When you create a mix with a modeling plugin, then copy the settings to a different model (even when you correctly match the output levels), 9 times out of 10 the first plugin will sound better simply because you chose those settings based on the sound of the first plugin which almost certainly will be calibrated differently than the second. I'm not bashing this comparison but it doesn't make justice to the Waves version (which imho sounds more like the real deal than the UAD). It would be just fair to make a new comparison with settings matched by ear. Cheers
Very true! When I'm comparing compressors, I often end up making them sound the same (within the, in fact often minor, confines of each), despite them having different settings. EQ-wise, an EQ-point may be narrower in EQ A and wider in B, and at slightly different fixed frequencies. But even then, the gain will make it possible to overall match the sound of the two, sonically, quite closely. What REALLY makes the difference, between two plugins like the Waves and UAD one, is whether one has a UAD card, and whether one enjoys utilizing M/S processing. And yeah, one may sound slightly better than the other. But only if significant in a blind-test would it matter, and if only small differences, other factors like cost and convenience may be more important.
Your theory makes sense. However, I've got them both, and there is just no comparison. I think he was being polite when he said the Waves version had its uses as well. You just can't get the analog feel, warmth and openness with the Waves version that you can with the UAD, especially when using it for tracking. The UAD does some "behind the scenes" mid/side adjustments, as you can hear in this example, and the Scheps gives you more control over that, but no matter what you do with the Scheps, you can't come close to the quality. Waves plugins really are garbage when compared to just about anything else. I know a lot of people are used to them and can get great sound out of them, but UAD bring the game to a whole other level. I especially notice the differences on simple things like voice over or tracking a cello. There's just nothing like it unless you have 10s or 100s of thousands of £s, €s, or $s to spend on vintage gear and keep it maintained. My Apollo and Satellite were the best investments I ever made!
Setting both to “SAME” settings visually isn't right. If you look at the tech specs of both plugins you can see that gain scales are different . You will get more gain at same frequency in UAD then in Waves in case if gain knobs point to the same direction. For example : when you set High Shelf gain to 8 o'clock in Waves you will boost about 5 db , in UAD 8 o'clock will boost about 7 db UAD High Shelf Gain (dB): -22 to 19.6 Mid Bell Gain (dB): -19.0 to 19.4 Low Shelf Gain(dB): -16.7 to 14.8 Waves High Shelf Gain (dB): -16 to 16 Mid Bell Gain (dB): -18 to 18 Low Shelf Gain(dB): -18 to 18
I own both and they are both great. In my opinion UAD sounds better and the mic/line knob actually makes changes to the sound, unlike the waves version. The mic/line section on the waves is extremely subtle. If you are considering which one to buy, my advice is demo both and think of how you would use them. I have the Apollo Twin so am never really recording more than 2 tracks at a time so the UA version works amazing for me. When I mix, I tend to use the waves version more, just to save the processing power. Cheers
1) the scheps comes also in a stereo version, it would be great to hear a comparison with the Scheps 73 stereo 2) the eq of uad and waves has different gain (uad provide more gain with the same movement of knobs) 3) the mix gain levels is different between the two version
The level's are not properly matched... off course the UAD one sounds clearer and more open... if you look closely at the meters (at 6:11) on the left on the Daw tracks on the hats and OH there's like a 3-4 db difference in both the hats and overheads (hence clarity and openness) between the UAD and Waves version... This for sure makes a huge difference... they have to be level matched for this comparaison to make any sense. The kick and snare are the same level but not the OH and hats. No wonder the waves sounds narrower and less Highs... just turn up the volume of overheads and Hats and voila... same as UAD. You've gotta be careful with stuff like this... everyone here thinks the UAD is kicking waves ass when it's just that we're hearing more of the direct mics on the waves and more overheads and hats on the UAD.
I can't help but think that the UAD 1073 might be a little louder than the Waves. If it's not and both were set gain wise to within .01dB of one another, I'm very impressed. FWIW we do have real Neve 1084s at the studio and when we A/Bd the 1084s to the Waves 1073 (i think they call it VEQ3 or similar), no one could consistently tell a difference (blind), but thank you for the video!
Or rather that some people can't hear the difference between mono and stereo. The Waves plugin was obviously in dual mono, same as the UAD. Dual mono on a stereo track = stereo.
I own the UAD Neve 1073 and it's excellent. I have no complaints except the amount of DSP it takes is tremendous. Base line of a solo is mono 40.1% and stereo 67.6%. It's not practical, for me, unless I print the tracked tones or obtain a very high end octo. I'm running an RME UFX and have considered migrating to an OCTO for the Realtime processing this plugin can offer. I like the pre's on my RME but they don't compare to the iconic tone of the 1073. That's a big change from my work flow and a lot of cash.
using a mono version of the plug (waves) vs a stereo plug(uad), not much of a comparison. everyone who thinks uad wins the waves is not really listening. when he solos the UAD the drums are in stereo, and when in waves it's summed to mono. Consider changing the channel name to Pro Tools Noob.
@@thesethreekings Because there is only one channel showing on the plugin....in the stereo version, it's two channels showing...two rows of knobs and faders....it also has the option to switch from m/s to stereo in the stereo version....this test is so bad.
@@PlayExe-jl5fi He uses the mono to stereo version when he has a stereo track, which can be seen from the blue link icon on the top right! The only problem is that he brings an instance of a mono track on waves ex Kick and an instance of a stereo track in uad ex. OHS, pro tools do not allow you to copy a stereo plugin on to a mono track only the opposite and you have to enable the link button to apply the same settings! Having said that, UAD sounds Super Clear, Open, 3D and full while Scheps' one not that much but not that it isn't usable!
Thanks for doing this comparison! I checked the files from sound cloud. To my ears Waves is the clear winner. (If there is a winner) The UAD sounds broken, less musical. Waves has more character, yet more natural sounding. For those of you just listening here, be mindful of volume and pseudo stereo. It is deceiving.
Something's weird about this. Listen at 8.13 on the switch to the mic pre version. The drums are clearly flamming and the image splits wide as if left and right have come unstuck. That's not any modelled analog mojo that we want - that's something funky happening!
I record in studios with real vintage 1073's all the time not the ams reissues but the real ones and I would have to say the waves sounds more like the real thing. the uad sounds a bit more like a focusrite isa circuit. the waves just has the squishy saturation like the real one.
If you're really going after "that" drum sound you'll probably end up layering triggered samples, instantly putting to sleep those "warmth subtleties" these plugins supposedly have to offer. However, on vocals (provided the 1073 is of any relevance) I can see how these could perhaps change the game
the "OHs dup1" channel , which is the stereo channel, clearly has a mono Waves plug-in loaded. Skip to 11:42 in the video and you can see that Waves mono plug-in is on the OHs stereo channel. The reason the waves sounds "kinda stereo but less so" is because the mono hat channel is panned. That's the only thing that is stereo on the Waves playbacks. Really this whole comparison was done wrong.
Listening on ATC SCM25A Pro: Waves sound is much narrower (stereo image), withouth depth, and a bit agressive. Uad: BIG difference, love the kick. Overs are absolutely amazing. The room reverb is much more present, it really gives wings, and overall the sound is softer and rounded Scarry part is that this can be heard on UA-cam video, that's how much better uad is ;)
the uad seems to add low end and top end, while the waves is more mid focused, to me - in this video. to me the waves sounds more natural - it gives me more of the feeling of being in the room - and closer to `mixed status', which involves a good mid response, and taming those extremities. it also sounds more energetic to me - just seems to bring out more of the room nuances, and pushes more air. as such, i prefer the waves on all levels. the saturation on the uad also seems a little pushed, that also falls under the natural character that i was talking about. the uad is more 'in your face', which is not that good when overdone, and to me falls a bit under the 'ear candy' category - deceives the ears, but more stuff to fix later in the mix - to basically turn into what the waves already sounds like.
So funny how the sound effect in the beginning of all these videos of Pro Tools Expert is taken from a Logic Pro loop (its modified a bit).....the irony!
It's a shame that you overlooked that the UAD is set to stereo and the Waves is the mono version of the plugin. I'd like to see this comparison done with both set to stereo.
Waves Scheps 73 looks like the mono channel plugin, not as a stereo bus plugin. If you really compared UAD 1073 stereo with Waves Scheps 73 mono, then it´s a big fail. I would like an explanation from Pro tools expert. Is it a market scam or an innocent failure from your behalf? Regards Johan
9:07 I even can hear on my laptop speakers that the UAD vs Waves is a faulty comparison because they are not level matched. Take care of Fletcher Munson …en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-Munson_curves
So. Right off the bat, it looks like you're running the Scheps 73 in mono. That would make a huge difference on why the UAD sounds wider and more open than the Scheps. This comparison is kind of null. I would love to hear a stereo vs. stereo comparison.
It's amazing how the drums mix sounds much wider when you put the UAD version on. How's it widening it just by putting that on, I wonder? I'll probably have to pick this plugin up.
Uncanny how you came to my personal rescue with this post . . . Much as I tried never found a way out of the "choke" this Scheps 73 contraption put on things, let alone in comparison to the UAD, which along with the stock 76 have been unavoidable since I first heard them . . . Thanks PT Expert . . . Cheers
OK- so some of the comments have answered some of my nagging questions, because I doubted the Waves plugin could sound quite THAT terrible. To me it sounded like one was in stereo and the Waves in mono, which someone here is saying is true. Is it? Also, though, the UAD is definitely widening the stereo image, which sounds great with these drums- but is that what the channel actually does and what it is supposed to do? (And I'm just listening on earbuds right now. and these things are still obvious.)
LOL Actually it's different when it comes to mono compatibility and mid / side information within a mix! Also Dual mono is used to save cpu on a Pro Tools rig over using a stereo insert.
This is a bit meaningless if you use a stereo track an then compare the waves mono version against the UAD stereo version (there is a Waves stereo version, why on earth use the mono then?) I don't get it....
The UAD is kinda widening the top ends... I really love the way the Uad treats the Snare... And the kick is soooo beefy.. :-) Like you said, the waves 73 did mod the circuits ... maybe thats why it doesn't treat it like the actual 1073... Awesome Review..!!! ;-) thankss
I just realised the fucking setting are different on the eq aswell example the low cut one one is 50 and 80 on another what kind of comparason is this !
+Q ilinati You can't tell from this video if you're looking at the plug-in window for the UAD kick, while the Waves kick is shown. If you look at the gain pots you'll notice that the UAD is on the mic pre and the waves is on line pre - my guess is that the creator has simply shown one of the wrong plug-in windows - simple but crucial mistake!
I don't think it's fair to set these two plugins up "identically" with concern to the "knobs". I'm fairly confident that the Scheps could be made to sound very-very-very close to the UAD if you brought up the highs a bit, adjust the pre, etc. Setting them at the same level isn't quite right for this kind of test. Also, gain-staging the Waves Scheps is much more important here - if it's not being hit correctly, it won't give it's best results.
I don't see how this isn't a good comparison. Unless the two channels that they modeled are this different in real life (that would be interesting to find out).
Todd Matthew Well, yes - they are that different. For one, we know that the Waves plugin is emulated from a customized Neve board. That already makes them completely different. However, there is quite obviously a widener in use on the UAD high end spectrum. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is there. You could get the same results using the Waves P22 alongside the Scheps, but it would certainly be quicker to use the UAD.
There's a Bb harmonic overtone on the kick that would drive me crazy if I was mixing.. especially if the song ( bass guitar)was in A or E ... LOL Just sayin'...
More of these nosense comparisons. YOU ARE COMPARINGWAVES to UAD, NOT UAD TO WAVES. Why don't you set the Waves FIRST to what sounds really good, like raise whatever needs to be raied to get it sounding like the UAD, then when you use the same settings on the UAD that the waves is using then IT WILL SOUND OVERDONE!!! Every time I see these they FIRST set the UAD plugs to be exactly what they want, then they use that as a baseline then set the same settings on the Waves and if it's more subtle they claim it isn't as good. It's nonsense. Set the waves FIRST to what sounds great, you can, you can turn up the bass, more or less highs, you can taylor it very precisely, then put the same exact setting on the UAD and it may be overblown with bass or highs and then we can claim that the UAD is just worse, right? RIGHT. So I fork out hundreds on a UAD hardware system, I NEVER want to admit I may have wasted hundreds, MOST all people have an ego, they would NEVER admit they wasted hundreds of dollars. Then, I am going to do a comparison, Geez, guess which unit I setup first, get sounding exactly as I like and as good as I can, THEN, I can trash any other unit when I put the same settings on it and it doesn't sound exactly the same, right? It's nonsense. These are BOTH MODELS, and BOTH have nothing but a few flawed Human Beings at the end of the process deciding with their OPINIONS that it sounds good and sounds like the real thing and is ready for release. The one difference is, Waves has guys like Scheps as one of the listeners, guys who make a living with their ears. I'll trust guys like CLA and Schrps when they tell me something sounds good and they put their professional name on it. The difference I heard was a little more bass and volume with the UAD, I can TWEAK the WAVES with a little more of this ad that and get it sounding MUCH closer than you did. In Fact, I can set the waves FIRST, thn trash the UAD when it doesn't sound exactly the same, when I really could have just adjusted the UAD and also got it sounding very much the same. NEITHER of these is better, they are simply different and one can tweak and adjust to get them sounding pretty much exactly alike.
musicdreamerish or you can make music and shut up about your “wasting money” when our president is trying to build a wall with your very cash. Feel better now? Shut up and enjoy what you got, quit bitching.
What a moron. and the wall is darn well needed, that's not wasting money, that's protecting our borders. I pointed out the TERRIBLE flaws in this comparison, that's not complaining, it's telling the truth. You would have actually posted a rational argument against what I said, BUT YOU COULDN'T!!
@@musicdreamerish Big respect for the comment! That's 100% true. Also if you read Musicradar reviews, they always praise UAD and say that Waves suck in comparison...
Personally, I think Waves, for the most part, is overpriced for what you get. They DO have some great plugins and technology and do some great work (their algorithms are actually found everywhere nowadays), but some of their plugin bundles cost $12k. Absolutely not worth it. For that much bread, just buy the real thing. The UAD sounds fantastic. Better sounding than the Waves one to my ears.
Waves is lot cheaper than UAD, buy only when it is in offer, and which sound better or worst it is impossible to said cause they simply sound different
Fernando Monreal I was referring to when their plugins aren't on sale. Some of Waves' stuff is really good. I like their Pultec one. TrueVerb isn't bad either. I definitely don't think their SSL 4000 channel strip sounds as close as Slate's does, but Slate doesn't literally model the ENTIRE strip (ie, eq and dynamics sections), they just give you the circuitry emulation. However, I think Slate's circuitry emulation is better than Waves'. But you are correct, it's completely subjective. I don't think Waves is terrible, but UAD's 1073 emulation here sounds much better. I just don't like that you can't really use UAD's stuff without their cards/interfaces. That's reminiscent of what Digidesign did with Pro Tools...only their stuff would work with it.
Eric Pederson i own both hardware SSL the k9000 and K4000 Superanalogue G and E coloration on both, channel strips, the hardware is a lot more aggressive than the plug ins, and are more difficult to use but lot more useful too, the pre amps can´t be compared they just are in another league, at end in the mix the hardware is less Hi Fi sounding than plug ins, but i get more consistent result with the thru hardware, than with the plug ins, the pro of the Plug ins is the immediate easy of use use and you can save setting, the cons are they are lot thinner and they can´t be pushed as hard than the hardware goes, apart of course you never can get the enormous quality of an SSL pre amp or a Neve one in a plug in version, i´m not talking about the cheap VHD pre amp version of SSL hardware which i don´t like, about the comparison here i will not use this UAD drum result in a hard rock mix by example, but i´ll surely prefer the waves one, in another hand the UAD sound better for R&B and a light pop mix, all depends of what you need, at end to me the difficulty is to know what to choose to do a good production in a determined style or genre
that´s not true they bundle cost 12 k you can get them for $3000 when they are in offer that happen´s all along the year many times, i have just buy the ¨phase plug¨ in awesome plug in to arrange phase in takes with multiple mics, for only $39 when the price street of this plug in is $200 when it is not in offer, buy from waves what they have in offer and you will get just the contrary great stuff for a very cheap price, there is no need to buy all the bundle it is better tool by tool while you are needing them and when the stuff is in offer, for the client like me who owns practically all they stuff from waves they are lot of discount coupons in their email,and you can write them for completing box they always do a deal for you, i´m very satisfied with they policy, same happens is you need to upgrade, do it when they are in offer to re-nove your update plan, if you only use them in one computer the price is very cheap
You've probably been paid by UAD to try to ridicule the Waves plugins, but it's gone, still using UADs in stereo and Waves in mono, do that during all your shabby life, and you'll become more and more expert Protools
the UAD sounds better, but it definitely sounds like the settings are totally different... like the waves is a lot more monofied and punchy -- but the UAD is a bit wider with some crisper top end. not sure if there's much point to comparing the two with the same settings really.
I'm afraid I have to agree with you. I was starting to wonder why my mixes had started to sound worse instead of better even though my knowledge in mixing had been increasing. It wasn't until I stopped using waves plugins that I noticed they actually literally do what you said, "smallarize" and destroy the nuances. I mean that limiter of theirs alone is huge proof of it. When I first tested it out I couldn't believe my ears. I thought I had been misusing it, nope, it just sounded like complete shit. Slate are definitely better, but not the best (Slate VTM and VCC plugins are fantastic though). I have to admit that after trying (and buying) plugins from many companies, none, and I mean just none come even close to UAD. Brainworx are very good as well, and so are the Softube UAD plugins. These three companies are definitely the best in the industry. Some may say I'm biased, but I only recently got my first Apollo interface, and had tested (and again, bought) those waves, Slate etc plugins way before I started using UAD. I still use several native plugins, but never those of waves anymore.
might this solve it i think maybe...... you have used the mono version of the scheps ! maybe and the uad is stereo .........maybe thats why they sounds different !...maybe
Yes I was wondering about the Scheps soundings like it did. So the UAD is Stereo? Then it's not a fair comparison. And all these exact setting stuff. I agree with the plugins don't have the same knob calibrations, I agree with the, it's your ears not your eyes mindset. So setting by looks won't get you the same sounds on two two differently built anything. Theses things are more suited for seeing if the two same plugin set the same way etc sound the same. I just wanted to know what the difference in the sound was cause I'm sure what the difference in price is . Lol
a couple things...uad needs to drop the proprietary hardware nonsense so I can buy this fucking thing...it's the only uad plug I give a shit about because it's the only one I can point to and say "that's far and away better than any other emulation on the market" also, I have this odd feeling that waves keeps certain products on retainer...this came out right around the same time the uad 1073 came out and now the exact same thing is going on with the codex synth...I believe it's happened in the past at other points as well...I'll bet you they have certain things lying in wait or very near completion and then once something similar comes out, BLAMMO...instant alternative with a company you're already "invested" in
my Neve 1073 that I bought (using UA Apollo) does not have the wood surround and fader/output on the right. Its just the Pre/EQ on the left, and the plug in is horizontal? Any ideas why?
Russ, there is absolutely no comparison on this! The UAD spanked the Waves on this one! I almost bought that Scheps one too. I just got the UAD one yesterday! Great vid!
Slate is so bad ass. Fabrice Gabriel is probably the best algorithm writer in the business, hands down. I like that Slate is flawless, yet extremely affordable. The downside? It takes a LOOOONG time for them to get stuff done because they don't make as much money as Waves does. I think Slate sounds better than Waves though, also. Waves' SSL bundle is pretty excellent though. That one is definitely worth the $650 price tag.
I have been feeling the same way. I know for sure that I am going to buy VMR. Based on what I find there, I may also supplement with the UAD 1073, since I have the apollo and will be able to take advantage of tracking with the 1073.
usfenderfsdlx My plan is to use the VMR neve for the less important tracks. Its going to be much more CPU efficient. Even with my Apollo Quad I can't run very many of these Neves. And as much as I love Slate, I cannot imagine them topping this one. Sadly I also bought the Waves one when it first came out from an impulse buy. I still might use it for the odd M/S thing here and there.
Todd Matthew You might be one to ask. Does the UAD 1176 plugins require an Apollo interface, or can you use them with a Pro Tools native or HDX system? I've looked on Universal Audio's site and can't find a definitive answer. I've heard the emulations are excellent, but I'm not buying an Apollo just to get them.
Todd Matthew I have the same kind of plan, if not just for the subtle tonal variations that will definitely exist between the two models (not to have too much of the same distortion/non-linearity algorithm). I am very hopeful about the Slate and excited to compare the two! :) Let's see what happens.
This was God Awefule.... Where to begin? First his two processors had totally two different eq settings... the sheps was cut and he boosted at around 7.2 on the UAD... WTF how doest that make sense??.... once i seen this i didnt even give the rest a chance... i can deal with the mono vs stereo units but his levels (not only on the eq bands) were absolutely disgusting and of gross negligence for a protools pro video!
all the UAD plugins have been a game changer IMO. I now own 2 Octo cards and a better part of my mixes are UAD plugins. Waves has some good stuff as well but i hear a big difference between them. I'm a UAD guy all the way
I found it. I'm curious, are you just using the Neve as an insert? I have a drum submit and I put the Neve in as an insert over the stereo channel and it doesn't have the same effect as what you are showing. Using -20 mic level and same eq settings.
Thanks so much for the upload. I suppose that finding the right pre-amp console is a lot like women; it's best to try out a whole bunch first before committing to just one! But i certainly wouldn't complain if I owned both the Neve and the Scheps' 73's! :P
I NOTICED THAT THE UAD MODEL HAD MORE OF A WIDER SOUND AS WELL BETTER TOP END. BUT WITH THE WAVES MODEL IT SOUNDED MORE MUFFLED AS ELL NOT AS WIDE. I ALSO NOTICED THAT THE WAVES AND UAD MODELS DIDNT HAVE THE EXACT SETTINGS, WHY WAS THAT?
+Solito/AllMyPeopleLoco You can't tell from this video if you're looking at the plug-in window for the UAD kick, while the Waves kick is shown. If you look at the gain pots you'll notice that the UAD is on the mic pre and the waves is on line pre - my guess is that the creator has simply shown one of the wrong plug-in windows - simple but crucial mistake!
***** TRUE VERY TRUE. WHEN THEY DO THESE VIDEOS THEY NEED TO MAKE SURE ITS ON THE UP AND UP. I MEAN WAVES N UAD R EACH OTHERS COMPETITORS, SOMETIMES THOSE DOING THE REVIEW TAKE SIDES DEPENDING ON THE RELATION SHIP. I HAVES WAVES N NOTICED THAT FOR EXAMPLE OTHER MANUFACTURES HAVE PLUGIN THAT MIMICS THE SAME ONES, BUT IF U COMPARE WITH THE EXACT SETTINGS U GET A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SOUND. MEANING THAT THEY R NOT ALL CALIBRATED THE SAME. IF IT SOUNDS CONFUSING I APOLOGIES. WHAT I MEAN IS LETS SAY WAVES IS COMING OUT WITH A PLUGIN THAT IS AVAILABLE IN HARDWARE ONLY SO IS ANOTHER PLUGIN MANUFACTURE. IF THEY R MAKING A PLUGIN TO RESEMBLE THAT HARDWARE THEY WILL TRY TO MAKE IT AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. BUT U COMPARE THE PLUGINS OF EACH MANUFACTURE AND SET THE SAME SETTINGS THE EFFECT IS DIFFERENT. MAYBE THE RATIO NEEDS TO GO HIGHER OR THE INPUT ETC. DO U FOLLOW?
+Solito/AllMyPeopleLoco All I was saying is that you can't tell from the video if the comparison is fair. Make of that what you will, I suppose. Also, is you keyboard broken? It's really difficult to read messages in all caps and it seems a little unnecessary.
Well I would ditch the software which was used for level matching because it's not done a proper job. There's an obvious +2dB level difference between the UAD mix version and Waves mix version. And if the settings were really set the same as stated in the video, I would say that the main difference is in the drive section which is harder in the UAD version which is most obvious in the overheads track since it brings out the stereo information. I recently talked to a producer friend of mine who bought some UAD plugs and he said that in comparison to Waves the changes were much more obvious. He also said that he noticed when using UAD plugs, eq's especially, that he could go well beyound +/-3dB with them while retaining the same sound while with Waves he could feel the sound start to loose it beyond that point. So he's going UAD all the way. I wouldn't know, I use Waves so... but now when I think about it I think I also stay in that 2 to 3dB range and if I go beyond, it sounds weird. I have to do some more testing I guess.
I love the UAD Neve 1073 but I'm running a apollo twin solo. Once I put it on a track it pretty much eats up my DSP. I'm thinking about picking up a Quad Core Satellite in conjunction. Do you think that would be a good addition to get much need power from my interface.
Funny business here. Totally flawed comparison. Ignore everything from 8:58 forward. Decent review of the UAD warmth, but there's no chance Scheps 73 sounds like a bad mono sum.
I invested in Waves and feel bloody sorry for it. UAD stands alone in terms of sound and quality. Gonna have to get the UAD stuff. The waves is just awful. I feel screwed. F*** :-(
Okay that's also true. I guess I was too fast in judging. Will have to check myself. Meanwhile I also purchased an Octo core from UAD. Just need the $ to get all their plug ins :-)
liveguy Hi, well it's true UAD is pretty expensive, but you know, I don't care all that much about it as I want the same quality of processing as I get when mixing on large format consoles. I feel when doing that, I always get better results much faster. For some reason, plug-ins still don't reach that level. I don't think it's because of the digital vs analogue debate, because you know, take hardware synths, hardware digital consoles for example, they too are entirely digital, yet they sound damn good! So it's got to be something else. I was pretty disappointed when SSL released Duende. They claimed it was exactly the same software as on the real C200 with the same Sharc DSP's, yet Duende was very awful! If a million dollar C200 really sounds this terrible, I'd sue them.So somewhere in the process there's got to be something still majorly different. The question is what.
UAD blows waves out of the water. The waves top end saturation doesn't sound as sweet as UAD, and the midrange in the waves sounds tinny and squished. I'm totally buying an Apollo Twin now.
Everyone complaining about levels and mono etc...UAD sounds worlds better than waves period. I own UAD, Slate, and Waves, and Waves is for sure not as good as UAD or slate.
if you think that the waves plugin was in mono, then you should change your career! at least use the mono button to find that the hihat was panned slightly to the right. also the untreated mix was similar to waves plugin in terms of stereo spread.. and it was in stereo.
+Robert Johnson III dude if you think that one set of controls means mono then UAD plugin is mono also and it's better anyway.. use your ears not your eyes.. the "stereo" waves version is a dual mono.. meaning separate control for each channel.
you should delete this video, waves is in mono here... hey guys, if you have this plugin, open it and you can see that just mono version had one line channel, the stereo plugin had two line eq ...
It is stereo - he's using a multi-mono plugin across the overheads. No different than using the stereo version, as long as you want all your parameters to be the same in the left and right channels.
mmm, looking at the meter seems you are right!!! maybe the waves should have different setting to obtain similar result, because the stereo spread is much about more high freq on ambient, and less muddy freq on snare.. waves sounds exactly with more pronounced boxy freq on snare (that is at center) and less high on ambient (that are wide) ... also kick bottom... anyway, cheers!!!
MUDRA Ultimately, the same settings across the two plugins won't sound the same, since they were modelled from different pieces of hardware. But if he had tried to make them sound the same, he would've had people complaining that the settings weren't the same and that he had skewed the results. There's no way to do this properly in a UA-cam video haha. No worries :)
I have the Uad 1073 and the Waves V3. I demoed the Scheps as well. The Uad absolutely smokes the Scheps. The Scheps sounded closed and dark to me. The Waves V3 sounded really close the Uad 1073 without the drive fader. So regardless of how this guy setup the Two in this video, the Waves Scheps doesn't come close to the Uad 1073. I mean the Scheps does have MS processing but then it's really not a 1073 at this point. The actual 1073 doesn't have MS processing.
When you create a mix with a modeling plugin, then copy the settings to a different model (even when you correctly match the output levels), 9 times out of 10 the first plugin will sound better simply because you chose those settings based on the sound of the first plugin which almost certainly will be calibrated differently than the second. I'm not bashing this comparison but it doesn't make justice to the Waves version (which imho sounds more like the real deal than the UAD). It would be just fair to make a new comparison with settings matched by ear. Cheers
Very true! When I'm comparing compressors, I often end up making them sound the same (within the, in fact often minor, confines of each), despite them having different settings. EQ-wise, an EQ-point may be narrower in EQ A and wider in B, and at slightly different fixed frequencies. But even then, the gain will make it possible to overall match the sound of the two, sonically, quite closely.
What REALLY makes the difference, between two plugins like the Waves and UAD one, is whether one has a UAD card, and whether one enjoys utilizing M/S processing.
And yeah, one may sound slightly better than the other. But only if significant in a blind-test would it matter, and if only small differences, other factors like cost and convenience may be more important.
Your theory makes sense. However, I've got them both, and there is just no comparison. I think he was being polite when he said the Waves version had its uses as well. You just can't get the analog feel, warmth and openness with the Waves version that you can with the UAD, especially when using it for tracking. The UAD does some "behind the scenes" mid/side adjustments, as you can hear in this example, and the Scheps gives you more control over that, but no matter what you do with the Scheps, you can't come close to the quality. Waves plugins really are garbage when compared to just about anything else. I know a lot of people are used to them and can get great sound out of them, but UAD bring the game to a whole other level. I especially notice the differences on simple things like voice over or tracking a cello. There's just nothing like it unless you have 10s or 100s of thousands of £s, €s, or $s to spend on vintage gear and keep it maintained. My Apollo and Satellite were the best investments I ever made!
This is some old video but your comment is spot on. This comparison is nonsensical.
Setting both to “SAME” settings visually isn't right.
If you look at the tech specs of both plugins you can see that gain scales are different .
You will get more gain at same frequency in UAD then in Waves in case if gain knobs point to the same direction.
For example : when you set High Shelf gain to 8 o'clock in Waves you will boost about 5 db , in UAD 8 o'clock will boost about 7 db
UAD
High Shelf Gain (dB): -22 to 19.6
Mid Bell Gain (dB): -19.0 to 19.4
Low Shelf Gain(dB): -16.7 to 14.8
Waves
High Shelf Gain (dB): -16 to 16
Mid Bell Gain (dB): -18 to 18
Low Shelf Gain(dB): -18 to 18
I own both and they are both great. In my opinion UAD sounds better and the mic/line knob actually makes changes to the sound, unlike the waves version. The mic/line section on the waves is extremely subtle. If you are considering which one to buy, my advice is demo both and think of how you would use them. I have the Apollo Twin so am never really recording more than 2 tracks at a time so the UA version works amazing for me. When I mix, I tend to use the waves version more, just to save the processing power. Cheers
1) the scheps comes also in a stereo version, it would be great to hear a comparison with the Scheps 73 stereo 2) the eq of uad and waves has different gain (uad provide more gain with the same movement of knobs) 3) the mix gain levels is different between the two version
The level's are not properly matched... off course the UAD one sounds clearer and more open... if you look closely at the meters (at 6:11) on the left on the Daw tracks on the hats and OH there's like a 3-4 db difference in both the hats and overheads (hence clarity and openness) between the UAD and Waves version... This for sure makes a huge difference... they have to be level matched for this comparaison to make any sense. The kick and snare are the same level but not the OH and hats. No wonder the waves sounds narrower and less Highs... just turn up the volume of overheads and Hats and voila... same as UAD. You've gotta be careful with stuff like this... everyone here thinks the UAD is kicking waves ass when it's just that we're hearing more of the direct mics on the waves and more overheads and hats on the UAD.
I can't help but think that the UAD 1073 might be a little louder than the Waves. If it's not and both were set gain wise to within .01dB of one another, I'm very impressed. FWIW we do have real Neve 1084s at the studio and when we A/Bd the 1084s to the Waves 1073 (i think they call it VEQ3 or similar), no one could consistently tell a difference (blind), but thank you for the video!
Thank you for this comment
THE *ONLY* LESSON TO BE LEARNED HERE:
Stereo sounds better than Mono.
genius!
and always use a pop filter on your mic
Or rather that some people can't hear the difference between mono and stereo. The Waves plugin was obviously in dual mono, same as the UAD. Dual mono on a stereo track = stereo.
I own the UAD Neve 1073 and it's excellent. I have no complaints except the amount of DSP it takes is tremendous. Base line of a solo is mono 40.1% and stereo 67.6%. It's not practical, for me, unless I print the tracked tones or obtain a very high end octo. I'm running an RME UFX and have considered migrating to an OCTO for the Realtime processing this plugin can offer. I like the pre's on my RME but they don't compare to the iconic tone of the 1073. That's a big change from my work flow and a lot of cash.
using a mono version of the plug (waves) vs a stereo plug(uad), not much of a comparison. everyone who thinks uad wins the waves is not really listening. when he solos the UAD the drums are in stereo, and when in waves it's summed to mono.
Consider changing the channel name to Pro Tools Noob.
How can you tell the Waves version is in mono?
@@thesethreekings Because there is only one channel showing on the plugin....in the stereo version, it's two channels showing...two rows of knobs and faders....it also has the option to switch from m/s to stereo in the stereo version....this test is so bad.
@@PlayExe-jl5fi He uses the mono to stereo version when he has a stereo track, which can be seen from the blue link icon on the top right! The only problem is that he brings an instance of a mono track on waves ex Kick and an instance of a stereo track in uad ex. OHS, pro tools do not allow you to copy a stereo plugin on to a mono track only the opposite and you have to enable the link button to apply the same settings! Having said that, UAD sounds Super Clear, Open, 3D and full while Scheps' one not that much but not that it isn't usable!
your EQ and preamp parameters in Scheps 73 and UAD are different. Looks to me not a fair comparison
Good joke, and now use stereo Scheps 73 plugin ! ;)
dude it sounds 10 times better
Thanks for doing this comparison! I checked the files from sound cloud. To my ears Waves is the clear winner. (If there is a winner)
The UAD sounds broken, less musical. Waves has more character, yet more natural sounding.
For those of you just listening here, be mindful of volume and pseudo stereo. It is deceiving.
Something's weird about this. Listen at 8.13 on the switch to the mic pre version. The drums are clearly flamming and the image splits wide as if left and right have come unstuck. That's not any modelled analog mojo that we want - that's something funky happening!
I record in studios with real vintage 1073's all the time not the ams reissues but the real ones and I would have to say the waves sounds more like the real thing. the uad sounds a bit more like a focusrite isa circuit. the waves just has the squishy saturation like the real one.
exitplan2 facts
agreed
True... Waves beats UAD
No contest ! the UAD version is a clear winner!
Pro Tools Experts??? or Pro fake Experts...
I dont like how all the attack and dynamics of the snare was sucked out of the UAD version, which doesnt happen in the waves.
If you're really going after "that" drum sound you'll probably end up layering triggered samples, instantly putting to sleep those "warmth subtleties" these plugins supposedly have to offer. However, on vocals (provided the 1073 is of any relevance) I can see how these could perhaps change the game
DISHONEST. UAD mix is more louder than scheps 73 and Over Head Volume is more louder. Not Fair.
the "OHs dup1" channel , which is the stereo channel, clearly has a mono Waves plug-in loaded. Skip to 11:42 in the video and you can see that Waves mono plug-in is on the OHs stereo channel. The reason the waves sounds "kinda stereo but less so" is because the mono hat channel is panned. That's the only thing that is stereo on the Waves playbacks. Really this whole comparison was done wrong.
wow the UAD sounds incredible, time to get a UAD card when I can afford it
Listening on ATC SCM25A Pro:
Waves sound is much narrower (stereo image), withouth depth, and a bit agressive.
Uad: BIG difference, love the kick. Overs are absolutely amazing.
The room reverb is much more present, it really gives wings, and overall the sound is softer and rounded
Scarry part is that this can be heard on UA-cam video, that's how much better uad is ;)
denoiser it's because the waves plugin he was using here is the mono version of the scheps 73. it's definitely not a fair comparison.
the uad seems to add low end and top end, while the waves is more mid focused, to me - in this video. to me the waves sounds more natural - it gives me more of the feeling of being in the room - and closer to `mixed status', which involves a good mid response, and taming those extremities. it also sounds more energetic to me - just seems to bring out more of the room nuances, and pushes more air. as such, i prefer the waves on all levels. the saturation on the uad also seems a little pushed, that also falls under the natural character that i was talking about. the uad is more 'in your face', which is not that good when overdone, and to me falls a bit under the 'ear candy' category - deceives the ears, but more stuff to fix later in the mix - to basically turn into what the waves already sounds like.
So funny how the sound effect in the beginning of all these videos of Pro Tools Expert is taken from a Logic Pro loop (its modified a bit).....the irony!
It's a shame that you overlooked that the UAD is set to stereo and the Waves is the mono version of the plugin.
I'd like to see this comparison done with both set to stereo.
Waves Scheps 73 looks like the mono channel plugin, not as a stereo bus plugin. If you really compared UAD 1073 stereo with Waves Scheps 73 mono, then it´s a big fail.
I would like an explanation from Pro tools expert.
Is it a market scam or an innocent failure from your behalf?
Regards
Johan
It's a multi-mono plugin, exactly the same as linking the parameters of the left and right channels on a stereo plugin.
The waves plugin is in multi-mono. It opens two instances of the plugin using the same settings.
@@curtean88 why are you so thick... he is using the mono version. Of all the things you can be on the internet, you chose to be thick lol
Everyone saying the waves is in Mono, it is not.
Listen to the cymbal hits at the end of the drum loop, in headphones they are clearly on the right.
Does no one else notice the weird, nearly flam-like smearing in the UAD line and mic pre examples?
9:07 I even can hear on my laptop speakers that the UAD vs Waves is a faulty comparison because they are not level matched. Take care of Fletcher Munson …en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-Munson_curves
So. Right off the bat, it looks like you're running the Scheps 73 in mono. That would make a huge difference on why the UAD sounds wider and more open than the Scheps. This comparison is kind of null. I would love to hear a stereo vs. stereo comparison.
It's amazing how the drums mix sounds much wider when you put the UAD version on. How's it widening it just by putting that on, I wonder? I'll probably have to pick this plugin up.
wider (better said brighter) but thinner and as it is mentioned above, the two plug ins cant be set in the same way, they are so different,
Uncanny how you came to my personal rescue with this post . . . Much as I tried never found a way out of the "choke" this Scheps 73 contraption put on things, let alone in comparison to the UAD, which along with the stock 76 have been unavoidable since I first heard them . . . Thanks PT Expert . . . Cheers
OK- so some of the comments have answered some of my nagging questions, because I doubted the Waves plugin could sound quite THAT terrible. To me it sounded like one was in stereo and the Waves in mono, which someone here is saying is true. Is it? Also, though, the UAD is definitely widening the stereo image, which sounds great with these drums- but is that what the channel actually does and what it is supposed to do? (And I'm just listening on earbuds right now. and these things are still obvious.)
The waves is in dual mono which is a pro tools thing
joe salyers isn't dual mono essentially stereo one set pan left the other set pan right...... Lol #BeingASmartass
LOL Actually it's different when it comes to mono compatibility and mid / side information within a mix! Also Dual mono is used to save cpu on a Pro Tools rig over using a stereo insert.
Yeah- this answer does not answer my question(s)- unless the dual mono tracks happened to be panned to the center in this case...
RogueRecords dual mono isn't stereo lol.
you have the hi pass on the UAD at 80hz while the Scheps is at 50hz..
Turn the knobs on the Scheps to see if you can get it to match the sound of the UAD. Or is the Scheps hardwired to only that one setting?
This is a bit meaningless if you use a stereo track an then compare the waves mono version against the UAD stereo version (there is a Waves stereo version, why on earth use the mono then?) I don't get it....
It's a UAD shill video
Вы сравниваете плагины с разными настройками. Это реклама Universal Audio?
The UAD is kinda widening the top ends... I really love the way the Uad treats the Snare... And the kick is soooo beefy.. :-) Like you said, the waves 73 did mod the circuits ... maybe thats why it doesn't treat it like the actual 1073... Awesome Review..!!! ;-) thankss
the waves 1073 is still a good plugin
I just realised the fucking setting are different on the eq aswell example the low cut one one is 50 and 80 on another what kind of comparason is this !
+Jay N unlucky mate
+Q ilinati You can't tell from this video if you're looking at the plug-in window for the UAD kick, while the Waves kick is shown. If you look at the gain pots you'll notice that the UAD is on the mic pre and the waves is on line pre - my guess is that the creator has simply shown one of the wrong plug-in windows - simple but crucial mistake!
I don't think it's fair to set these two plugins up "identically" with concern to the "knobs". I'm fairly confident that the Scheps could be made to sound very-very-very close to the UAD if you brought up the highs a bit, adjust the pre, etc. Setting them at the same level isn't quite right for this kind of test. Also, gain-staging the Waves Scheps is much more important here - if it's not being hit correctly, it won't give it's best results.
I don't see how this isn't a good comparison. Unless the two channels that they modeled are this different in real life (that would be interesting to find out).
Todd Matthew Well, yes - they are that different. For one, we know that the Waves plugin is emulated from a customized Neve board. That already makes them completely different. However, there is quite obviously a widener in use on the UAD high end spectrum. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is there. You could get the same results using the Waves P22 alongside the Scheps, but it would certainly be quicker to use the UAD.
There's a Bb harmonic overtone on the kick that would drive me crazy if I was mixing.. especially if the song ( bass guitar)was in A or E ... LOL Just sayin'...
UAD combined with Protools? the Best.
si
More of these nosense comparisons. YOU ARE COMPARINGWAVES to UAD, NOT UAD TO WAVES. Why don't you set the Waves FIRST to what sounds really good, like raise whatever needs to be raied to get it sounding like the UAD, then when you use the same settings on the UAD that the waves is using then IT WILL SOUND OVERDONE!!! Every time I see these they FIRST set the UAD plugs to be exactly what they want, then they use that as a baseline then set the same settings on the Waves and if it's more subtle they claim it isn't as good. It's nonsense. Set the waves FIRST to what sounds great, you can, you can turn up the bass, more or less highs, you can taylor it very precisely, then put the same exact setting on the UAD and it may be overblown with bass or highs and then we can claim that the UAD is just worse, right? RIGHT.
So I fork out hundreds on a UAD hardware system, I NEVER want to admit I may have wasted hundreds, MOST all people have an ego, they would NEVER admit they wasted hundreds of dollars. Then, I am going to do a comparison, Geez, guess which unit I setup first, get sounding exactly as I like and as good as I can, THEN, I can trash any other unit when I put the same settings on it and it doesn't sound exactly the same, right?
It's nonsense. These are BOTH MODELS, and BOTH have nothing but a few flawed Human Beings at the end of the process deciding with their OPINIONS that it sounds good and sounds like the real thing and is ready for release. The one difference is, Waves has guys like Scheps as one of the listeners, guys who make a living with their ears. I'll trust guys like CLA and Schrps when they tell me something sounds good and they put their professional name on it.
The difference I heard was a little more bass and volume with the UAD, I can TWEAK the WAVES with a little more of this ad that and get it sounding MUCH closer than you did. In Fact, I can set the waves FIRST, thn trash the UAD when it doesn't sound exactly the same, when I really could have just adjusted the UAD and also got it sounding very much the same.
NEITHER of these is better, they are simply different and one can tweak and adjust to get them sounding pretty much exactly alike.
musicdreamerish or you can make music and shut up about your “wasting money” when our president is trying to build a wall with your very cash.
Feel better now?
Shut up and enjoy what you got, quit bitching.
What a moron. and the wall is darn well needed, that's not wasting money, that's protecting our borders. I pointed out the TERRIBLE flaws in this comparison, that's not complaining, it's telling the truth. You would have actually posted a rational argument against what I said, BUT YOU COULDN'T!!
@@musicdreamerish Big respect for the comment! That's 100% true. Also if you read Musicradar reviews, they always praise UAD and say that Waves suck in comparison...
@@musicdreamerish cheers. Let's hope that the country doesn't flip this year, especially during a time of such vulnerability.
Personally, I think Waves, for the most part, is overpriced for what you get. They DO have some great plugins and technology and do some great work (their algorithms are actually found everywhere nowadays), but some of their plugin bundles cost $12k. Absolutely not worth it. For that much bread, just buy the real thing. The UAD sounds fantastic. Better sounding than the Waves one to my ears.
Waves is lot cheaper than UAD, buy only when it is in offer, and which sound better or worst it is impossible to said cause they simply sound different
Fernando Monreal I was referring to when their plugins aren't on sale. Some of Waves' stuff is really good. I like their Pultec one. TrueVerb isn't bad either. I definitely don't think their SSL 4000 channel strip sounds as close as Slate's does, but Slate doesn't literally model the ENTIRE strip (ie, eq and dynamics sections), they just give you the circuitry emulation. However, I think Slate's circuitry emulation is better than Waves'. But you are correct, it's completely subjective. I don't think Waves is terrible, but UAD's 1073 emulation here sounds much better. I just don't like that you can't really use UAD's stuff without their cards/interfaces. That's reminiscent of what Digidesign did with Pro Tools...only their stuff would work with it.
Eric Pederson i own both hardware SSL the k9000 and K4000 Superanalogue G and E coloration on both, channel strips, the hardware is a lot more aggressive than the plug ins, and are more difficult to use but lot more useful too, the pre amps can´t be compared they just are in another league, at end in the mix the hardware is less Hi Fi sounding than plug ins, but i get more consistent result with the thru hardware, than with the plug ins, the pro of the Plug ins is the immediate easy of use use and you can save setting, the cons are they are lot thinner and they can´t be pushed as hard than the hardware goes, apart of course you never can get the enormous quality of an SSL pre amp or a Neve one in a plug in version, i´m not talking about the cheap VHD pre amp version of SSL hardware which i don´t like, about the comparison here i will not use this UAD drum result in a hard rock mix by example, but i´ll surely prefer the waves one, in another hand the UAD sound better for R&B and a light pop mix, all depends of what you need, at end to me the difficulty is to know what to choose to do a good production in a determined style or genre
The waves does sound muffled on the high end BUT...the snare sounds way more focused. I guess that it's a matter of what you want achieve.
that´s not true they bundle cost 12 k you can get them for $3000 when they are in offer that happen´s all along the year many times, i have just buy the ¨phase plug¨ in awesome plug in to arrange phase in takes with multiple mics, for only $39 when the price street of this plug in is $200 when it is not in offer, buy from waves what they have in offer and you will get just the contrary great stuff for a very cheap price, there is no need to buy all the bundle it is better tool by tool while you are needing them and when the stuff is in offer, for the client like me who owns practically all they stuff from waves they are lot of discount coupons in their email,and you can write them for completing box they always do a deal for you, i´m very satisfied with they policy, same happens is you need to upgrade, do it when they are in offer to re-nove your update plan, if you only use them in one computer the price is very cheap
You've probably been paid by UAD to try to ridicule the Waves plugins, but it's gone, still using UADs in stereo and Waves in mono, do that during all your shabby life, and you'll become more and more expert Protools
Lovely, warm & wide sound!
the UAD sounds better, but it definitely sounds like the settings are totally different... like the waves is a lot more monofied and punchy -- but the UAD is a bit wider with some crisper top end. not sure if there's much point to comparing the two with the same settings really.
so the UAD version is basically a stereo spread?
I'm afraid I have to agree with you. I was starting to wonder why my mixes had started to sound worse instead of better even though my knowledge in mixing had been increasing. It wasn't until I stopped using waves plugins that I noticed they actually literally do what you said, "smallarize" and destroy the nuances. I mean that limiter of theirs alone is huge proof of it. When I first tested it out I couldn't believe my ears. I thought I had been misusing it, nope, it just sounded like complete shit. Slate are definitely better, but not the best (Slate VTM and VCC plugins are fantastic though). I have to admit that after trying (and buying) plugins from many companies, none, and I mean just none come even close to UAD. Brainworx are very good as well, and so are the Softube UAD plugins. These three companies are definitely the best in the industry. Some may say I'm biased, but I only recently got my first Apollo interface, and had tested (and again, bought) those waves, Slate etc plugins way before I started using UAD. I still use several native plugins, but never those of waves anymore.
Actually it's only for the first second or so on the switch to the mic pre version. Then the flamming settles down.
not on the original MC, I just checked, funky stuff happens to audio when it gets uploaded.
Pro Tools Expert Gotcha! Carry on.
The UAD emulation is awesome... super LIVE!
might this solve it i think maybe...... you have used the mono version of the scheps ! maybe and the uad is stereo .........maybe thats why they sounds different !...maybe
Great demo but I wonder if you tweaked the settings on the Waves 1073 could you have made it sound as good as UAD?
UAD sounds a lot more open, waves sounds tighter so it will be a bit more easy to mix with for a lot of people
Yes I was wondering about the Scheps soundings like it did. So the UAD is Stereo? Then it's not a fair comparison. And all these exact setting stuff. I agree with the plugins don't have the same knob calibrations, I agree with the, it's your ears not your eyes mindset. So setting by looks won't get you the same sounds on two two differently built anything. Theses things are more suited for seeing if the two same plugin set the same way etc sound the same. I just wanted to know what the difference in the sound was cause I'm sure what the difference in price is . Lol
Why are you using a mono instance of the Waves plugin with a stereo signal? Are you trying to bias the video in favor of UAD?
UAD is a clear winner, now we need to wait for Slate's new Neve plugin coming soon.
how can you compare stereo uad vs waves mono??????????
a couple things...uad needs to drop the proprietary hardware nonsense so I can buy this fucking thing...it's the only uad plug I give a shit about because it's the only one I can point to and say "that's far and away better than any other emulation on the market"
also, I have this odd feeling that waves keeps certain products on retainer...this came out right around the same time the uad 1073 came out and now the exact same thing is going on with the codex synth...I believe it's happened in the past at other points as well...I'll bet you they have certain things lying in wait or very near completion and then once something similar comes out, BLAMMO...instant alternative with a company you're already "invested" in
why is this video still up when so many ppl have called u on the fake comparison?? have some integrity, take down the video...
That's a fantastic video.. full of useful info, thanks a lot!
the nob on the Botton in the eq section is a high pass filter and not a low pass filter
my Neve 1073 that I bought (using UA Apollo) does not have the wood surround and fader/output on the right. Its just the Pre/EQ on the left, and the plug in is horizontal? Any ideas why?
Great video buddy!!!!
Why does the waves version have no stereo width?
please tell me I'm not the only one who heard a phasing issue with the cymbals - a "swirl" - that was evident on the Waves processed version...
Hello my name is Russ and I'm going to show you the difference between a Ferrari and a Lambo by driving the Lambo in wet and Ferrari in dry.
Russ, there is absolutely no comparison on this! The UAD spanked the Waves on this one! I almost bought that Scheps one too. I just got the UAD one yesterday! Great vid!
Before people make up their minds they should wait for Slate's VMR!!
Slate is so bad ass. Fabrice Gabriel is probably the best algorithm writer in the business, hands down. I like that Slate is flawless, yet extremely affordable. The downside? It takes a LOOOONG time for them to get stuff done because they don't make as much money as Waves does. I think Slate sounds better than Waves though, also. Waves' SSL bundle is pretty excellent though. That one is definitely worth the $650 price tag.
I have been feeling the same way. I know for sure that I am going to buy VMR. Based on what I find there, I may also supplement with the UAD 1073, since I have the apollo and will be able to take advantage of tracking with the 1073.
usfenderfsdlx My plan is to use the VMR neve for the less important tracks. Its going to be much more CPU efficient. Even with my Apollo Quad I can't run very many of these Neves. And as much as I love Slate, I cannot imagine them topping this one. Sadly I also bought the Waves one when it first came out from an impulse buy. I still might use it for the odd M/S thing here and there.
Todd Matthew You might be one to ask. Does the UAD 1176 plugins require an Apollo interface, or can you use them with a Pro Tools native or HDX system? I've looked on Universal Audio's site and can't find a definitive answer. I've heard the emulations are excellent, but I'm not buying an Apollo just to get them.
Todd Matthew I have the same kind of plan, if not just for the subtle tonal variations that will definitely exist between the two models (not to have too much of the same distortion/non-linearity algorithm). I am very hopeful about the Slate and excited to compare the two! :) Let's see what happens.
This was God Awefule.... Where to begin? First his two processors had totally two different eq settings... the sheps was cut and he boosted at around 7.2 on the UAD... WTF how doest that make sense??.... once i seen this i didnt even give the rest a chance... i can deal with the mono vs stereo units but his levels (not only on the eq bands) were absolutely disgusting and of gross negligence for a protools pro video!
all the UAD plugins have been a game changer IMO. I now own 2 Octo cards and a better part of my mixes are UAD plugins. Waves has some good stuff as well but i hear a big difference between them. I'm a UAD guy all the way
Hey Expert, Do you think having a Grace 101 mic pre overkill if I get the Apollo Twin With Avalon Plug-ins, 610 B plugins etc?
UAD sounds better from other videos comparison as well.
I found it. I'm curious, are you just using the Neve as an insert? I have a drum submit and I put the Neve in as an insert over the stereo channel and it doesn't have the same effect as what you are showing. Using -20 mic level and same eq settings.
INSTANCE Counts on this plugin is crazy!!! 40.1% dsp for 1 mono Instance 67.6% dsp for 1 Stereo instance!!! (Solo Cards can only run- 2 mono and 1 Stereo , (Duo Cards) 4 Mono 2 Stereo, (quad Cards) 8 Mono 4 Stereo, (Octo 16 mono 8 stereo!!!
Thank you for the Explain ❤
why waves version was opened in mono
uad done a great job. that's why their plugins are so high quality and priced accordingly! not $29 ))))))))
Uad is louder than the scheps you can even see it on the meters. UAD hiting above -18 ... while scheps is around -20 (,-19) ...
Thanks so much for the upload. I suppose that finding the right pre-amp console is a lot like women; it's best to try out a whole bunch first before committing to just one! But i certainly wouldn't complain if I owned both the Neve and the Scheps' 73's! :P
Just wondering how the Slate FG-N stacks up against this?
I NOTICED THAT THE UAD MODEL HAD MORE OF A WIDER SOUND AS WELL BETTER TOP END. BUT WITH THE WAVES MODEL IT SOUNDED MORE MUFFLED AS ELL NOT AS WIDE. I ALSO NOTICED THAT THE WAVES AND UAD MODELS DIDNT HAVE THE EXACT SETTINGS, WHY WAS THAT?
+Solito/AllMyPeopleLoco You can't tell from this video if you're looking at the plug-in window for the UAD kick, while the Waves kick is shown. If you look at the gain pots you'll notice that the UAD is on the mic pre and the waves is on line pre - my guess is that the creator has simply shown one of the wrong plug-in windows - simple but crucial mistake!
*****
TRUE VERY TRUE. WHEN THEY DO THESE VIDEOS THEY NEED TO MAKE SURE ITS ON THE UP AND UP. I MEAN WAVES N UAD R EACH OTHERS COMPETITORS, SOMETIMES THOSE DOING THE REVIEW TAKE SIDES DEPENDING ON THE RELATION SHIP. I HAVES WAVES N NOTICED THAT FOR EXAMPLE OTHER MANUFACTURES HAVE PLUGIN THAT MIMICS THE SAME ONES, BUT IF U COMPARE WITH THE EXACT SETTINGS U GET A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SOUND. MEANING THAT THEY R NOT ALL CALIBRATED THE SAME. IF IT SOUNDS CONFUSING I APOLOGIES. WHAT I MEAN IS LETS SAY WAVES IS COMING OUT WITH A PLUGIN THAT IS AVAILABLE IN HARDWARE ONLY SO IS ANOTHER PLUGIN MANUFACTURE. IF THEY R MAKING A PLUGIN TO RESEMBLE THAT HARDWARE THEY WILL TRY TO MAKE IT AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. BUT U COMPARE THE PLUGINS OF EACH MANUFACTURE AND SET THE SAME SETTINGS THE EFFECT IS DIFFERENT. MAYBE THE RATIO NEEDS TO GO HIGHER OR THE INPUT ETC. DO U FOLLOW?
+Solito/AllMyPeopleLoco All I was saying is that you can't tell from the video if the comparison is fair. Make of that what you will, I suppose.
Also, is you keyboard broken? It's really difficult to read messages in all caps and it seems a little unnecessary.
*****
THATS HOW I POST IN ALL CAPS, IT DOESNT MEAN IM SCREAMING OR ANYTHING ELSE. NO MY KEYBOARD INST BROKEN.
Well I would ditch the software which was used for level matching because it's not done a proper job. There's an obvious +2dB level difference between the UAD mix version and Waves mix version.
And if the settings were really set the same as stated in the video, I would say that the main difference is in the drive section which is harder in the UAD version which is most obvious in the overheads track since it brings out the stereo information.
I recently talked to a producer friend of mine who bought some UAD plugs and he said that in comparison to Waves the changes were much more obvious. He also said that he noticed when using UAD plugs, eq's especially, that he could go well beyound +/-3dB with them while retaining the same sound while with Waves he could feel the sound start to loose it beyond that point. So he's going UAD all the way.
I wouldn't know, I use Waves so... but now when I think about it I think I also stay in that 2 to 3dB range and if I go beyond, it sounds weird. I have to do some more testing I guess.
I love the UAD Neve 1073 but I'm running a apollo twin solo. Once I put it on a track it pretty much eats up my DSP. I'm thinking about picking up a Quad Core Satellite in conjunction. Do you think that would be a good addition to get much need power from my interface.
+Raymon Bueno throwing myself in. I would also like to know
Was this intentional or a mistake a mono and a stereo?
Listening on dt1770 pro, UAD sounds like wider more open stereo image/sound
Funny business here. Totally flawed comparison. Ignore everything from 8:58 forward. Decent review of the UAD warmth, but there's no chance Scheps 73 sounds like a bad mono sum.
UAD beats the Waves version hands down. Can't compete with all that extra DSP that the UAD version has!
Great Review!
Hi expert,
Can give us a review about IK EQ-73 compare UAD & Waves ?
I invested in Waves and feel bloody sorry for it. UAD stands alone in terms of sound and quality.
Gonna have to get the UAD stuff. The waves is just awful. I feel screwed. F*** :-(
+Lawrence O he doesn't even use the same settings on both plug ins! Waves rules!
Okay that's also true. I guess I was too fast in judging. Will have to check myself. Meanwhile I also purchased an Octo core from UAD. Just need the $ to get all their plug ins :-)
+Lawrence O What? They both sound good. You didn't make a mistake at all. UAD requires a very expensive dongle to use their plugs too, btw.
liveguy Hi, well it's true UAD is pretty expensive, but you know, I don't care all that much about it as I want the same quality of processing as I get when mixing on large format consoles. I feel when doing that, I always get better results much faster. For some reason, plug-ins still don't reach that level. I don't think it's because of the digital vs analogue debate, because you know, take hardware synths, hardware digital consoles for example, they too are entirely digital, yet they sound damn good! So it's got to be something else. I was pretty disappointed when SSL released Duende. They claimed it was exactly the same software as on the real C200 with the same Sharc DSP's, yet Duende was very awful! If a million dollar C200 really sounds this terrible, I'd sue them.So somewhere in the process there's got to be something still majorly different. The question is what.
Man whats that UAD 1073 Pre Thing :O
This sounds amazing!
Great review thanks :)
I'm sorry, but it's a HP not a LP but it's all good.
UAD blows waves out of the water. The waves top end saturation doesn't sound as sweet as UAD, and the midrange in the waves sounds tinny and squished. I'm totally buying an Apollo Twin now.
Snare eq is off uniformally. Try 230hz and 4.3k
Everyone complaining about levels and mono etc...UAD sounds worlds better than waves period. I own UAD, Slate, and Waves, and Waves is for sure not as good as UAD or slate.
ok, but here waves is in mono, if you have open the plug in... the stereo version had 2 line not one ; )
if you think that the waves plugin was in mono, then you should change your career!
at least use the mono button to find that the hihat was panned slightly to the right.
also the untreated mix was similar to waves plugin in terms of stereo spread.. and it was in stereo.
it's obviously in stereo!
Waves has two versions Mono and Stereo. The mono was inserted, so stereo becomes mono and mono is panned hard left and right, why is that stereo?
+Robert Johnson III dude if you think that one set of controls means mono then UAD plugin is mono also and it's better anyway.. use your ears not your eyes.. the "stereo" waves version is a dual mono.. meaning separate control for each channel.
you should delete this video, waves is in mono here... hey guys, if you have this plugin, open it and you can see that just mono version had one line channel, the stereo plugin had two line eq ...
It is stereo - he's using a multi-mono plugin across the overheads. No different than using the stereo version, as long as you want all your parameters to be the same in the left and right channels.
mmm, looking at the meter seems you are right!!! maybe the waves should have different setting to obtain similar result, because the stereo spread is much about more high freq on ambient, and less muddy freq on snare.. waves sounds exactly with more pronounced boxy freq on snare (that is at center) and less high on ambient (that are wide) ... also kick bottom... anyway, cheers!!!
MUDRA Ultimately, the same settings across the two plugins won't sound the same, since they were modelled from different pieces of hardware. But if he had tried to make them sound the same, he would've had people complaining that the settings weren't the same and that he had skewed the results. There's no way to do this properly in a UA-cam video haha. No worries :)
I have the Uad 1073 and the Waves V3. I demoed the Scheps as well. The Uad absolutely smokes the Scheps. The Scheps sounded closed and dark to me. The Waves V3 sounded really close the Uad 1073 without the drive fader. So regardless of how this guy setup the Two in this video, the Waves Scheps doesn't come close to the Uad 1073. I mean the Scheps does have MS processing but then it's really not a 1073 at this point. The actual 1073 doesn't have MS processing.