Cytomic the glue upsampling series#

I own both Millennia NSEQ-2 and Shadow Hills plugins, and to my ears, they are both stunning. UA's Art and Science of Modeling UAD Plug-Ins, Part 2 - Blog - Universal Audio UA's Art and Science of Modeling UAD Plug-Ins, Part 1 of 2 - Blog - Universal Audio

Cytomic the glue upsampling series#

Anyway, you can read this excellent two part series 'The Art & Science of Modeling UAD Plug-ins' for more details. In fact, I don't believe there is a single third party UAD plug-in that is even upsampled. These are very processor intensive modeling techniques. But then how is it they can do such a great job on things like the Millenia NSEQ 2 EQ plug in? That thing sounds awesome!!It is not only the true physical and circuit modeling that UA has pioneered and perfected, but virtually every UAD-2 plug-in since 2008 is upsampled to 192k (4x upsampling). If I had to guess its because they are probably not doing circuit modelling to the extent that UA is. Does anyone have a definitive answer as to why most Brainworx plugs don't consume nearly the amount of DSP that UA plugs do?Д®specially the newer plugs like the Neve 1073 MKII In another 2 years, we will probably be seeing UAD-3 cards to keep up with the newest Native CPUs and the modeling. I think even the Sharc chips are starting to show their age thus the +50% chip consumption of a fully modeled circuit path like the 1073 Mk-II. 6-7 years ago? In CPU terms, that is 2 lifetimes. This will help to answer my question & perhaps shed some light on the OP's question.ДЄnother point - UAD-2 cards came out. We need to find someone with a few Native & UAD plug-ins willing to conduct tests to see if they notice sonic differences, or null. The only UAD - Native plug-in I have is the Sonnox Inflator, and though I have not done any null tests, they both sound fine. It makes no sense for them to port and dump all their plug-ins onto UAD quickly. But they will eventually.Дў) Brainworx is being slow and selective about the UAD ports they do, partly sticking with what they think will appeal most to the UAD crowd and partly as a business model. I see some overlap, but Brainworx seems like they are not rushing to port all their plug-ins to UAD, though they have the specs to do it.ДЎ) The Millennia and Bax EQ were particularly ambitious projects by Brainworx, and for both CPU and economic reasons, they are not rushing to release a Native version. I also have some SPL stuff, mostly native. But Brainworx never released the Millennia NSEQ as Native. UA came out with the bx_refinement & bx_saturator, then Brainworx released them a week later, and there's there BX_Digital EQ (I have the UAD versions of bx_refinement & Digital and already had the native Saturator, which I updated). I have most of the UA stuff and over half of the Brainworx stuff unfortunately, I don't have any of the same plug-ins to compare Native vs. I have also wondered if there is any difference between available Native vs. There is also the basic fact of what a given plug-in is supposed to achieve (a transparent EQ is very different from a Fairchild, etc.). The Millennia (and Bax EQ) was a chance for Brainworx to design a plug-in for a predictable platform and hone their circuit modeling chops at the same time. UA has a predictable processing baseline from which to work, whereas native plug-in designers are selling to people with a wide range of processing power. It was only around 3 years ago that UA got deeper into the transformer-tube-tape modeling.