# UAD Studer 800



## Ashermusic (Dec 1, 2010)

I think folks are going to love this plugin.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Dec 1, 2010)

Not if you have to buy a $300 alignment tape to use it. 

.


----------



## JT3_Jon (Dec 1, 2010)

I'm assuming you're using it? How's it working for you?


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 1, 2010)

JT3_Jon @ Wed Dec 01 said:


> I'm assuming you're using it? How's it working for you?



It is the most analog sounding digital plugin I have heard to date.


----------



## JT3_Jon (Dec 1, 2010)

Sounds interesting! I know its very soon to ask, but I'd LOVE to hear some before/after mixes, or even tracks, if possible?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Dec 2, 2010)

Interesting. I was starting to shop around for a half-track. Maybe I'll spare me the trouble and try using this instead! Thanks.


----------



## jsaras (Dec 2, 2010)

Here's a sample of a a mix "before" and the same mix "after". I used several instances of the plugin with varying settings on the various submixes/buses.

http://www.audiorecordingandservices.com/a.GoingHome_003.wav (http://www.audiorecordingandservices.co ... me_003.wav)

http://www.audiorecordingandservices.com/a.GoingHome_004_Studer.wav (http://www.audiorecordingandservices.co ... Studer.wav)


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 2, 2010)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Dec 02 said:


> Interesting. I was starting to shop around for a half-track. Maybe I'll spare me the trouble and try using this instead! Thanks.



Well, Ned, as I know that you know whether it is tape decks, synths, compressors, reverbs, EQs, etc. nothing is quite the same as great analog hardware obviously, but UA comes closer than anyone IMHO. This thing sounds great, you can have a lot of them, and there are so many other great UA plugs that I always recommend them.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Dec 2, 2010)

Oh... just noticed that it's for UAD-2 owners. Silly me, I thought it was Native. :x Back to looking for a real-to-reel.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Dec 2, 2010)

Nothing against emulations, but I do find some tape players to be very... sexy. Something about those big, wide flanges spinning, and spinning, and...


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 2, 2010)

Some say Tape is dead, but I can assure you that those who still have Tape machines use them for their specific sonic character.
For the last 6 months I have watched and witnessed what an engineer/producer who knows the tricks can do with them. 
This plug alone makes the UAD 2 worth getting IMHO.
Considering who developed this plug and how long it took the price is more than reasonable.
Wonder if Ampex 2" is an option. That's what these geeky Tape freaks I have seen claim ò  Œ   ‚;


----------



## dach (Dec 2, 2010)

> A Gearslutz member posted that the best results (tape compression, 3-D effect, etc) are when you track to tape, not recording a mix from your DAW. The later only yields the 'bad': wobble, loss of highs, hiss. That bums me out a bit, as I don't track much.



That's true to an extent. Tracking to tape (or through tape to daw) is the best hybrid way to go for a lot of material. So much depends upon how good the deck is, how the decks are set up, what tape formulation is used, what you track to it and how hard you hit it (level). That being said, I rarely use tape at all anymore.

Printing a mix to tape in my case is usually left to a mastering engineer and it sounds very different from what tracking to tape sounds like. I do it sometimes but to me it's a trade-off and usually not worth it. Once I hit digital I do not like to leave (with a few exceptions). I have the Lynx converters on the PC which sound pretty decent and a Lucid clock that I use when transferring word to superclock (pro tools mac) but I usually try to track through outboard and always try to use the least amount of plugins as possible.

If you actually are hearing wobble, a more that a dB or so loss of hi's and objectionable hiss, something is very wrong.

I still own a Studer, 4 Otari's, 4 Scully's, 1 MCI, 1 Revox/Studer and have a good amount of outboard gear. 

I haven't tried the plug because I haven't upgraded cards yet but I'd imagine it's a pretty good solution if you use it on every track like you'd actually hit the tape (but you'd already need to know what that sounds like to get the most mileage out of it) or on the 2buss for a more gentle hit. I haven't tried many of the tape emulations out there but the few that I did try I didn't like too much.

Hope this rambling helps some instead of being confusing.


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 2, 2010)

Jay it could have been a Quanategy Tape too, or a 499 Gold.
I was merely parroting what 2" Tape the geeks here claim is the best for their trickery.
The main reason this plug will be a big hit it because small hardware studios can get real close now, and maybe even ITB only.
These guys prefer recording instruments mic'd w/ cabinets, and right into the SSL4000G but are making a mint off of guys sending them stems, that they burn to Tape and then master.
Great way to pay the bills.


----------



## veetguitar (Dec 2, 2010)

So, noboby seems to know the Nebula programme r2r?
http://cdsoundmaster.com/site/r2r.html

Have a look at this review:

http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14476 (http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewt ... =2&amp;t=14476)

I own and use r2r 
The same guy at cdsoundmaster.com has also done _tape booster _which is without comparison in the plug-in world.


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Dec 2, 2010)

Interesting that this topic popped up, I've just been looking lustfully at the UAD-2. Last I heard there were problems with drivers for 64-bit Win 7. Does anyone happen to know if that is still the case?


----------



## JohnG (Dec 2, 2010)

Anyone know how the Studer 800 compare to the FATSO, also from UAD?


----------



## Dietz (Dec 2, 2010)

I adore UAD for their efforts. Still _this_ seems to be the proper way for tape sound in a DAW-based world: -> http://www.endlessanalog.com/what-is-clasp

~o)


----------



## veetguitar (Dec 2, 2010)

I could do a compairison between UAD (by activating the demo) and Nebula.
By the way: Nebula sounds absolutely marvellous on orchestral and any acoustic stuff.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 2, 2010)

Nebula is a little wonder soundwise, but too bad that they do not really get their act together in nearly all other concerns.

However the idea of using reel or console saturation on each track and then on busses again etc. and thus emulating an analog workflow ITB was pioneered in the Nebula world, so a big tip to the hat for that. I even admit I bought Slate Digital Virtual Console collection only to have 60 % of Nebula with 5 % of effort (I think I have nearly all commercial Nebula libraries but when under the hammer never can use them).


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Dec 2, 2010)

Thanks for reminding me to buy VCC Hannes! I LOVE that plug-in.


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 2, 2010)

JohnG @ Thu Dec 02 said:


> Anyone know how the Studer 800 compare to the FATSO, also from UAD?



personally, I like it a lot better than the Fatso, which I have yet to make friends with.


----------



## Garlu (Dec 2, 2010)

Hannes_F @ Thu Dec 02 said:


> Nebula is a little wonder soundwise, but too bad that they do not really get their act together in nearly all other concerns.
> 
> However the idea of using reel or console saturation on each track and then on busses again etc. and thus emulating an analog workflow ITB was pioneered in the Nebula world, so a big tip to the hat for that. I even admit I bought Slate Digital Virtual Console collection only to have 60 % of Nebula with 5 % of effort (I think I have nearly all commercial Nebula libraries but when under the hammer never can use them).



It seems like they are working really hard on improving all the aspects of Nebula. It´s impressive how it sounds but, for inserting it on real time, it´s not there yet. 

They are working also in a server with the same concept of VEP but for nebula power use (by ethernet). I was thinking on using my slave with VEP for my libraries, send stems back to my mac and then use the nebula server in my i7 for mixing, and just with an ethernet connection! Hopefully it will work!

Also, they will release iDesk which it´s a simulation of a SSL 4k and... it will be free! It´s gonna be a good competition for VCC.


----------



## Animus (Dec 2, 2010)

Garlu @ Fri Dec 03 said:


> Hannes_F @ Thu Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Nebula is a little wonder soundwise, but too bad that they do not really get their act together in nearly all other concerns.
> ...



idesk is a emulation/impulse of the VCC SSL.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 3, 2010)

Actually iDesk is a cheap shot and shows again that the makers of Nebula don't have the professional conduct that would do justice to the initial idea and principle that still is great. Instead they should implement things like a standard Windows/Mac file opener for loading programs from different directories without the long scanning procedure when opening a Nebula instance, better RAM management (give free on demand what is not used), time domain behaviour (compressors) and possibilities for editing kernels directly (like we can with impulse responses since they are in the .wav format). Instead of this they are very hard-headed and waste their time thinking everybody is against them.


----------



## wst3 (Dec 3, 2010)

returning to the subject line (sorry<G>)...

I downloaded and installed the new UAD software bundle last night. I spent all of my time with the A-800 plug-in.

It sounds really cool. It's deep, and it uses a LOT of DSP cycles, so my dinky UAD-2/Solo won't let me process 16 tracks with 16 instances... bummer!

But, it sounds cool! As a reference, I still own, and occasionally operate an MCI JH16, this one has the JH100 transport, and the Ampex style electronics. It doesn't sound like a Studer A-800 really, lots more artifacts of the "wish they'd go away" variety than the Studer. But also a bit more of the "hey that's cool" tape EFFECT. I think by the time they released the A-800 they had figured out how to get rid of a lot of the problems.

Inserted as an effect in individual tracks on a small-ish project this plug-in really does give the impression that the material was recorded to tape. I tried it as the first effect, followed by compressors and EQ, and as the last effect, preceded by compressors and EQ. If there's a difference it is too subtle for my ears and monitors. And in the real world there was a difference between processing before and after tape - most of the facilities I worked in processed on the way to the tape because they did not have enough processors to do otherwise. But I did expect a bigger difference, or at least an audible difference, so that was surprising.

I also tried inserting it as a two-track effect on a buss. Now all track processing precedes the tape, but of course you can put buss processing before or after the tape. Again the order of the effects didn't seem to matter.

And the overall effect was really quite subtle, more of a 'glue' kind of thing than anything else. BUT, a very pleasing and musical glue!!!

Then I read the manual...

OK, the engineers at UA have designed the interface for folks that never had to align a tape deck. I don't say that as a good or bad point, just a point, and it does have an impact if you attack this as you would a tape deck.

There are controls provided to select tape type, reference fluxivity, and tape speed. There are 'hidden' controls to tweak EQ and bias and noise. There is an "Auto-Cal" switch that manages the hidden controls.

Selecting tape type and reference flux was, initially, very confusing. Once I got the hang of it I was able to use those two controls, and the input and output level controls to emphasize, or even exaggerate the "tape effect". The level controls are a bit on the touchy side, you go from minimal (probably realistic/accurate) amounts of tape compression and distortion to insane levels of both very quickly at first, till you get the hang of it. It also pays to disable the Auto-Cal and tweak bias settings if you want to get more of the effect of compression with less of the distortion.

The noise deserves a special note... it's scary accurate. At one point I did not realize that the A-800 was engaged, and all of the sudden I had this hiss in the monitors that took me way back in time. Except that of course I thought something had gone wrong with my monitor system. I'm embarrassed to admit it took me a couple of minutes to figure out what was going on. Yes, it's that natural.

All in all I'd have to say this is a must have plug-in for anyone that genuinely misses recording to 2" tape. I think it should be part of the default package of plug-ins<G>! It's that cool - or at least that's my first impression, and I really don't see me changing my mind, but you never know when the novelty will wear off. Now I just have to figure out if my kids will get upset if I spend the money budgeted for their Christmas gifts on another plug-in for my studio...


----------



## Blackster (Dec 3, 2010)

wst3, many thanks for your report  ... I'm going to save some money to finally upgrade my UAD1 to UAD2 ... I saw this step coming one time ...


----------



## wst3 (Dec 3, 2010)

Blackster @ Fri Dec 03 said:


> wst3, many thanks for your report  ... I'm going to save some money to finally upgrade my UAD1 to UAD2 ... I saw this step coming one time ...



Funny, I thought I saw this "trap" coming<G>...

In my case, it was a matter of timing, I was running out of horsepower, and my choice was to add a second UAD-1, or make the leap. The former was much less expensive, but I figured sooner or later they'd develop stuff that simply would/could not run on the UAD-1, so I jumped on the new wagon.

In hindsight, the jump was good, but premature. I would have been better off getting at least the UAD-2/Dual. Based on what I knew at the time my choice made sense, and I don't regret it for a moment... but, knowing the track counts for the A-800 if I had to buy today I'd wait till I could afford the Duo. Just puttin' it out there.

There is a chart on the web site (http://www.uaudio.com/support/uad/charts.html) that provides estimates for plug-in counts. Thus far it seems spot-on. I can get six instances of the A-800, and I plan to go back tonight and install the mono versions to see if it really increases to ten. That would get me pretty close to what I normally do - when I use the real tape deck I seldom have more than 10-12 tracks, and I can discipline myself to do the same with the computer until such time as I can upgrade from the solo to a duo. If it works! In the past I did not see much of a bump using the mono instances, but I may not have tried it since I moved to the UAD-2.

Oh, and keep your UAD-1 - especially if you use Nigel. It really is quite handy for the lighter-weight plug-ins as well. Refer to the chart mentioned above to assign different plug-ins to the two cards. It takes a little patience, but it is well worthwhile! And yes, you will need to revisit the issue with each new release.

EDIT - just noticed that my cheat sheet was on dropbox, I've attached it in case anyone is curious - this is just one way to do it, YMMV!


----------



## Blackster (Dec 3, 2010)

wst3, many thanks for the input  ... 

I guess you are absolutely right on all points. For sure I'm going to keep the UAD1 although I don't use Nigel (for guitar stuff I always go to GuitarRig). My dream is to put the Studer and a Neve channel strip on every audio track, but I assume that dream will not come true, even with a UAD2-Quad :( ... and I can't afford more cards at the moment. 

But UA really makes great sounding plugins, I'm very happy with them in general and I'm very sure the Studer will be a fixed part of my template .... soon .... o-[][]-o


----------

