UAD2 Neve compared to Scope mixing

[dante]

Having never used XTC mode, UAD2 NEVE, XITE, FAT SPACEF etc but reading / viewing UAD2 online videos, plus the following post :

http://forums.planetz.com/viewtopic.php ... AD#p236598

Does anyone use this combo - eg UAD2 NEVE mixing + Scope project + some sequencer eg cubase, logic, sonar etc ?

I'm wondering about UAD2 and Scope co-existing on one machine ( possibly a cheaper future upgrade option than XITE )

1) How would UAD2 Neve mixing compare against top 3rd party Scope mixers ( fat spacef etc ). quality / resource / gui wise etc.
2) Co-existing in the context of Cubase. Would this mean that UAD2 Neve console would open up in Cubase but be ASIO wired to rest of Scope components in Scope routing window, or maybe better to use XTC mode ( Ive never used it before ) ?

[nightscope]

I'm wondering about UAD2 and Scope co-existing on one machine ( possibly a cheaper future upgrade option than XITE )

They do so just fine. If, and a big if, your host doesn't have any problems with UAD.

1) How would UAD2 Neve mixing compare against top 3rd party Scope mixers ( fat spacef etc ). quality / resource / gui wise etc.

UAD Neve stuff compares very well to any of the best software EQ's and comps available. So does the free bundled Scope FX which I would be quite happy to use as the only plugs on a mix. The Scope FX are very good, might not be as flashy looking as UAD but they can do the job, no problemo. Depends what you want, like, can afford. The UAD Neve compressor is a hungry hog. Also the UAD Neve EQ's. I mean, you can get one Neve comp on a UAD-1, that's four on a UAD-2 Solo. 88RS is a lean machine. GUI-wise, using a hardware controller favours any VST based FX over Scope as Scope does not easily, if at all, support MCU[Mackie], Automap or other standard ergononic protocols, only the ol' CC's method. I have a UAD-1 which is nice for a few bibs and bobs, Neve 88RS, Neve comp and Plate especially, but I wouldn't hurl myself over the nearest cliff if it self-immolated. I have considered getting a UAD-2, though I'm not that bothered. Scope is a neccessity, UAD a nicety. If my 2 Scoper cards died I'd have to get an Xite. For me, the big advantage of using UAD, or any other decent native plug, sound preferences aside, is that I can deploy my hardware controllers quickly and easily and bin the flaming mouse for EQ's and other stuff.

2) Co-existing in the context of Cubase. Would this mean that UAD2 Neve console would open up in Cubase but be ASIO wired to rest of Scope components in Scope routing window, or maybe better to use XTC mode ( Ive never used it before ) ?

Yes. You can either ASIO tracks out to Scope or XTC things. I personally haven't had much success with XTC mode which has proved unstable. But many folks round here do use it succesfully with no problems or haven't encountered the same issues as moi. I would love to be able to use XTC mode stably for a lot of projects as it's so much faster doing everything in one application with decent controller support. I think the UAD Neve console is merely a collection of the individual Neve plugs, not some kinda console that pops up in the host. Might be wrong there.

ns

[the19thbear]

UAD2 is running fine here with a pulsar2 in normal mode and xtc mode.
I have had less pproblems with the uad2 card than the scope cards so far
-And the uad2 plugins smoke MANY of the SC plugins! i have the emt140 (sounds SO good!), the pultecpro eqs, neve 3306 stereo comp, roland bundle and neve 88r channelstrip (which i am loving by the way!)
somehow it takes less time for me to get the stuff blending right, than when i used scope in xtc mode in the past.
But UAD2 cant do latency free routing and synths. different tools for different things.


UAD2 is GREAT for mixing (and they have announce future collaborations with akg - spring reverb and lexicon!)
Scope is GREAT for latency free monitoring with effects and synths. (and they have the xite and new things happening)

by the way. check out the native plugin made by bootsy and antress
REALLY good plugins and they are free!

[erminardi]

My second post production system works ok with 2xUAD1 and 3xScope 6+6+14 DSP, winxp sp3, MB MSI Neo4 with AMD Opteron and 3 GB of ram.
Anyway I think that it's not logical compare hammer with saw... for my job I need both... and both UAD & S|C are top notch gears.

[dante]

Thanks for advice, Nightscope, The19thbear and Erminadi

Good to know its a compaitble mix and the functionality of UAD2 and Scope compliments each other rather than overlaps, which is what I expected. Using a UAD2 Neve may free up some DSP on Scope where Im using the STM4896 Mixer. Not sure whether Ill need a UAD2 duo or quad to get a similar number of stereo channels, or whether a UAD2 will fit on my mobo, but will research further.