some good 64 bit development, Pro Tools HD will be a thing of the past... Just wait, you'll see!
My LM sounds excellent compared to my UAD-1 (they each have good sound just in different applied techniques) and I have excellent EQ and Dynamics on way more channel for the same cost... How about a 7 band Pultec? With the LM you can build these types of hybrid models and they do sound really good and genuine to the original...

[brandondrury]

The Sony Oxford plugs have been ported to the "native" side so why if native systems couldn't pull it off why would Sony got this route with their so called Oxford sound?

I've never used the Sony Oxford stuff. Assuming they sound amazing, I can run 10 or 20 of them in a session, and they are native, than we have something. If they don't sound amazing or you can't run 10-20 of them, than the DSP universe still has the advantage.

Of course, we need to think into the future. Plugins have historially always taken as much in CPU resources as we would let them have. I think we'll see more Altiverb plugins in the future. They say that in "hardcore mode", you can only get a single instance of Altiverb on a kick ass machine from a few years ago.

I wonder what a plugin released in 2013 will use in terms of CPU power?

Pro Tools HD will be a thing of the past... Just wait, you'll see!

While I see where you are coming from, I have to think that Digidesign will implement some reason for you to blow $20k on their system. I don't think most people use HD now because of the onboard DSP. I think they use it because it's the standard in big boy land. I'm not sure if that will change even if onboard DSP is less of a benefit in 5 years. I couldn't imagine that Digidesign doesn't have a 5 year plan.

Brandon